had a cup of coffee last night — i do not usually drink coffee, not for any big reason, just because deviations from my routine have to be planned and when other drinks are on offer i default to the one i am most familiar with, and because i don’t usually drink coffee i didn’t realize that the caffeine would actually make my brain function the way that i am now certain my brain should be functioning. like i usually take an entire day to shower or cook or whatever it is but i cleaned the entire apartment and made my salad as well, and there was none of the “lying down for 3 hours for no reason doing nothing” in between? and now i am feeling very tangled and sad because i honestly did not realize my brain full on does work different on a lot of levels, and will need accommodations for things

i just finally watched the batman (2022) and need a repository for my thoughts

anyway yes i know i am the voltron blog but you all must understand. and this is key to my lore. that i am an insane batman fan. i haven't kept up with comics in recent years but i am a total sleeper agent when it comes to batman and i've been waiting literal months to watch The Batman (2022) and i finally watched it last night and have been marinating in my thoughts since. and also my parents are tired of hearing my ranting and watching me walk around in circles.

ANYWAY.

-

cinematography

this is literally the best looking batman film in years, if not the best looking one ever. the color grading was like a balm to my eyes, especially after the slog fest that is some of the other superhero movies... even with the constant rain the city never looked washed out, reeves and his set designers made such awesome choices when it came to fluorescent and neon lighting... the DINER SCENE!!!!!!!!!!! also omfg the way they made battinson the Red and Black Batman like what an excellent color combination. i loved it. i need to buy some of the theatrical release posters post HASTE.

more than anything this movie was SHOT like a comic book and so many scenes looked like they were ripped straight from a comic book, like i could visualize the paneling and everything... so freaking baller.

my family wasn't super impressed but i think it's because they expected an action movie but No You Don't Get It. batman sees the world as a gritty detective noir movie but to everyone else in gotham they're living in a horror movie and that is BATMAN CINEMA!!!!

when the riddler was arrested i was like 'wait there's still 40 minutes?' and then i preceded to have my mind completely blown. i kept questioning what reeves was doing only for him to IMMEDIATELY correct me minutes later. literally, let this man cook he knows what he's doing. when bruce lit the flare i didn't immediately get it -- and then the little mayor's boy reached for batman without any hesitation. and then the crowd began to follow him, closing the distance. and then he began to lead them to higher crowd. And Then I Got It.

-

2. gotham

yes i'm devoting an entire section just to the city.

gotham city is one of the hardest things to get right in any kind of batman media. like gotham is Not Normal and that should always be something hovering in the background. but many directors just don't bother because gotham architecture is so fundamentally different from normal sensibilities that building lore accurate sets would be both incredibly costly and almost impossible to do. but matt reeves tried and the movie was so unbelievably better for it.

bvs gotham was basically just new york city and don't even get me STARTED on how futuristic minimalistic modern the nolan movies were. ugh.

but when bruce and alfred were in their penthouse suite surrounded by fifty layers of gothic style trim my dad verbally said 'are they in a fucking church or something' and like YES DAD! that's the POINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! gotham is supposed to be borderline CAMPY GOTHIC like the city itself is not just a setting, it's a full blown supporting character. the city looking batshit is essential lore and PIVITOL to the world building that has produced a man dressed up as a bat to fight crime like you DON'T GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! batman is divorced from our reality but he is GROUNDED IN GOTHAM!!!!

actually side note i've been playing gotham knights on the PC and 1) the game is way better than critics gave it credit for and 2) GOTHAM LOOKS SO GOOD IN THIS GAME. THE LIGHTING IS CRAZYYYY. best adaptation of gotham city fr, i loved the arkham video game series but the panache. the style. it became so diluted after arkham asylum fr.

my one criticism is that reeves needed to make one more rooftop set it was so silly that all the characters kept returning to the same gcpd roof with the bat signal on it.

-

3. plot

FINALLY A MOVIE WHERE BRUCE IS A DETECTIVE. i've waited literal years for this. i do wish batman had been a little bit more active/proactive in the plot, i.e. not strictly following with riddler's games, but this is also early batman so i'm more forgiving of his rookie mistakes... however in the second movie i expect him to be on his BALL GAME!!!! give me plot-armor-borderline-prescient batman PLEASE MR. REEVES I BEG OF THEE.

LOVED this adaptation of the riddler. using the zodiac killer as an inspiration for the riddler was amazing, brilliant, showstopping, spectacular. and they kept a little bit of camp in paul dano's performance which i appreciate. i don't think we'll ever go back to batman forever levels of camp, but that's okay </3

there was a nod to the character of hush in the movie (at least that's how i'm choosing to interpret it) but i don't think they could ever use hush in the future because they already adapted so much of his gimmick for the riddler... but that's okay tbh i don't think hush is that interesting anyway.

at its core the batman was a buddy cop movie and i LOVED that. jeffrey wright KILLED it as lieutenant gordon and the dynamic between batman and gordon was amazing. excellent usage of our favorite future-commissioner, you could really see they already had an established rapport but their bond was becoming even stronger... their conversation in the interrogation room was so amazing, as well as their scene with the penguin.

my one criticism is that alfred became non-existent after a certain point. also lowkey the lego batman movie did a better job at the 'bruce realizes that his trauma has made him reluctant to form bonds or deepen them because of his fear of losing anyone else' subplot. lego batman movie on top!

-

4. characterizations

everyone and their mom has already talked about how this version of bruce wayne is more focused on developing his identity as the batman versus his identity as brucie wayne so i won't repeat those essays. but i will say that i have such high hopes for bruce's development in the sequel. like the way the movie ended with him emphasizing how he needs to become a 'symbol of hope for the city' reads to me as him preparing to finally re-enter gotham society as Billionaire Bruce Wayne and i am SO READY FOR IT.

but what i actually want to talk about is how amazing catwoman's development is. i love how much backstory they gave her in this movie. i will always love the nolanverse version of catwoman but you really learn almost nothing about selina in TDKR. but in the batman selina's is this fully fleshed out character. you can immediately guess what her life has been like. and her motivations in the story... the way she was prepared to run until she found annika... and then she immediately changed gears and focused on vengeance for annika and her mother... god, i love it.

cobblepot's character was also so, so good. you can intimately tell that he's a two-faced bastard who's spent years being a yes-man purely so he can climb the social ladder. i know colin farrell is going to rock the HELL out of that monocle in the sequel.

-

5. hopes for the future

i know it's too late but i reallyyy don't want joker to be in the sequel. i unfortunately think that's more or less guaranteed though since they've already casted barry keoghan. and his performance was really good. i'm just tired of seeing the joker in batman media. (inb4 keoghan absolutely kills it in the sequel and makes me eat my hat). i don't really consider batman to have one arch nemesis, only that the joker has consistently ruined batman's life more often than all the other villains.

literally the one hill i will die on is that reeves NEEDS to include robin at some point. PLEASE. you can't have batman without a robin, he gets so lonely. literally that's all i want. i want battinson to become a dad so, so bad. you have no idea.

and (and this is key) robin must be a kid. a pre-teen aged 14 or younger. "oh but that's so unrealistic, child superheroes totally break the immersion" well I DON'T CARE. FULL THROTTLE ON THE CHILD ENDANGERMENT. let children fight crime, for the culture.

[okay, okay. make it a robin origin story where dick grayson is introduced and is plot-relevant but he doesn't actively patrol and fight crime and only becomes robin at the very end.]

introduce robin in batman 2, and then have robin be a participating older teen/adult in batman 3.

my incredibly indulgent ideal batman 2:

at least two years have passed (bruce is more or less settled and has finally hit his stride). he has mastered air gliding and now attacks villains from the rafters instead of just constantly walking out of the shadows. i want to see arkham-level combat So Bad.

selina is mentioned, but doesn't really appear (and there are no other love interests.

actually wait i change my mind about joker. joker can be included in the movie IF the red herring "main plot" is that he's using a circus as a base of operations (because clowns and circuses).

i say red herring "main plot" because the movie starts with a joker crime spree, so you think the movie is going to be all about the joker, but then he leads batman to his circus base and it turns out that PSYCH! THIS IS ACTUALLY A DICK GRAYSON ORIGIN STORY. because joker's base of operations is haly's circus.

batman is snooping around looking for evidence and that's when he comes across dick grayson, age 10.

kid dick grayson. PLEASE. PLEASE.

batman decides to visit the circus as bruce wayne. You Know What happens.

plot plot plot

COURT OF OWLS SUBPLOT.

bruce has to balance hunting down the joker while also protecting this little kid he pretends he isn't totally attached to.

this is incredibly indulgent because i have no idea how you would balance joker screentime with that of the court of owls. idk. that's what's fanfiction is for i guess c:

i have decided that over winter break i am going to rewatch all the batman movies from 1980s onwards so i can revise my Batman Cinema power rankings. i will create some kind of metric or spreadsheet so i can grade and quantify each movie.

hell i should also replay all my favorite batman video games. because those are basically just movies anyway. and i miss kevin conroy :(

thanks for reading. god i love batman.

