#why did the shows have better characterization & development than the actual main movies?

[pa-pa-plasma]

about to watch an hour & a half long video titled "Why How To Train Your Dragon 3 Is Not Good" & I feel so fucking vindicated right now

[deedeethewriter]

Law and order VS Monsters. Why L&O worked by monsters didn’t

Introduction:

After rewatches, brainstorming, and discussions with others, I have finally decided what is truly the biggest issue with Monsters: The Erik and Lyle Menendez story. No, it’s not the inaccuracies or the incest undertones (although both are a real problem). However, multiple factors hinder this show’s potential as a fresh and unique telling of the Menendez Brothers case. To exhibit this, I will be comparing this show to the much more accurate and much better-written Menendez brothers dramatization, and that is Law and Order True Crime: The Menendez Murders, a Law and Order spin-off that premiered in 2017. It’s far from perfect, has its fair share of inaccuracies, and suffers from pacing issues. But it’s still far better executed than Monsters and the best out of the five Menendez dramatizations. 

This will not be a usual review. Instead, I will compare and contrast the two shows and explain why Law and Order worked and Monsters did not from a pure storytelling perspective. I will break down this comparison into several sections, including plot, subplots, characterization, character development, structure, conflict, abuse allegations, sexual topics, purpose, and overall storytelling.

Just a heads up, I will not compare the characters to their real-life counterparts unless relevant (for example, I address how Monsters wrote Erik’s sexuality and compare it to the actual Erik’s sexuality). In addition, I will not fact-check the inaccuracies in either show; I will look at each show as just that: two series inspired by the same case.

Plot:

(I will keep this brief since this is just a synopsis of both shows)

Both shows take inspiration from the real-life Menendez murders. On August 20th, 1989, Jose and Kitty Menendez were shot dead in their Beverly Hills home. Their two sons, Erik, 18, and Lyle, 21, Menendez, at first deny having anything to do with their parent's murders; however, eventually, the investigation leads back to the brothers being the perpetrators. The brothers eventually admit guilty to killing their parents and, during their infamous trial, make graphic allegations of physical, mental, emotional, and sexual abuse at the hands of both of their parents. However, they claimed they killed their parents in a state of panic, thinking their parents would kill them first to avoid the family secret from getting out. Despite these disturbing allegations and a mistrial, both brothers were sentenced to life in prison at their second trial in 1996; they are still currently incarcerated. 

Both series turn the actual case into a dramatization; despite being based on the same event, both stories use different plots to tell a dramatized story. 

In Law and Order, the main plot is Leslie Abramson’s (Edie Falco) goal of trying to win the Menendez case. Still, along the way, she deals with her issues, such as adopting a baby, disagreements with her husband Tim (Chris Bauer), her problems with her parents, and her growing bond with Erik Menendez (Gus Halper) and Lyle Menendez (Miles Gaston Villanueva). Law and Order is a franchise that consists of police procedural and legal drama; this spin-off Law and Order series, in particular, is being told through the perspective of Leslie, she is the main character here, and the show is about the Menendez Murders is mainly about the behind the scenes drama between the cops, lawyers and legal system surrounding it. 

On the other hand, Monsters aims to create a Rashomon effect about the Menendez case. The Rashomon effect is "a storytelling technique and a phenomenon that describes how people can have different perspectives on the same event." An example would be the film “Elephant,” a 2003 movie loosely based on the Columbine massacre. The film follows the lives of different characters doing their daily routine before the massacre happens at school. Monsters includes perspectives from Dr Oziel (Dallas Roberts), Lyle (Nicholas Alexander Chavez), Erik (Cooper Koch), Dominick Dunne (Nathan Lane), Jose Menendez (Javier Bardem), and Kitty Menendez (Chloe Sevigny), for example. We (the audience) are supposed to explore their different viewpoints regarding this case; by the end, the audience should conclude who the “real monsters” are. 

Both plots are unique in their own right. Before both shows, the only dramatizations of this case were through TV movies: A Killing in Beverly Hills, Honor Thy Mother and Father, and Blood Brothers. All three movies were A to Z stories of the case (before the killing, the killings, spending spree, jail time, and trial) that don’t stand out independently (except Blood Brothers with its ‘Kitty haunting Erik’ thing). Law and Order is a legal drama, and Monsters is a show with multiple perspectives. However, as I will explain, Law and Order had a more polished plot. Despite some pacing issues, it understands its end goal and does better at getting to the show's purpose.

Subplots

A subplot is a secondary plot that acts as a support story for the main story. By the end, the subplot is supposed to enhance and connect to the main plot. Some L&O subplots include Leslie and her husband struggling to adopt a baby, Lyle and his ex Jamie (Jamie Nobel) getting back together, Judge Weisburg’s (Anthony Edwards) reputation and job as a judge, and infighting between the Menendez (Jose’s) and Anderson's (Kitty’s)  families. Some subplots in Monsters include Erik becoming infatuated with another inmate (and trust me, I will get to that), Lyle and Norma Novelli’s (Natalie Taylor Gray) phone calls, and Dominick Dunne’s anger with the justice system after his daughter's killer was given manslaughter instead of first degree murder. Overall, the subplots in Law and Order do what a subplot should do to enhance the story. Even the unimportant subplots go somewhere; for example, at one point early in the series, Lyle is conversing with his lawyer, Jill Lansing (Julianne Nicholson). At one point in the conversation, she mentions her daughter wanting a baby brother, but Jill doesn’t want to give her one.

Lyle, in response, encourages Jill to give her one by saying, “Little brothers are the best.” Lyle then gushes about Erik and how happy he was and still is to have him around. This moment builds Lyle’s character by establishing how much Erik means to Lyle but also later sets up Jill’s exit at the end of the series when she decides not to represent Lyle in the second trial. She explained that while she still cares for Lyle, she felt like she missed out on her daughter growing up because she had spent so much time working on the case for the past three years. This is another issue I had with Monsters; it would introduce plots that lead to nothing significant. While not precisely a subplot, in episode 2 of Monsters, Erik mentions a new girl he’s seeing to his friend Craig Cignarelli (Charlie Hall). This girlfriend is most likely Noelle Terlesky, a girl the real-life Erik was seeing at the time of his arrest. Anyways, after this mention, she’s never seen in the show or mentioned by Erik again. It felt like the writers only mentioned her because she was an actual person in this case, but they had no real plans for her (something I will mention later). It makes me wonder why Erik would mention her if she wasn’t going to do anything in the story. As stated before, Monsters would introduce certain subplots or characters that wouldn’t do anything long-term for the plot. Completely stripping away the point of a subplot, which is supposed to create conflict, develop a character, and add depth to the main story, but the subplots in Monster failed to do that. 

For example, let’s compare the subplot between Erik and Tony's (Brandon Santana) subplot in Monsters vs Judge Weisburg’s subplot in Law and Order. In episode 3, Erik becomes infatuated with another inmate at the LA County Jail who also seems to like Erik, such as staring at him when he isn’t looking and helping Erik get dimes. Later, they’re seen working out together, and Tony brings up the fling to Erik; Erik denies being gay, although he did question his orientation at one point. Later, Erik and Tony are the only ones in the jail shower, and they shower seductively in front of each other. The subplot seems to be leading somewhere, such as a hookup or romance between the two, but no. Two episodes later, we learn from Erik that Tony was moved to another jail. That’s it. No moment shows them hooking up or having a “what are we?” conversation about their little fling. Erik mentions missing Tony to Dr Vicary (Gil Ozeri) in episode 7 (which, btw why would  Vicary's first response to that be "Miss the sex?" LMAOOOO), but this subplot has no conclusion. There’s no epiphany moment for Erik and his sexuality; this subplot did nothing for the plot. 

Let’s compare this to Judge Weisburg’s (Anthony Edwards) subplot in Law and Order. Judge Weisburg, at first, is portrayed as a fair and unbiased judge. He has his banter in court with Leslie before the Menendez trial, but it’s not shown that he has a particular issue with her. However, as the series progresses, he gets a lot of bad press because of the outcome of the Rodney King trial. His reputation as a judge is beginning to crumble, and he’s afraid that not getting a conviction in the Menendez case will be the beginning of the end for his career as a judge with election season coming up. The negative press explains why he becomes more harsh to Leslie during the trial and sabotages the second trial by not allowing any abuse evidence. Even though he is an antagonist in the story, his subplot

Gives his actions a motivation

Develops Weisburg and Leslie's character

It amplifies the plot by causing Leslie a conflict during the second trial (his actions lead to the brother's conviction).

Law and Order did a better job of leading its subplots somewhere, giving them all a conclusion and enhancing the show's main plot, while Monsters did not. The biggest issue with Erik and Tony’s subplot, in particular, is not the nude scene or the ethics of the writing of Erik’s sexuality, but the fact that you can take this subplot out and nothing would have changed. Nothing would’ve been gained or lost; it doesn’t develop Erik’s character, enhance the main plot, or raise any stakes. If Weigburg’s subplot were taken out, it would have taken away Weisburg’s and Leslie’s character development, not given Weisburg a motive, and it wouldn't have given Leslie a conflict for the second trial. A good subplot gives the main plot layers and adds complexity to the story and characters, but monsters don’t seem to know what to do with their subplots. 

Characterization

Law and Order and Monsters both have characters inspired by the real-life people involved in the Menendez case. Of course, we have the Menendez family, Leslie, and Jill, but both projects also include Pam Bozanich, Lyle’s prosecutor; Detective Zoller, the lead detective in the case; Judge Weisburg, the judge for both Menendez trials; Dr. Oziel Erik’s psychiatrist who he confessed to in October 1989, Judalon Smyth, Oziel’s lover who eventually told the police about the brother's crime and members of the brothers extended family such as their aunts, uncles, and cousins. In both shows, their roles seem to be drastically different. 

For one, in Law and Order, Pam Bozanich (Elizabeth Reaser) is a recurring character, but she still has her own story arc and character development. In law and order, she was the prosecutor in the McMartin trial. During the show's events, we learn that she failed to get a conviction during that trial. Still, she wants to desperately prove that she’s a reasonable prosecutor to the District Attorney’s Gil Garcetti (MArk Moses). Eventually, the DA is convinced to give her the Menendez trial, and Pam, thinking about her reputation, is desperate to get a conviction during the trial. Unfortunately for her, she doesn’t, and the DA takes her off the second trial, much to her dismay. Despite this, Pam develops a dislike for Leslie, so she doesn’t seem to mind being taken off the second trial. She said she’d rather eat glass than spend another hour in a room with Leslie. 

Pam Bozanich (Milana Vayntrub) is a character in Monsters; however, she takes on a much smaller role. She only shows up towards the end of the series when the trial begins, but she doesn’t have much of a role despite being a key figure in the Menendez case. This could be because of the two series' different premieres. Law and Order is a legal drama, and she is an antagonist to Leslie’s protagonist there, so it’s understandable why she takes a more significant role there than in Monsters. 

Still, given that Monsters is a show about multiple perspectives, I think the show could’ve benefited from an episode about how she looked at the murders. Dominick Dunne was just a gossip columnist in the show and real life and didn’t know the brothers personally, yet he gets so much screen time dedicated to his perspective on things. 

I had another issue with this show: despite wanting to explore multiple perspectives, it rarely gives time to explore the perspectives of characters who knew the brothers personally, such as their aunts, uncles, cousins, partners, and friends. I think an episode where both sides of their families are discussing their perspectives on what led to the murders would’ve been a great episode idea. Instead, their extended family members are reduced to background characters only added because the writers felt they had to add them because of their real-life counterparts. Even if the writers wanted to focus more on the immediate Menendez family, I still think members of their extended family could have worked as minor characters. Minor characters can be just as important as the main characters sometimes; if written right, they can add depth to the plot, help develop the main character, and help move the main plot forward. Unfortunately, it seemed like monsters didn’t know how to use their minor characters while also focusing on the Menendez family's story and different perspectives on what led to the murders.

On the other hand, Law and Order used their minor characters to move the plot, resolve conflicts, and develop characters. For example, minor characters Andy (Davi Santos) and Diane (Ashley Lenz) show up to tell Leslie and Jill about Erik and Lyle, revealing to them they were being molested when they were younger, and later testify for the defense about it on the stand during the trial. Even though they don't have much to do with the overall story, their testimonies and what they tell Leslie and Jill give the defense the corroboration they need for the brothers' sexual abuse claims in court. Diane's reveal to Jill and Leslie happens before Lyle admits Jose also molested him, so it also makes way for Lyle to be honest about his abuse from his father finally. 

To avoid this getting too long, I will only stick to the Menendez family and their characterization since they are the main focus of both shows (besides Leslie in Law and Order, but I feel it would be an unfair comparison to compare L&O Leslie to Monsters Leslie). But I will say that the Law and Order show does a better job at characterizing not only the main characters but also its recurring, minor, and antagonistic characters. All of the characters, including the antagonistic ones, are well-written. They all have unique personalities, are realistic and relatable, and are developed throughout the series. The main characters are also likable, making the audience want to root for them. I can’t say the same for the characters in Monsters. The characters were not relatable, developed, likable, or even realistic. They seemed more like caricatures instead of actual well-written characters.

Lyle Menendez as a character in Monsters

I won’t beat around the bush; I don’t like the character of Lyle Menendez in Monsters. Lyle is written as a fly-off-the-handle, bratty, arrogant, self-centered, spoiled, disrespectful, foul-mouthed diva that makes him unlikeable. It’s not like this happens when he’s on an adrenaline high or frustrated, but all of the time. In this series, he curses out and yells at his parents multiple times, yells at kids who are trick or treating, yells at a service workers, threatens Dr Oziel, is rude to Leslie (Ari Graynor), makes faces while his brother is testifying, doesn’t seem to care about Erik’s feelings most of the time, and is more concerned about dimes and his hairpiece over the fact that his life is on the line.

As stated before, Monsters was aiming for a Rashomon effect of storytelling. If that was the case, I could understand situations where Lyle is being a dick. I can see people like Oziel or his parents looking at him as a little bastard, but I'm supposed to take his attitude at face value because this storytelling isn’t made clear to the audience. Lyle, in this show, has almost no redeeming qualities. We hardly see a lighter side to his character; the bratty diva thing could have given Lyle’s character more depth and complexity had we seen a more sensitive side to him. Some moments show that he cares for Erik a lot, such as during their reunion at the jail, he advises Erik that he can’t just drink milk in the jail and he frequently tells Erik that he loves him. But the problem is that these are just that, moments. Lyle doesn’t get more layers to his character to balance out his negative qualities. Despite not saying it verbatim, Nicholas Chavez has implied that he took issue with Lyle's character, such as saying in interviews that he was written as the least sympathetic brother. But because he couldn’t do much about Lyle’s characterization, he wanted to play him as someone who acts the way he acts because he’s a profoundly hurt person wearing a mask to shield that hurt. I can see what he means on my second watch of the show. In episode 4, Lyle gets vulnerable about his abuse of Leslie and Jill. In that episode, it’s like Lyle is an entirely different person. You see that he still feels the need to protect his father’s image, and he feels the guilt and shame of being molested but also molesting Erik himself. There, we see just how much he loves Erik. While he wants to protect his father’s image, he also wants to safeguard Erik by not revealing this embarrassing and shameful encounter. We begin to understand that Lyle acts the way he acts because the root of that is insecurity, and his abuse is the main reason why he acts like a child because he’s still mentally a child himself. This episode would’ve been the perfect time to develop Lyle’s character, but the next time he’s on screen, he goes back to being a bratty dick. There’s no personal growth, no change in his morals, and no lesson learned from his moment of vulnerability. As a character, Lyle seems to stick to the “Status Quo is God” trope, where things always go back to the way things were before. It's like the writers didn’t understand the importance of character development.

Despite this, I do have to praise Nicholas’s performance. He is genuinely entertaining to watch and has excellent comedic timing. I am unsure if the writers intended to make his lines as funny as they were, but I mostly laughed when he was on screen. In addition, I can see that he studied the real-life Lyle Menendez. During the trial and court hearing scenes, he’s spot on with Lyle's mannerisms, facial expressions, and speaking. He even got Lyle’s child-like way of speaking when he was being directly examined by Jill down to a T. Unfortunately, his talent was wasted entirely. 

(Real-life Lyle’s wife was also SO excited for him to play Lyle; what a waste, lmao)

Lyle Menendez as a character in Law and Order

Law and order Lyle is a bit more tricky to describe.  Because Leslie is the main character, we don’t spend as much time with the brothers as in Monsters. But we see in Lyle that he’s confident, smooth, overly protective of his brother, naive, empathetic, and puts on a tough exterior even though he’s hurt and secretly emotional. He still has his flaws and moments of being obnoxious. He’s rude to the waitress and his bodyguards and is actively lying to his family, friends, and partner about his involvement in killing his parents. That said, his character flaws are justified from a storytelling perspective. He’s lying because he doesn’t want to hurt his loved ones, and his rudeness reflects how he was groomed at home, which we later see through flashbacks and his opening up about his family life. His rude moments can be chalked up to him mimicking his father; after his rude remark to the waitress, he says, “My dad always gave waitresses a hard time.” From the first episode during his police interview and what Jamie says to him at the hotel, it's clear how much Lyle admires his father and wants to make him proud. In episode 3, Dr. Conte (Raphael Sbarge), Lyle explains to Leslie and Jill that even though Lyle was sexually abused by his father, he still brags about how great of a man his father was and claims to love him; he’s doing something many survivors of abuse do, and that’s idolizing his abuser. So his rude moments are just him reflecting on his father, who he idolizes. This also explains to the audience why he didn’t want to reveal his father's abuse and why he felt so betrayed by him when Erik told him the abuse was still happening. While close to his father, through a flashback narrated by Donovan (Ben Winchell), it’s revealed that Lyle was upset by his father cheating on his mother, and we see multiple moments that show how deeply Lyle loves Erik. This also adds more depth to Lyle’s character. Even with his closeness to his father, he still needs to protect everyone in his family. This plants seeds for the brother's eventual allegations of what led up to them killing their parents. By the end of the series, Lyle has grown from the experience of his parents' murders and the trial. While still putting on a tough exterior, he has learned to be comfortable showing his more sensitive side and more open when expressing his feelings to Erik. At the beginning of the series, he seems to be unbothered by his parents' deaths and brushes off Erik's emotional hysteria. Still, in the second to last episode, he can tell Erik how much he misses his parents. While sticking to the main status quo of his character, Lyle's character still shows excellent character development. He still has most of his main character traits, but he also grows and learns from his experiences, and his sensitive side gives more depth to his character to show that he is a complex individual.

Even though I wish we had more time to explore Lyle’s character, his character here is way better written, realistic, likable, and relatable than his Monsters counterpart. 

Erik Menendez as a character in Monsters: 

As for Erik’s characterization, it's an unpopular opinion, but Erik was pretty unlikable in this show, too. I think the hurt man episode and people being biased towards Cooper have clouded judgment towards Erik’s character here. But in this show, Erik: Gets aggressive with Craig after Craig asks about the murders, yells and curses at Kitty for misspelling a word (a word he also misspelled too, might I add), and continues to scold her, blames his brother for the murders multiple times, yells at Leslie, says he should’ve killed Lyle too, robbed multiple houses, is rude to Oziel, doesn't care that his mom is spazzing in the kitchen, and is the one who came up with the murder plan. Watching this show, I got the opinion that Erik was bratty, passive-aggressive, sneaky, spoiled, and the mastermind behind the killings. Yes, he is more likable than Lyle, but not enough to think he's anything besides a disrespectful spoiled brat. I could say he’s more emotional and feels more guilty than Lyle. In The first episode, Erik is seen as being overly emotional over his parent's deaths, having near mental breakdowns and experiencing nightmares. But it's like his emotions have wholly dropped after the Oziel confession. There’s a lack of complexity in Erik’s character. I left the show looking at him like a toned-down Lyle. To echo what I said earlier, I can see someone like Dr. Oziel and his parents view him as a bratty kid, but with the lack of a narrator or establishing the story’s goal, I am supposed to accept that Erik is just as bratty as his brother. 

