#I'm not enjoying it BUT i understand the concept of an antagonist and character development soooo | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

nicosraf · 21 days

Note

What was ur thought process into making or developing Samyaza?? Or all of the watchers..I’m like 50% into the book and he’s hypocritical to me like he makes these back handed remarks abt azazel having a man but like does it matter cause you all are sinners in the eyes of god and it seems he wants to get rid of everybody on earth so far

It seems like most of the watchers still hold some type of bias towards the “sinners” of Heaven for being a “whore” but you guys aren’t even in heaven (and won’t be treated the same when u return) and you guys are doing the same thing :/ even having tons of babies like did you guys even think abt this being a possibility???

I feel like this is an unpopular opinion but I kinda dislike Samyaza it seem like after everything that’s happened he still doesn’t try to see different view points on life on earth apart from his. He chalks up Armoni not particularly liking his wife (that he was practically forced to marry) as just Armoni being his usual distasteful self. :(

I may just have to reread a couple of pages to try and understand Samyaza or any of the the watchers. But I LOVE your works and I think they’re amazing and I didn’t want this to come off as passive aggressive I guess I’m just confused abt some of these characters since I don’t think like they do

I realized this just seems like a rant but still you’re writing is AMAZING💕💕💕 you’re really inspiring as a writer 😋

a&m spoilers

Hello! I'm curious if your thoughts have changed since you sent this ask, but disliking Samyaza definitely isn't a minority opinion!

I think almost all my betas disliked Samyaza at the start, but they all liked him by the end. I think, for most readers, Samyaza is hypocritical, selfish, and etc., but the amount he suffers by end makes it so that.... well, yes, Samyaza might be a bit aggravating at times, he definitely didn't deserve any of what happens. And he does change as a person, at least I think so.

The story of Enoch sort of lends itself to the interpretation of a husky, tortured fallen angel who sweeps a beautiful woman off her feet and has to choose between her or God, his Father. I like to say this is the version of Samyaza that I would have been able to write if I wasn't as gay as I am, but my reasoning for not making him that is a little more complicated.

I like writing hypocrites, and I liked the idea of an angel that saw his struggle similar to a woman's, feeling a solidarity with her instead of just sexual attraction. One part of Enoch that always struck me is the passages about the Watchers crying and begging Enoch to talk to God for them. I thought the angels being unsure or not really knowing that this would make God as mad as it did was interesting. I liked the idea of him being an angel associated with water because of his role in the flood, so I made him a lesser angel of healing. I can go on and on.

In my original concepts of A&M (YEARS ago), I intended for Samyaza to be much more of a bad person, almost an antagonist to Azazel. But as I outlined, I started falling in love with this version of him.

Btw, it's okay if you dislike Samyaza and even dislike him after finishing the book. Not all characters have to be loved, and Samyaza would agree with you that he doesn't really deserve anyone's love or forgiveness after what he's done.

I can talk more about the Watchers if you like! I really like all of them :') Thank you for the ask! I'm happy you like my writing. I hope you enjoy the rest of a&m

#a&m spoilers #mine #ask

21 notes · View notes

rojaceartandgaming · 2 months

Text

Hello IEYTD fandom, I know I'm not much of someone who... participates much. I lurk, I drop in to throw an ieytd fic at y'all and put Jackson through more hell, but... I have a legitimate question. Please don't be mad if I am out of line, but I'm genuinely confused as someone who is a storyteller himself and is learning game design in college. This leads me into another point here-

This will go into game and story analysis!

I'll admit most of my questions are rhetorical, so as rude as I may accidentally sound... I want to have a genuine discussion about this fandom, and I am coming in as a third party who doesn't partake in anything here really other then loving people's fanfiction and art. I watch, I listen, and yet... I am utterly exhausted and kind of frustrated with the state of this fandom as a mostly outside observer.

So, I'm legitimately just putting these questions out there to get them off my mind, and I really don't have the energy to partake in any arguments. I am not looking for any arguments like "well I don't think so" or "I don't see that." I have been here silently watching and yet what I shall bring up has stood out to me near-constantly.