Deep diving into Alejandro's ethnicity and family because the show is vague with how both are portrayed, and I'm pedantic:

Off the bat, we know that he was born in 🇪🇸 Spain. Or at least, that's what his wiki page says, so I'm sure it's mentioned in some kind of canon content (the show, the character interviews, the creators' stating it, ect). He often times speaks en español, either by replacing words and phrases in otherwise English sentences or cussing out his team in an entirely spanish confession. His name is also rooted in Spanish origin; 'Alejandro' is the Spanish equivalent of Alexander, and his surname 'Burromuerto' literally translates to "Dead Donkey", likely a combination of the idioms "beating a dead horse" and "no ver tres en un burro", translation: can't see three on a donkey; akin to 'blind as a bat'.

I could go on about the symbolism of his name(s) and how it relates to his performance on Total Drama, but that's not essential to the topic at hand so I'll go over it later.*

With this in mind, the show really wants us to believe that he's Spanish, or at the very least Hispanic.

In Chinese Fake-Out, we learn that he won a gold medal at the South American Skate Olympics, so he presumably lived somewhere in South America in his childhood. On the wiki, it claims that he moved to Latin America soon after he was born. His comment in the same episode about eating barbequed guinea pigs where he grew up had a lot of people deducing that he lived in 🇵🇪 Peru since guinea pig is famously a delicacy there. The question begs, why would Alejandro and the rest of the Burromuertos move to Peru from Spain?

We know that Alejandro's father is a diplomat, so uprooting the family to a new country could be related to his work, but I doubt a diplomat would settle down and start a family just to go through the hassle of moving them halfway across the world to a random country, regardless of his salary.

What other reason would anyone have for dragging their brood across the sea? To see their extended family.

Family is a big character motivation for Alejandro: he has a lot of pride in being a Burromuerto and often times complains about disappointing his family or being susceptible to José's teasing when his plans don't work out. Pride is a staple of the Burromuertos; they even have a family code they abide by. That kind of mindset is usually generational, implying that his parents place the same emphasis on the presentation and opinions of their family.

The most glaring example of this mindset is the hate fuelled rivalry between Alejandro and José, which was sparked by their desperate need to be the "better son". The main goal of the Burromuerto brothers is familial recognition. Understandable, when your parents are too successful to raise you themselves, any kid would be desperate for their attention. Since their competition was allowed to escalate to the point of mutual loathing, their parents probably encouraged their behaviour; when you value familial reputation over everything of course you want your children to continuously prove themselves. (Poor Al is just full of complex familial trauma, from his parents' neglect to his brothers' bullying to the incredible pressure he's put under to succeed. No wonder he's like that.)

After seeing how the brothers are willing to go to extremes for the sake of family, it's reasonable that parents sharing that mindset would move across an ocean just to see their relatives (and likely compete with them, after all even a younger Alejandro was showing up everyone in South America's skateboarding scene).

Suggesting that either one or both of his parents, or grandparents, are Latin American. For simplicities sake, we'll say that Alejandro's dad is Spanish (as he carries the surname), and his mother is Peruvian (since Peru is the assumed country they moved to).

That means that the brothers qualify as both Hispanic and Latino. Alejandro's latin blood really is canon, and the stereotypical 'Latin Lover' archetype he fills (alongside the "Archvillain" he's titled as) is all the more accurate. He's evidently very proud of both heritages.

To clarify, the Burromuertos moved to Peru when Alejandro was young to be with his Mother's side of the family.

If we want to really wade into the theoretical waters, I'd like to suggest that Alejandro's father left Spain because he disgraced himself/his family in some way, and that's why he's so insistent on his sons restoring the family pride and prestige.

So, I've established Alejandro's ethnicity and touched on the bare-bones basics of his home life. But what about his other brother, or his uncle? You know, the characters that were mentioned once and never expanded upon. Don't worry, I've got notes on them too.

Carlos: The eldest child and a professional soccer player. Alejandro doesn't mention anything about a rivalry with Carlos. Instead, he suggests the two share a healthier bond as Carlos taught him soccer skills. 'Carlos' the name is a Spanish variant of Charles, meaning "free man". Fitting, since it's widely assumed that Carlos escaped from the Burromuerto home's harmful environment at his first opportunity and 'freed himself' from their high expectations/standards, hence why he doesn't engage in the family-typical hypercompetitive bullying. A somewhat common fandom troupe I've seen is Carlos being disowned by the Burromuertos, and post-World Tour/All-Stars Alejandro reconnecting with him after he too is disowned.

Uncle Julio: The hypnotist. All we really know about Julio is his name and occupation, but it's enough to pin him down as Alejandro's maternal uncle. Alejandro states that he learned hypnosis from Julio in The EX-Files; as he grew up in Peru, the only family he reasonably could have interacted with outside of the nuclear unit would be his mother's relatives. His comment "manipulation runs in the family" is never ascribed to the Burromuertos by name, which adds to the implication that Julio isn't his father's brother, as any skill as useful as hypnosis would definitely be branded under his surname otherwise. Additionally, 'Julio' as a name is derivative of the Latin Julius or Julianus (meaning "Devoted to Jove/Jupiter", the Roman incarnation of Zeus, though I can't find any meaning in this applicable to his character), and not a strictly Spanish name like those of Alejandro and his brothers. Instead, it's common in most Hispanic and Latin American countries.

José: The middle child and Alejandro's source of his lingering childhood trauma, if the aversion to the nickname "Al" is anything to go by, I've already written about their relationship. The name 'José' is a Spanish variant of Joseph, which means "to add/give" in it's simplest interpretation. He sure does give Alejandro a tonne of issues, so I suppose it tracks.

*And finally, analysing the symbolism of Alejandro's name.

Alejandro, derived from Alexander, meaning "warrior" and "man's defender". Though in Al's case, it's likely a reference to Alexander the Great as opposed to the name's literal meaning/origins- Alejandro conquered the competition like Alexander conquered his empire.

Burromuerto's double idioms combine "beating a dead horse donkey" with "blind as a bat", likely as a convoluted way to say he's blinding the dead donkey; in this case, the beaten dead horse donkey is the OG cast of Total Drama who have already been milked for two seasons of content and have little left to offer (therefore, the third season is the beating of the dead horse, as its' an attempt to force content out of a resource with nothing left to give. that's why they added two more competitors, if that makes any sense? I'm not sure if I'm explaining this well enough,) and Alejandro is deceiving or 'blinding' them through his manipulations.

Obviously, this is all speculation written by someone with too much free time and no expertise. All of my knowledge/facts come from google searches and connecting dots that likely have no real links to each other. I'm not an authority on any subject. Keep that in mind, please.

Feel free to add your own opinions/thoughts! Or correct things that are be wrong!

New Member Spotlight - March 2024

The Pond is always growing and we want to make our new members feel welcome! Here’s a list of recent additions to our fishy family, along with a little info about them!

Guppies, Jellies, and Mutuals, oh, my!

@samanddean76 -

Other SM names? - Same name on AO3 and Discord

OTP? - Wincest and/or J2.

Looking for in the Pond? - To be around other open-minded and creative people so that I can see how far I can be inspired to go with this writing thing.

Pairings you read? - All of it. I love Wincest, Wincestiel, Sabriel, Destiel, Jammy, and J2.

Genres you read? - Angst, Hurt/Comfort, Fluff, Smut, True Mates, Soul Mates, Unrequited Love, and A/B/O is my favorite way to combine all of the above.

Favorite writer(s)? - nyxocity. She started on LiveJournal with the first episodes to air and transfered a lot to Ao3. Her work in both SPN and SPN RPF is some of the best I've ever read.

What do you like to write? - A/B/O, AU's, Angst, Hurt/Comfort, True Mates, Soul Mates, Revenge, and All The Feels

Masterlist!