Erik also comes across as quite a jerk. When Craig tries to pry a confession out of him, Erik, for some reason, tries to intimate him. The show does not clarify why Erik got aggressive like this; it makes him seem like a passive-aggressive cold-blooded psycho. He doesn’t develop from this either; in the last episode, he pushes Lyle against the wall and says he should’ve killed him, too. Yes, the argument could be made that Lyle had been picking on him before this, but it shows Erik's lack of character development by showing that he is still an aggressive jerk. 

However, Cooper Koch's outstanding performance also saves Erik's characterization. The Hurt Man episode was excellent. Not only does Erik lay out his abuse at the hands of his father, but we also explore other things about Erik. Such as his complex feelings towards his parents, his idolization of Lyle, his confusing sexuality, and the root of his insecurities. Cooper does a fantastic job of displaying Erik’s emotions; one of the best things about this episode is that it feels like a real conversation between two people, not an exaggerated Hollywood script. Leslie tries to comfort Erik when he’s tearing himself down, and he keeps interrupting Leslie while she tries to comfort him. It is so natural to have a real-life conversation when someone is trying to reassure you when you are venting and vice versa. Like Nicholas, he’s also spot on when portraying the real-life Erik when necessary. At times, he even sounds like the honest Erik; it's almost eerie. Cooper is also entertaining, “Lyle, is that my toothbrush?” And “That’s where I keep it cold!”  It never fails to make me laugh. 

And yes, I am going to address the elephant in the room. The writers were awful in how they addressed Erik’s sexuality. I know he denies being gay multiple times in the show; however, between the Tony subplot and Pam telling Dominick that Erik was having oral sex with other inmates (they show this, too, by the way). Lyle and Jose making comments about Erik (allegedly) having sex with Craig, the average viewer might come out of this show thinking Erik is gay. I know the real Erik said he was confused about his sexuality, but it’s like Ryan took that one statement and ran with it. He ignores that Erik also said he did like girls and eventually had intercourse with girls and the fact that Erik did have multiple girlfriends. Yes I know there is an acknowledgment of Tammi, but that came towards the show's closing. There is a way to explore Erik’s sexuality from a storytelling point of view. Episode 5 did a decent job of addressing Erik’s confusing sexuality, and I wouldn’t have minded it if that was the only incident of it. But the sheer amount of gay subplots and jokes with Erik seemed more like a fetish as opposed to exploring how the sexual abuse confused the real-life Erik. Story aside, it feels offensive to the actual Erik.

Erik Menendez as a character in Law and Order:

Again, in Law and Order, we don’t spend that much time with the brothers. However, what we do see of Erik is that he’s very close to completely breaking down mentally. He’s outwardly more sensitive than Lyle and cries quite a bit in the show. He looks up to Lyle, calls him for everything, and loves and misses his parents. After their deaths, he focuses full time on tennis to make his father proud. He even recalls Jose encouraging him from the stand (although Lyle corrects him by reminding him that Jose was yelling at him). Erik seems closer to his mom; he tells his girlfriend that his mom would’ve been proud of him for having a girlfriend because she always gave him deadlines to get one. Kitty, in flashbacks, is shown as very sensitive and also cries often. In a way, Lyle is taking after his mom and Erik his mom. Even before the audience knows that he killed his parents, we see him close to breaking multiple times and know that he’s struggling to accept the fact that his parents were dead. Erik is also feeling the heat from guilt; his mental break isn't just over his parent's death but the fact that he was responsible for it. So, it is justifiable to the audience when he confesses to Craig and Dr Oziel. With Dr. Oziel, Erik only confessed to him because the only person he wanted to talk about it with, his brother, kept blowing him off, so when he confesses, it shows that Erik did it out of desperation and under the impression that he would be safe in doing so. It doesn’t make him seem sneaky, but he can’t take it anymore. He isn’t passive-aggressive or a jerk when Craig tries to pry a confession out of him. He still gaslights Craig but tries to brush it off like Craig is crazy instead of getting aggressive with him. It is explained here, though. He finally got it off his chest after the guilt was eating him alive, and after the drama with Dr Oziel and Lyle, he doesn’t want to talk about it anymore with anyone but them. Erik also develops by the end; even though he sticks to his same emotional self, he learns that it’s unhealthy to keep his emotions bottled up. Because his confession to Dr Oziel leads to his arrest, it stands to reason why he would feel cautious about being honest with his feelings. He also doesn’t reveal his abuse to Dr Oziel, but he learns to trust Leslie and is entirely open with her to avoid going on death row. Sure, it doesn’t stop him from shedding a few tears, but his honesty and relationship with Leslie develop him from someone close to breaking at any moment to someone in touch with his emotions and learning how to express them. I do prefer Cooper as Erik, but I still loved Gus’s portrayal and I think Law and Order did a better job at matching how the real-life Erik was feeling at the time.

Jose and Kitty Menendez as characters in Monsters:

Before I start, I will say regarding performance and chemistry alone; I prefer Javier and Chloe.  They are great with their material, and I think they capture Jose and Kitty's real-life energy. Javier, like Jose, is legitimately intense and intimidating, and Chloe nailed Kitty’s “I hate my kids; they ruined my marriage and life” spirit. 

Now, in both dramatizations, they take a smaller role. However, their roles are different in each series. In Monsters, Jose and Kitty are more characterized. For one, it explores the issues in their marriage, such as Jose’s affairs, his telling Kitty he doesn't love her and only wants her to give him children, and Kitty’s frustration with how he treats her and her loneliness. 

Kitty states multiple times that she hates her kids. She is characterized as a sad, pathetic, bitter, and insecure woman. We learn about Kitty's trauma from her abusive childhood, which explains why she treats her sons the way she does. Kitty’s resentment toward her sons was explained; she felt like she gave up her whole life for Jose only for him to treat her like garbage later, cheat on her, not love her, and pay more attention to their kids over her. Not that it justifies any abusive behavior, but it adds more layers to her character and actions. We also learn that she’s turned to alcohol to deal with her emotions, as seen when she reaches for the wine bottle for help after spazzing out in the kitchen.

Jose also has his fair share of trauma. He is characterized as a stern, strict, cunning, savvy, perfectionist, prideful, and abusive man. We also learn that he also has his fair share of trauma; he reveals to Kitty that his mother used to molest him as a kid, and when Lyle calls out his physical punishments to him and Erik as abuse, Jose brushes it off. Stating that his father used to hit him harder and that his sons' out-of-control behavior (the robberies, Lyle’s Princeton suspension) was the result of him not hitting them hard enough. This does not excuse his actions, but it explains his mentality.

Now that’s out the way, here is my issue with their characters: The show seemed to take more time to make the audience believe that Erik and Lyle were spoiled and bratty than they did, showing how scary Jose and Kitty were in Erik and Lyle (and others') perspectives. The moments that do show them as tyrants are limited and rushed quickly. I feel like the episodes that showcased last week’s events were rushed. I didn’t even mind the light-hearted moments, such as the Christmas moment, not because I felt terrible for them but because the audience would understand that no one is a Monster all the time. It also showed how the brothers could still love their parents even after all they did to them. Even the real  Lyle said during his cross-examination that he and his father had plenty of good times. 

Despite that, they are more sympathetic and complex than Erik and Lyle are. The brothers claimed they feared their parents, but I never got that feeling. How the show presents it, they came across as more strict, harsh, inconvenient, and demanding than they did someone to fear. It seemed more like two bratty kids who killed their parents because they resented them than people they killed out of fear and desperation. The deep horrors of how they allegedly treated their kids are only left to the imagination. If Ryan wanted the audience to decide who the “real” monsters were, he failed at showing just how monstrous they were to their boys (I will elaborate on this when we get to the abuse section).

Jose and Kitty as characters in Law and Order:

Jose and Kitty, in law and order, are explored even less than the brothers were. I’ve already explained why (the show is told from Leslie’s POV). What we see of them is shown through flashbacks from the brothers and other relatives. We see that Jose is controlling, intimidating, a bully, powerful, and abusive. We also learn that Lyle really looks up to his father, and at the beginning of the series, he constantly talks about making his dad proud. There’s no character growth to Jose here because this is ultimately a story about Leslie. Even though I preferred Javier, Carlos was also great at embodying Jose. The real Jose was said to be scary and intimidating even to grown adults, and Carlos made me feel afraid of him.

On the other hand, Kitty is shown as what Lyle describes as a “basketcase,” and Erik tells his cousin Henry that she is “so unhappy.” Flashbacks and comments of Kitty show her as constantly breaking down crying, dependent on drugs, passive, and showing little interest in her boys. Kitty also doesn’t grow much character; we learn that Jose had an affair with her, and Lyle tells Donovan it destroyed her. It helps the audience understand why Kitty turned into a basketcase, not necessarily to feel bad for her but to understand her more. Again, I prefer Chloe over Lolita; she did a better job embodying Kitty’s “I hate my kids” energy, but it’s not Lolita’s fault. I think she did great with what she had, but she wasn’t exactly playing the real-life Kitty. Lyle even pointed out on Facebook that Kitty here wasn’t shown as scary and violent as she was in real life. Law and Order even had a moment where the boys reminisced on a funny moment with their parents and flashbacks where Lyle remembered good times with his parents. I think it handled showing that Jose and Kitty weren't awful all the time without humanizing them too much. By the end of the show, the audience has seen why the brothers feared their parents so much and why they felt like killing them was their only option but there are still moments that show the brothers still love them and had good times with them.

Despite the flaws, law and order made the audience hate Jose and Kitty better. I will talk about the abuse later, but Law and Order did a far better job showing just how Monstrous Jose and Kitty were, even though Monsters did develop their characters more. A criticism I often see towards Law and Order is that the brothers were too sympathetic and the Menendez family were one-dimensional, and I can understand that viewpoint. We spent way more time with Leslie and behind-the-scenes legal drama than with them and their parents, which is why it was tough to explain their characters. However, this is excused because this is a legal drama explained through Leslie's eyes, which explains why the brothers are more sympathetic here. Throughout the series, we see that she begins to care for them like they are her children; it’s how she views them, and everything she knows of Jose and Kitty is being told to her from the point of view of other people, including their victims. Hence, it stands to reason why (Jose and Kitty) are only looked at as vile and one-dimensional. From a pure story point of view, it makes perfect sense.

Character development:

Monster’s storytelling also suffers from little to no character development. By the end of the show, almost everyone stays the same as they were. Lyle is still obnoxious and rude, Erik is still bratty and aggressive, and Dominick is still a bitter journalist who takes his distrust of the legal system out on the brothers. It’s like everyone stayed at point A and didn’t learn anything from their experiences. Out of the significant characters, the only ones who got real development seemed to be Jose and Kitty. In episode 6, they are struggling with their marriage and seem to hate each other, but by the end of the episode they seem to work out their differences and have a happy marriage. But like….their personalities don’t seem to change or develop. Kitty still hates her kids and Jose is still a controlling tyrant. Good storytelling means developing their characters, it doesn’t mean that they should have a complete 180 with their personalities, but they should have learned something from their experiences that leads to a change in their flaws, morals, and actions. This is another example of the characters here being over the top and cartoony. It’s not just the hyperbolic personalities, but the fact that no one seems human enough to develop. Lyle throughout the whole show is an obnoxious prick who is always yelling and cursing. Episode 4 showed a more vulnerable and soft side to him, giving the audience the impression that he acts the way he does because the abuse stunted his growth and he’s still mentally a child himself. However, for the remainder of the episodes he doesn’t change. He’s still rude and obnoxious, he’s learned nothing from this experience and it takes away the impact of seeing his more vulnerable side. It’s another example of lazy and ineffective storytelling. The show seemed to want to stick to a certain status quo, not understanding that characters are allowed to change without becoming completely different people.

I won’t talk too much about the characterization since I’ve already talked about that. Law and Order did a great job at developing its characters. By the end, everyone has grown, learned, and evolved from being a part of this case. I will be using as an example since she is our main character here. By the end of the series, Leslie turned a whole new leaf from losing her case. By the end, Leslie is heartbroken that she lost her case and the fact that Erik and Lyle both get life sentences. However, we see her grow throughout the series. She stays her same fierce, brash, bold and confident self, however we see her more vulnerable side. She has issues with her parents, her mother passes away and she reconnects with her estranged father. In the midst of all this, she becomes a mother again and adopts a baby boy. Her new son, own issue with her parents and closeness with the brothers is a factor on why she became so passionate about their case and why she turned a new leaf after the second trial to focus on raising her son and working at a toy store. Of course her decision was because of her loss, but also because learning about the horrific abuse the brothers suffered made her appreciate family and want the best for all children. As a result of both, she understands the real impact of a healthy and normal family and not only wants to be there for her child but other people’s children. 

Not only is there great development, but none of the protagonists are unlikable. Sure, they have their flaws, but it makes them come across as more complex and human. Even the antagonist characters (Weisburg, Detective Zoller, Pam, Gil Garcetti and David Conn) have their own subplots that fulfil the antagonistic role by having motivations behind their actions and having a foil for the antagonist that makes the audience question the protagonist. For example David Conn (Robin Thomas), as a part of the California DA office is assigned as the prosecutor in the second trial. Throughout the show, we see how desperate the DA office is for a conviction after losing the McMartin, Rodney King, and later OJ Simpson trial. After the OJ loss, the office is determined to convict the brothers. Later during the second trial, Conn reveals to the jury and the audience during his cross examination of Erik’s psychiatric in jail Dr. Vicary that Leslie had  hand in altering Dr Vicary’s (Todd Weeks) notes about Erik’s view of his mother. While this a small example, it shows how smart the law and order team was with its writing and storytelling. Not even the antagonists are over the top and cartoony, but real relatable people with their own backstories, goals, and motivations that makes the audience understand their viewpoint. 

Sexual/adult situations:

It’s no secret that monsters heavily sexualized the brothers. While I cannot praise Cooper and Nicholas’s performances enough, it’s clear that Ryan also cast them based on their looks and bodies. There are far too many scenes of them nude, shirtless, or in sexual situations, even when not necessary. I have no issues with nudity or sex scenes/suggestions in the media, but it was very excessive here. Law and Order had a scene of Erik’s girlfriend Noelle (Anna Osceola) teasing him with sex when he got out of jail. However, the most significant difference is context. Erik’s girlfriend teasing him made sense because she’s assumingly a young girl who wants to give her boyfriend a “gift” when he gets out of jail. It doesn’t seem out of the ordinary, and it’s not “in your face,” so to speak. It’s subtle and not distracting, like the sexual moments between Oziel and Judalon. The over-sexualization was so bad that monsters included incest undertones between the brothers. In the second episode, Lyle kisses Erik on the mouth, and later, they dance seductively with each other at a party. Then, in episode 7, Dominick Dunne gives people his theories of the Menendez family and suggests that the real family secret was Erik and Lyle's incestuous relationship. The scene then cuts to Kitty catching the brothers in the shower together. 

In Law and Order, one juror commented that Erik probably got his stories of sexual abuse from having sex with Lyle, which is a disgusting comment; it’s nowhere near as awful as Ryan deciding to showcase an incest scene between them. Even if it was Dominick Dunne’s imagination, I still don’t understand why it had to be shown. The juror's comment in Law and Order is met with disdain from the other jurors; unlike Monsters, the whole “brother incest” is brought up but not even entertained.

I will admit I laughed at the scene where an inmate sarcastically tells Lyle he’ll give him a dime if Lyle gives him head and Dr.Vicary’s “Miss the sex?” When Erik says he misses Tony, gave me a chuckle. If everything else weren’t so in your face and had the gross incest stuff, I wouldn’t have minded these moments so much. But the layers of over-sexualization, including sibling incest, showed (to me) what was on Ryan’s mind when he cast two good-looking 20-something-year-olds to play the brothers.

The abuse:

In Monsters, the brother's allegations of abuse weren’t shown like they should’ve been to get the point across. I’m going to start with Kitty. In real life, the brothers alleged that Kitty was also violent and abusive to them. We also know that she sexually abused them both. The show attempts to address that Kitty was also an abuser and not just an enabler. However, it is poorly executed, and there is not enough time to show that. The only incident of this is her raging out on her kids after they accuse her of trying to poison them, but just before that, we see them cussing her out and ganging up on her. It comes across that she is justified in her rage out, and considering her kids are sociopaths, her kids were being dicks to her, and she got frustrated. Add onto the fact that they just watched her spazz out on the kitchen floor unconcerned. So when she tells her therapist, “I hate my kids,” someone may think, “Well, they cuss her out, gang up on her, accuse her of poisoning them, and are thieves. I get why she hates them and feels like they ruined her life.” To make it worse, we see her kissing Erik on the head and calling Lyle “sweetheart” (we all know the real kitty would never lmao) and telling her therapist that she still feels the umbilical cord connecting them. It makes it seem like she has love for them, but their attitude makes her hate them. Even if I can give it the “this is Kitty’s perspective” excuse, as stated earlier, the show does a terrible job of providing more corroboration to the brother's perspective of the abuse they say they suffered and what led to them fearing their parents. In addition, the only incident of sexual abuse of hers that is shown is her looking at Erik’s penis to check for AIDS, but the show leaves out that she used to pop blisters on them (Erik was also much younger when this happened) and even then it’s seen as justified and not motivated by the real Kitty’s perverted nature. Before that, she and Erik were talking about how Erik could bring AIDS in the house because he isn’t using the condoms they bought (and they are aware of his sexual relationship with another boy). It makes it seem like Kitty was just a concerned mother instead of the pervert she was. Erik mentions Kitty sexually abusing Lyle in episode 5, but it’s wildly “blink and you’ll miss it,” and Lyle does not even talk about it. The naked pictures are shown in court, but it came after it was implied that Leslie coached the brothers to lie on the stand. However, the show spent more time showing that the brothers were rude brats who talked back to their parents instead of showing how vile Kitty could also be.

As for Jose, my issues are pretty much similar. We don’t see enough of him being abusive to his sons besides slapping, degrading, and yelling at them. Yes, it’s still abuse, but it's not abusive enough to make us hate his guts.  If I recall correctly, the only incident that shows his sexual abuse was in episode 6, when he drags Erik to his room, and there’s a bunch of thumbs behind the door. Everything else about his sexual abuse of them is only talked about. I’m not saying they should’ve shown explicit rape scenes, but Law and Order was able to show the abuse of both parents that makes the audience hate them both. Jose, like Kitty, is seen as justifiably angry with his boys because of their burglaries and Lyle’s suspension in episode 6. Again, I understand this episode is his point of view, but I found myself understanding Jose’s frustration. Perhaps that’s what the writers were aiming for; they explored multiple perspectives and let the audience decide who the monsters were. Still, less time was dedicated to showing how monstrous Jose and Kitty were in the brother's eyes. Again, it suffers from telling and not showing.