Why is there just... such blatant mischaracterization in this fandom? And why, furthermore, are people so... shocked that people enjoy villainous characters? And even furthermore.... why are people constantly dumbing down antagonists? As a writer myself, I often constantly find myself mentally praising Schell on this amazing trilogy of games. Especially because 99.9 percent of the characters are villains. A hero is only as good as their villain - that is a crucial part of video game development. Of storytelling as a whole.

I am studying game design. Actively going to college for this.

I have been reading and consuming and analyzing fiction since I was a kid.

I've been working on an RPG for the past three years, my passion project.

No matter if you're reading a story, watching a movie, or in this case playing a video game, this is a fundamental concept. A hero is only as good as their villain. That is what makes us root for a hero. A villain has to be menacing, a threat to the main hero, needs to be compelling, and furthermore most of the time needs to be understandable. A villain that you can see exactly how they got to that point and can kind of empathize with that is a well written villain.

Being able to see or analyze how a villain got to that point is not excusing their bad actions or ignoring that a character is a bad guy.

That is someone critically analyzing a character and enjoying their arc. And furthermore, that is a testament to good writing.

Being able to understand exactly how a villain got to the point they're at makes them more terrifying.

Characters like Sephiroth (honestly most Final Fantasy antagonists, really), the Dead Three's Chosen from Baldur's Gate, basically every villain from Splatoon, Count Bleck from Super Paper Mario and so much more are not beloved characters just because they're just like, considered hot (idk fandoms be wild) or blorboified (is that even a term?).

They're loved because they are genuine threats who have such depth to their character and are interesting because they are villains. And furthermore, vanquishing or going against these villains feels important because they have depth. Because they can be analyzed.

That's what I love about IEYTD as both a gamer, and a storyteller myself. The Phoenix is a complete blank slate. The Phoenix is a player insert. That is not a personal stance. That is an intentional game mechanic. That is not a consequence of IEYTD being a VR game - many VR games have a proper named main character, even if they are a silent protagonist. The Phoenix is once again a blank slate for the player to project onto, and that is an intentional decision by Schell. This is how they wanted to tell their story. I love an oc-ified Phoenix as much as the the next person - I mean, look at Jackson - but the Phoenix is a literal blank slate. You cannot ignore that.

So how do you make a silent character with no appearance or voice interesting? How do you make the player care? Furthermore, how do you make the game feel rewarding?

You fill the game with a plethora of characters - primarily villains - that have enough character and drive that make the player feel good about overcoming the challenges and trials that come. That is just good game design.

Every single villain - from someone who barely gets any mention like Daniel Sans, to major, major villains like Solaris, Juniper, and Prism, to even a villain who we don't know shit about like Zor - is a menacing force. Overcoming the obstacles that are sent your way leads to a rewarding game play loop where you, the player, actually give a shit about the story, the world, the villains, and the player insert of the Phoenix themselves.

There is so much to every single villain that one can pick apart, that it becomes insulting to the characters and honestly to Schell's writers when you reduce their characters to just "a girlboss who kills people" (Fabricator) or "a whiny bitch of a privileged asshole" (Juniper) or "just a silly guy who likes bees" (Hivemind) or "she didn't do anything wrong, she was just manipulated" (Prism).

Even the most minor of a villain in this game has so, so many layers you could pick apart and analyze and... so many people in this fandom all but Flanderize them. It almost feels like people in this fandom cannot grasp the concept of characters being multifaceted.

And even more, that they cannot imagine liking a villain even though they are a villain.

This is a trend that I've seen a lot within fandom recently and... it's something I don't get. Writing a character who is a terrible person (and liking said character) does not make someone a terrible person. That is something that people do not seem to get nowadays thanks to likely lack of media literacy and... it kind of kills me a little bit as someone who analyzes so many types of media and is working on a story driven RPG, and once again is going to college for game design.

A character who is flawed is believable. No realistic character is infallible.

John Juniper is prone to anger, he is a man who is egotistical, arrogant, and a bit of a prick. However, these bad traits of his were likely preyed upon by Zoraxis and he became worse because of that. I am not saying he did no wrong, I am saying that you have to acknowledge that he is multifaceted.

The Fabricator has a fair bit of flair too, but to reduce her to just a quote-en-quote girlboss ignores her work. She makes Saw-esque death traps and delights in the pain and ultimately death her traps make.