Most underappreciated fic? - Joyous Memories Amongst The Sorrow

Something you haven't written but would like to try? Why not? How can we help? - A full on, hard-core revenge story where nothing is softened, the focus doesn't shift away, and there is no doubt as to what was done. Haven't tried it yet as I'm not sure I'm ready to embrace the darkness required to write it. Also, I don't want to scare off my readers. How you can help? Encourage me to finally tackle that next seemingly impossible challenge.

@kayleighwinchester -

Other SM names? - KayleighWinchester (AO3)

OTP? - Awful as it sounds, Dean and my OC! Beyond that, absolutely Destiel.

Other fandoms? - I'm pretty active in the band Ghost's TikTok fandom! I used to be *huge* into Harry Potter, but that's definitely faded in the last few years. As it stands, Supernatural has definitely become the main obsession.

Looking for in the Pond? - I'm mostly here for the community! My fanfic writing has mostly been just for me and shared with a few close friends in the last few years - publishing it anywhere, especially in the really rough state it's in at present, is super daunting! I'm always looking for more people to bounce ideas off of, chat with, and generally obsess over the show with, as well as finding new stuff to read!

Pairings you read? - I'm especially fond of reader inserts, and they were my first big step into fanfic! When it comes to ships, I tend to stick specifically to Destiel, since it's my OTP, but I'm always willing to branch out!

Genres you read? - I love angst! Writing was, for a long time, my free version of therapy, so reading and writing angst was always a huge thing for me. I also love smut and fluff. ...Essentially, everything. Depends on the mood!

Favorite writer(s)? - I always have to boost TinkerbellBleu on Ao3, even though she isn't active anymore. She wrote an amazing DeanxOC fic, essentially turning episodes 1, 2, and part of 3 into full-length novels. I adore her writing and hope she comes back soon!

What do you like to write? - Most are CharacterxOC, and I have absolutely no self-control, so they are almost always ridiculously long. As it stands, I've been incapable of not just writing a fic that is supposed to span the entire show, because there's just *so many* good moments, good scenes, good storylines, etc. There's never one specific 'theme'; I write everything! I do enjoy writing angst, though.

Something you haven't written but would like to try? Why not? How can we help? - Smut! I've made an *attempt*, but never one that I actually kept. Generally, it comes down to a lack of confidence; I'd love some critiques if I ever get around to it!

@whiskeyjuniper -

Other SM names? - Whiskeyjuniper (AO3)

OTP? - DeanCas, Midam, crackship DeanChuck

Looking for in the Pond? - Sprint buddies!

Pairings you read? - DeanCas, Midam, crackship DeanChuck

Genres you read? - Horror

What do you like to write? - Horror, Weird

Masterlist!

Most underappreciated fic? - a happy place to dream about

@bloodydeanwinchester -

Other SM names? - Same name on Discord, alovelyhorror (AO3)

OTP? - Destiel

Looking for in the Pond? - Looking for a place to talk to other writers and participate in sprints.

Pairings you read? - Almost exclusively Destiel

Genres you read? - Angst with a happy ending is my favorite but I also love some good horror. my favorite trope is probably time travel.

Favorite writer(s)? - sobsicles and komodobits on ao3

What do you like to write? - mostly into writing longer destiel canon/canon divergent fics (although i do have an idea or two for aus)

Masterlist!

Most underappreciated fic? - When the Night Is Over

Something you haven't written but would like to try? Why not? How can we help? - The thing I'm most focused on wanting to do now is to finish the longer fic that I’m currently working on. I'm struggling with keeping up motivation now that I'm right in the middle of the fic!

@notanotherthembo -

Other SM names? - Same name on Discord

OTP? - Dean/Cassie

Other fandoms? - TWD, TOWL

Looking for in the Pond? - Beta readers, homies, amazing writers to talk shop with

Pairings you read? - Sam/Femme!Reader, DeanCassie, Sam/Dean/Femme!Reader, Wincest

Genres you read? - Smut, Rivals or Enemies to Lovers,

Favorite writer(s)? - @uncouth-the-fifth is the GOAT

What do you like to write? - Crossovers, specifically ones that feature Black femme characters as the romantic lead

Masterlist!

Most underappreciated fic? - Clap Your Hands If You Believe

Something you haven't written but would like to try? Why not? How can we help? - Reader inserts! I'm working on one right now that I need a beta reader for. I'm also considering finishing up/rewriting an old Spn/True Blood crossover series that I haven't touched in years.

@bigmouthlass -

Other SM names? - darali_starscream (AO3) & Darali (Discord)

OTP? - I write Dean/You, and Dean/Donna should've lived happily ever after.

Looking for in the Pond? - Get a better handle on fandom stuff, meet some other like-minded obsessives.

Pairings you read? - Dean/anyone. He fascinates me.

Genres you read? - Smut to start, anything interesting and well-written.

Favorite writer(s)? - @thoughtslikeaminefield, @sam-is-my-safe-word , @talltalesandbedtimestories, Edge_of_Clairvoyance (AO3), and @rizlowwritessortof

What do you like to write? - They start as smut, and insist on growing plots.

Masterlist!

Most underappreciated fic? - Stairwell Drums

Something you haven't written but would like to try? Why not? How can we help? - I'm trying to get comfortable writing Sam; he's harder for me to feel at ease with. Also slash generally, it doesn't come naturally to me.

That's all for this month, folks! (If we're missing anyone, let us know and we'll add them to next month's list!) Make sure to say hi to the newbies and make them feel welcome! Thanks to all from @manawhaat, @mrswhozeewhatsis, @mariekoukie6661, @thoughtslikeaminefield, @spencereliotwinchester and @heavenssexiestangel!

speaking of psychosis- i wasn't speaking of it here but i was speaking of it- i've been trying to figure out what was up with the great psychotic episode of freshman year, because i had assumed it was a trauma-induced psychosis type of deal, but it occurred to me that i was definitely having sort of thought broadcasting types of beliefs, probably some other stuff but i can't remember atm and don't feel like digging thru my old vent account lol. (ramble continues under the cut this got VERY long)

(line with text so tumblr doesn't eat the image. idk if it still does that but better safe than sorry)

(the months with "2" are split into first and second half of the month bc it was relevant, couldnt figure out how else to signify that succinctly)

i cut out the labels of each belief for safety + in case that's triggering to ppl but each row is a different belief i had that in retrospect was probably some sort of delusion? top two are very similar but different enough i tracked them differently. bottom two might have just been anxiety+ptsd but i do really think they're connected to this

it was definitely at its worst mid nov-end of jan, but started in september and didn't really let up til like june

anyway like i said i had assumed it was a combination of trauma and being off my meds and isolation that made the perfect situation for me to go fucking crazy, but i hadn't really thought about it that hard . but now that i Am thinking about it, again, i was definitely having these kinds of beliefs before The Trauma

and in my past self's defense. one thing about my thought broadcasting beliefs specifically was that i was straight up being essentially cyberstalked at the time and didn't know, so i was completely right that certain people knew more about me than i had told them, but i was wrong about the reason why

anyway i was reading up on schizospec disorders for class (kind of. also just for fun) -- also important context schizophrenia does run in my family i think on both sides? but my parents are weird about talking about it. so that's part of this also.

but i noticed that of the three labels i was looking at- brief psychotic disorder, schizophreniform, and schizophrenia- (i didn't look into schizoaffective bc i dont think i have many bipolar symptoms, and didn't look into stpd bc i don't think it counts as a personality disorder if it lasts like 10 months lol, and delusional disorder because i do think i had some negative*&cognitive symptoms (*psych term meaning absence of things present in nonschizospec people, not literally just bad symptoms lol)-- though to be fair, that may have just been a combination of situational aspects & autism?)-- either way, it's not on this beautiful and awesome diagram in mspaint i made so i could illustrate the timeline aspect of the diagnostic criteria:

bc a diagnosis of brief psychotic disorder requires symptoms to only last a month, and schizophreniform for 1-6 months, whereas schizophrenia is lifelong .

basically the problem is- while the worst part of my psychotic(?) symptoms lasted ~4months, they were definitely there in some form for around 10 months, which is too long for a diagnosis of schizophreniform, but i don't feel comfortable just, assuming it's schizophrenia lol, especially when most of the symptoms i experienced dont affect my life anymore? it does make me nervous though that this happened right around the typical age of onset.

this might just be a problem with diagnoses being too specific to cover the entire spectrum of human experience, and i might just be outside of any area where a specific label could be applied . also, i know it's been written about but not become an actual diagnostic label- but there are places where ocd and psychosis can over lap, and schizo-obsessive disorder has been suggested as a diagnostic label, but not officially used anywhere afaik..

i think my main concern at this point is just, whether or not i should be concerned about it coming back. like, is it possible to be in various stages of active psychosis(?? it still feels very strange to refer to it that way but i guess that's what it was, so) for ~4-10 months, and then just be chilling after. or should i be worried. was this a one-time thing starting because i was off my meds and being worsened by isolation and trauma or is there a possibility of this happening again. and i think that's a question that can't be answered with any certainty, probably

Madara’s Issues - a combination of nature and nurture

My elaborate answer to this particular anon ask.