Law and Order was able to show Jose and Kitty’s abuse without being explicit but also bad enough to make you hate them and sympathize with the brothers. Through flashbacks, we see that Kitty is negligent (how she handles Erik’s nightmares, ignoring Jose and bearing Erik), relies on pills and alcohol, keeps kiddy porn pictures of them, and that she also molests Lyle. It’s not explicit, but it’s clear what’s happening as it leaves little to the imagination. Jose, in these flashbacks, is also shown as abusive. Multiple times, he is seen striking fear into his boys, and the sexual abuse is not explicit, but it leaves little to the imagination of what is happening. By the end of the series, the audience has seen how disgusting and frightening Jose and Kitty are to their boys. Someone might say, “Well, the show is biased for the defense, so it will be in their favor. Monsters are trying to give multiple perspectives and letting the audience decide.” That’s true, but the writers took plenty of time to show how bratty and annoying Erik and Lyle were to others. But, there was barely any time spent showing the audience just how vile Jose and Kitty were from the perspectives of their boys. While I appreciated episodes 4 and 5, their telling their stories would not have been as impactful as showing their stories to the audience. The last episode of Law and Order was also better at addressing generational trauma. The last episode has Jose’s sister Marta (Constance Marie) and Kitty’s sister Joan (Molly Hagan) telling Leslie that they were abused as children, which shows the impact of generational curses but doesn't humanize them too much to forget their abuse.

Overall Storytelling:

Lastly,the storytelling is what makes Law and Order work but not Monsters. While the plot in Law and Order is about the Menendez case, the show sticks to the Law and Order formula by sticking to the legal drama that surrounds the case. The story, like any good story, has a beginning, middle, and end. Its storytelling is polished, shows instead of telling, well structured, has conflict, well developed characters and has a clear purpose and identity. 

Beginning, middle, and end. The beginning of the story is the murders of Jose and Kitty Menendez and the investigators in the case trying to find the killers and ultimately their investigation leads them to the couple’s own two sons.

Middle: Erik and Lyle are arrested and adjust to life in jail. Meanwhile, the prosecution and defense are both building their case.

End: Both sides present their case during both of the brothers' trials. The defense, despite being the protagonist, loses the case and the brothers are sentenced to life in prison and Leslie turns a new leaf.

Polished and structured: As explained by the beginning middle and end, the storytelling in Law and Order is structured and clear. It’s organized in the kind of story it’s telling but also has important elements a well structured story needs like conflict and purpose.

Conflict: This is another reason why I feel like Law and Order dealt with the subplots better because they added to the story by adding conflict to drive the plot forward. As mentioned earlier, Judge Weisburg’s subplot at the end provided conflict for both him and Leslie. For him, the bad press gives him a conflict because he is desperate to get a conviction to keep his job and save his reputation. For Leslie, Weisburg’s desperation causes him to not allow any abuse evidence in the second trial. This causes her conflict because she struggles on how she’ll be able to argue her case without abuse evidence. The conflict here does what it’s supposed to do by creating tension, advancing the main plot forward, and once the story ends, the created closure.

Purpose: Lastly, the core thing that makes Law and Order better executed than Monster’s is its purpose. The show has an identity and knows exactly what message it is trying to send. For Law and Order, the purpose of the show is to showcase the corruption and unfairness of the legal system. To prove this point, it takes the real life Menendez murder case, a case that was a prime example of legal corruption and unfairness and dramatized it into a TV show. It makes sure to stick to the Law and Order format by being a legal and courtroom drama, as a result the brothers don’t get much attention, but they are still important as characters. Their testimony and allegations help build a case for the defense and their relationship with Leslie Abrahmson gives her character development.

Monsters like mentioned have a Ransom effect type of storytelling. The purpose of the Rashomon effect is supposed to show how multiple views of the same event can be interpreted in different ways and the contradictions that can arise from that. An example would be the 1970s sitcom “Good Times" episode “When there’s smoke”, after the couch catches on fire, the characters JJ, Michael and Thelma all tell Willona their story of what happened. Each story contradicts each other, making each narrator look favorable and the others look bad. In the end, it’s revealed that the character Penny is the one who lit the couch on fire after she tried to have a cigarette and dropped it on the couch after JJ says that he doesn’t like smokers. While this could have been a fresh and unique twist on dramatization of the Menendez brothers, the show drops the ball by failing to establish this. It’s not well structured, the timeline is off, the characters are not developed, it tells instead of shows, there’s a lack of proper conflict, and there’s no real purpose or identity for this show’s existence. 

Structure and timeline: One big difference between Law and Order and Monsters storytelling is how it’s structured. Law and Order for one had a clear cut story beginning, middle, and end where Monster’s does not. To give it the benefit of the doubt, it follows the timeline of the actual crime. That being, the murders, the brothers shopping spree, the Dr. Oziel drama, their arrest, then revealing the abuse to build the case, the first trial being a hung jury, the second trial, and the brothers conviction. However, the timeline seems jumpy and unfocused. For example, we see some of the same plot points multiple times such as Lyle’s Princeton suspension. Lyle explains his Princeton suspension in episode 4, in this episode this is his side of the story. We see this same plot point again in episode 6, the episode that is supposed to be the perspective of Jose and Kitty. However, the timeline is confusing because by the time the Jose and Kitty perspective episode happens, it’s after the brothers are in jail and Jose and Kitty are dead. So who is exactly telling the story? Again I understand wanting to incorporate a Rashomon effect story but the timeline is jumpy and is not structured in a way that makes it clear to the audience that the story being told is how different people interpret things. 

I mean, I’ve seen children’s shows write a better Rashomon effect story then this show has. One example I can think of is the cartoon “The powerpuff girls” in the episode “The Bare facts”, the Mayor of Townsville is kidnapped and blindfolded by the show’s main villain Mojo Jojo. The girls eventually save the mayor and take him back to his office, but the girls are giggling when they save him but he’s still blindfolded so he wants to know what’s so funny. When he is finally unblindfolded, he continues to ask the girls what’s so funny but they don’t want to tell him so they all change the subject by telling the story of how they found out he was kidnapped and how they rescued him. Each girl narrates the story from their perspective, but each account contradicts each other and is extremely hyperbolic. By the end, it is revealed that the girls were giggling about the fact that Mojo Jojo had stripped the mayor nude during the kidnapping and the girls were telling the mayor this story to avoid telling him the truth about why they were laughing. 

This kind of storytelling concept could have worked with the Menendez story because there are alot of characters in this case that have different perspectives on what exactly happened. But the problem is the story makes no effort to let the audience know that this is the case, so when we see Erik and Lyle ganging up on their mom and cursing her out, the audience doesn't know that in this particular episode it is supposed to be Kitty and Jose’s perspective so we are supposed to their behavior at face value. There’s no narrator or anything else to indicate that this multiple perspectives show. If episode 1 had stayed exactly the way it is and had ended with Dr Oziel on the stand or talking to his wife, Judalon, a journalist, or Jill and Leslie explaining what he thinks happened, and every episode began or ended like that, I probably still wouldn’t be a fan of the show but at least I could understand the kind of storytelling. Unfortunately, it seems like the show did not know how to properly structure that kind of story it is telling and thus comes across as sloppy, confusing, and inconsistent. 

Conflict: I’ve already touched on this in the subplots section, so I will keep this brief, Monsters includes very little conflict or tension for the story. Of course there are conflicts such as Judalon and Oziel’s drama and Dominick Dunne’s articles. But the conflicts don’t really do much to drive the plot in a unique way, but because they happened in real life. The show took many creative liberties when it came to the brothers' personalities but not when it came to plot points. The conflict between Leslie and David Conn was based on actual events, yet it was still highly dramatized enough to give the main plot a conflict and a resolution. Monsters, when it did have a conflict, didn't seem to know how to resolve it. Dominick Dunne’s storyline did not have an antagonist to foil his plans, and as a result the conflict created no tension and no flakes. This creates what’s called a forced conflict, or a conflict that’s added in just to create a conflict. In this show, it feels like Domonick Dunne’s gossip is added in just because Dominick was an actual figure, he was in the Law and Order show but he is reduced to a minor character. Ryan Murphy has stated that Domonick was heavily involved in the series because he was a key figure in how the public viewed the brothers. This can be a valid point, however Dominick's gossip comes across as more of a nuisance as opposed to an actual conflict for the brothers. A conflict is supposed to raise stakes, create tension and develop characters but his involvement doesn’t do much for the main plot. Unfortunately, it seemed like the writers didn’t know how to write a proper conflict.

Lack of purpose: Lastly, the biggest issue is that it has no purpose. Unlike Law and Order, the show has no real identity and doesn’t know what message it's trying to send. I understand wanting to let the audience decide who is telling the truth. Although I am on the brothers' side, there are perspectives out there that could put the brothers in hot water, the show doesn’t seem to know how to portray the multiple perspectives thing. So, on my first watch I was left confused on what the point was. Who are the monsters here? Erik and Lyle? Jose and Kitty? Domonick? If the writers wanted to let the audience decide then they did an awful job at establishing the Rashomon effect storytelling. The biggest proof that this was a terrible storytelling decision is the cast and writers having to explain this in every interview. If the show made it’’s purpose and identity clear then the case wouldn’t have to explain the show’s message. Simply put, Monster’s has reason to exist and doesn’t know what message it wants to convey,

Final thoughts:

All in all, Law and Order, while far from being perfect and having its fair share of inaccuracies, it’s still by far the most accurate out of the five Menendez dramatizations and blows Monsters out of the water. It does struggle with pacing issues, especially towards the end and I think Monsters had better acting, production quality, and chemistry between the actors than Law and Order. I do prefer Nicholas and Cooper over Miles and Gus as Lyle and Erik. They’re both very talented and entertaining to watch and are more believable as brothers in my opinion. I enjoyed their brotherly moments and their back and forth bantering scenes, it may not be accurate but it really establishes them as believable siblings. Javier and Chloe also have more chemistry as Jose and Kitty in my opinion, although Carlos and Lolita were given better material, I still prefer Javier and Chloe. I think the main cast had better chemistry and we’re more believable as a family then Miles, Gus, Carlos and Lolita.  The production team for Monsters also did a better job at establishing an 80s and early 90s aesthetic by the costuming, set designs, and music. The brothers costuming, especially when it came to their court outfits were spot on.

However, overall Law and Order did a better job when it comes to storytelling. Sure, it is biased for the defense but because it’s covering the case from a legal standpoint and Leslie is the main character, we are seeing the version of events from her eyes so storytelling wise it makes sense that the story would be in her favor. The biggest issue with Monsters is not the inaccuracies or the oversexualization but because it doesn’t know what it’s trying to say. It’s clear that Ryan wants the audience to decide who the Monsters are, but because he isn't clear with his aim to tell a Ransom effect storytelling, the audience is left confused on whose side they are supposed to be on. It comes across as inconsistent, unorganized, and lacking in identity. It’s frustrating too because you can see a lot of potential here for a good or even passable show, but it seemed like Ryan was more into capturing his fantasies as opposed to writing a good story. Really the only saving grace of this trainwreck of a show is the actors who are really putting on their best performance to save this mess of a series. 

[burst-of-iridescent]

atla live action thoughts: season one review

first things first: anyone who says the Movie That Does Not Exist is better than the live action is straight-up lying. the shymalan film fails on the criteria of even being a decent movie, let alone an adaptation. the netflix series, for all its problems, is at least an enjoyable watch with great effects, music and (mostly) appropriate casting. there's absolutely nothing to compare here - the netflix version clears easily.

now that we've gotten that out of the way, let's delve into the series, starting with the positives.

the good:

visuals and cinematography. they really did a great job of making it feel like a fantasy universe you wanted to be in & i love how vibrant the saturation and colour grading was. it made the world feel so much more dynamic and alive instead of the same flat, boring dullness that so many movies and shows have these days. sometimes i didn't even mind that i was being fed obvious exposition because at least they were giving me something pretty to look at lmao

effects and action. the bending was surprisingly good for the most part, and they did a good job of making the elements feel unique through the stunt choreography and the actors' movements. i'm immensely thankful they didn't try to skimp on budget by merely cutting away from fight scenes or showing us as little as possible. almost all the action sequences were fast-paced and engaging, and i was never bored watching them

acting. the main four were all great, but gordon cormier and dallas liu have to be the standouts for me. gordon brings such an earnest, innocent sweetness to aang that you can't help but like him, and dallas plays all of zuko's facets perfectly: the angst, the explosive anger, the bratty snark, and especially the deep-rooted pain that characterizes so many of zuko's actions in book 1. the range he has, especially when flashing from younger to older zuko, was insane. special shoutout to maria zhang and sebastian amoruso as suki and jet respectively, because they killed it

music. leaves from the vine instrumental had me tearbending and i love how they kept the iconic avatar theme while making it a little darker for this iteration of the story. in general, the soundtrack felt very true to the animation while still being a fresh spin on it

zuko and iroh's relationship and expanding on zuko's crew. i think the fandom universally agrees that lu ten's funeral and zuko's crew being the 41st division were the best changes in the series, so i'm not going to talk about it further other than to say that these scenes show me what the show can be, and that's why i'm not giving up on it

the bad:

characterization. almost all the main characters are missing the little nuances that made them so great in the original, but the greatest casualty is katara. i hate that they took away so much of her rage, and gave many of her traits and struggles to sokka. i don't think this is a problem solely with the writing though, because certain lines do feel like things animated katara would say, but the directing and line delivery don't have the same punch that made her so fierce in the original. this is an easily fixed issue though, so i hope they take the criticism and let my girl be angry and fuck shit up next season

exposition. this was primarily a problem in depicting aang's personality and the relationship between the gaang, because a) why are you TELLING me that aang is mischievous and fun-loving instead of just showing me and b) the gaang do NOT feel like close friends, mostly because they spend so much time apart in every episode that they have little screentime to actually bond and develop intimacy.

lack of focus on the intricacies of bending. for a show whose tagline is "master your element" the characters spend very little time actually... mastering their element. zuko is never shown to struggle with firebending (which is going to have ramifications when it comes to developing his relationship with azula), and neither aang nor katara ever learn waterbending from a master throughout the the entire show. i'm pretty sure aang never willingly waterbends ONCE in the entire eight episodes, discounting the avatar state and koizilla. bending isn't just cool martial arts, it's closely linked to the philosophies and spirituality of each nation, and i wish that had been explored more.

pacing. they really needed to do a better job of conveying that time passed between episodes because an 8-episode season is just going to FEEL shorter than a 20-episode one. the original animation felt as though they'd truly been on a long journey before arriving at the north, but here it feels like the entire show happened in the span of a fortnight or so because each episode seemed to pick up right after the previous. they needed to have more downtime within episodes instead of just rushing from plot beat to plot beat because it made everything feel a lot more rushed. give the characters and story time to breathe.

final rating: 7/10.

overall, i would describe the live action as a better version of the percy jackson movies - not an accurate or perfect adaptation, but a decent story that's very fun to watch. but what really makes me root for this show to get a season 2 is that it has a lot of potential and more importantly, a lot of heart. it's evident that the people who worked on it do genuinely love and respect the original series, and it shows onscreen.

regardless of anything else, this show created opportunities for so many asian and indigenous actors, writers and creators to tell the kinds of stories and play the kinds of roles they don't usually get, and that's something worth supporting. if they take the criticism from this season and improve, i believe they really do have something special on their hands which - although it might not be the original we all know and love - could still be a story to be proud of.

[spider-spirit-god-whatever-bitch]

ok fine let's talk about how the Loki tv show made him straight & how that's basically why hes so different in the show. an essay which will probably go on longer than i want it to.

ok, swooping claim right off the bat: Loki is a queer coded villain in the first two Thor movies and in The Avengers (2012). idk how widely accepted this is, but it's absolutely true. and they didn't only pick up the good tropes. Loki is very effeminate in looks (long hair (well actually they all do in the thor movies), that outfit is just a dress lets be honest, very skinny. absolute skin and bones, no muscle). shown as much more cowardly than the manlyTM Thor, instead of using brute force relying on tricks. the flamboyant speeches. being self-centered. no confirmed girlfriends nor romantic/sexual relationships of any kind. also the obsession with his mother, which was just a thing from the hays code era when ppl just assumed all gay men were obsessed with their mothers. there's a reason queer coded villains are a tad problematic. But Loki falls under so many of these accepted tropes. this article I have opened in parallel about what makes a villain queer coded lists him TWICE in the examples. in the movies, he's gay. he's a gay disney villain.

however, the Loki tv show needed to make him a protagonist. especially if they're airlifting 2012 Loki out of the narrative, they're going to need to speedrun some character development FAST. of course, that means you need to ditch his villain traits immediately (remember we only have 6 episodes and we have to cram in a recap, two intros and an outro into each of them). however, in the original movies, a large part of his villain-ness is so heavily entangled with his queerness. at this point there were two choices: disentangle the queerness from the villain-ness, keeping him queer but making his flamboyancy, tricks and effeminacy a part of his new protagonist characterization. which i would have fucking loved. lets be honest everyone wants the queer coded villain to be the main character. but that would require innovation and you're not allowed that at marvel. careful!! you almost took a risk there!! so instead of subverting the queer coded villain trope with a relatively innovative idea, they just chucked everything in the trash. seriously, rewatch the first episode, and see how quickly they try to subvert every single last thing on the list. in the first MINUTES they take away his magic so he can no longer rely on tricks, they strip him of his effeminate clothes (showing off that he now has chiselled masculine manly male abs) and replace them with a collared shirt and tie. they have him realise that he's self obsessed, and have him be like "ohhh im going to get better its bad that im narcisisstic im self conscious now". also, they introduce Sylvie, and absolutely use her to point out how 100% straight he is. when sylvie is on screen they make a big deal about how SHES THE FEMALE LOKI!! SHES A GIRL AND HES A BOY AND THEYRE DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF THAT!! taking away any gender ambiguity. idk why they do this with such a passion but they LOOOOVE pointing out that Loki is a guy in this show. and then they speedrun putting him in a romantic relationship with her.

and there's no argument to be made about making him canonically queer, because what they did is so painfully token its not even funny. they casually drop that he is bi, and it is never acknowledged again. ever. just a casual "a bit of both". four words. thats it. they could have very easily elaborated on this, because there's so many gaps to be filled here: what is it like being queer on asgard?? is it the future the woke left TM wants, or is there stigma around it? if there is stigma, how did that contribute to his whole thing of feeling like an outsider? what about jotunheim? does his family know? you're building an universe here. elaborate on it. maybe you don't need graphic gay sex on screen, but there is a middle ground here. and boy are they far from it. because not only do they not elaborate on it, but by this point they have drained all the queerness out of him. they made him the most cishet-acceptableTM gay they could. this is to an extent personal taste but i really dont like it when movies do that. please, let them actually embody queer culture. let him have some fashion sense, some mannerisms, SOMETHING, which shows that he's outwardly queer. queer coded villains do somewhat come from a time of homophobia, but that does not mean you can't try to reclaim it. Loki could have stayed androgynous and ambiguously bi/gay/aro?. or you could have just made that canon, and kept him how he was. I'm not saying avoid character development, but this was too fast and incredibly unnatural.

anyways in conclusion they fucked up and this was the fakest gay representation i have seen in a while. and that's not even TOUCHING on the frankly disgusting amounts of queerbaiting going on between him and Mobius like dude come on is it 2014 or 2024

[seventeenlovesthree]

Can I ask you another question? This happens to be just an overall view I see from the Digimon community, but why are the personalities of the Digidestined seem almost offensive or wrong to so many people when it comes to Digimon Tri?

I know it may seem inconsistent with the Digidestined from Adventure all the way to Kizuna with Tri thrown in there, but Tri focused more on the negative aspects of a Digidestined’s personality.

Back in there teenage years it to me makes more sense they are showing inconsistencies in character as they are all trying to find out who they are. They are inbetween being children and adults and they are allowed to make mistakes or show that side of themselves at a more extreme level.

Sure it’s kept in check with the other series but raging hormone filled teenagers have to make those mistakes (or learn from others so they don’t repeat them) in order to build character and grow is refreshing and helps. E have more empathy for them.