Hivemind delights in killing people with literal bee stings. Think about that, think of how brutal of a death that would be. The average adult can withstand over one-thousand bee stings, or approximately ten stings per pound. And he laughs about it.

Prism knew what she was getting into, and hearing people say she did nothing wrong is... confusing. She worked for the EOD. She knew who Zor was. She knew what they would do. It is no secret that they regularly backstab their own employees. Zoraxis elite have a target on their back from their own employer. Prism likely knew that, and yet worked for them anyways. Yes, she helps the Phoenix in the end. But that is the culmination of her arc. You have to acknowledge that.

These are but a few examples - I am not going into full rants about every single character. I have an essay due on Sunday, I need some of my sanity left. But I feel like this had to be said.

To reduce these characters to Flanderized versions of themselves is to almost insult the writing in these games. To insult the very complexity and depth and thought that was put into these characters. And as a lover of story driven media who often analyzes - occasionally over-analyzing - these sorts of games for fun, and is aspiring to complete a story driven RPG with hopefully in-depth villains.... it is simply saddening to witness.

I felt this had to be said, thank you for your time if you read this. I now hopefully should have some peace of mind for the time being.

#ieytd #i expect you to die

20 notes · View notes

boinin · 3 months

Text

Adding this guy to the carousel of blorbos in my brain. I like that his tarot schtick leads into him being obsessed with probability and data 🖤

He's needlessly antagonistic, but that's Blue Lock for you. All bets are off when it comes to football. I personally enjoy the shit talking.

My only criticism of Hiiragi's great characterisation in Episode Nagi is... what for? Solely to entertain? Besides that, there isn't much purpose to it. His bravado in this match will be short-lived. Chigiri, Barou and Nagi win. Hiiragi passes the second and third selection, but remains on the bench for the U20 match, and barely plays during the Neo Egoist league. A guy that interested in probability must be aware how unlikely he is to make the national U20 team for the World Cup.

One of Blue Lock's strengths is its engaging line-up of characters. Even when they're barely shaded tropes, you root for and against them. But on the flip side, due to the manga format and pacing, there simply isn't enough time to spend on these interesting side characters. They rarely become more than a once-off antagonist or joke.

Hiiragi gets this one time to shine, before Episode Nagi moves on. After that, he's resigned to being background fodder, alongside other interesting characters (Darai, Hayate and Niou from the original U20 line-up spring to mind). If we're lucky, Hiiragi might show up to annoy Nagi during the U20 match or while they're teammates in Manshine.

It's a frustrating criticism. On the one hand, Blue Lock and Episode Nagi have an amazing formula. They're fast paced action manga, with sharp dialogue and thought-provoking concepts. The main characters in the franchise (which I'd identify as Isagi, Bachira, Chigiri, Kunigami, Rin, Nagi, Reo, Barou and Kaiser) get consistent development and page time. Other characters... don't. At least, not beyond the resolution of a particular arc or problem they're facing (Yukimiya for example).

Other characters are engaging but static—Raichi is an example. Has he received any significant development since his Team Z days? He's more grounded and less boastful, I'll accept, but we don't know much about his inner thoughts or motivations. Kurona and Gagamaru also suffer from this.

Don't get me wrong: Blue Lock achieves a lot of depth through clever exposition and panelling. If they spent more time on character development, they'd risk sacrificing hype. That'd be a greater lost, imo.

In truth, I don't think anything should change. There's nothing wrong with entertainment for entertainment's sake.

If anything, I'm bemoaning the fact there isn't more time or more English-language content available for Blue Lock's side characters. What we get is so good, it makes me hunger for more. Maybe that's what I'm really bothered by. In which case, less a complaint than a compliment.

Speaking of side characters, this chapter also gave us the Zantetsu-Niko team up that was teased years back.

Niko appears to be avoiding the main action this match, but one thing I enjoyed: he briefed Zantetsu on what kind of plays to expect from Barou, Nagi and Chigiri. He also doesn't rely on Zantetsu to recognise these on sight—instead Niko does the watching and calls the next play out to him, using nicknames that Zantetsu will remember and understand.

Underrated moment that reinforces their character tropes to the reader: a watchtower, supporting the stupidly fast.