It is no secret that Madara suffers from issues. The most obvious is probably his trust issues, but the other thing is him having a psychological complex as well, and how could he not have one when the environment he grew up in is the way it is?

How could he develop a healthy sense of self when his entire reality hinged upon survival, and - more importantly and even tragically - the survival of his loved ones.

I think it’s pretty straightforward to read an inferiority complex between the lines that, as Madara became older (and more unhinged), became a superiority complex (mixed with a god complex even) to compensate for his every perceived failure and mistake(s).

Or why would Madara want to create a world “of only victors” (besides love and peace) if he did not perceive himself as having been someone who “lost”?

It would also surprise me if anyone in that situation (and I just mean the environment itself, the tension, the conflicts, the wars) would be able to grow up with their trust intact. It’s impossible in all honesty. Of course he had (severe) trust issues, and it is best illustrated in his inability to even pee the moment someone stood behind him. (The same scene in the anime had him relax for a second, breathe a sigh in relief, before becoming incredibly tense at Hashirama standing behind him)

That’s actually tragic.

And now we return to his inferiority complex. The thing is, it did not simply appear out of thin air, it had to come from somewhere. And I suspect that it would - realistically - come from a combination of the following; Tajima (who instilled a “power is everything” philosophy…at least if the below scan is any indication. Madara and Hashirama had to gain their worldview from someone, no? And their fathers are the most logical ones…considering they lead by example, literally even)

In german the meaning is pretty much the same. The most interesting change is the fact that Hashirama’s statement about “lasting change” is changed into a question. It is probably the same in the official english release as well, but I cannot say for certain.

It is the “no one will follow a weakling” that probably is the philosophy Tajima drilled into the heads of his remaining sons, that they need to be strong so people will follow them. But are we talking about physical strength or emotional? Or even a combination of both?

The next thing would probably be Madara’s status as heir apparent, that in some shape or form he shouldered a heavy burden of being the son of the clan head. Then the fact that he was the eldest brother of five (and in many cultures, perhaps even all, the eldest child in the family has the responsibility to be a good “role model” to their siblings) which means that he was expected to care for his siblings.

Last but not least, we have Madara’s personality itself. The probably greatest contributor to his inferiority complex even taking root.

The most defining traits of Madara’s personality (surprising as they may seem): his sensitivity and his capacity to feel emotions deeply.

He felt emotions deeply, and he was someone who loved and adored his siblings, while valuing his family highly.

He saw it not so much as a burden, and probably more like his purpose, to keep his loved ones safe.

And there is a particular scene that confirms just how essential family was to Madara.

While his ultimatum can be seen as the complete opposite of someone being compassionate, he is still kind at his core (or would he have gone back on his word and stopped Hashirama’s foolishness otherwise?).

In that moment in time he simply lashed out in grief and in pain.

Too wounded emotionally to do anything but lash out in the way that would “ease” the pain the most. The only way someone could understand the pain he was in from losing Izuna.

“I have nothing left to protect.” Is the sentence that follows thereafter.

He needed something to protect, without such he probably saw himself having little value. Mind you, the above is coming from one of the greatest warriors in their generation - one of the strongest to have ever graced their world - and yet…as much as power meant to him, as much as he enjoyed battling someone capable and strong…it could scarcely replace that first and foremost Madara loved his family. He became strong for their sake. He fought for their sake. He wanted peace for their sake (and his own).

And in the above scene he is completely beaten down, has lost the will to live even. Accepting death and that it would be an honour dying by Hashirama’s hand (or, “if it’s you I can go in peace”).

Power was only the means to an end for Madara. The way to achieve his ambitions. The centre of his world was his loved ones.

Even his desire for peace was intimately linked with his sole surviving brother, Izuna - who was the one thing he could - and would - protect from any harm.

He probably swore to protect each and everyone of his siblings, until he was only left with Izuna in the end. Making a promise like that as a child and not being able to keep it, had to hurt.

He appears quite young in the flashback of Hashirama’s, perhaps 10 - 14 at most.

That is a lot of pain to bear. That is a lot of blame to wrongfully attribute to himself (which he is implied to do). While not plainly stated, Madara probably was very critical of himself - spoke harshly about himself and blamed himself for deaths that were out of his control (perhaps he was in a similar situation as Hashirama when he raced to save Itama? Madara most likely had something similar happen to him where he was too late to save a life that perhaps would have still been alive had he just been better - as stated by himself)

That is…heartbreaking honestly. If he was “better”, that is worse than saying “if only I was stronger/faster”

He is attacking himself - not blaming the death of his loved ones on his abilities per se.

To speak that low of himself…

This (the death of his other three siblings at this point in time) is probably where his inferiority complex began in earnest in all honesty.

While he was a prodigy - having killed capable adults when a mere child - and was rightfully proud of his talent and accomplishments on one hand, a part of him probably still saw the need to boast about his strength - so to feel better about himself because he could not protect what mattered.

“Sometimes, people with an inferiority complex show signs of being overconfident or narcissistic, but this isn’t really the case. Instead, it’s a way of masking an overwhelming feeling of being inadequate. These symptoms may include:

Being highly competitive

Being a perfectionist or sensitive to criticism

Finding faults in others

Seeking attention

Having trouble admitting mistakes

Individuals with inferiority complex usually have experienced events during their childhood that fuel their symptoms. One isolated episode typically isn’t enough to trigger a long-term disorder.” (source)

Madara has showcased each of these traits, no? “Seeking attention” may be up for debate, but the rest have been shown throughout Hashirama’s memory.

I can imagine that having Izuna’s admiration helped Madara immensely on one hand, on the other hand it would be a certain Senju that would challenge Madara’s ego tremendously…

Madara is a very competitive soul. And you can see his sensitivity to “criticism” here as well. It obviously chafes at him not mastering something so “simple” as skipping a mere rock across a river…

Throughout Hashirama’s memory we see that - in a way - Madara was always “inferior” to Hashirama. Well, maybe outside of him suggesting that his eyesight is better than Hashirama’s (nearly giving away from which clan he hails in the process).

Yet - while he might have been weaker in physical strength - Madara showed tremendous emotional strength. During the river confrontation Madara appeared much more collected than Hashirama at the beginning - only giving in to genuine wrath (and distress the moment Izuna willingly put himself in harm’s way when confronting Tobirama and Butsuma together with Tajima) when Izuna could have died in front of his eyes.

He also showcases a strong sense of loyalty to his loved ones (which differs a touch from Hashirama’s loyalty in all honesty).

For all his flaws in prioritizing Izuna - and then their clan - Madara is honest about it (even when it has severe repercussions in hindsight).

Madara’s trust issues probably had everything to do with his siblings and maybe comrades. Anything could have happened: from kidnappings to more literal scenarios (turning his back to a believed dead enemy and one of his brothers protected him from death). But his trust issues could also be there because of Madara just not trusting himself (his abilities and leadership) and this uncertainty of his spilled out to encompass the rest of the clan: showing itself by Madara hating having people behind him. Having to trust them. Having to depend on them while they have to depend on him. Being a leader (especially the type of leader Madara was) had to be suffocating for him due to his trust issues (that were severe, as much as it is played for laughs and “neurosis”)

Hashirama does not appear as if his leadership is questioned the same way Madara is doubted (after the scene where he flees with Izuna, leaving his people to fend for themselves).

While never regretting prioritizing Izuna, he probably realized in hindsight that he should have done something differently. He did the right thing by listening to Izuna, but he could perhaps have taken a different action (ordered a retreat for example…but he was in distress and did not think clearly at the time).

In his old age Madara appears tired and melancholic. And bitter, the type of bitterness that comes from having been disappointed time and time again.