Aside from their personalities this is what made Digimon so enticing. So that being said, in light of this do you still think that Digimon Tri did each Digidestined a disservice by portraying them as really people that they are nowhere near as?

Tri does get a lot of flack and rightfully so, but this part shouldn’t be one of those reasons.

Sorry for the long winded question. It was only fair I delivered it in context for your answer though.

My ask box is always open and I'm always interested in discussions like this, it doesn't matter if it's a bit more lengthy, because that helps me to understand where you come from yourself a bit better.

Admittedly, I do have my own personal "vendetta" with the way Tri is constructed in several ways - I have my issues with the pacing, the number of plot points, parts of the fanservice, the way the 02 cast was handled... However, I tried to bring up some positivity the other day by listing the majority of my favourite moments (and as I browse through my screenshot folder, there may actually be more I didn't immediately remember).

There are things that grind my gears - but I agree that not everything deserves flack.

My main problem with the characterization and arcs of the characters was mostly that it did feel like "recycled" conflict. Which, as you said yourself, is not NECESSARILY a bad thing, as we're all human, we all have our moments of regression and self-doubt. It IS relatable. There's a reason why this Jyoumi moment is one of my favourites after all:

On the other hand, I simply couldn't shake the feeling that Tri would have worked better if it had taken place between 01 and 02 - or if 02 hadn't existed in this universe in the first place. Because a lot of the conflict and development would have made a lot more sense if it had happened between 01 and 02, simply due to the fact that the majority of the characters already seemed WAY more mature in 02 despite their ages. I understand that writing characters consistently after 02 must have been incredibly difficult because of that - but witnessing Jyou as serene and confident and Yamato as open and dorky as they were in 02, just to see Yamato turn a lot more cold again and Jyou losing a lot of his self-efficacy all over again was just a bit disappointing. And in terms of Koushirou, I just didn't like how MUCH emphasis they put on his "hormones", it took them almost three movies for him to feel like an important character again and he deserves so much more than that. Yes, he had his good moments before that, of course! But he lost a lot of his dignity on his way there (at least in my opinion). It's just not nice to ignore the development they already went through.

I tried to summarize that once in a post before, I hope this will make a little bit more sense!

Upon rewatching a lot of scenes again, I may argue that Taichi (and in parts Sora) was the one I could make most sense of in his/their Tri portrayals after analyzing it for a while - even if their conflicts repeated themselves. I have written several analysis posts on Taichi regressing due to him getting older and struggling to find his path, prioritizing and making difficult decisions to maintain balance and unity, mourning the loss of his "younger self" being more daring (see for example here and here). Sora deals with similar issues after all, as she also struggles with her sense of self, obligation and femininity, unsure whether she can and should make decisions for herself, as a Chosen Child and/or the daughter of an iemoto and that is why she HAS to make uncomfortable (and sometimes even wrong) decisions (see here, here, here and here).

I love Digimon for how deeply I can analyze these characters and, as mentioned, the regressing is human and realistic after all - but at some point, I would just like to see them succeed and overcome their conflicts to at least some degree. Digimon never shied away from NOT writing happy ends for their characters - but with all the suffering they put Taichi through (just for example), it would be almost cruel not to see him get his personal closure at some point.

[novelmonger]

1, 7, 13, 14

Okay, you specified FMA or LotR, but I'm gonna do both because I can and because no one else is sending asks in.

The character everyone gets wrong

FMA - I think Hawkeye may be the one most likely for people to get wrong. If I had a nickel for every time I started reading a fanfic where Hawkeye is a trigger-happy lunatic that everyone in the office lives in fear of, and/or is a strict taskmaster who is perpetually annoyed with everyone, I'd be rich. She's a very complex and layered character, but so many people don't seem willing to look any deeper than the surface of a sequence that was played for laughs, and they make that her entire personality. Never mind all the examples we have of her being gentle, being someone children feel safe enough around to share their hopes and fears, getting emotional, relaxing and joking with friends, teetering on the razor's edge of suicide.... There are so many sides to her, and it's difficult to get her right, but it's also astonishing to me just how badly some people characterize her.

LotR - There are a few contenders, but...maybe Merry? Most of the blame can be laid to the movies, I think, but a lot of people seem to take him as "the more boring but less stupid Pippin." That does him such a disservice, because when you really pay attention to him (especially in the book), there's so much more going on than being part of a comic relief duo who eventually manages to kill a Nazgul. In actuality, he's debatably the most capable all-around of the four main hobbits, and he deserves much more recognition than he gets.

7. What character did you begin to hate not because of canon but because of how the fandom acts around them?

FMA - Hmm...you know, I'm not sure I hate any of the characters, really. Even the villains are at least interesting and well-developed, so I don't mind them as far as that goes. They serve the purpose they were made for. The character I come the closest to hating would probably be Kimbley, but that's entirely for what an awful person he is in canon. I will say I find certain prevalent descriptions of characters to be annoying because everyone uses them and they stopped being amusing twenty years ago. Like saying that Envy's hair makes him look like a palm tree. I've never liked that. But Envy is actually my favorite Homunculus in the manga/Brotherhood version, so....

LotR - The Show That Shall Not Be Named is almost enough to make me dislike Galadriel. Almost. Not quite. (And I haven't even watched said show!) Faux-Galadriel is a hateful abomination that I want to kick off a cliff, and any time a fan tries to defend her, I hate her that little bit more. Real Galadriel is super cool, though. I'm hoping that my current re-read of The Silmarillion and LotR will cement the real Galadriel in my mind again. This is what happens when you butcher a character and flaunt it like you're better than the person who created the character in the first place.

13. Worst blorbofication

FMA - I'm not entirely sure I understand the term "blorbofication," but I must confess I've never understood the obsession with Greed in the fandom. Like...yeah, it's a pretty cool concept for a villain and an interesting departure from the rest of the Homunculi because he's a rebel. But I don't personally find him that likeable; he creeps me out as much as the other Homunculi, and he's more unpredictable too because he's got his own agenda going on. I appreciate his help in the fight against Father, but I don't understand why he gets so much focus by certain circles of the fandom.

LotR - This is actually really hard, because all of the characters are so good, it's like...yeah, of course that's someone's blorbo. But if I have to pick one, I think I'm actually going to go with Legolas. Not because he's a bad or uninteresting character - by no means! But I think - partly because of the way he was handled in the movies, where he's little more than a pretty face who's good at shooting things - when fans latch onto Legolas as their blorbo, they forget a lot of details that make him so much more than that. Like how sassy he is. Or how just kind of...weird he can be, as an Elf in a party of beings who are much more down-to-earth.

14. The one thing you see in fics all the time

FMA - Ohhhh, there are so many dumb things to pick from ʘ‿ʘ I mean, there are good things (or at least things with the potential to be good) that crop up a lot too, like turning a character (usually Ed or Mustang) into a chimera and the rest of the characters having to deal with it. Or there are the things you see in fics from most fandoms, like self-inserts and "my super special OC tags along with the protagonists for some reason and basically nothing changes in the plot except that the protagonist falls in love with them." But one that's more specific to FMA is the fic where Ed randomly starts singing (sometimes with the accompaniment of a piano or maybe a guitar), even though there isn't the slightest indication in canon that he has any musical ability or interest whatsoever. It's usually very emo and angsty, and almost always features a Vic Mignogna song.

LotR - Confession time: I hardly ever read LotR fics. Mostly that's because no one can write as well as Tolkien, and whether the writer attempts to or not, it's often quite jarring when you compare it to the books. (I say this as someone who is currently attempting to write an LotR fic with the full knowledge that I will never reach that pinnacle of excellence. Generally, stories centered around hobbits don't stick out to me as much as ones about, say, Elves.) Anyway, I don't think I have enough data to really point to any trends. But one thing I'm pretty confident I can say, even without having read that many fics: Too many fics are focused on shipping.

Send me more spicy asks!

[snazzyo]

Movie Dune beats Book Dune

Why the Dune Movie is better than the Dune Book

New to Dune?  The original book was written in 1965.  It’s full of sexism with moments of misogyny, homophobia, interoperability (wrongly) of the white male savior trope, and some difficult to swallow premises even for Science Fiction.  So WHY am I a fan?  Because the series as a whole has some fascinating concepts, interesting mysteries, and set aside at least some of the highly offensive elements as it progressed.  And it’s actually a pretty complex and meaty evaluation of forms of government and human nature. Also note, the last of the “original concept” books was finished by Herbert’s son with a co-author and while still weirdly overconcerned with the mystical powers of sex, it has become significantly less offensive while finishing the story. 

But the main reason Movie Dune beats Book Dune is how well the major characters are developed.  They are more in keeping with the entire franchise perspective than the original book.  In fact, the first book was a bit like a TV pilot. Definitely clunkly at times.  It was introducing the Duniverse (Dune universe) with a 1965 understanding of technology and relationships.  By the third or fourth book, Herbert had improved some of the more off-putting elements.  Further, Herbert made time jumps that leave out critical character development.  The series spans 20-30 millennia.  But even within the periods he’s writing about, and an overabundance of ‘internal voice’, character development is both convoluted while often unsatisfying. Many of the characters end up as fallen heroes or make decisions difficult to support. That IS a vital element to the story. But we need to see why they do what they do and what options they choose to correct. [Note: I’m avoiding spoilers but will provide a warning — Dune is more complex than a high concept hero’s journey)

Fortunately Denis Villeneuve brings a 2021 perspective and a character development that is both more satisfying and yet consistent with the main beats of the entire franchise.  Here’s the rundown of the differences in major elements.

Characters: - Paul: Movie Paul is much more likeable and understandable.  Timothee Chalamet shows the transition from teen to manhood with great skill. The trauma he experiences is better expressed, his horror at the future he sees and the decisions he makes are all much more clear with less dialog and less words.  Paul as a ‘Chosen One’ is reasonably undermined (appropriately) in the movie but only time will tell what the audience picks up on. - Chani: We see very little in the movie but the few moments of ‘reality’ Chani brings out the warrior elements of the character and less of the simplistic “elfin featured” repetitive characterization.   The warrior elements are true to the story, this is an example of how the movie fleshes out so much better than Herbert did.   - Leto: There are times in the book series where I pretty much hated Leto and his coldness towards Jessica.  The entitlement is grotesque at times.  But movie Leto was also a part of the Herbert story. And THAT is the Leto that could motivate the dedication of Thewfir, Gurney and Duncan. - Jessica: Is a badass in both book and movie. But the whole concubine concept is gross despite the Duniverse rationale laid out more clearly in the books. - The warrior trio is a mixed bag compared to the book: Thufir is nearly absent from the movie, which is a pity, but Gurney and Duncan are better developed.  The movie fails to have Gurney’s warrior-poet personality (we should have had ONE song on the ballaset), but his toughness is spot on.  And Duncan is a full-blown movie hero.  Which works well in context of what Herbert ultimately intended. - Stilgar: Movie Stilgar’s intelligence radiates from the screen.  There are times that book Stilgar can look naïve.  Movie Stilgar is far better developed.  Again, in a short span. - The Baron: Movie Baron shows the intelligence that comes across in the books.  The David Lynch Dune movie really damaged that character.    

The Duniverse Premise: - Nobility and Intrigue:  It doesn’t play that well in 2021 but “Science Fiction” and pseudo-dystopian universe covers a lot of questions.  The movie does not flesh this out as well as the books but this is where some of the problems lie (especially in sexism) so it’s not a great loss. Conversely, Paul lays out the central feudal-intrigue (the Emperor has no sons) so sexism is still fundamental in the plot. - Technology:  No computers is a HARD SELL.  Book or movie.  If you read all the prequel books you get the concept.  But… there is little discussion about Mentats and why they are needed. Probably best to skip that in these first two movies.  If there are more, they can delve deeper. - The Guild: the book franchise ultimately improves these characters.  They and the court are non-entities in the movie. - The Bene Gesserit: Brilliant casting of Charlotte Ramping as Mohiam in the movie.  The gom-jabar scene is vital and she nails it.  I prefer the movie version over the book.

 Bottom Line: Taking on Dune as a book series to read requires you tolerate a 1965 mentality in the first book.  By the end of the series it’s better and you see the concepts, the storyline, the conflicts as much more fascinating.  Movie Dune was interesting right from the start and side-steps most of the unnecessary offensive elements of the book.  Movie Dune improves on the characters without actually deviating from the author’s intent.  The author’s intent, however, take more than one book to get to.  So, if you read for the concepts and conflicts it poses, enjoy  but please envision movie characterization as you do.  

[out-of-this-dimension]

Hypothetically Rewriting Assault’s Story + Some General Assault Opinions

There’s a game my husband and I like to play when we watch a movie, play a game, or read a book that has a story that we don’t really enjoy or we enjoy certain parts of but not others.  We look at things we’d keep and things we’d change and we build a story from there-- sort of like an AU but we don’t really go into the writing part, we just stick to theorizing and mapping a general story.

I decided to play that game with Star Fox.  Not because I think Star Fox has a bad story but because sometimes I think the stories could have been handled better.  Note: for the rewrite game, I only really look at story, even for video games, I don’t really look at gameplay mechanics, but I do understand those have a lot to do with story potential so I do take it in as a factor... I just don’t bother to “rewrite” the mechanics, if that makes any sense at all.  Some of my list today will include boss encounters but I wouldn’t necessarily say those are mechanic-related... more like “event-related”.

I’ve mused a bit in the past about rewriting Adventures and Command and I do have plans to do a mock up of an Adventures remake eventually.  However, today I was thinking about how I would go about handling an Assault re-write in particular.  Much like Command and Adventures, I don’t have any beef with the core story but I do think there’s a few things that could’ve been better about Assault’s storyline-- like they had good ideas rolling but they didn’t quite refine them.

Under the cut because SUPER long.

My basic feelings on Assault are pretty positive.  I think the game is generally just fun and I like that it feels like the natural progression from SF64.  I liked getting to see planets we haven’t seen since the N64 era in better graphics and I liked seeing Star Wolf return.  I also just thought the aparoids were neat enemies. 

Generally speaking, though, when it comes to Assault, I think it suffers from the thing it tries to push the most-- the story.  I think a lot of people get caught up in thinking the story is better than it is because it’s the first game since SF64 that really follows the same Star Fox vibe without retelling the Lylat Wars.  Don’t get me wrong, the overall plot is great but the execution and pacing are... wonky.  Certain characterizations also take a hit in some regards but no one really talks about that when Command exists. That’s something we’ll talk about later on with this post.

That being said, Assault really does have a lot good going for it.  An absolute banger of a soundtrack, some great dialogue, a neat story synopsis, the introduction of cool characters like Panther and Beltino (who existed but was always off-screen), and just good levels.  

So, here’s what I would add, I suppose, if I were to somehow have the ability to rewrite Assault.  Originally I had this in paragraph form, but I’ve made it into more of a list under topic segments with main points bolded for your viewing pleasure.  Some of these points might be considered nitpicky and while I do understand that yes, this is a game about space animals, I do hold the developers in high enough regard to make a game with a continuity that makes sense.

The Story Changes

- Reduce Pigma’s storyline in Assault.  This is the biggest one for me because a bulk of the plotline feels like a giant chase to just get at Pigma and it feels like it derails from the actual plot with the aparoids.  We only go to Sargasso because of Pigma.  We only go to Fichina and then back to Meteo again, because of Pigma.  That’s 3 levels in a 10 level game devoted to just tracking down Pigma and chasing him.  While it makes the build up to fighting Pigma kind of nice, I personally feel like the plot could be reduced to 2 levels.  If Assault overall was a longer game, I could see them making it 3 levels.  Overall, though, in its current state, I feel like the side plot overstays its welcome and the aparoids promptly get shoved to the side in favor of “Oh no, we gotta get to Pigma!” And I get the main motive here is to show how the aparoids affect people and because of the build up, it does a good job at showing how utterly terrifying the aparoids are.  But it’s still too long given the length of Assault’s story. The only alternative to this is make Assault longer, which... honestly, it should be.  

- Revise the scene with Tricky.  I’m obviously not well-versed in dinosaur biology but I’m pretty sure dinos didn’t grow that fast from what studying I HAVE done.  And why is he suddenly king now?  Did his parents die?  He seems not affected by this at all?  Like it’s a funny scene with him, Fox, and Krystal, but it’s odd if you really look at it.  Give us, as players, more context because I’m still not even sure what happened to make Tricky suddenly the leader and... big.  As a note, you’re gonna hear me gripe a lot about the Sauria level in this post.

- The Star Wolf + Peppy sacrifice is a low effort way to raise tension/stakes and then cop out.  Oldest trick in the book, imo, is to act like you’re going to kill off important characters only for them to be alive miraculously.  And let’s face it, as an audience we all know they aren’t going to kill those characters because it’s Nintendo and those characters are too beloved.  I would’ve forgiven them for only doing this with Peppy or Star Wolf, but when you tack them both together and throw in the fact they make it seem like you’re going to have to kill General Pepper too... yeah, it’s just a bit much of the same trope over and over again.  I wanted to put a note in here about how I’m fine with the Great Fox being “sacrificed” but overall, it needed to return to the series because of it’s icon status, but I think that’s more of a gripe at Command instead of Assault.

- Keep Pigma alive.  This will conflict with a point I have later on about the game consistently having characters cheat death for easy drama points but with Pigma, I would’ve kept him fully alive... but maybe with some physical damage from the aparoids.  I understand he’s semi-alive in Command and tbh I don’t know where I stand on that.  Why keep Pigma alive, you might ask?  I feel like his character has a lot more potential than being “just the greedy guy”.  Like he’s got good potential future villain material for future games and... if I’m honest?  I just don’t see Nintendo wanting to keep Pigma dead so why even bother killing him off?  They couldn’t even commit to him being dead in Command anyways so it seems very moot.

- Bring Bill and Katt back.  Assault is acts a bit like a big reunion of all of our SF64 favorites but our two favorite side characters are suspiciously missing.  Wouldn’t Bill be out on the front lines fighting against Andrew in the beginning?  Or maybe back in Katina?  And wouldn’t Katt inevitably show up in the midst of the invasion, maybe to pointedly check in on Falco?

- Bring Andrew back for the final fight. I think Andrew being defeated early into the game is fine overall but I think bringing him back in for a reunion final fight against the aparoids would serve to really solidify that it’s really everyone vs the invading aparoid force.  It would show that not only is Star Wolf willing to put aside their differences but so is basically everyone in the Lylat System in the name of survival.  Imagine the Venomians and Cornerians working together against an aparoid fleet, giving Star Fox and Star Wolf time to attack the queen?  I just think it’d be neat and it’d open up the potential for some fun banter mid-mission.  I do understand that quite a few people consider Andrew canonically dead after Assault but personally, I feel that his defeat left his fate questionable (I’m a staunch believer that unless there’s a body, they’re probably alive, especially for Nintendo games because, again, they never like to kill people off) so him returning in Command never really bothered me.  

- In general, reconsider some of the character portrayals.  Unfortunately, when a series has a different studio for each game, character portrayals will inevitably have inconsistencies.  While I give Namco a lot of credit for putting in oodles and oodles of detail into the game (particularly the levels), I think they failed in their portrayal of Fox, at the least, and Wolf is a considerable offender as well.  While it’s obvious that Fox in Adventures was effectively modeled off of Sabre even in terms of personality, Rareware was at least able to justify Fox’s newfound jaded attitude with the passing of many years and a distinct lack of steady income, resulting in the team being in disarray.  Assault’s Fox is a stark contrast to his cynical interpretation with seemingly no explanation other than maybe “Oh, I have more money and a gf, maybe I should behave myself”.  As if the sudden change in personality wasn’t random, Fox also just seems very blah, like a blank slate stereotypical shooter game protagonist dude with little to no emotion.  Wolf is less obvious but gets slated into a mentor-like role midway through the game and ends up in a respectful rivalry with Fox... which there’s nothing inherently wrong with that except for it happening abruptly (and, I mean, Peppy is right there).  But I take less issue with this and more of an issue with the fact that there’s an entire level establishing that Wolf now runs a crime den with effectively what seems to be an army and no one bats an eye at this.  He doesn’t even call on them to help with the aparoids.  Did they all die when the aparoids attacked Meteo?  Are they safe somewhere else?  Where do they go?  How was Sargasso able to operate without the CDF being on their doorstep with warrants for arrests?