#this became a justice for hiiragi post without me meaning to welp #blue lock #blue lock analysis #episode nagi #blue lock manga #blue lock spoilers #episode nagi spoilers #bllk manga #epinagi chp 20 #hiiragi reiji #tsurugi zantetsu #niko ikki #boinin talks bllk #mine #bllk analysis #long post

26 notes · View notes

citylighten · 9 months

Note

Hello! I've been reading Sink or Swim, and I am absolutely enthralled in the depth of your writing. Which brings me to my first of several questions... How long have you been writing? I find Pietro's backstory personality very complex. How he presents himself... Handles obstacles... It's intriguing. How long did it take to create Pietro's... well... life? Did you have to do a considerable amount of research? And for my last question, how long does it take you to caption a scene? Are you editing the dialogue right until you post?

HELLO~!

First off thank you for this message! I'm very happy you're enjoying the story!

In regard to your first question: I began writing at a young age. So young, that my earliest memory of writing is sitting on my grandmother's lap and telling her exactly what to write down in Microsoft Word. (I figure these were probably stories about Simba the Lion) Eventually, I told her I wanted to figure out how to use Word on my own and the rest is history. But yeah, I've always been big on writing and reading, there was always a story of some kind in my head. By the time I was ten, I was on FF.Net posting very shitty fanfics. But that's the thing about writing, you know? The more you do it, the more you read, the more you even do something like observe films and shows for the narrative value rather than strictly looking at it as entertainment the better of a writer you become. I also made the decision back in high school to become a journalist (something I don't think I want to be anymore, but I digress) still, having the responsibility of writing about real events, or about real people, definitely influenced my writing, as well. Especially when it comes to the way people speak or may explain something.

Admittedly, writing a story in the mafia genre isn't easy. A lot of research is involved (ranging from reading biographies to just watching films, but I also love the video game Mafia because their worldbuilding is pretty good😂) and I often take mental notes of things so I can understand/apply similar topics with my characters.

In regard to your second question: We've hardly scratched the surface of who Pietro is as a person! I planned to do a few edits of him as a kid as well as a "mini-story" of how he ran away from home at sixteen but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

Pietro is a very new oc - he was made this year, so understanding him/developing him has been a push-and-pull process. Before Sink or Swim started, he was originally meant to be way more antagonistic, but then I found myself liking him. I thought of Pietro and Rosie hooking up and the drama that could entail of, but then I thought, "what if this guy cared about her?" And boom, I found myself jotting out a bunch of outlines and concepts.

However, because Pietro isn't born in America...er, Simerica, I've found myself reading about Sicily a lot. Since I view that as the real-world counterpart to Tartosa. The norms, the lives of farmers, the way organized crime functions there because Pietro's family suffered greatly due to the local mob. But that's all I'm saying about that!

In regard to your third question: Captioning a scene can take forever. I'm not sure why because all I do is copy-paste pre-written text. But the time it takes to write out a scene can vary depending on its length, relevancy, and tone. Small talk is horrible to write, just plain horrible. Banter is usually quick. But when you have scenes like Rosie reading Pietro's email - that took forever because not only am I writing out Sheila and Pietro having a serious conversation, I had to write out the details of the email. Similarly, in my last post, when Pietro more or less confesses that he's an affiliate of the mob: that conversation took three rewrites before I felt it was good enough to put on caps. The first conversation draft was rough, I kept zoning out. The second was a little easier, but I found myself rearranging the conversation to better flow. And the third edit was the easiest because it was like I was 'smoothing' things over and ensuring the flow was decent. Sometimes though, once I paste dialogue onto a cap I do slightly tweak it to correspond with the expression the sim has. But again, thank you for all these questions! I enjoyed answering them!

15 notes · View notes

anisecandy · 2 years

Note

Character ask number 21 and characters Peter and Eddie

21- Wild card! Talk about anything to do with this character! Anything at all!

Welcome everybody to a series of rattled off reviews concerning Peters and Eddies of all kinds from cartoons I don't remember well and/or didn't finish!

Spider-Man: The Animated Series from 1994s

In Polish dubbing he was voiced by Jacek Kopczyński. While he wasn't excellent voice actor at this point, he sticked around as Peter's voice all the way to the Ultimate Spider-man and definitely became an important part of character's image. I also believe that casting Przemysław Stippa as Peter's voice in Into The Spider-verse was at least partially due to the similarities in their voices, and since Stippa did a wonderful job with this role, I'm willing to forgive the slight awkwardness of some of Kopczyński's lines.