The sadness…that is the gaze of someone remembering a lifetime of failures and regrets.

The reason he created his Moon of the Eye plan (Mugen Tsukuyomi) was partly out of the feelings he felt above, but also because the world - mankind - is the way it is.

To reality Madara lost first his three siblings. Then his father. Then Izuna perished - and then Hashirama ended up disappointing him, before completely horrifying him, the moment he literally “backstabbed” him for a village that would end up becoming shrouded in “darkness”.

No matter if you feel Madara’s extreme idea of peace is “peace” or not - at its core he wanted to spare the world of experiencing the loss of losing what you hold dear, spare people the disappointments of reality and create a world only full of love and peace (and victors), because he had to lose everything for a world that ended up remaining the same even after Konoha was built.

I can't stop thinking about Lilith saying that Gwendolyn hasn't visited her at all. She doesn't say that the Emperor forbids members of his coven to see their relatives. On the contrary, she talks about it as if Gwendolyn deliberately did not visit her own daughter, although she could.

She says she hasn't seen her mom in forever and is surprised that she regularly visits Eda. By the way, I'm shocked at how Gwendolyne just shrugs off Lilith, whom she hasn't seen for thirty years.

And I literally don't know what to say about Hunter's words that it is necessary to leave the family forever in order to be in the Emperor's Coven. Because the two ideas contradict each other and I do not know what to believe.

I mentioned it in my previous post regarding Lilith's relationship with the Emperor's Coven, and after further re-watching and thinking it through, I came to a conclusion that Lilith not seeing her mom for so long was a result of three or four different factors combined.

More below the cut, as always.

So, let's start with...

Cult Mentality.

The Emperor's Coven is your run of the mill cult - and the main thing cults expect from their members is resigning from their individuality for the sake of pleasing some higher figure, that usually being the cult leader. So, what do you do when you want to strip someone of their individuality?

Easy. You separate them from things that make them unique and multifaceted - which of course, means the things that shaped their personality to begin with. Family, friends, hobbies, even a particular way of dressing. All of it has to go away.

Notice how almost everyone in the Emperor's Coven wears a mask. Them being the military aside, concealing one's individuality by enforcing a uniform on them is just one of many cult tactics.

In that case, why do Lilith and Kikimora get to have their faces uncovered? Two reasons.

One, Lilith up until a certain point was the poster face of the Emperor's Coven - and that was only after years of having to be a scout just like any other. In Hunter's own words, in the Coven even chances have to be earned. I imagine it's the same with identity.

Even then, she was forced to straighten her hair and dye it black - depriving her of a symbol of her connection to the Clawthorne family - wild, unruly and messy hair. Really speaks volumes, in my opinion.

Workplace Mentality

On top of the Emperor's Coven being a cult, it's also the second worst thing possible - a toxic workplace.

You know how sometimes people brag about not spending time with their family because they're "on that grind"? I wouldn't be surprised if that kind of mentality was rewarded, too.

Like, seeing your family isn't entirely banned, but if you keep choosing them over the Emperor, you will never get a promotion and you will be stuck being a Scout forever. And we know Scouts are essentially cannon fodder and meat-shields. At best.

So, of course some more ambitious individuals would be more than happy to skip the birth of their child, if it means that they won't have to be sent to their death from a bird-tube-worm out in the woods. And as we know, Lilith is very, very ambitious.

Basically, she was on that thirty years long hardcore grind.

Family Misunderstandings

As Gwendolyn herself said, she thought Lilith was self sufficient and that she didn't need as much attention as Eda - which wasn't the case.

As it happens, my younger sister is neurodivergent and from very, very early on my mother had to pay her more attention as her future functioning in society depended on it. So, I tried to be self sufficient and not as occupying, believing that otherwise I would be a burden to my mother.

In result, for many years I shut myself away from her and tried to resolve my issues on my own, while simultaneously resenting her for not realising just how much I actually needed her. At the same time, she was somewhat unaware of it and thought I was just being difficult.

Fortunately, we both stepped out to one another and we're now healing, making up for all the things we missed as mother and daughter.

But you didn't come here to listen to talk about my self improvement or my past traumas, so I'll end it here.

I believe that their situation was similar to as described : Lilith moved away from the family believing that she would burden them with her issues, and Gwendolyn thought her daughter simply didn't need her anymore - so she didn't reach out, believing that's what her daughter wanted which unfortunately lead to a thirty years long separation neither of them truly wanted.

Which of course, Lilith being in the Emperor's Coven made only worse. Wouldn't want to bother your daughter when she's a government official!

So that's about it, as I think I had gone over all points important. Though if I missed anything, I'd be happy to know.

And, also, let me let you in on a secret.

I am still not a therapist or a licensed professional in psychology. Everything I said is based on personal experiences and observations of both real life and fiction so I may have made some mistakes here and there.

Thank you for reading!

Top 12 Portrayals of Scrooge

Last Christmas, I covered my favorite renditions of Charles Dickens’ timeless classic, “A Christmas Carol.” I’m feeling rather “Scroogey” this Christmas, due to...reasons...so I thought I’d continue the tradition by taking a look at my favorite versions of the story’s central character: everybody’s favorite miser, Ebenezer Scrooge. This time, however, I thought I’d go a little more in-depth. When I listed my favorite versions, I just gave the titles, a reference image, the ranks, and that was it. I didn’t really analyze or explain why they were my favorites, they just simply were. This time, I thought I’d cover the Scrooges with a bit more elaboration.

This is going to be an interesting ranking, because, in my opinion, what makes a truly great Christmas Carol really rests on its Scrooge. It’s one of those stories where if the main character doesn’t work very well, then something just feels lacking overall. However, by the same token, not all Scrooges are created equal: the ranking of my favorite Scrooges isn’t exactly the same as my favorite versions of the Carol, and vice-versa. Sometimes a rendition can have enough good points that I love it more than others even if the Scrooge isn’t too great; similarly, even if the Scrooge is VERY good, if other elements feel poorly handled, then I can’t rank that one among my favorites. So the rankings and choices here, while having plenty of overlap with the former list, will not be ENTIRELY the same. Having said all that, let’s waste no more time. Here are My Top 12 Favorite Portrayals of Ebenezer Scrooge!

12. Fred Flintstone, from The Flintstones Christmas Carol.

I can’t believe that I left this version out of my Honorable Mentions when I did my aforementioned list of the Carols, because it definitely deserves a spot there. This version of the Carol is a classic case of a story within a story, as the plot is essentially split into two halves: on the one hand, there’s the Carol we all know and love, but the framing device is where things get interesting. In this adaptation, the Flintstones are taking part in a stage version of the story (written by “Charles Brickens,” har har), and Fred has been cast in the coveted title role. The fame goes to Fred’s head, causing him to neglect his family and friends; as a result, we actually have two different stories going on: at the same time Scrooge is learning his lesson, Fred starts to realize and learn a few lessons himself. It’s this double-plot that makes this version unique, and when you combine Jean Rhys Davies as the Narrator into the mix, this take definitely has some good qualities worth noting. As far as Fred as Scrooge goes…it’s Fred Flintstone as Scrooge, I think you can imagine what that would be like. I can assure you, it does not disappoint.

11. Sir Michael Hordern, from A Christmas Carol (1977).

Hordern played Jacob Marley twice in his lifetime: first in the 1951 live-action feature film, and then again twenty years later in the 1971 animated short version (both of which starred Alastair Sim as Scrooge). It seems only fitting that, in 1977, he would graduate from Marley to Scrooge. Hordern played the character in a BBC TV version of the story. For some reason, throughout the 70s and 80s, there was a BIG push on the BBC’s part to do adaptations of classic works of English literature and drama; many people consider these televised productions to be interesting because, while the production values are generally sort of low and the overall feelings of each are somewhat dry, the actual performances and characters are VERY strong. Some of England’s finest performers handled these stories, and they have managed to stand the test of time as some of the most unique and/or definitive depictions to date. Sir Michael Hordern’s Scrooge is no exception: granted, I don’t know why he looks like Benjamin Franklin, but the portrayal is quite decent. Hordern plays the character less as a snarly, sneering scoundrel, and more as a sort of pompous elitist. His Scrooge is haughty and slightly foppish, but still has the crotchety, coldhearted qualities so many great versions have. With the way Hordern plays the character, you get the feeling a great deal of Scrooge’s problem comes not only from his past bad experiences with Christmas, but the fact he’s effectively become so used to having money and having everything he wants that he either remains totally unaware of how poverty truly works, or simply doesn’t remember what it was like to be in the opposite situation. This ties into the concept of “Ignorance and Want” when they are introduced, and helps to make his redemption all the more interesting: it’s the story of a man “waking up” to the world around him. That’s always been an element in the story, but this one really pushes that angle, and it makes this Scrooge quite unique.