- Don’t kill all the dinosaurs.  A bit of a dramatic statement but the ending screen that showed all the damage to Sauria really bothered me.  While I understand that the dinosaurs had less of a chance against the aparoids than a more technology-focused society like Corneria, I was a bit disappointed that the decision was made to just state that a lot of tribes had been wiped out.  I know this could easily be retconned in a future game and I feel like it should be.  “But why, Amalia?  Why are you disappointed by that?”  1) It’s a little too grimdark for my tastes.  2) The fact it all happened off-screen felt very hand-wavy.  And 3) It brings into question the entire point of Adventures.  Why did we bother to save this planet if it was going to be reduced to rubble and ash 1 year later?  Where were the Krazoa in all of this?  Why did they not make an appearance at all to try to stop the invasion with their alleged powers?  It just raises too many weird questions and I feel like Namco didn’t think it through too much.  Which I mean, sure.  Family, kiddo game.  I’m not asking for bigbrain plot and lore but I’m squinting at this bit because it does feel very contrary to the lore from the previous game.

- Make the aparoids more relevant.  As nice as it is to have a random bad guy from another galaxy, I feel like there was more that could be done with the aparoids in terms of their origins.  Tiny things, mind you, not huge revelations.  Off the top of my head, they could have been tied into Krystal’s backstory to help alleviate some of the complaints that she was too random to be added to the series’ main cast.  Alternatively, they could have been a product of Andross or even a weapon prototype from Corneria that fled the lab (I actually thought the game was leaning in that direction for a bit then just Nothing Happened).  I get that the vagueness of their origins leaves room for people to speculate and speculation is nice but... when you leave too many things unknown, it starts to feel less like giving fans room to interpret and more like just doing random things for the sake of it.  I think a lore tidbit here or there would work wonders for the aparoids instead of leaving them as just borg/zerg clones.

Level-Based Changes

- Add either Aparoid RedEye or Aparoid General Scales as a boss to Sauria.  Given that this level mysteriously lacks a boss, which is just weird compared to the other levels, I think that they had the opportunity to add something cool to go along with the cinematic feel they were going for with Assault.  Assault’s cutscenes do play in a movie-like fashion and it’s clear they’re trying to make the game as epic as possible.  It’s a shame they had so much fodder for a great boss here but they failed to go through with it.  Alternatively: Add a Krazoa-Aparoid fusion.  Why?  Because Star Fox is about cool epic sci-fi and that would be cool epic sci-fi incarnate.

- Add a boss to the Aparoid Homeworld Level, aka the penultimate level.  Another one I felt was personally weird that there was no “final defense system” to challenge the team.  Would be cool to do an aerial battle over the aparoid planet with some giant flying aparoid.

- Be kinder to Sauria.  The level had some good homages but overall was incredibly small and incredibly short.  It felt like a bone tossed to Adventures fans but was not entirely true to the setting built by Rareware.  I’m... not even sure where the Sauria level is supposed to take place?  I presume it’s Walled City but it doesn’t really have the same color scheme or aesthetic?  Also where is my revised Adventures music?  Why do all the other levels get it but Sauria doesn’t? 

- Put some of those funky items from the multiplayer into the main campaign.  I don’t know why some of these things, items especially, were omitted unless it was purely due to time constraints.  I remember having missile launchers and jetpacks in the multiplayer and was a bit sad that they were not in the main campaign.  Retuning the levels and adding those in would be a nice breath of fresh air for the more tedious on-foot missions.

- More levels.  Self-explanatory.  Still sad we didn’t get the Zoness or Titania levels in the single-player mode.  

I think all of the above changes would improve the game, though I recognize all of this is being said 16 years later after lots of time to contemplate Assault’s weaker points.  I’m not entirely certain how long Star Fox Assault took to develop but given that there’s obviously quite a bit scrapped from the game (an entire arcade mode was scrapped as well), I’m going to assume that the studio felt pressured to shove the game out the door and into the hands of customers.  It’s a shame, really, because I think a little bit longer in the oven would have done a lot of good.  Still, the product we got was good in its own right and a game that many people look back on fondly.  I haven’t gotten to replay it in years but I hope to quite soon.

You might wonder why I bothered typing this all out and I guess my point was this-- Assault was great but it wasn’t perfect, and while a lot of other games fall under a crushing amount of scrutiny, Assault seems to dodge it.  And don’t get me wrong-- I adore Assault.  But given that not many takes exist out there about rewriting it, I decided to give it a shot.  For variety’s sake.  

I do want to a mock up of a revised Assault story, which I think I will get to work on after completing this while all my ideas are still fresh in mind.  So stay tuned for that sometime in the near future.  I will also be doing my Adventures mock up at some point but probably not for a little bit as I do wanna focus some of my free time on actual fic-writing.

Anyways, if you stuck around this long, thank you for reading!  Have any changes you’d like to see to Assault if you could time machine your way back to the early 2000s?  Feel free to post in the comments, I’d love to read your ideas!

[tanoraqui]

okay I have to do this today because even I wouldn’t do it after the godforsaken finale airs, and it’s basically my specialty and I did spend like an hour thinking about it last night while washing dishes. Definitely partly inspired by @words-writ-in-starlight​‘s insightful post on everything Supernatural did wrong, and apologies in advance to all the characters for dragging them into anything related to Christian mythology:

Wei Wuxian’s parents die in a house fire when he’s 6(? I refuse to look anything up) months old

Jiangs are a hunter family I guess? That whole disaster of a family dynamic, except WWX dips out at some point to be idk an environmental activist bc at the time, that seems like the larger threat to the whole world. “Mom and Dad went on a hunting trip and they haven’t come back”, “bitch” “jerk”, 2 brothers in a beat-up old car, you know the drill

Jins are also an old hunting family, but more Men of Letters energy - they have a fancy bunker and do research and avoid getting their actual hands dirty. Jiang Yanli ducked out of the active hunting life a few years ago to be happily married to her peacock and settled down with a baby and she’s fine. We’re not going to bother Yanli. She’s safe and happy and doesn’t need to involved in any of this

so, WWX is the demon blood child developing exciting new abilities like telekinesis, mind control, exorcising demons by sheer force of will...etc, and Jiang Cheng is the Righteous Man. Lucifer, Michael, etc.

s1-3 probably proceeds more or less as spn canon...which I more or less remember...by the time they find their parents at the end of s1, Jiang Fengmian is...ugh, we probably shouldn’t kill him offscreen, I mean, we should probably meet him before he dies. I guess. Madam Yu lasts longer because I’m way more interested in her. But we do know that both Jiang parents are totally inclined to fling the boys into a metaphorical or literal escape boat and go hold the line for as long as possible, so...that’s spn energy...

Xue Yang is the one who’s like “fuck yeah, demon powers” and opens the gates of Hell, because I want him to have nice* things

*nice for Xue Yang

from characterization rather than memory, I’m 90% sure that Dean tried to hide his crossroads deal from Sam, but Jiang Cheng does it...better. I think it does come out, though. Right before the hellhounds do.

here’s where it starts to go farther off from spn canon. Jiang Cheng crawls his way out of the grave, gets stalked by a menacing presence that explodes windows for an episode, incidentally can’t find WWX...*Lan Wangji voice* “I’m the one who gripped you tight and raised you from Perdition” (a baller line then and a baller line now)...and then the next episode starts with them all awkwardly standing around, and JC is like, “ok well let’s go find my brother then”, and you think there’s going to be an mdzs-riffing JC+LWJ Roadtrip To Find WWX...and they’re immediately attacked by like a dozen demons

in fact, the first time we see WWX in s4 is here, wherein he goes toe to toe with an angel and...holds his own. that’s new and terrifying! also is leading a squad of demons??

because here’s the thing: for the last 3(?) months, there’s been war in hell

because unlike Some People Mooses, upon finding out that his brother’s soul was legally nearly-owned by a crossroads demon, heir-apparent-to-Satan!WWX went, “actually fuck that” and kicked open the door of Hell (metaphorically, not loosing any demons this time) and was like, “who do I have to beat the shit out of to get a specific crossroads contract around here”

this did not work, obv. He didn’t know until it was too late, Lilith had already snapped up the contract, etc. etc.

obviously he also tried to offer himself instead, and got rejected for some reason

Since Jiang Cheng died, however, there’s been a war for control of Hell. Leading one side, Lilith, the Original Babe, who wants to break all 666(?) seals keeping Lucifer bound and in the meantime, break the Righteous Man so Heaven won’t even have Michael’s destined host ready for the Final Battle. Leading the other side, Wei Wuxian, infamous upstart, who wants to rescue the Righteous Man and restore him to life, tear Lilith’s guts out through her nose, and also stop her from doing the Lucifer thing because Wen Qing explained that yes, that’s a Thing, and it’s Bad.

Wen Qing! I’ve decided to combine Bela and Ruby’s roles and let WQ be both the cool badass example of how demon deals can go Bad and the demon deliberately leading our heroes astray for most of s3-4. Wen Qing is a very new demon; she used to be some sort of herbalist/witch but then she sold her soul in a crossroads deal to cure her brother of some lingering illness. 10 years of happiness and then boom, hellhounds. WQ is so obviously competent, though, that they (Lilith, I guess?) immediately offers her a job, with the promise threat that gee, that’s a nice brother you’ve got there, even with his Designated Chronic Health Condition getting all relapse-y. It’d be such a shame if something were to...happen to him...

we find this out at some point in last s3 I guess? some Monster of the Week case involves WN as a witness or something, or possible next victim, and WQ shows up to be A Normal Amount Of Invested In This, while desperately trying to avoid actually interacting with her brother (who thinks she’s dead). YES, the truth comes out; YES there’s a tearful reunion

now in s4, Wen Ning is fine actually, health-wise, bc he maybe made a crossroads deal with Wei Wuxian personally, and Wen Qing may or may not have admitted that she’s supposed to be working for Lilith to get WWX ready to host Lucifer? Or potentially that comes out later, idk. Either way, she’s 100% his top lieutenant in this exciting Hell War they’re waging

[insert whatever the hell (ha) happened plot-wise in s4 of supernatural]

we obviously mix up the relationships, too, bc it’s like, *LWJ internal monologue* I’m too young to remember my brother Lucifer as he was before he Fell, but surely Wei Wuxian is his Heir and Destined Vessel in truth, for he is Charismatic and Charming and Makes Me Feel Things, with his Clearly Feigned Righteous Drive and Compassion for All God’s Creatures and - why does heat keep pooling in the lower abdomen of my vessel when I look at his lips, which I am definitely doing a Normal and Not-Weird Amount - I’m just keeping an eye out for the famed Silver Tongue, and not in any way wondering how it would feel in my own mouth -

it’s actually DEFINITELY plausible for Lucifer to still be released even if our designated Heir Apparent is using his demon powers to his full potential and no one’s lying to each other about their motives. You just need to let Lilith be more scary too, and especially bc by “no one” I mostly mean Wen Qing; the angels are still totally hiding the fact that they, too, want to jumpstart the shit out of this apocalypse.  LWJ decides at the last minute that that’s a bad idea actually, gets himself discorporated to send JC to intercept WWX because he accidentally releases Lucifer, etc. etc. Oh yeah, the boys were def fighting before this, bc JC has actually fairly reasonable concerns about the sort of things WWX is getting up to in his quest to become King of Hell...

SO

...I neither know nor care what happens in s5

it does end with both Lucifer and Michael locked in the cage probably, bc I rather liked that solution. Fuck both of ‘em, basically.

I was toying with the idea that WWX also found Madam Yu in whatever hellish torment she was suffering after making a deal so her idiot son(s) would survive, and she was leading forces for him in the war against Lilith as well. If she came back to life somehow, body and all, it’d probably be compelling if she offered her own body to Michael - bc it’s her lineage! - and we’re all led to believe that she’s, uh, being a bitch and actually wants to risk destroying the world in order to destroy all demons...but then she seizes back control and flings herself/Michael and Lucifer into the Pit, because she’s just That Hardcore?

which means we’d actually have had her around and having characterization for most of s4-5, too, which would be fun

More importantly, it ends with newly crowned King of Hell Wei Wuxian appointing Wen Qing as Queen-Regent and ditching to go on an indefinite honeymoon with his new angel boyfriend (they’re going to fuck for like three weeks straight, then roll up their sleeves and go conquer Heaven in the name of free will), and Jiang Cheng gets to live out his hitherto-unknown-to-himself life’s ambition to be the sugar baby of the Queen of Hell. It’s very Hades/Persephone, except he goes back down to the underworld at least once a month. He gets his own demon squad whom he trains up in all the hunting techniques and it’s gr9. Wen Qing is reforming the crossroads deal process to make it more fair to the humans.

the end

Addenda:

it should go without saying but Jiang Yanli is definitely a recurring character, like, at least once a season there’s a filler episode where they go to Jiang Yanli’s for dinner and have to get along as a family, and also do the much easier job of defeating some sort of terrible demon that gets loose in the bunker and turns the evening into a horror movie. She’s their main research/emotional check-in person, a la Bobby, more often appearing in later seasons when there’s, uhhh, more to emotionally check in about.

Jin Zixuan is actually a perfectly competent hunter; he’s just a priss and we don’t Like him

we like Mianmian, though. Oh, I guess the official Hunter’s Guild or w/e tries to declare WWX a public enemy on account of the whole “King of Hell” thing and she’s like “actually what if you’re morons and assholes?” and joins hte team in s4 or 5? Yeah.

idk how the 3zun disaster happens in this ‘verse but I do encourage it to be happening in slow motion as a recurring subplot for several seasons. NMJ is a hunter, LXC is obv an angel, and JGY is...I wanna say one of the more human monsters, like a vampire? Or, you know, something that could be born from JGS sleeping with someone/something he shouldn’t have

[fonulyn]

I need to scream about RE ID bc like. Did I enjoy it? Yeah, I did. Was it. Just wrapped up way too nicely and quickly? Also yeah. I was a little disappointed by it tho, like the length, and the flashback scenes weren't as clear as I think they should have been? Like I understood what was happening, but it took me a little too much brain power to like keep up with what was and wasn't a flashback lmao

Also I wanna say, I get wanting to keep Jun See alive but god, that did not look fun. Just let him die, dude, no one wants to live like that, smh.

Thank god they kept Leon's one liners tho, like thank you for that at least lol also Claire, my GIRL, I love her holy shit. Honestly she was amazing, like, just perfect. Not sure why she has a gun in the promotional poster, bc she just. Never has a gun throughout the entire show, I don't think? Also can we talk about how she took that guy down with that lamp, and then hopped on top of him just fucking ready to continue to beat the shit out of him? Chris would be so proud 🥲

Okay also, I saw what you said with that flirting scene, and I agree that it seemed like Leon was trying to lighten the mood, but it so didn't need to be put in there at all @ the writers. Like this show could have gotten away with no romance, or just that one moment near the end with Claire and Leon (which, I don't ship them much, and that moment at the v end where she was like "are you ever gonna stop treating me like a kid?" And he responded with "probably not" or whatever kind of ruined whatever was shown earlier? Like it feels like she's had that convo with Chris before too, so I'm like hm no don't imply romance and then imply that he treats her like a little kid every time they run into each other, now it's weird lol) and been fine. None of the story was contingent on any kind of romance between anyone.

Now with that said, can I just say Patrick absolutely wanted to suck Leon's dick? Like he was smitten, and I bet you they at least fuck after all this is said and done, if not date for a short period of time. I thought they were gonna kill Patrick off, I'm glad they didn't tho, he was v wholesome lol.

Also I wanna mention that every serious moment (save a small handful) I just. I couldn't take it seriously, it was too over the top. Acid? Really? That's the self destruct measure? Slowly rising acid? I dunno, that doesn't seem quite right to me, I don't think that's how it works lol

Honestly they should have just made this into a new movie, bc making it a series implies more to follow and in general a longer narrative, but these eps were barely 20 minutes each, so there's almost no point splitting it like that. Did I enjoy myself? Yeah, I always do when Leon is involved, but it could have been so much better.

Also the silly little shipper in me is kind of desperate for more interaction between Chris and Leon, bc as far as I'm aware it's just RE6, RE vendetta, and RE ID (and I think the person who told Chris to save Claire in either code x or Veronica was Leon? Not 100% about that tho lol) where they actually interact with each other, and considering that they're the two main characters of the franchise, they should probably meet up more? Idk, that's just my gay ass hoping for more Chreon content lmao but still.

ANYWAYS yeah, I would rate the show like a 7.5/10? It wasn't amazing but it wasn't garbage, either. Probably my least favorite of the four animated movies tbh, but I will take the Leon content, thank you Capcom. Also it was interesting to see Leon around the time following/around RE4 and RE degeneration, I thought, I dunno.

oh boy I agree 100% it was wrapped up way too quickly in the end. like killing Jason? by just dropping him in the acid? it was way too simple and easy if you ask me. and like, why didn't he yeet Leon into the acid when he had him by the throat? him not killing Leon makes zero sense to me??

asdfg yeah I get they weren't ready to let Jun See go, but I bet Jun See really would've preferred to go...

I am so happy that they kept the one liners!! Leon felt very, very in character which I loved so much. I was afraid they'd tone it down or make him super serious or so, and it was such a relief they didn't. he was so eager to help and so goddamn kind to everyone I don't know if my heart can even handle it ;;;;;

also Claire!! so badass!! I loved the part where she attacked the guy with the lamp (yes Chris would be super proud haha) and THE HEADBUTT seriously, one of the top highlights of the entire series :'D

(but honestly this is gonna get long i'mma gonna hit that read more here)

and the flirting scene, I do think they could've left it out entirely and it felt a little strong-armed in. but I'm trying to look at the silver lining? Leon was super goddamn adorable in it, like, so cute it hurts :'D and Shen May didn't seem bothered really, it was more this joking thing between them. so while yes, it was unnecessary, i'm focusing on the joking feel of it and choosing to interpret it as such :'D

also, can I just say, the "romantic moment" with Claire and Leon near the end didn't feel very romantic to me? I know it's a romcom cliché (or at least a fanfic cliché lmao) how they ended up in a pile after the rescue but ...it didn't scream romance to me? although I do kind of like the pairing! (not a top fave but a cute one)

and yes, the whole "when are you gonna stop treating me like a kid?" "probably never" felt SO much like a sibling moment!! such big brother energy from Leon, and I don't know, that made me super duper happy?? I want them to be friends. I neeeed them to be friends gdi. which is why I am unhappy with how mad Claire seemed to be at Leon in the end and how they left it off like they did. I am hoping that it sets things up for a second season? and they for whatever reason need them on kind of the opposing sides at first? because otherwise it makes no sense to me for her to be that disappointed in him. in Degeneration they already establish they work in different ways towards the same goal, and for that to do a 180 now feels... like a disservice to the characters? idk?

lmaooooo but yes Patrick 100% wanted to suck Leon's dick he didn't even try to be subtle about it :'D idk I would've wanted Patrick to have more depth and screentime too, i so wish they would've made it a longer series and given the characters more development. because I liked pretty much all of the new characters they introduced! but it feels none of them reached their actual potential!

then again that is kind of the whole deal with resident evil in general, they set up awesome characters and end up wasting them half of the time :'D guess i shouldn't be surprised.