Yeah, that's all I got. I only watched like three episodes of this one because I was looking through Venom iterations in cartoons. This Peter feels very whatever to me.

Moving on.

2. The Spectacular Spider-man (2008)

My feelings regarding this version are that while it’s an example of an okay Spider-man, the Peter Parker part ultimately lacks charm and leads to more slices of life segments landing flat due to the feeling of Peter’s relationships often being underdeveloped, which is pretty much crucial to a Spider-man story. I especially didn’t enjoy the romance subplot. Peter’s infatuation with his love interests for a gigantic portion of the series felt very skin-deep, causing him to appear pretty shallow and at times egocentric and unpleasant.

While I feel that tssm had some pretty interesting and well developed concepts, their Peter Parker wasn’t one of them.

3. Ultimate Spider-man (2012)

I like this guy. He’s my homie.

Ultimate Spider-man’s Peter Parker is simultaneously a quite good, entertaining and what’s perhaps most important, likable character, and a very different interpretation of Peter Parker as a whole. This Peter goes to a private school for superheroes, has a ton of cool gadgets, his own team he leads and confides in and a mentor figure in person of Nick Fury. Basically gone is any mention of financial struggles, gone is the loneliness Peter usually faces while trying to balance his double identity, as well as the lack of guidance that comes with them. Instead, this Peter’s journey is more of a conventional one toward simply becoming the best superhero possible, with him learning how to be a team player, taking responsibility for his mistakes, trusting others, etc.

And this doesn’t make it a bad story.

The lessons he learns mostly stick, and he has enough charisma to actually be able to be the one man show Spider-man’s role often demands him to be (something that in my memory of the show, tssm failed to do). While I heard that the “imaginary segments” of Peter’s narrative were annoying to some people, I found them even if they weren’t always funny, charming and original and appropriate for a cartoon exaggerated take on Peter’s already vivid imagination and sense of humor.

His most important characteristic though, is curiously something that basically no other interpretation, nor the original of Peter Parker has; his empathy. While he often resolves the villain of the week problems through fists (that’s the kind of genre he is in after all), there are numerous examples of this Peter being the most emotionally intelligent and observant of all the characters, trying to understand the antagonists and attempting to help those he can with kindness and compassion.

This is his greatest strength as a character, while at the same time being, at least from my point of view, the most crucial deviation from the Peter Parker character. I think while he shares personality traits with classic Peter Parker, ultimately he might have worked better when seen as just a different character. The story is already different enough from most Spider-man adventures, that it perhaps would have been better to just introduce a new character, with new backstory, powers and gimmicks. But this would have made less money, wouldn’t it...?

My only real problem with this version is that his empathy doesn’t extend to the symbiotes Ultimate introduces. But since from all the versions here at least one of them reaches a happy ending with Flash and isn’t treated as evil incarnated, I’m willing to turn a blind eye to this one flaw...

Oh, also I headcanon him to be aroace (and as long as I won’t see the finale and discover that my dreadful premonition of him getting with MJ was true it won’t get disproved), which is always a plus.

4. Spider-man (2017)

...Did you notice that all of them have different eye colors...?

Anyway.

This is probably a very controversial take, but here goes nothing. I think this is what Raimi’s Peter Parker should have been. Personality-wise anyway. He’s very socially awkward, incredibly nerdy, a little stuck up and ultimately, likable. That is, for the audience. In universe it’s very easy to understand why he would get picked on and have troubles finding friends outside of Harry and later other tech-savvy students.

But unlike Raimi’s trilogy, 2017 presents a Peter Parker who is full of emotions and passion. From the first scene he isn’t just “a geek”, we’re shown how much he loves science, how much he loves discovering and how learning and creating excites him, something that, for me, Raimi failed to convey. We can connect to this Peter through seeing what he cares about. That applies to people as well. His friendship with Harry feels genuine and natural, we can see why they click together and it hurts when they start drifting apart. His relationship with Aunt May is very sweet as well, with a lot of charming little moments that show his dedication to her and his desire to help.

While he might feel a little too soft and lack the inner anger and less heroic and likable traits of original Peter Parker, I still find this interpretation to be worth checking out.