10. Albert Finney, from Scrooge (1970).

The 1970 musical interpretation of the Carol is notorious for its dark and semi-satirical sense of humor. This is an intentionally comedic take on the Carol, with a lot of wry, ironic moments of wit and weirdness strewn throughout. At times it almost feels like something out of Monty Python, but it still has the heart and soul of the story at its…well…heart and soul. Key to this version’s success is Albert Finney as Ebenezer Scrooge. This is, to be blunt, one of the most over-the-top Scrooges of all time. Finney stalks through the film like a crooked spider, his face all scrunched up, croaking and squawking many of his lines and lyrics. However, you sort of forgive the melodrama because it fits the overall tone of the movie, and when he needs to show moments of greater depth and character development, he still does a good job. His heartbreak at losing his fiance, his heartfelt joy when he finds a chance to redeem himself, and many other moments all carry real weight. At times it’s a little TOO hammy for my tastes, and Finney is not really the best singer, but generally speaking it’s a solid interpretation, if a bit overdone.

9. Jim Carrey, from A Christmas Carol (2009).

This version seems to be a take people either love or hate, with little in-between, both in terms of Scrooge himself and the movie overall. Personally, I think both are good; while I’m a bit more iffy when it comes to Carrey as the Three Spirits, I unironically really do love his take on Scrooge. While there’s definitely a humorous angle to this portrayal, as you’d probably expect, Carrey actually takes the role relatively seriously and tries to play the character straight. You really do buy the different emotions this Scrooge goes through and the journey he takes as a character. He’s not as cartoony and as zany as you’d expect, at least not the majority of the time; if anything, when the film gets more ridiculous, that’s not even HIS fault, it’s the writing and direction that take him down that route. He’s everything Scrooge needs to be, and there are moments in this film that I think are among the best moments of any Christmas Carol, and among the best scenes with Scrooge any version has presented. It’s not enough to get him higher in the ranks, but he’s more than worthy of a spot in the Top 10, at least in my books.

8. Mr. Magoo, from Mr. Magoo’s Christmas Carol.

My biggest gripe about Mr. Magoo’s Christmas Carol is that I don’t feel it takes enough advantage of its own conceit. Aside from maybe two or three typical Mr. Magoo-ish bits of slapstick silliness or jokes about his nearsightedness, for the most part, this version of Scrooge really is JUST a version of Scrooge. He just happens to look and sound like Mr. Magoo. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, though, because it allows the character to truly shine as old Ebenezer, and Jim Backus - Magoo’s original voice actor - really does nail it out of the park, giving perhaps one of the best performances of his career, if not his best. There are moments where this Scrooge genuinely does make you hate him in the opening, and that’s actually quite an accomplishment when it’s MR. MAGOO in the role. And as the film goes on, you do feel sorry for him in the sadder scenes, and are as overjoyed as he is when he finds his second chance. The filters at play do nothing to dampen the effect this character and portrayal has on the audience, and that’s really what makes this version of the story and the part so great.

7. Sir Lionel Barrymore, from the Campbell Playhouse Radio Version.

Yep, we’ve got a RADIO version on this list, of all things. I know most people won’t care about this one, but I absolutely had to list it. Lionel Barrymore is a name most people probably won’t recognize nowadays, but it’s worth pointing out he’s probably most famous today for his portrayal of another Christmas curmudgeon: the evil Mr. Potter from “It’s a Wonderful Life.” Basically, you can call Barrymore’s radio Scrooge Mr. Potter if he had any redeemable qualities. It’s the same basic part, when you get down to it, except that Scrooge ultimately learns his lesson and has to face his own tragic past: things Potter never gets to experience. Barrymore played Scrooge a few times, both onstage and on radio, and considered the character to be one of his favorite roles; it’s easy to see why, because Barrymore really does knock it out of the part as the Dickensian miser. There’s really not much else to say, this is just a very solid and underappreciated take on the character. I listen to this version every year for good reason.

6. Scrooge McDuck, from Mickey’s Christmas Carol.

Once again, this is a pretty cartoony Scrooge…but just like Albert Finney, you sort of forgive that because, well…it’s Scrooge McDuck. You expect him to be cartoony, since he’s LITERALLY a cartoon character. This version somehow ups both Scrooge’s sympathetic and unsympathetic elements at the same time; he cackles with villainous glee at the thought of robbing old widows and swindling the poor, yet he actually shows more kindness towards Cratchit (played by Mickey) and seems to genuinely regard Marley (played by Goofy, of all characters) as a long-lost friend. And of course, as the story goes on and we see him face his past and try to change his ways, we only come to like him more and more. This was actor Alan Young’s first turn as Scrooge McDuck, and - perhaps simply because of the story this is based on, and the emotional adventure the character has to take - I’d argue it’s his best performance in the role. As far as “substitute Scrooges” go, he’s easily the finest around.

5. Michael Caine, from The Muppet Christmas Carol.

The Muppet Christmas Carol is arguably the most popular to have come out within the past decade or two; when people talk about the best versions of the story, this is a version nearly always mentioned. It is, in my opinion, the best MUSICAL take on the Carol, and it still stands strong as both a Muppet movie and a Christmas Carol adaptation. A big part of its success, of course, lies in Caine’s performance as Ebenezer Scrooge. Caine attributed the secret to his performance’s success in how seriously he took it: he said the best way to make the movie and his character work was to treat this as if he were working with the Royal Shakespeare Company, and not a collection of colorful puppets. Indeed, Caine plays one of the coldest Scrooges of all time: due to the way his past is depicted and his personality is shown to change, this version emphasizes the idea that Scrooge’s callous nature largely comes from the fact he didn’t learn much about compassion and human closeness as a child. And as he grew older, he clung to material matters more and more as a means to cope with what he saw as the harshness of the world around him. Nevertheless, there ARE hints of humanity in him from the start, which makes his redemptive journey more powerful and believable. Plus, in hindsight, it’s just fun to see Alfred be such a curmudgeon…especially around Kermit the Frog. Ha Ha.

4. Tim Curry, from A Christmas Carol (1997).

So, as it turns out, Curry has actually handled Scrooge SEVERAL times. First, there was an episode of “Peter Pan and the Pirates,” wherein he played Captain Hook. The episode “Hook’s Christmas” is a parody of the Carol, in which Captain Hook acts as a surrogate to Scrooge. That’s fun enough, but then Curry played the role onstage in a stage version of “Christmas Carol: The Musical.” (There used to be a recording of this version available on YouTube, but it sadly seems to have been removed.) And later still, Curry would present an audiobook of the story, wherein he played all the different characters, Scrooge obviously included. Any one of these could get Curry a place on this list, but it’s the 1997 direct-to-video film made by DiC Entertainment that lands him placement. The movie, overall, is pretty…meh. A lot of people dislike it, and I can see why; it���s honestly not the worst version of the Carol ever made, but it definitely has a myriad of flaws. For all its problems, however, Curry absolutely nails it in the role of Scrooge. He remains, for me, one of the most underrated and definitive portrayers of the part; while he naturally has his melodramatic moments (it’s Tim Curry as Scrooge, would you expect any less?), he actually has more restraint than you’d expect, and manages to capture the character’s humanity pretty well, also. He seems to understand Scrooge isn’t just some nasty old codger, but someone who’s become embittered by life. It’s not a version I imagine will ever get a ton of attention and respect, but the overall rendition is still in my personal Top 12, and Curry’s Scrooge, in particular, definitely in my Top 5.

3. George C. Scott, from A Christmas Carol (1984).

Yet another interpretation that many consider to be one of the best and most definitive versions of the character put to film. It’s certainly one of the most naturalistic and subtle interpretations put to the screen in any medium. Scott gives us a very introspective and restrained Scrooge, but there’s so much intensity in the simple LOOKS he gives characters, and such nuance to the way he phrases and expresses his lines, that you never feel he’s underplaying anything. There’s a sense of intense repression to his Scrooge; this feeling that he’s working really hard to hold back the full force of his feelings, whether they be great joy, great sorrow, or great anger. Of course, he can’t hold EVERYTHING back, and seeing the buildup to the moment when the kettle boils over, and those emotions burst forth with explosive power, is what keeps his work so engaging. Seeing the cracks in the armor, and how they work into his development, is truly a delight, and Scott himself just seems to disappear into the part perfectly. This is generally regarded as one of his finest performances, and for good reason.