THE SLOWLY RISING ACID PISSED ME OFF lmaooo c'mon!! it doesn't seem like a good self destruct measure. especially since ...you'd need different acid to dissolve organic matter and to dissolve inorganic matter if we're being nitpicky. and how would it be plausible for them to store enough of it safely to even do this?? they should've just detonated the whole place and blown it to smithereens or something, the acid was. stupid.

i agree, it feels like a movie. but I think @tirsynni is probably right when saying that it was sort of a test run to see if they should make more? which I am so hoping for. because even with the complaints I have of this, I DID enjoy it, a lot!! and I do want more! and maybe this time we get Claire and Leon actually working together for more than fifteen seconds! :'D

also I definitely would not say no to more Chris and Leon interactions. (yes it was Leon who told Chris to save Claire :) at least that) it... in general makes no sense to me how capcom seems to think friendships work? like how Sherry is all "Leon and Claire are my best friends" and then they imply they haven't met in years? if not more? idek it's. weird. it's like their characters go into storage containers in between their missions to be stored away so they can't even accidentally have personal lives or friendships or anything. weird.

(what I said about having amazing characters and ending up wasting their potential? yeah)

for me, personally, it's... well, my score for the show would depend on whether I just focus on the characterizations and what I liked, or if I try to actually take the plot and all into account too :'D but I did like this more than Degeneration! already the fact that Leon has actual facial expressions is enough to put it way above that one. (and for the record, I don't hate Degeneration either, I do like it, but... Leon is such a cardboard cutout with zero personality in it, it's super frustrating)

idk I think I need to still process this a bit to see how I will like it in the end :'D there are things i'm super hyped about in it, and things i'm disappointed in, let's see how they'll weigh in the overall experience eventually.

[moviewarfare]

A Review of “Zack Snyder’s Justice League (2021)”

The movie that hardcore dedicated Zack fans fought for has finally been released. I'm not a huge Zack fan and I honestly didn't like Batman v Superman (BvS), although I did like Man of Steel, I also supported the movie because I believe the movie released should've been Zack's true vision. I watched Justice League (2017) in theatres when it came out and thought it was a very bland movie that had very obvious reshoots from another director in it. If I had to give that movie a rating then I would give it a 1.5/5. The premise is still the same "Fueled by his restored faith in humanity and inspired by Superman's (Henry Cavill) selfless act, Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck) enlists newfound ally Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) to face an even greater threat. Together, Batman and Wonder Woman work quickly to recruit a team to stand against this newly awakened enemy. Despite the formation of an unprecedented league of heroes-Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman (Jason Momoa), Cyborg (Ray Fisher) and The Flash (Ezra Miller) -- it may be too late to save the planet from an assault of catastrophic proportions". So does this live up to the hype or is it overrated?

Let's get this out of the way first, this version is infinitely better than the 2017 version. The best scenes in the 2017 version were all Snyder from watching this version. I did wonder how different this version was going to be from 2017 one but it feels completely different. I would say 70% of the 2017 version is in this movie but the editing, removal of Whedon scenes and addition of new scenes changes this into one with tonal consistency and coherent storytelling. Since this version is longer, it also feels like there are more build-up and tension throughout. Due to this every scene that was also in the 2017 one now feel a lot better and earned. The screenplay is still written by Chris Terrio but unlike BvS it feels a lot more engaging and not unironically silly. Some powerful and emotional lines here resonated with me which is quite surprising.

Additionally, the action scenes are more enjoyable in this one due to its R rating and how it's longer now. The biggest change is to the action in the climax where instead of in 2017 where Superman does everything, the team all contribute so it feels like everyone was relevant to the team. Junkie XL returns to score this version from BvS and it is amazing. His score adds a lot of impacts compared to Danny Elfman's 2017 version. It's a lot more memorable and makes scenes feel more exhilarating. There is also an Aquaman and Flash theme of the sort that sounds great albeit not as iconic sounding as say the Wonder Woman, Lex Luthor or Superman theme from BvS. The cinematography by Fabian Wagner is pretty good for the most part and there are still those gorgeous shots that we expect from Snyder. The humour from the 2017 version is now toned down substantially so no more "wHaT iS BRunCh? or Flash landing on Wonder Woman boobs, thank god. Surprisingly, there is still a fair amount of humour here compared to BvS which some say was lacking in a lot of fun. The humour in this version land a lot better and is the right amount as well which add some levity to a mostly serious natured story.

The biggest improvement this version has is the characterization. Cyborg has a proper fleshed out arc in this version. You have a greater understanding of his dislike for his dad and his feelings about his current situation but still having a believable development where he grows to accept who he is now. He is the heart and soul of this movie in thanks to Ray Fisher's wonderful performance.  They turned a character I barely cared about even before the 2017 version, into one of the most interesting and memorable characters. His relationship with his dad played by Joe Morton is some of the best aspects of the Justice League. They also conveyed his power very well and made it seem incredibly powerful. Flash is also improved a lot as he now has more to do. Despite still being the comic relief of the team, he is no longer unbearably annoying or treated as trash compared to Superman and is now actually doing super cool things that make him way more interesting. Ezra Miller is quite lovable in those comedic moments which are genuinely funny but when the serious moments come, he delivers a great performance.

Aquaman has some slight improvements as well. More scenes are explaining his reluctance to become King of Atlantis and also some more scenes showing his stone-cold outwards personality but hidden kindness compared to the others. I also love his interactions with the Flash including a small scene where Flash is asking Aquaman which looks better which is just a nice interaction. He also does a bit more aqua looking powers in the neat climax. Wonder Woman has more action scenes that make her more badass which is nice. Her animosity and rivalry against Steppenwolf is a lot clearer as well. She also has some nice interactions with nearly every member of the league including Superman and Alfred. Batman has a naturally continuing story from BvS where he is the one who is trying to assemble the team. His interaction with Alfred are some of the best with Alfred questioning him not doing things with a reason but from guilt instead. Unfortunately, his action scenes don't live up to that of BvS and he doesn't change at all from beginning to end. Superman appears near the end, so there isn't much to his character arc or story since it was just beginning. He wears a black suit in this version but it doesn't have much significance in terms of story or reason behind it apart from it looks cool I guess? Batman and Superman the most iconic characters are the weakest characters in the story surprisingly. Steppenwolf (Ciarán Hinds) has clearer motives this time around as he now wants to collect these Motherboxes to get back into his master, Darkseid, good graces again. His new design makes him look more alien and his action scenes make him more fearsome. He is a better villain compared to the 2017 version but is still just someone for the league to fight rather than an interesting villain.

However, some characters don't improve in this version including Lois Lane (Amy Adams) who in every scene is just mourning Superman. She is described as a key character but doesn't do anything else apart from hogging screen time. Commissioner Gordon (JK Simmons) has fewer scenes in this version compared to 2017 and both just involve him talking. Makes me wonder why JK Simmons bulked up for the role just for talking scenes.

The 4-hour length of this movie is honestly fine since it is releasing on streaming and since fans have been fighting for ages, they might as well see everything that Zack shot. However, in terms of the story, the movie could still convey important aspects without having to be 4 hours. There are a lot of scenes that drag on for too long or pointless scenes that don't add much which could easily be cut. The pacing of the first half is incredibly slow as well and it takes a fair amount of time for things to start picking up. There are also some scenes with slo-mo and some vocal song in the background that are kind of cringy and go on for way too long as well. The team don't even assemble until over 2 hours. The ending also goes on for too long which is weird as there is a very satisfying ending but then it keeps going. This new additional shot ending from Zack is cool but it feels slapped on. There are also some scenes concerning a certain character that occurs over halfway through the movie but is just really distracting from the main plot. They then appear at the ending but it feels kind of unnecessary for the story. I don't particularly mind the 4:3/square ratio that this movie has but it does take a while to get used to and I still find 16:9 would look better on my TV. Finally, some of the CGI looks bad and unpolished which is slightly distracting because they are very noticeable.

Overall, I was incredibly surprised at how much I enjoyed this version of the movie. I'm not a big fan of Zack Snyder but this might be his best work so far. I am glad he got to release his vision of Justice League and hope that this isn't a complete one-off thing. This was a great win for fans and was worth the long, gruelling fight.

[courtneystriker]

My Thoughts on the HG Prequel

I just finished reading The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes and I got to say, my feelings are mixed. Below I have an entire review  for the story which included how I felt, the expectations, the biases I had going into the new book, and how I felt after reading. Please note there will be spoilers. Also this review isn’t meant to hurt anyone and if you absolutely love the book so far...good! Enjoy it fully! As an aspiring writer myself and someone who studied in college/loves creative writing I’m well aware that people just have different takes on writing. Glad you are enjoying it :)

Anyways, here it goes…

The Expectations

As the Hunger Games series is one of my favorites of all time, I had a strong bias to like this book. Since it was first announced, without knowing any details, I was extremely excited and optimistic. I re-read the entire Hunger Games series twice beforehand in preparation; once with my fiancé and once on my own. The only thing I really wanted, knowing that it took place during the tenth hunger games, was that the arena reflected how new the hunger games were. Then, when we learned what the series was about, people started voicing some concerns or were disappointed by the plot, instead wanting it to be something like Finnick’s arena, Haymitch’s, Mags’, etc. etc. I was not among this group. However, I understand where they were coming from, because I always thought the idea of the first Quarter Quell (the one where the districts voted for the tributes) was an extremely interesting concept. 

Yet I think these things are best left explored in fanfiction as they add nothing to the series and Suzanne Collins did an excellent job just giving us enough information to get the idea. At that point it’d just be a book on details, which could fall short or be a gimmicky, cheap way to keep people reading the series and keep her name relevant. And wasn’t that part of the message in her series, the thing Katniss so heavily criticized that gave a great irony to the books? Who would watch children killing each other for entertainment? Meanwhile, we as the reader are reading these books as a form of entertainment. Plus, Suzanne Collins so skillfully painted the illusion of knowing but not fully knowing their stories that it’s haunting, and I think that is one of the many reasons (along with the battle royale trope being naturally compelling, liking the characters, etc.) that a lot of us are more drawn towards these stories rather than (at least for me)  a book on Snow. 

That being said, I was not against the idea of a book on Snow because I find villain characters, especially grey ones, to be very interesting to read about, and I was pretty certain Suzanne was going to handle this beautifully, especially since you could already feel this atmosphere coming off of Snow in the Hunger Games series. I know some were really concerned about a Snow redemption arc, but to me it felt very obvious that it couldn’t be and it would be more of him sliding into evil.

I did have other concerns when I read the description for the first time. I could not believe they went with the whole tribute from District Twelve thing again. I loved Katniss and District Twelve, but I did not want Katniss 2.0. I said right from the beginning to my fiancé that she’d have to make the tribute from District Twelve extremely different for me to get on board (though I was holding on faith that Collins would). It just felt cheap and gimmicky to rehash the District Twelve thing, it sort of made me feel the same way I would have if she had written about one of the games I mentioned above. Sure, it’d sell, but it wouldn’t add anything to the series. I was thinking she better not hunt, sing, or have any qualities resembling Katniss really.  

Another thing I worried about was the love story they hinted at in the description. It just didn’t make sense to me. Because how was Snow going to ever support the games if from an earlier age he fell in love with a tribute and vowed to protect her? Then later he’s all like pro-hunger games? Just this itself could weaken the entire series if done poorly, because it would weaken the main antagonist’s motives for not only the prequel but also the Hunger Games series as well. I kept thinking either the girl has to die in the arena betraying Snow somehow (which is what I was hoping for), Snow will have to betray her, or perhaps he would have been faking love for her for some sort of personal gain I couldn’t imagine. Either way, I thought it weakened the story's appeal to me. Yet overall I was still excited, desperately waiting for the book’s release. 

And now that I have read it, I have to say it felt forced at a lot of parts and lackluster overall…

*Spoilers start here*

My Review:

Suszanne Collins’ writing style is one I’ve always loved and has consistently appealed to me. Even though this book is written in 3rd person (which some may like less if you don’t particularly like third person) it holds up well against the original series. So I really had no complaints in this regard besides the excessive use of songs (felt like fanfiction a bit). I think if you liked the original series and don’t mind third person you’ll feel right at home with her style.

The concerns others had about Snow’s redemption are completely dismissed in this book. Like I had predicted, she writes about his fall into evil, and although it’s not black and white evil (as I don’t like anyways) you can very much tell he’s a bad guy and that the hardships he faced in life only further pushed him towards obtaining status and power. Overall, he feels true to the character when we end up seeing him in the Hunger Games series, and his journey to power fits the images Finnick painted in Mockingjay. He is very well characterized in the book and perfectly unlikable while maintaining an intriguing internal dialogue (although it does occasionally feel tedious, but not enough to bother me; others may feel differently).

 The way he is written is very much in line with Collin’s great characterization, one of the reasons I always loved The Hunger Games. All the characters felt like real people. They all had an extreme depth to them and I felt they all resembled people I had actually met in real life. There were little to no characters that relied solely on gimmicky personalities to get by. Even very minor characters that seemed depthless and swallow at first--like Katniss’s prep team--had more to them. So I thought going into this book I had nothing to worry about in that regard. I didn’t even really spare it a thought, but boy was I wrong. 

I think Snow and Lucy Grey were the only characters that had (at least partly) the depth that the original Hunger Games cast had. I’ll discuss Lucy Grey later but first let me talk about some side characters. Where to even begin really? There’s a LOT of characters in this book. Frankly, way too many, which I think contributes heavily to the lack of depth in the characters. Honestly there’s so many that the names of characters were hard to keep track of while listening to the audiobook (my hard copy of the book was still in the mail and I didn’t want to wait). Things got a bit clustered in my mind quickly. There were twenty-four tributes, twenty-four mentors,  Snow’s family, The Dean and Drs at the university, Snow’s Peacekeeper crew, and the Covey, and those are just the groups that I can cluster together. At least, the ones I remember having names and getting introduced, but I think that’s everyone really important. There was no real time to develop or get to know them really, which made the tributes’ deaths more meaningless as I could barely recall their names. It caused impactful scenes to weaken significantly overall and it made characters serve only to characterize and amplify Snow’s fall into evil. 

Here’s what I mean by that. The head Gamemaker, Dr. Gaul, really was the character I hated the most while reading this. She was just evil without reason (one of the weakest villain types with little to no personality besides being evil). She even made creepy rhymes as if she was in some sort of horror movie, and the entire point of her character was to contribute a lot to some of the forced plot points driving Snow’s moral decline. For example, there were all her tests, which seemed contrived and all directly connected to getting Snow to think the Hunger Games was a good idea. She was seemingly supposed to be a Dr. Mengele type character, as this book has a lot of Holocaust-esqe imagery. I’m fine with irredeemably evil villains, but instead of getting the depth that a Dr. Mengele character could offer (as some may know, many children that were part of his experiments actually said he was kind and gave them candy, and I find that deeply haunting to this day.) She is a flat, one-dimensional character whose entire personality could be described with one word: sociopath. Evil people are master manipulators, which is how they get away with evil things. I think at one of the funerals she puts on a good public face, and she seems to have power, money and influence. Yet the book doesn’t show this seemingly present quality nearly enough to make her a haunting character. Instead we get nursery rhythms and clearly driven lessons towards evil at are contrived. Like “Write about what you most liked about the war” or the assignment to improve the hunger games? Like what class is this? Why are they taking it? And why are the young kids of the influential deciding this instead of the influential people themselves?

Another character I feel was just there for Snow’s development and to represent an opposite viewpoint but lacked Collin’s usual depth is Sejanus Plinth. As a District 2 citizen whose family got rich off the war and moved to the Capitol, he is the main opposing viewpoint of the book, presenting Snow with a chance to do the right thing. I’ve seen people say he’s a Peeta-like character, but I completely reject that idea. He lacks in the charm Peeta has, relishes in self-pity (although he’s completely justified in his sadness and has a right to be upset), and while he has a heart like Peeta, he ultimately doesn’t know how to use it. Instead of working within his position to get influence like Peeta so masterfully does, he’s hot-headed and continuously makes poor decisions that ultimately don’t help anyone. It’s like he wants to help but doesn’t know how as he’s driven completely by emotion without reason. He too contributes to some forced scenes, particularly my least favorite in the book; when they sneak into the arena. Overall, he just falls flat for me. Again, I feel I don’t know anything about him beyond what he contributes to Snow’s story line and he doesn’t come across as realistic. It’s like Collins just wrote how someone would normally react to the hunger games, slapped a district number on him and went on her merry way. 

I just wasn’t prepared for these sort of characters when the Hunger Games series made even the smallest of characters stand out dramatically. I feel neutral to annoyed by most characters in this novel. I could expand this portion, and maybe if people inquire I’ll elaborate on some of the other characters as I have strong opinions on them, but this post is already getting long, so I’ll move on to Lucy Grey.

Lucy Grey is by far my favorite character even though she is bordering towards being a character from a fanfiction. Not quite a Mary Sue in my opinion but there is a certain connection to fanfiction I made with her. You may have guessed some issues I had with her by reading my expectations earlier in the post, but that has not displaced my love for her. Her personality is very different from Katniss’s, or even Peeta’s or Haymitch’s. She had a different type of charm than all of them, is a natural performer, and seemed more extroverted. Also, the whole idea of the Covey and her “not really” being district was intriguing. It really highlighted the displacement that war can cause and how people can just be in the wrong place at the wrong time. (Although I was confused on how much mobility between the districts there were….and did District Twelve have a fence or no?) It really emphasizes one of the main themes of the book, extreme prejudice against both Capitol and District. Her spot sort of in between really drives home the point that there's literally no difference except extreme poverty, and even then there was poverty in the Capitol, only better hidden. Her bright mood (and clothes), her poised attitude, and her optimism made her endearing. She was confident in her skin yet still held the fear of a sixteen year old going into the hunger games.

There were only two main things that bothered me about her, which was of course the direct connections made to Katniss (which I’ll elaborate on) and the forced “love” story between her and Snow. I suppose that has less to do with her and rather more to do with my dislike of that subplot. And I'm a sucker for some good romantic subplots, but yikes!

I think having one strong connection to Katniss was all that was really needed in this book. I really liked the idea of that connection being the Hanging Tree Song, as I can only imagine how it made Snow feel watching “The Mockingjay” sing it in the propo. Despite me not liking that fact that Lucy Grey is also an enchanting singer as that felt like directly stepping in Katniss’s territory, I did enjoy the little twist of Lucy Grey writing the song. Yet the connections between the two when the plot took us to District Twelve went too far. It felt like it took away all of Katniss’s special places and things. The lake, her katniss roots, her gift towards music, her fondness for the meadow, sneaking into the woods, etc. I think one solid connection would have solidified their bond beautifully. Having so many seemed like it was really trying to force the reader to make the connection when it was already painfully clear I guess? Plus, having Lucy stand out at her reaping ( the whole song part read like a bad, contrived fanfiction bit to me) and having people care about her in the Capitol while moral questions of the hunger games were still surfacing made me start to think...isn’t this how the rebellion for Katniss got started? At least partly. I get it’s a different time. Too close to the war. It just felt way too similar. I guess Collins was going for the idea of a lost rebellion that in a way Lucy Grey started that Katniss later revives. Yet it feels like that invalidates the specialness of what Katniss does in the original series as it’s already happened; it just got erased. I guess history repeats itself, but I really just didn’t like it. I could see the appeal to some extent, and it could be a beautiful connection, but it just wasn’t for me.