Unless it gets worse after the first half. I only watched, like, eight episodes of the 2nd season...? Oh well.

And now onward to the Eddies!

1. Spider-Man: The Animated Series from 1994s

Why is he ginger.

Now, I’m not an expert on Spidey-media, but as far as I’m aware of the adaptations timelines, this is the one that introduced the concept of Eddie a) working with Peter b) being a photographer instead of a journalist. And while the a) could, (and I stress the but wasn’t really present in that word,) be used well to establish him as a character before he became Venom, b) from the start is something I’d say is in no way tied to character’s backstory, personality or motivations and the “rivalry with Peter” that it’s supposed to lead to doesn’t really make up for it, or serves to make the character more entertaining. It could be argued that it makes for a foundation for Eddie’s hate toward Peter, but personally I think that an important part of Eddie’s original character is that there is NO foundation. There’s no ties, only baseless resentment and misplaced need for revenge. The fact that initially he was a completely outside force of which Peter had no prior knowledge, and that Eddie’s hatred was something incidental and completely out of Peter’s control made him more scary.

And on the topic of scary. My other issues with this character are that he doesn’t really feel like a threat. He starts out basically as a comic relief, he’s pathetic. And while Eddie SHOULD be a little pathetic, the problem with this version is that he’s silly and unthreatening all the way toward the end. I mean... I can’t be the only person who thinks this design for Venom makes him look kinda like a duck with those plump lips.

Also screw the “Symbiote is evil and manipulative” trope, all my homies hate the “Symbiote is evil and manipulative” trope.

The biggest fault of all though, is that this version is dubbed in Polish by Jarosław Boberek. My distaste for this guy’s voice is immeasurable. How does he sound like, you ask? Imagine Alex Hirsch voicing Stan Pines, but a tone higher. Now imagine him speaking like a village idiot. You have now a pretty close picture. And yes, this voice actor IS good at his job, but I loath his voice. So this means this version is automatically the worst, 0/10, blocked and won’t recommend.

2. The Spectacular Spider-man (2008)

Is this... even still an Eddie Brock...?

I mean, he’s not a bad character, the way too quick 360 ° shift in personality aside. That was lame. But being Venom and general look aside, there really isn’t much left there from our beloved original feral rat man Eddie. I guess that’s what happens when you interpret an already very remote interpretation of a character in a way that won’t make the audience want to throw bricks at him (yes, I’m talking about the Eddie from the comic Ultimate Spider-man).

Dunno what I could say about him, fam. I guess he’s a nice kid(how old he is actually...?) and it’s cute how protective of his friends he is? Especially Gwen- I think he has a little crush on her? With all this “I have the person you love the most Peter!” or whatever (was it, “I have your girlfriend maybe...?) and Peter being all “er...MJ...?”... not gonna lie, I think he was both jealous and projecting.

The Venom design for this one is also cute! I like it a lot and they were doing pretty cool stuff with the Symbiote’s powers. And, as bad as the “Symbiote is evil and manipulative” trope is, in this one at least there were some pretty explicit romantic connotations, so I like that.

All in all, I have only one question... Do people in the USA actually call each other “bro”? Because this feels on the same level like, idk, “cowabunga” or “radical”.

3. Spider-man (2017)

At first, I didn’t really care much about this one. But I started thinking about it, and now I came to a conclusion that this one just could have worked. You see, 2017′s Eddie has exactly one scene that for me feels a lot like potential. Wasted potential.

This Eddie has one scene, when he’s genuinely scary.

And I’m a little... invested into why and how what really clicked there could carry over to the rest of characterization in a way that would make this take memorable and more horror-like than other villains of the 2017′s??

The scene I’m talking about is when Peter finds Eddie in his room, and he starts to talk to him about his life and how Peter is supposedly ruining it. It feels unpleasant. Out of place. At this point, Peter doesn’t know that he has the Symbiote yet, so this doesn’t play out like a villain encounter. Eddie doesn’t feel like a supervillain here - he feels like a stalker. Peter is uncomfortable, doesn’t know what to make of it, reacts how a normal person would, threats to call the police. It grounds the scene in reality and makes how creepy this really is. We know basically nothing about Eddie at this point, aside from seeing him in the passing and now how he got the Symbiote, so while there’s some prior establishing, he’s still a stranger to both Peter and the audience. A stranger apparently obsessed with a teenager he should have no ties to.