2. Patrick Stewart, from A Christmas Carol (1999).

In the 1990s, Stewart headed a one-man show of the Carol, in which he played all the parts. Somebody noted the popularity of this play, and decided, hey, if Professor X was so great doing a one man show of the story, why not make him the lead in a proper film version? So, in 1999, this made-for-TV movie was released to TNT, attempting exactly that. At the time, this version was very highly regarded, but over the years it seems to have become somewhat more forgotten; what was once lauded as being on par with the likes of the Scott and Sim versions now tends to be overlooked when people talk about great Christmas Carols. I don’t really know why since, to this date, I still consider it one of my Top 3 Favorite Christmas Carol adaptations, as well as one of the most accurate to the book ever put to the screen. Stewart’s work as Ebenezer Scrooge is, as always, a large part of what makes it work: I’d venture to say this is one of my Top 3 favorite performances/characters from Stewart, and that’s saying QUITE a lot. While he has a few slightly over-the-top moments (specifically during his redemption sequence), he really does sell the character brilliantly, once again presenting us with a fairly straightforward and generally subtle portrayal. It’s one of the first I think of when I think of the character, and definitely deserves far more praise.

1. Alastair Sim, from Scrooge (1951) AND A Christmas Carol (1971).

Sim played Scrooge twice, and both of his outings are in my Top 5 favorite versions ever made. And, in the case of the former - a live-action film (the latter is animated) - he is almost ENTIRELY the reason that version still holds strong. Alongside Scott, Caine, and arguably Stewart, Sim remains one of the most popular and beloved takes on the character to date. It’s funny because, nowadays, most people don’t even know about Alastair Sim BEYOND his work as Ebenezer Scrooge; before the Carol, Sim was primarily known for playing comical characters and was regarded as one of the greatest comedic performers of his day. Scrooge was one of his first “serious” performances, and even though he does bring a few comedic quirks to certain moments, what makes the character work - much like with Carrey and Curry - is the restraint he has. There’s a surprising amount of subtlety and refinement to his Ebenezer; once again, just his EXPRESSIONS can say so much, and he runs the gamut from icy and dictatorial to tender and vulnerable with aplomb. He’s so wonderfully energized and exuberant when he finds his new outlook on life, and so stiff and sneering at the start, it’s almost hard to believe they could be the same person. Naturally, that is the entire point. Twenty years after his live-action portrayal, Sim proved he still had it. His voicework for 1971 still carries excellent gravitas and wit together, and gives him a chance to play with new elements of the character unexplored in the earlier version, while at the same tie offering him the opportunity to relive the magic of his first interpretation. There isn’t a shadow of a doubt in my mind that Alastair Sim is My Favorite Scrooge.

Honorable Mentions Include…

Christopher Plummer, from The Man Who Invented Christmas. (Wasn’t sure whether he really counted, since he’s a bit different from most versions, but still worthy of an Honorable Mention.) Michael Gambon (as Kazran Sardick), from Doctor Who: A Christmas Carol.

Bill Murray (as Frank Cross), from Scrooged.

Fredric March, from A Christmas Carol (1954).

Luke Evans, from Scrooge: A Christmas Carol. (This is a WEIRD version, I don’t really know what to think of it…but - overall - I do like his Scrooge.)

BIOGRAPHY | MUSINGS

character name: cricket james campbell

nickname: cj, chef, bug (by her mom)

age & dob: november 14, 1997 (26)

gender identity & pronouns: female, she/her/hers

sexual orientation & relationship status: bisexual, single

residential area: ocean crest apartments

occupation: personal chef

place of birth: tuscon, arizona

length of time in aurora bay: two years

personality traits: + audacious, - naive

faceclaim: rachel sennott

FAMILY.

mother: libby campbell

father: unknown

siblings: mavis campbell (older half sister, wc)

TL;DR.

tw power dynamic

grew up on the road at the whims of her generally unstable mother, who never could quite manage to settle down in one place...until she did, with a man who had no idea that she had children and essentially left cricket in the dust. after a nannying gig gone wrong (affair with her boss), realized her passion for taking care of people through food, and attended culinary school in california, where she returned after a brief european stint over two years ago to work as a local personal chef!

HEADCANONS.

is fully convinced that miley cyrus and hannah montana are, in fact, two entirely separate people and will not be accepting any criticism on her theory!

diet coke fiend, her go to caffeine fix more than anything else

sometimes lies just for fun, a habit she picked up in her childhood, especially when she knew she wouldn't be sticking around somewhere for long--not usually about anything major, just a little something to keep it interesting

only got her first cellphone a few years back but caught on very quickly; doesn't quite understand twitter yet but is fully addicted to tiktok and has recently started posting little day in my life as a personal chef videos as a sort of online journal

has absolutely zero clue who her birth father is and never bothered to ask, but thinks her middle name could maybe possibly be a homage to him

cooking for others is her love language but when it comes to feeding herself, it's either strictly the basics (kraft mac & cheese, pb&j, cup noodles) or she's ordering takeout! definitely pays for dashpass

recently adopted a street cat she's named caesar (after the salad ofc)

didn't think anything much of her name growing up but for some reason is very aware/self conscious of it now and sometimes introduces herself as cj instead

despite the lack of stability, the one thing her mom was serious about was school, so through a combination of both in person and homeschooling, cricket did get a high school diploma, and even managed to graduate early

personal chef is her main gig, but does offer a less expensive meal prepping service for some extra cash!

has a finsta @friendswholunch where she posts little photo dumps of pics she snaps of her friends when they go out/come over to eat! not only to document good meals but also good company 🫶

CURRENT CONNECTIONS.

ocean crest mommy issues club founding members with @finnbrooks

her recipe tester guinea pig/not so reluctant sous @aidenxstevens

forever hiding from their awful third roomie with @lorelailewis

ex-girlfriend of @mackmontgomery

the older brother she (probably) never had @buddywellls

co-club head and dinner party coordinator for @samucl-kane's community garden

two dumb bitches telling each other “exaaaaactlyyyy” @maura-cortes

wants @paxton-brady's mom to adopt her

culinary school pals/used to run a pop up restaurant out of @solaadisa's apartment

thinks her doordash order is what got @cassius-banks run over, still feels bad

london friends with @luckylewis

work besties to reg besties pipeline @helenasoarcs

@santiagodeleons used to date her mom

cool older sister vibes @thegillyxliang

WANTED CONNECTIONS.

to be posted: older half-sister

clients (either personal chef or meal prepping)

someone who she sometimes enlists as a sous chef

blasts from the pasts from her time on the road/abroad

stable influence(s)

roomies

somewhat recent ex

someone (or someones!) she'd consider to be her best friend(s)

someone she's decided to lie to for fun and it's just spiraled from there

friends who've had a falling out/frenemies/enemies

party/drinking/smoking friends

fans of her tik tok

neighbors

fwbs/one night stands/tinder dates

@aurorabayaesthetic

Wait… I thought Mai and Maki shares curse energy within your AU due to the Heavenly Restriction being placed upon them, right?

Am I misremembering it? Hold up.

*digs through the fic again for an explanation*

Okay, I think found it.

“Heavenly restrictions can’t be willingly imposed. They’re like mutations in the genetic code. In other words, you and your sister are just freaks, the cursed energy equivalent of conjoined twins. But even conjoined twins aren't really the same person. You share cursed energy between the two of you, it could be a strength or weakness depending on how you use it. You weren't born wrong though. The only reason you were born that way was random chance. Albeit, a chance that has a significantly higher percentage of occurring due to the number of consanguineous marriages in your family.”

Am I perhaps misinterpreting this explanation wrong? It is possible since my reading comprehension skill isn’t the sharpest.

No, it's not the fault of your reading comprehension I should have just made the rules clearer / communicated my intentions better.

Basically, I wanted to change the whole "cursed energy considers twins the same person" explanation for how Maki's heavenly restriction works. However, I try to write my fics as canon compliant as physically possible because I am obsessed with the fight mechanics and power system of Jujutsu Kaisen. So, instead of making a blatant change I tried to find a workaround for why Heavenly Restriction would make it so Maki was born with no cursed energy whatsoever.