Now on to the plot, which is the last thing I’ll talk about as this post is getting ridiculously long. A lot of the plot felt very forced or contrived, which was another shocker coming from Collins because her pacing and plot was done really well in the original series. Of course, a lot of this was driven by Dr. Gaul and Sejanus Plinth as the entire plot hinged on the moral debate of the hunger games these two represent. Other plot points just hinged on what happened to establish the games. I mean the rebel bomb explosion seemingly only happened to change the terrain so Dr. Gaul can then bring up the idea of the different arena and how that made the tributes act differently, thus creating the crazy arenas we see later in the series. I do have some praise for how Collins established the disparities between the earlier hunger games and the ones we see in Katniss day. From the way they lock the tributes up, don’t feed them, the spotty coverage of the arena, etc. All of that was exceptionally well done. The only complaint I have was that so many tributes died before they even got to the arena (though not because I wanted to see them fight). I had been expecting one to escape or something to further establish that this was new territory and was waiting to see how they handled it in earlier times, but I wasn’t expecting that many to die before the arena got started. It just seemed like a huge Capitol failure that they advertised loudly. I really wasn’t expecting that level of incompetence, just an escaped tribute that threatened to embarrass or harm the fragile beginnings of post-war Panem. Instead, most of the pre-arena stuff felt disastrous. A lot of the mentors' deaths felt forced, and it was weird that the academy never really came under fire at all from all the rich and powerful parents whose children were getting killed because of the mentor experiment. Like it seemed there should have been some interaction there, but there wasn’t. Maybe some was passively mentioned but still, it could have been a whole subplot that further established the debate of the hunger games.

While the pre-arena up to the break-in to the arena felt like the most forced part of the book and certainly I felt it needed more workshopping plot wise, it also harbored some great and powerful scenes, like Arachne pulling the sandwich away from the tribute while she was starving and laughing about it. Basically, all those interactions of poverty and captivity meeting the citizens of the Capitol were done well, but nothing spectacular (unlike the scene of Katniss screaming at Buttercup at the end of Mockingjay which is heart wrenching.)

The last plot point I’ll talk about is the “love” story. I wasn’t a fan, but it was sort of what a lot of the plot hinged on and led to the great scene at the lake between Snow and Lucy Grey. How easy it was for him to betray his “love” for status. This led to some of the most interesting and evil internal monologue Snow had in the entire book. I honestly feel the ending scene, the interaction Snow had with the jabberjays and Mockingjays in District Twelve, and the lynching scenes were among the strongest and most memorable.

The love story again felt forced (sorry I’m using that word so much it’s just so accurate) into the story. This hindered the book from having a strong plot in the same way the weaker characters caused forced interactions and plot points to move things along. Yet at the same time the kind of abusive and lackluster nature of their relationship throughout the book fit perfectly with the ending. Unfortunately, it didn’t really make it very compelling for the reader. Luckily Lucy’s  personality kept my interested during these parts. I wouldn’t say their relationship was poorly written at all; in fact the way it was written makes perfect sense. I just think the plot relied too heavily on their “love”, which was gross because of the way Snow is, and the reader knew it had to inevitably end in some kind of betrayal or reveal that there was no love at all. This creates tension for the reader, but I kept wondering: if the love plot had been ditched could we have gotten a stronger plot altogether?

So overall, like I’ve said I’m really conflicted. I know I focused heavily on things I didn’t like, but honestly the book was well written in some regards, plot bouncing between really compelling and a little contrived, the two main characters being written well enough but other characters not so much. Some connections between Lucy Grey and Katniss made at the end were powerful, I loved the Covey, Collins still excelled at writing a lot of the social issues/scenes in the book, and honestly the idea of Lucy Grey being completely forgotten in the Districts that hurts my soul a little. Nothing compared to the feelings I got in any of the Hunger Games books but there’s still something there.

I really hope someone made it through this long ass post. The book was entertaining. I mean I listened to all 16 hours of the audiobook in like a day. I can’t wait until my hardcover comes so I can look through it. Maybe once I know what I’m getting into I can enjoy the book a little more than I did, because right now it’s sitting at very average for me. Maybe I went in with my expectations too high? I certainly like the Hunger Games a lot more and probably always will. Honestly, I love new content, but I’m also the type that likes firm, planned endings to stories (even though it hurts to let things end and the fandoms can suffer from lack of content). I think fans can oftentimes get caught up in what they want and pressure the writer into writing more, which ends up a disappointment since it wasn’t originally planned in the series from the beginning. While I don’t think this is by any means the case with Suzanna Collins or that Lionsgate even pressured her to write this book (I don’t like conspiracies of that sort of thing as a writer myself that plans to have a series in which a book comes out many years after the original part of the series is released), I do wonder if this is the end of the Hunger Games for good. I sure hope so, especially if she would be writing about the other victors. I love them too much and really don’t want to feel similarly about their books, and like I said at the beginning, it wouldn’t add to the series just to my guilty pleasure lol.

Hope you all have enjoyed your reading of the book more than I did :) Again sorry if I wrote anything to upset you! Please if you loved this book ENJOY IT! I’m actually kind of jealous if you did. Feels like missing out on something special.

[kinetic-elaboration]

February 13: Star Trek Beyond

Some attempted thoughts on Star Trek Beyond.

So first it was bad lol. It is the worst. I thought maybe it would be less the worst than I had previously thought but it really, really is just irredeemably bad.

Trying to keep up with what was actually happening and talk in the group chat was too difficult and I now feel very exhausted lol. And I’m not even sure what I watched.

I liked Jaylah a lot, including her back story, characterization, “house,” traps, and cool mirror tricks.

I also like Kirk in that emergency uniform with the jacket unzipped.

That’s it! That’s all I liked.

In the past I’ve also said I liked the Spock and Bones parts but I honestly wasn’t a fan of them either this time around!

None of the characters felt IC and none of the relationships felt true or were compelling. Which is particularly egregious given that the alleged theme was strength in unity.

The movie was especially lacking in K/S content or even K & S interaction, which obviously didn’t please me. And it’s definitely the worst Kirk characterization I’ve ever seen. There’s no excuse for that either because it’s halfway through the 5YM, which means he should be pretty close to TOS Kirk--yes, he has a different set of experiences, so there’s going to be some variation, but there’s comparatively less excuse for a radically different characterization than in STXI and STID. They should have had Shatner read the script and make notes lol because whatever else you might say about him he KNOWS Captain Kirk.

Like, he (Kirk) lacked humor and charm and, often, confidence. He had moments when he was very smart and moments when he had a commanding presence. But he had just as many moments when he was whiny or bored and his Captain’s log??? I deserve financial compensation for every time I’ve listened to that. Bored of space?? No, this man is bored when he’s stuck on Earth. He stagnates in desk jobs. He is an adventurer and explorer before he’s ANYTHING else; if you don’t get that, you don’t need to be writing Star Trek.

Also, as I have frequently complained, I’m tired of him having no internal conflict or emotional complexity past his father issues. First reboot movie: dealing with his dead father’s memory and his step-father’s abuse. Fine, that makes sense for how they set up the AU. Second reboot movie: entirely motivated by the need for Manly Vengeance upon the person who killed his father figure. And for this redundant story line (in many sense) we had to lose Pike? Third reboot movie: you’d think he’d finally be ready to move on to other conflicts but actually no this time he’s sad about his birthday and having a longer life span than his...you guessed it!! father!! Yet again.

What else has ever motivated him? Legitimate question.

The destruction of the Enterprise was truly horrific. Long, boring, unwarranted, and without any emotional punch. As if it were just any ship! No, she’s a character in her own right and she’s not to be sacrificed like that but please tell me again how Simon Pegg is a true fan who brought the franchise back to its roots?

B said he did like that they split up the crew into unusual units but I have mixed feelings about it. I don’t entirely disagree, but I don’t think they did a lot that was interesting with any of those separated units. Uhura and Sulu are a cool pair (but this would have been a good opportunity to include Sulu’s semi-canonical crush on Uhura but whatever... a different rant) and they almost did some interesting stuff with them. There were glimmers of a caper in that story line and times when I could tell they were straining especially hard to make Uhura, their Sole Female Main--now that they cut out Rand, Chapel, and even Carol Marcus--into something Feminist and Interesting. But it didn’t quite gel for me. Like, Uhura would be having almost interesting dialogue with the villain and holding her own...and then she loses track of her colleague and has to watch that person die, thus undercutting everything she just said about unity and seeming to prove the villain’s point. Is she competent or not?

Bones and Spock are a pair I care about and like but again I think their canonical relationship in TOS is more interesting than STB showed. I personally read them as like...reluctant best friends who originally just had one person in common, and then realized they also like each other too, but they’ll never really say it. They understand each other but pretend not to. They have fun with the barbs they throw at each other. They both deeply love Jim but in different ways. They enjoy their intellectual debates. (That’s one thing that was definitely missing from them here! The intellectual debates!) So again, there was something there but not enough.

And Kirk and Chekov just happened to land near each other; nothing was done with that relationship per se. They really aren’t people who have much of a relationship in TOS so there’s not a lot to work off of but then on the other hand there IS an opportunity to create something new. Maybe I’m being too harsh and too vague but it just didn’t gel for me. The only specific K and C moment I remember was that supremely un-funny joke about Kirk’s aim as he sets off the “wery large bomb.”

But like there are possibilities.. they’re both pretty horny and Chekov is a whiz kid and Kirk is also very smart and has always been smart... Like in other words people Chekov’s age don’t end up on the bridge crew, in either ‘verse, without the Captain’s say, so even though he’s TOS!Spock’s and AOS!Scotty’s protege, Kirk is important to his life. Something with that maybe??

I’m upset that Spock’s individual story line was about whether or not he should go off and make baby Vulcans because, again as I have complained many times before, that was a conflict he faced and resolved in ten minutes two movies ago, and it doesn’t make sense to me for him to bring it up again now just because the Ambassador is dead. Like... the Ambassador told him to stay in Starfleet!! “Ah, yes, I will honor him by doing precisely the opposite of what he wanted me to do.”

Also--if they had made his motivation different or gone into it more, I would have been more into it. Make it about New Vulcan! Say there’s news from New Vulcan that it’s not doing well. Or what if T’Pring got in contact with him? Or what if we used this as an excuse to bring in Sarek?

This is part of a larger point for me which is that STXI set up a really cool AU and STID tried to do something with it--a little hit or miss, but it tried--and instead of pushing even more at the AU and developing it more and doing more with it... STB just ignored it! Was that part of what Paramount was warning about with making it “not too Star Trek-y?” Was it SUPPOSED to be a movie you could watch without having seen the last two? If so they did succeed but like.. .why? They made the supremely ballsy move of blowing up a founding Federation planet two movies ago and now they’ve just forgotten about that and all the reverberations that would necessarily have?

But of course we got a call back to Kirk being a Beastie Boys fan so.... Guess it was Deep all along.

We all three agreed that the core story of this film was potentially interesting but could have been done as a 50-some minute episode of a TV series rather than a whole-ass 2 hour movie. First off, cutting or cutting down the action sequences would have shaved off half an hour easily.

I’m frustrated in large part because there are certain things that are interesting here. I do like the concept of the crew being pulled on to an alien planet by a ship of former Federation crew, from the early days of the Federation/deep space flight, who were presumed missing but are somehow still alive because they have turned into aliens/used alien tech to prolong life, and who have also captured other aliens, like Jaylah, for the main crew to interact with. All of that was cool.

I would even be okay with these old Federation crew being villains but I don’t think that’s necessary or even the most interesting take.

But...first of all, as my mom pointed out, Krall was basically Nero in his illogical motivations: feeling aggrieved because someone who couldn’t help him didn’t help him and then just maniacally wanting revenge. It made more sense to me with Nero in a way. Maybe that was because he was better characterized, maybe it was because his anger was more personal (the loss of his wife), maybe--probably--it was because he was angry at Spock and Spock had actually promised to help, so there was some kernel of logic in his sense of betrayal, even if it was out of proportion etc. Also, Nero’s mania was portrayed as mania--we were all supposed to recognize that the strength of his emotion was warranted but his logic was deeply flawed. I think we were supposed to think Krall had some kinda... real criticism of the Federation, but in fact he doesn’t! He’s wrong! So like if he’d been angry with the Federation for abandoning him but the narrative and the other characters explicitly recognize that he’s wrong--the Federation tried but he was just doing something very dangerous and he recognized that danger on signing on--that might have been more palatable to me.

I’m not sure I’m making sense here entirely or explaining myself as well as I could.

I just don’t entirely get Krall’s beef with the Federation. I don’t get that whole “being a soldier and having conflict makes you strong and having people you can rely on and connections and community makes you weak.” That seems pretty obviously false. It also doesn’t really seem, not that I’m an expert, but particularly in line with military ethos either.

BUT the idea that he had a life that was comfortable to him as a soldier and then the Federation comes in and forms Starfleet and says, actually, we’re going to pull back on the soldiering and up the diplomacy and the exploration and the science--yeah, I could see that. I DO think Starfleet is military but even if you must insist it’s not, it’s clearly based on and formed from the military, and it has certain military functions. So obviously the first people to join or be folded into Starfleet probably were more explicitly military.

So he’s one of those people. Now he’s supposed to be a scientist and a diplomat and an explorer and he doesn’t like that. He’s given this very prestigious and interesting mission and jumps at it. Starfleet warns him, you might go beyond where we can reach, we might not be able to help you. That’s fine. But then when his ship is stranded and he is lost, he gets angry--maybe somewhat irrationally, but understandably--why?? Why did the Federation do this to him? What was even the point? When he put himself in danger before, at least he knew why. But just flying around space for the hell of it, and this is the cost? So that’s what creates his anger.

I thin this could be tied into Kirk’s diplomacy at the beginning--if the scene were written to not be a comedy bit where Kirk looks like an incompetent buffoon and is completely disrespectful the whole time. He’s good at this job and we should say it. But we could emphasize that this IS a diplomatic mission often, just as often as it’s a military or scientific mission. Maybe we could include other bits of their missions, too, to play up the variety of things they do and roles they play.

Another thing I think could be interesting, going back to my point about Spock, Vulcan, and using the first two movies and expanding on the world building... what if Spock wanted to leave Starfleet for better, more well-defined reasons, and we used that? Paralleled the two? Connected the two?

Because I think Vulcan in the AOS verse is very interesting and the movies didn’t do nearly enough with it. First, we have the Romulans showing up way earlier, at least visibly: in TOS, no one knew what they looked like or their connection to Vulcans until Spock is in his late 30s. In AOS, it happens not long after he’s born. So he’s growing up probably with more anti-Vulcan racism floating around the Federation. THEN Vulcan is destroyed. Now it has nothing and it needs to rely on the rest of the Federation, which must be both humbling and frustrating to many Vulcans, on top of the extreme tragedy of losing everything. Most of their population, a lot of their history, their manufacturing, their scientific facilities, their resources, their animals, literally whatever else you can think of that a planet has--all gone. Now all of the survivors have lived some period on an alien planet, by definition, and they’re probably very dependent on the Federation not just to set up the new colony, but to replace all of the resources--natural and Vulcan-made--that they lost. And they’re a founding Federation member, Earth’s first contact. They’re especially important. And now they’re weak, and reliant on others.

So maybe Spock, early on, hears from New Vulcan and they’re not doing well. Maybe we hear from Sarek or T’Pring (...I’d just like to see reboot T’Pring). Maybe it’s not about, or just about, having children, but about being from an important and ancient family, and being seen as a hero for his part in the Narada mission, that makes him want to go and help rebuild their government (taking his mother’s place perhaps? she was on the High Council) or their scientific facilities, or the VSA, or their space travel capabilities--you know Vulcan had space ships of their own, outside of Federation ships. This would be the perfect place to showcase that tension between wanting to be independent--out of pride, out of fear, even--and needing help, because Vulcan could not survive without the Federation, probably less than 10 years out from the original planet’s destruction.

And then you feed it back into Krall.

So I could see like... well the tension, and then Krall comes in, and he's angry that the Federation "abandoned" him, but we actually explicitly address this. Maybe Spock gets to interact with him and say "I get it. You had a life and a mission and a purpose that was comfortable for you. Then the Federation came in and changed everything. A lot of my people are also feeling upset for similar reasons. But here's why actually you're wrong."

So anyway as you can see I’m smarter and more interesting than Simon Pegg.

I also hated, speaking of writers of this movie, the gay Sulu thing and HEAR ME OUT on this. It’s homophobic. His husband doesn’t have a name? Might not be his husband at all? Looks like he could be his nanny or his brother? As B said “at least grab his butt or something.” That was the most sanitized, no-homo depiction of a gay person I’ve ever seen. He’s gay (see, progressives and queers! gay! you like that right!) but DON’T WORRY STRAIGHTS--he’s in a monogamous relationship and has a child, he’ll show nothing but the most platonic physical affection with his male significant other, and the plot point will be so minuscule you’ll need a microscope to detect it. Also, we’ll throw in a no homo joke about two male characters not wanting to hug and we’ll make sure Kirk and Spock interact as little as possible, because we know they give off Big Queer Vibes every time they’re together.

Yes the last point is a little unfair but can you blame me for being angry about all the “look how hip to the times we are” back-patting that went on in 2016 when canonical bisexual Kirk is RIGHT THERE and we could have had ex-boyfriend Gary Mitchell instead of Unnamed Nanny??

Also Sulu is a hella random choice because again, like... he may not have had an s.o. in TOS but nor was there any indication he was gay. So it seems a LITTLE like they picked him because (1) his original actor is gay and gay people can’t play straight people duh so probably Sulu was Gay All Along I mean did you not get vibes???; and/or (2) asexual Asian stereotypes preclude giving Sulu any kind of love interest, male or female, that is actually... sexual, outright romantic, anything.

Anyway I can’t remember if I had any other thoughts, but I’ve said quite enough I think.

I miss Kirk so much... real Kirk... even my version of AOS Kirk who is probably not even characterized that well but at least I worked with love!!!

[tsukikoayanosuke]

7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 16, 27, 35 & 39

[It’s a lot again 😅 hope you don’t mind :D]

I might be going way too far with these answers, so please bear with me ^^’

Sorry for the long rambles but these are my answers!

7. Share a snippet from one of your favorite pieces of prose you’ve written and explain why you’re proud of it.

Oof. This is hard. There’s actually a lot of paragraphs that I like throughout the writing process. I can re-read and just pick which is my favorite, it’ll be different every time.

But, I think the thing currently going on with TW:OPT can be summed up in this Once Upon a Time… (I was being dumb and I thought prose is just poetry without rhyme)

So, this drabble is written on the run. There’s not really deep thought and I can’t even remember why I wrote it in the first place. From the date I posted it on Tumblr it was in the middle of Octavinelle Arc.

But, in this small crappy prose-poetry, it has one of the themes in TW:OPT: happy vs sad ending. This is something that I want to build since in the early stage. The theme of TW:OPT is second chances for the reincarnated villains, giving them a happy ending, something way better than the original ones.

So, if you look for example the two lines about the Queen of Heart:  

The Queen of Heart was forgotten by Alice like it was just a bad dream

The Queen of Heart will always be remembered by Alice as his dear friend and the greatest queen

The first line is what happens to the original Disney Alice’s Queen of Hearts, while the second line is what happens to Riddle, the current reincarnation of the Queen of Hearts. It’s a good change for Riddle’s life.

However, like everything, there has to be something to balance it. 

After all, good endings cannot exist without bad endings.

Can the good guys really live with the bad guys in harmony? After all, all Disney movie always has “good wins, evil lose” theme. If the “evil side” wins, wouldn’t that mean the “good side” loses? Is that even a good thing or even possible?