And it works. It’s scary.

But right after that, when Peter with help of Miles does research on him, we’re reminded again how pathetic Eddie is. He lives in a dump, his photos are of horrid quality, how did he even get hired, he's a worse photographer than a kid with no real training! When he is again introduced as a threat, it’s in full super-villain form, with his main asset being physical strength and- And that’s it. That’s not scary anymore, we’ve seen Peter take on superhumans. This doesn’t stand out, provides new challenges, shakes the status quo. He goes out unmemorable. The same way any other villain of the week would.

Bud damn, that scene, that one scene. I want so badly to build on it! Because this could work!

So, what can we do? The first problem is the “pathetic factor” as in, if he’s this incompetent, then how are we supposed to be scared of him? to this I say, you could a) change him from being a horrible photographer to, perhaps, doing photos that Jameson just personally finds horrible. This Eddie could be all about artistic photography and very arrogant and proud of his work, refusing to change his approach and ultimately this being his downfall. Or b)he’s good at his job and is just your typical journalist photographer, but his (actually established in the show!) shady methods of getting photos have already resulted in some legal actions and he’s more of a problem than an asset at this point, Peter appearing and taking Spider-man’s photos that he couldn’t is simply the last straw. Or even c)leaving everything the same, but simultaneously establishing him as a different kind of threat. Maybe he has a scrapbook with informations on the competition that he got rid of by publishing compromising photos of them, that would be in character with his immoral methods of working! Maybe he was obsessed with Peter even before getting the Symbiote, maybe Peter finds evidences establishing Eddie as an actual stalker. And then later, when it comes to the confrontation, maybe Eddie doesn’t just use brute strength, maybe he blackmails Peter with some informations and photos he shouldn’t have, maybe he says he’ll spread some info that will cause problems for Aunt May.

I don’t know! But I see some potential here and I hate to see it going down the drain like that. Idk, maybe he gets better in the second half of the 2nd season. Wouldn’t get my hopes up though.

Aaaaand that’s all folks! Well, that was long, wasn’t it? I wanted to give you a nice pic of Ultimat’s Agent Venom, being the one and only happy symbiotic relationship of the cartoons, but I couldn’t find anything good. Oh well. What can you do.

Laters!

#peter parker #eddie brock #ultimate spider man #spider man 2017 #the spectacular spider man #ask #ask game #long post

33 notes · View notes

convenientalias · 1 year

Text

My 2022 Kdrama Roundup

Making my 2022 cdrama roundup is taking too long (...I watched so many fuckign cdramas this year) so, since I watched considerably less kdramas, I decided to just do a post of them first!

KDRAMAS I FINISHED THIS YEAR:

The King's Affection--A kdrama targeting me personally. A crossdressing female crown prince would have been enough, but did she have to be so lethal? So handsome? Did she have to be good at both archery and swordfighting? And schemey? And did her love interest have to be a bisexual Rowoon? I was Attacked. My favorite kdrama of this year!

Eve--I'm always here for a solid Monte Cristo. Just people coming back with a new identity to fuck up the lives of those who wronged them. Lee Ra-el really goes for it. The drama, the angst, the fashion! Also the femslashy tension with Han So-ra was great, I need more female archnemeses in my life. The only thing is I didn't really like the actual romance that much? Maybe I just don't understand the tango.

Alice, the Final Weapon--More of a miniseries. The dynamic is a female assassin/a kind of suicidal masochist who becomes more invested in life after meeting her. And they're both highschoolers? Honestly the only way to sell me on a teenage romance is to make it this insane, I did enjoy.

The Silent Sea--Ngl it did creep me out a lot. The lunar water, that is. Didn't feel super connected in the characters bc this show is more about plot, concept, and action than character development, but it was quite tense and I was certainly invested in whether they were going to survive.

KDRAMAS I ALMOST FINISHED BUT DID NOT BUT WILL FINISH IN 2023, OKAY? REALLY!

Alchemy of Souls--I love Naksu/Mudeok! I love her fucked up mentorship with Jang Uk, especially in the early episodes where her attitude is just "throw him at death and see what happens". Also enjoy the obnoxious crown prince lols. I have only two episodes left (of the first season, at least) and have enjoyed both the scheming and the character development, but I have to say it can sometimes be a bit slow, and I don't care that much about ALL the supporting characters that have to have their moment in the limelight EVERY episode. (Park Jin and Park Dang-gu, I'm looking at you!)

Flower of Evil--New obsession! I had to stop watching for a week or so bc I was just bingeing too fast and losing sleep lols. The suspense is way up there, the whump is a thing of beauty, and I found myself super invested in Do Hyeon-su's life of fake (but come on, it's not really fake!) domestic bliss. Just so intense. I was kind of scared off by the hype for this show when it first came out but the hype is real, this show is incredible. Just hope the ending lives up to the rest of it.

Connect--An enjoyable thriller, but I don't really see why you have to make the antagonist of a show that already has organ traffickers, mad science and mutants... a random serial killer? On the other hand I do love his weird vibe with the surprisingly normal mutant MC so. I am not immune to serial killer antagonists.

OVERALL

A good year for morally dubious female protagonists (yes, I am including Lee Hwi/Dam-yi! she comes very close to murder multiple times and I am including her!). I watched less kdrama thrillers than usual bc I was watching cdrama thrillers instead, but the ones I watched were enjoyable. I want more fanfic for all of these shows but the fanfic wants I have are immensely specific so I should probably just write some but we will see.

#kdramas

13 notes · View notes

thebookchaos · 2 years

Text

What Once Was Mine: a Twisted Tale's Book Review

It took me quite a long time to finally sit down and review this book — mostly because I was in denial — but here I am at last. So, let's talk about What Once Was Mine, shall we?

Personally, Tangled is one my favourite Disney movies. I can relate a lot to Rapunzel, who grew up trapped in a tower by her abusive stepmother. Her curiousity about the outside world, her restlessness, her feelings of guilt and her need to constantly search for new things to occupy herself with, make me feel represented as a survivor of domestic abuse myself. So you can imagine my excitement when I stumbled upon this book. I have read some of Liz Braswell's previous works on the Twisted Tales series, so I naturally had high expectations for this one.

However, What Once Was Mine was quite the disappointment. My main issue with it is that on contrary to the other volumes on the series — at least those which I've read — the idea behind it is not that original. The Twisted Tales series present to us, readers, a new take on these classic fairy tales. They bring a new twist to the table — as we can see on A Tale as Old as Time. And although we are familiar with the possibility of Rapunzel's power being used for evil or to serve other purposes besides healing (I'm talking about the Hurt Incantation) I expected Braswell to explore it further. For the most part of the book, I felt like I was reading the movies' script: the conversations were the same, the plot was the same, the order of events was the same. Because of that, I quickly got bored of it and was unable to enjoy it as I wish I could've.

The second thing I would like to point out is that Gothel is not the main villain. For me, this didn't make any sense because since the beginning she's introduced as this antagonistic character who, for selfish, narcissistic and superficial motives, kidnaps Rapunzel and locks her away from the rest of the world in order to keep her powers to herself. Gothel's actions should've built up to something, they should've make us feel fearful of what she would do next. But instead, she's pushed aside and we get another villain, who appears out of nowhere and who we know nothing about. Why would you erase an already well-developed antagonist and choose a random one instead in the last third part of the book? I will not be spoiling who it is, but for the sake of this review I will disclose that it's a queer-coded villain, which for obvious reasons just didn't sit right with me.

Despite everything I mentioned above, there were in fact some aspects I really liked, such as the historical setting of the story, for example, and the existence of witches. I appreciated the focus on the role of the midwives at the beginning and the fact that Gothel pretended to be one — which then again just shows how she unreservedly lies to obtain everything she wants. I also liked seeing Rapunzel explore her powers, how she used them in her own unique way, and the concept behind it, but as I mentioned before Braswell didn't describe them as well as I would've liked and it was overall a bit predictable.

I absolutely loved Gina. I think she was the better character in the book, and I specially liked how she wasn't afraid to point out to Rapunzel that she was very privileged in comparison with orphans like Gina and Flynn who lived in poverty and had to go through many difficulties back at the orphanage.

I rated this book 3 stars, because unfortunately it was not my cup of tea, although I understand how others can enjoy it regardless of its faults.

7 notes · View notes