After all, the One-Eyed Captain found his happy ending to sail away once again. What will happen to him in his next life?

This line becomes the question. What will happen to the already-set happy endings? Would they just disappear to change into bad endings to keep the balance?

.

8. Share a snippet from one of your favorite dialogue scenes you’ve written and explain why you’re proud of it.

I’m debating between many dialogues, but I think the one piece I’m most proud of is in Chapter 97. I'm cutting a lot of the narration and just focus on the dialogues because it becomes too long.

Riddle: What happens that day? The day when everything went downhill. Azul: Didn't anyone tell you already? Riddle: I want to hear it from your or Jonah's mouth. What happened that you must curse him? Azul: Pretty simple, really. I told him not to come here that day, and he did To make it worse, that boy was stupid enough to go back against our agreement. Riddle: Just that? Azul: Oh, please, dear Crimson Ruler. I don't want to hear that from you. Have you forgotten about your reign before? Riddle: I know what I did was tyrannical, but I want to be better. Azul: Because of the captain told you too? Riddle: No. This is my choice to change. Just like it was your choice to curse him. He trusts you, you know? He knows that you wouldn't go back against your own words, which was why he was willing to sign another contract with you. Azul: If he trusts me that much, why is he against me? If he trusts me, why did he choose to save his stupid friends than agreeing with me? Tell me, Riddle Rosehearts...Why does he choose you instead of me?

We all know what happened during Octavinelle Arc and I don't deny that this sounds cheesy or slightly ooc. And let me just say this, there's no intention of this become a love triangle or whatsoever.

There are two things I want to highlight in this exchange: Riddle's growth and Azul's decline.

Riddle, after everything happened in Heartslabyul and Savanclaw arc, finally putting his foot down on where he wants to stand. He wants to be a better person, more than just the feared Crimson Tyrant. That's why he's helping them. Not because the boys are breaking the rules, not because someone tells him to, but Riddle is willing to risk it all, even his unique magic (as we see at the end of this chapter and the next) to save his friends. Again, this might sound ooc and I apologize, but from my perspective, this is a logical step of development for Riddle.

Meanwhile, Azul is showing more and more decline from this until the end of Octavinelle Arc even Scarabia Arc. For Azul who knows how easy people can leave and mock when you have nothing, seeing Jonah leave him and siding with the anemones is basically a betrayal. He can't think rationally when it comes to the betrayal and we see how brash he can be with anything related to Jonah throughout the arc where all of their interaction nearly kills Jonah.

If Riddle-Jonah is a coming-of-age story, Azul-Jonah is a broken friendship story.

.

9. Which fic has been the hardest to write?

This is a hard one to write. You might think I’ll just answer with TW:OPT, but honestly, all multi chapters fanfic has their own difficulties, so I can’t choose which is the hardest.

For Twisted-Wonderland: Our Precious Treasure, where I do treat this as a novel-writing practice, keeping the consistency with the theme, plot points, and characterization.

For Private Tutor, Angel of Death, Philza Minecraft, actually coming up with new ideas is hard because I don’t based this on anything, and just write anything once a week. In addition that I’m still new in Dream SMP fandom so characterization won’t be the strongest thing.

For both TWST MC Hybrid AU and Magical Girl AU, giving the massive cast equal spotlight and actually not getting lost is quite a challenge. Both AU has seven main characters and I need to give them the same amount to screen time.

And don’t get me started with those smut. I won’t be talking about it because I’m keeping it family friendly. Those has their own problems XD

.

10. Which fic has been the easiest to write?

As I said, every fic has their own problems, even one shot. So, I’m looking through my works and trying to figure out which fic I wrote the fastest but had the most fun.

I think I’ll go with A Wish for a Proposal because the comfort in this fic with Ace going heads over heels for Deuce and being doki-doki all the time. And the kiss under a shooting star, AH! Poetic cinema~

I do enjoy when I wrote how Ace thought keeping a toy ring as childish but he ended up using it to confess to Deuce and thinking that it’s not as childish as he thought.

.

13. What’s the best writing advice you’ve ever come across?

There are good writing advice that I had head, one of them came from On Writing: Great Character Descriptions! by Hello Future Me. He has so many good advices in writing and I highly recommend him.

He said that “when describing characters it’s good to focus on their movements that can tell the readers of who the characters are”. As someone who has many troubles in writing physical description, this is actually a great alternative, especially when you want to go thought the “show don’t tell”.

After watching the video I tried to write something. I ended up writing Jonah’s father, Benjamin, in Chapter 137

The owner of the inn was an old man who, coincidentally, also shared the 'Argentum' surname. Benjamin Argentum was a man with slouched back from the burden of the world, white strands on his reddish-brown hair and tired, but kind, black eyes. He walked slowly with his walking stick, claiming that his knees were never that strong since a cart accident during his younger days. The way he speaks was gentle like everyone's favorite uncle/grandfather, along with the delicious appetizer that he had prepared a few minutes ago on the reception table. The spices he used reminiscent of the spices Jonah used in his Ramshackle Kitchen. There was no way all of these were coincidences. Crowley wouldn't doubt if Jonah Argentum ever grew old, he would be looking exactly like the warm innkeeper.

I want to highlight how Benjamin is a kind old man ("He walked slowly with his walking stick, claiming that his knees were never that strong since a cart accident during his younger days”, ”The way he speaks was gentle like everyone's favorite uncle/grandfather”) but has his own problems (”a man with slouched back from the burden of the world”), and very similar to Jonah (”The owner of the inn was an old man who, coincidentally, also shared the 'Argentum' surname”, ”The spices he used reminiscent of the spices Jonah used in his Ramshackle Kitchen”, “Crowley wouldn't doubt if Jonah Argentum ever grew old, he would be looking exactly like the warm innkeeper.”)

It’s not the best descriptions, because most of the example used highlight only one most recognizable feature while my description highlight nearly everything. I still need some practice.

.

14. What’s the worst writing advice you’ve ever come across?

“Write what’s mainstream”.

Here’s my problem with it: sometimes anything that’s mainstream is not my thing. I like to challenge what we are given and give it a spin. 

I mentioned before that growing up with Indonesian TV Series that only centers around love, riches, and cheating, I grew tired of it. That was why I once tried to make a script for a group of friends creating a classical music band and mental problems. 

I’m not the first one to make an adaptation of TWST, but I think I’m one of the first, at least in AO3, that make an adaptation with Male MC. Among the Female MC or Female Readers story with a hint (or too much) of Romance, I want to give something for the small group who wants Male MC or something more platonic to read.

I always want to push slightly further, trying something that I haven’t seen at first glance, giving varieties. I will admit that would always doubt whether me writing something different is even worth it or not. But when I saw that yes, this is worth it, I gain more confidence and become bolder in my twist.

Going against the mainstream is risky, but we'll see whether it's worth it or not.

.. 

16. If you only could write one pairing for the rest of your life, which pairing would it be?

Oh no... Does it have to be a romantic pairing?

Okay. I don't really have an OTP. I mean, I like ROnah and JonAzul, but I don't think I can't live with writing only about them.

So, romantically, I don’t know. But, this doesn’t help with platonically either because I find enjoyment in writing all relationship. Just pushing the limit of my writing, you know?

So, I don’t think I can answer this because I’m a coward XD

.

27. How do you feel about collaborations?

A mixed bag.

So currently I'm in at least 2 collab projects: TWST MC Hybrid AU and Arisu in Alternate Wonderland. In the former, I'm the group leader, while in the latter, I'm just a writer.

Both sidea are different experiences. With AiAW, it's definitely lighter because this is basically retelling TWST but with seven Yuus. However because of this freedom and the possibilities of anything, I cannot predict whether my oc action will affects in the future or how they would interact with other ocs in the project.

With Hybrid AU, since this is a fantasy au, anything can happen. Plus as the main writer, I can see and plan clearly which event will be important and setting the characters' arc. It's definitely harder to organize because of the various idea that we want to write.

So, yeah. Collaboration can be two things for me: a scripted roleplay or a freestyle roleplay

.

35. Would you ever kill off a canon character?

*looking at draft for TW:OPT Book 2*

Maybe...?

.

39. Do you ever get rude reviews and how do you deal with them?

I remember when I was a kid, I wrote a fanfiction where it only features OCs, and someone gave a review, ranting about the lack of canon characters. I, of course, sulked a bit but then just keep writing.

However, what I usually do when it comes to comments is take them into considerations. During Scarabia Arc I got a comment that the Jonah-Azul therapy moment is kinda weak, and rereading it, I can see that. Which was why the next part of the therapy Arc I tried to connect them further. So compare the JonAzul scene in the last part of Chapter 124 with the first part of Chapter 126. At least for me, I prefer the latter because there's more intimacy.

[afoolforatook]

I liked your post on Qrow and grief. I think 99% of rwby discourse is people being upset with writers choices and handling of characters vs being defensive of character actions as commentary on real world situations. Like most Adam discourse is between the writers decision to make a civil rights leader an abusive villain vs people noting that abusers can and do hijack social justice movements. One is anger at the writers not the character the other is concern about the character not the writers.

Thanks (sorry, I just forget asks exist sometimes....oops)

Honestly, I avoid discourse as much as possible (the tiniest bit of possible conflict makes me feel physically ill, thnks rsd, which is why I never really actively participated in fandom as a creator before FG) so I can’t say much on other issues such as Adam, but I can see that. 

I think the issue usually starts when there’s a disconnect between understanding characters and their actions in the context of the world and story, and the context of why the writers choose to frame things the way they do. 

Which personally, is where most of my own frustration comes from about RWBY’s writing. Because there is so much of it that is genuinely brilliant, deep, powerful storytelling that has all the building blocks for some important subversive storylines, and has such amazing attention to detail and thought put behind it, but then doesn’t always get developed consistently enough to pull it all together with the appropriate tone/intent. We know they can do such powerful things with all the potential they set up, so when it falls flat, for reasons that seem like inconsistent direction and intent, or narrow understanding of complicated topics, or just plain sloppy oversight, it can be really disappointing

Grief is one of those topics that I take very seriously when it comes to how it is portrayed in media, and it’s something I hope to be able to be a part of creating better realistic representation for. So many people believe they understand grief because they’ve seen it in movies and shows and books that rarely show it in all its complexity and diversity. And so when they see characters, and even real people, grieving in ways that don’t fit that mold, that may seem callous or toxic from an outside perspective, it can feel like poor writing or characterization. Because we as a society don’t talk about grief, not really, not honestly, it makes us uncomfortable. So, through no fault of their own, people don’t understand how that kind of trauma changes how you think, and affects you on a daily basis.

There are a lot of complicated topics that RWBY has a lot of potential to do important, powerful things with, in how they tell this story. Some they have handled well previously, and some they *really* haven’t.  Mental health, abuse, racism, classism, lgbtq representation, morality, trauma, grief. And I certainly won’t say any single one of those is more important than any other. 

But, personally, grief is the one that will hit me hardest if they mishandle it. There will be other places to turn for diverse, informed, meaningful narratives about all those other topics, and of course the same is true for grief. I certainly don’t want to have those topics mishandled in RWBY, and RT and CRWBY have a responsibility to put in the work to avoid that and to admit when they don’t, and if all of those things were just horrendously mishandled it would be upsetting and infuriating, but in the end, there would be other material, other, diverse, creators to turn to. 

But RWBY is in a (certainly not completely unique, but fairly rare) special position when it comes to showing the place that grief in all its complexities has in storytelling. And how, in turn, storytelling can play a huge part in helping people process their own grief.  

Because RWBY is a story, a world, created by a man (of color) who died far too young, and whose legacy is now carried on by his friends and family (and a company that, while certainly popular and well known in its niche, is by no means mainstream). They know grief. And they have a rare opportunity —with a story perfectly built to address this kind of narrative— to be able to provide others who are grieving with a complex, inspiring, empowering reflection of their experiences, which are so often absent, or oversimplified, or treated as shock factor or tear-jerkers in media. 

For most other projects in that kind of situation (sudden loss of a young creator, a creator of color, not already backed by a huge production company, with not only story and animation development to work on, but a unique soundtrack that is one of the things at the core of the show’s appeal imo), the story would have most likely been abandoned after the creator’s death. Roosterteeth, and RWBY, certainly have a not insignificant following now (and even did to a lesser extent, at the time of Monty’s death, less than six months after the end of volume 2) but RWBY was still pretty new, not nearly as popular as it is now. I watched the first volume when it was brand new, and I think the start of volume 2, but then didn’t come back to it until the end of volume 6, so I don’t know for sure what things were like in both the fandom and production following Monty’s death. But I am sure that RWBY’s survival is due to tremendous work and dedication and love for Monty and his creation. Volume 7 ended on the fifth anniversary of Monty’s death, and regardless of your opinion on the quality of the show over that time, the fact that it has come this far at all is almost miraculous. 

For a story, and a team, so well suited for this point of view, to not simply ignore the topic (as so many writers do, aka one tribute episode and then it’s like it never happened), but to actually address it, only to fail to do it true, honest, important, justice, would be (at least personally) devastating. 

None of this is to say that because of their grief, or in order to ‘properly’ honor Monty, CRWBY was obligated to make grief an important part of this narrative, especially so soon after a loss and in a project where it is impossible to separate their feelings for the story from their grief over Monty. They did not owe us, or ‘Monty’s memory’, their personal trauma. Not everyone wants or needs to put their grief in their work. To have decided to gloss over that narrative thread and aspect of character growth, or included it but never make it a main theme, would, admittedly, still have been somewhat disappointing, but understandable given the circumstances. 

But they didn’t do that. They gave it a prominent role. (Also admittedly not as much as I would have liked at times, but still much more than plenty of other stories) In the music, in the symbolism, in the character development, in the main plot. Grief, in multiple manifestations, is a huge part of RWBY. I am immensely grateful for that, and regardless of the issues I have and may have in the future, that is something that will always be very important to me. 

But, in making that choice, they gave themselves an obligation to follow through. To consciously make grief a complex part of multiple characters’ narrative, and then fumble the execution and turn that pain into cheap shock factor or poorly framed justification is, in my eyes, an irresponsible failure that could work to only damage the vulnerable people you had gotten to trust you. Especially when it comes in the form of showing a character finally starting to recover, only to get torn down again out of nowhere. 

I’m not saying that this is already a failure in how they’ve handled Qrow’s grief, there’s just too much still to happen to be able to say that or not. But any trust I had in their intentions and narrative direction was destroyed by Ch12 (which is a different topic all together really), so I’ll just have to wait and see.

Ahhhhhh this got wayy too long (and probably not put the best way, oops brain dump.)

[boxedblondes]

heya, for you what would summarise what you think to be bad characterisation in S2? Are there any specific scenes that jump out for you or just in general?

Ooh, what an excellent question! I want to start by saying that I do dearly love this show and I genuinely think it is one of the best pieces of television of all time. Even though I think s2 is the weakest season overall, it is LEAGUES above any given season of virtually any other show on television. (Also, these are entirely my opinions, so if you don’t vibe with them that is completely fine!!)

I personally think there are three key things that make a show/movie “good”: an intriguing plot, relatable/well-developed characters, and appealing visuals. S1 of KE obviously has all of these, as does s3 (ESPECIALLY in regards to character dev. and the visuals/actual “look” of the show. The overall season plot has been somewhat convoluted, but the writers have done a wonderful job of building the tension every week and I think it will all really come together in the finale). S2, on the other hand, suffers from both plot and characterization issues, especially in comparison to the first season.

Anyway, I’m going to branch out a little from your question and address all of the major downfalls of s3, which are:

1. The overarching plot and dropped storylines

S2 had SO MUCH potential in regards to the plotlines introduced at the beginning of the season (not to mention the necessary continuation of the s1 plot), but the writers just... went nowhere with it? Not only did we get no closer to learning anything about the Twelve (arguably the core plot of the show, even if I’m really only watching for the gay shit), but the attempt at having Villanelle and Eve work together - while an exciting and intriguing concept - was disappointing in its execution. 

Not to mention the Ghost storyline. Like... who was she? What happened to her? What did Villanelle do/say to her in that trailer that completely broke her? Why did she call Eve a monster? Literally none of this was answered, and the whole arc was just dropped halfway through the season.

And of course, Aaron Peel. I hated this plotline with a passion. Why would Nadia write his name on a piece of paper in s1 as her final message for Eve? What was his connection to the Twelve? Why did Carolyn/MI6/whoever want him dead? Why were there no repercussions for any party after his death?

I had SO many questions coming out of s2 that were never answered and probably won’t be. 

2. The characterization of Eve and Villanelle (individually)

I’m sure other people have spoken more eloquently about this (someone please link me other posts if you know of any!), but for me, s2 was also frustrating for the way Eve’s and Villanelle’s individual characters developed.

For Eve, my main issue is that she was just written as a complete asshole for most of the season??? And why? Much as I loved the sheer quantity of V/E scenes in s2, I hated how frequently it seemed Eve was annoyed by/angry with Villanelle during them. I guess this could be excused as Eve still being upset with Villanelle for “ruining her life,” but then how do you explain Eve being a complete dick to Kenny? Or her new workmates?

As for Villanelle, I think she was written as somewhat of a caricature of herself throughout the season (particularly 2x06-2x08). There was substance to the Villanelle of s1, but not so much during s2 - with the exception of her scenes with Eve, which I found to be very strong regarding Villanelle’s emotional state/motivations.

This is nitpicky, but I also thought the Eve/Niko relationship was especially gross during season 2 (read: the opening sequence of 2x06 🤢). I also didn’t like how the writers tried to push the Villanelle-is-a-psycopath-and-therefore-irredeemable narrative so hard.

3. The characterization/development of the Eve/Villanelle dynamic

I already spoke a bit about this above, but the pervasive message regarding the Eve/Villanelle relationship in s2 was “toxic! bad! you should feel bad for wanting them to get together!” Much of this was insinuated by the "psychopath” storyline, as well as by Eve’s random and nonsensical hostility towards Villanelle.

At the end of s1, Eve and Villanelle were on relatively equal footing (before the whole stabbing thing ofc). S2, on the other hand, seemed to push the narrative that Villanelle was “bad” and Eve was “good,” but when she was acting like/working with Villanelle she was also “bad.” I think this sort of black and white thinking is what made the E/V dynamic seem so... off? during season 2.

In comparison, the character development we’ve seen in s3 has been MASSIVE for both these characters, as well as in regards to their mutual dynamic. Both Eve and Villanelle have gone on extensive personal journeys this season, which will (hopefully) culminate in them once again being on equal footing, as well as having a respect for one another. (And this doesn’t even include the shift in their romantic dynamic!!)

I said earlier that I agree with the opinion that s3 has felt more like a “true” second season/followup to s1 than s2 ever did... and I stand by that!! I genuinely think you could watch s3 directly after s1 and have a much better appreciation for these characters/their development as individual people as well as two halves of one whole than you would by watching s2 in the middle.

One final disclaimer (because this post is now officially WAY too long): Although s2 had its pitfalls, it was, in general, a fun season. I had a good time! I laughed a lot and envied Villanelle’s outfits and appreciated how much screentime Eve and Villanelle had together!! Even though I am critical of certain aspects of s2, it was a genuinely good season of television. If it were not naturally existing in comparison to seasons 1 and 3, I would likely have much fewer complaints! The only reason s2 gets critiqued as often as it does is (I think) because the bar set by season 1 was so astronomically high. Also 2x05 is one of the best episodes of the entire series, hands down.

Thank you for the question!! Sorry for rambling on so much, but hopefully this clarifies my opinions a bit more. Enjoy the finale tonight! 💗