The only other heavenly restriction we see imposed on a person from birth is Koikchi, who specifically has incredibly powerful cursed energy and the ability to project the cursed energy. Koichi has an enormous supply of cursed energy and can projec them--------> into his robots.

Hang on let me actually just look up Kokichi's exact wording of his power on the wiki.

Immense Cursed Energy: As a result of his heavenly restriction, Kokichi's cursed energy was vast enough to cover the entire nation of Japan. He can exceed the limits of his cursed energy output and use his puppet manipulation across an extremely wide range. He was born without a right arm, and both of his legs were useless - In exchange he was granted boundless amounts of cursed energy that spreads over a vast range. Innate Technique - Puppet Manipulation - Kokichi's technique allowed him to remotely control cursed corpse puppets over wide range.

So, Heavenly Restriction -> Ability to project Curse Energy wide Range. Puppet Manipulation -> Innate technique he was born with.

My plan was to make it so Mai also has a heavenly restriction, that allows her to give her cursed energy to another person / project her cursed energy.

Therefore we would have had:

Mai

Heavenly Restriction -> Ability to share her cursed energy with Maki somehow.

Cursed Technique -> Matter creation with her cursed energy.

My whole goal for this was to promote the idea that Mai and Maki's powers are incredibly auspicious when working together. The ideal way for them both to resolve their character arcs would be finding some way for them to fight together, rather than Maki doing the fighting on their own.

So, my plan for having the ultimate combination of their technique would be, Mai's ability to one project her cursed energy out and two make objects would be that she could essentially make cursed tools for Maki to wield. WHICH! LIKE! She can in canon, she just had to die to do it. Therefore, when Maki is fighting with the cursed tool, the curse on it, and the cursed energy that fueled the curse comes from Mai. On top of that, my idea was that Mai could have theoretically just picked up anything and reinforced it as a weapon for Maki giving Maki more versatility. Like, Hey, Maki here take this kitchen knife. It's now haunted .

Also, character like Mei Mei and Ui Ui have shown there are ways you can devise when working as a two person team to share cursed energy. From what I understand their combo attack works like this.

They have a binding vow between the two of them, Ui Ui can only use his Jujutsu when Mei Mei asks if Ui Ui is willing to risk his life for her. Mei Mei controls when Ui Ui releases his cursed energy. By making a binding vow between them with Ui Ui's life as a tradeoff, Ui Ui's cursed energy increases. Mei Mei's bird strike also uses binding vows, as she makes those crows commit suicide, erasing their cursed energy with their life as a tradeoff and then hurls them at the enemy

So this is my rewrite on how their powers could theoretically be used if they were both post character development working together and fighting together.

So, my idea was that basically Maki and Mai are born with complementary heavenly restrictions that allow them to share cursed energy between the two of them. Therefore, Mai not wanting to practice or get stronger as a sorcerer doesn't make Maki weaker. Instead, Maki and Mai not working together, and Maki insisting on doing everything alone, means that they are not taking advantage of what a good team they could be together. Not that they are both drawing from the same source of cursed energy

Of course there is the second canon workaround which is, if they are not considered the same person by cursed energy, then why does Mai dying power up Maki's heavenly restriction?

Which I'm not totally there yet, because that fic is in the planning stages. Do you remember that part in Hunter x Hunter where Gon basically speeds up his aging by using his Nen Technique and unlocks his potential at the cost of his body. I was thinking of something like that though, instead of Mai's death making Maki stronger (because this time Mai just kind of dies helplessly in front while Maki watches) Maki does something similiar to Gon where she makes a binding vow imposed upon herself to unlock her full potential with serious consequences later. As I detailed above, Mei Mei has shown that making a binding vow with your life on the line can increase your potential as a jujutsu sorcerer.

Ok so I was going through my legendkeepers tag, I think I've mentioned this offhandedly but a really important note for anyone who goes through certain character tags:

I toyed with the idea of Rex and Ritsu being cousins for a while as I began fleshing out their story. I have since retconned this entirely.

I may write or reference them in either more qpr or romantic connotations going forward so I HAVE to make it clear that I'm not writing them with the old ties.

Reasons/development of why I have done this, if anyone for some reason wants to know:

I made Ritsu as a standalone character in middle school, years before Rex.

Likewise, Rex was originally just my trainer name in my Shield file, eventually given character and personality organically and independently.

As such, neither character was made with the intent of being related, I did not think of them this way for a while.

I had the idea they could be related due to visual similarities. However, these similarities were derived from my avatar customization, when I was making a point of making the character look more like me. It's a specific combination of colors and traits I feel would be really unusual to see repeated so I was trying to retroactively justify the similarities by making them related.

As I fleshed out their stories more, I found Rex's feelings towards Ritsu were very strong - on the one hand, it's important to tell stories where family is the most important. On the other hand, I wasn't entirely comfortable with the concept of people interpreting things wrong out of context. This was not a likely scenario but if I am posting the story online, in bits and scraps, it's not impossible either.

However, a key deciding factor was something I rewrote for Ritsu's side of things as well - namely his rescue team partner during his PMD arc.

On the original pmd file and backstory for Ritsu up to this point, his partner has always been a pikachu I named Avery. I always had a general vibe for Avery, how they got along etc, but for some reason I never felt like I had a handle on the character even after all these years, no matter how hard I tried to develop them. Things always felt too vague, or generic, or flat, like something was missing.

On a whim, partway through ironing out the Rex/Ritsu combined story, I took a pmd quiz for Rex, curious what results he'd get (mostly for an excuse to develop a roleswap au, for fun) - and Rex got Pikachu.

The following idea clicked things into place for the pmd partner as an individual, and also provided Ritsu's story a lot more closure and stability than it had before - what if an au version of Rex had been the partner this whole time?

This way I had a strong idea of the character, and also while Ritsu is forced to leave the rescue team behind, he isn't stuck feeling like he's lost it all forever - and when human Rex finds him in Hisui, it gives Ritsu motivation to trust and bond with this guy claiming to be a childhood friend from a lifetime long forgotten.

All in all, it smoothed over a lot of lumps in the road I kept tripping over as I fleshed out stories, and helped me feel happier with the story I was telling.

But, between Rex's strong attachment to Ritsu - and how I always framed Ritsu's relationship to the pmd partner as a qpr in my head; combined with the fact that both characters were made related as a Huge afterthought in both cases's stages of development... I ultimately decided to retcon them being cousins. It only complicated things at the end of the day, and even if their dynamic ends up entirely platonic it just didn't feel like a necessary element to their dynamic to have to tiptoe around and worry over.

Essentially, It did not make me happy to write it that way, and it was a grafted on element to both characters and their backstories so it never felt fully natural to how I see them, individually or together.

Did I need to write all of this out to explain myself? Probably not. But on the offchance someone noticed and decided to call attention to it, I wanted to put a clear explanation as to what happened and why I handled things the way I did. I'm sure I won't entirely avoid questions or comments on it, but this way I've pre-empted any attention on the subject and made it clear where I'm coming from with all of this.

So tl;dr - Rex and Ritsu are not related, and I will never write them in an incestuous fashion, nor would I ever aim for or support that sort of thing.

This was an odd turn of events in the developmental stages of my writing that has been captured in snapshots on my blog posts that, rather than fully scrub out of existence, I wanted to clarify how things turned out the way they did.

I have taken to crossing out text in the post body where I can that references Ritsu and Rex as cousins, but I can't and don't feel like trying to erase traces of it in uneditable tags and preserved reblogged states.

Blog series #1

#1 Jan. 20th   

With the world becoming a very globalized place the boundaries between cultures are less strict. The widespread influence of the American culture can be seen in many countries around the western world. I have not been exposed to many diverse cultures in person, but I have read many books and watched shows about various places around the world and their ways and customs. The farthest I have ever made it from 'Home' is halfway through the next province, where other than the fact that proper highways exist and there is more French being spoken there is little to no difference that I had ever noticed. Many others and I from this region all have similar pasts in terms of family history. Arriving as immigrants from western Europe, namely Ireland, Scotland, and France, then settling across the region and spending most of the time working the land or the sea without much interruption. The many traditions and beliefs held then are still strong today and I suspect that the culture really has not changed much only to accommodate modern technologies and practices.  

#2 Jan. 22nd  

I have been thinking about how my family celebrates holidays recently, and on both sides of the family the traditions are essentially the same. All getting together for a meal, if it is Christmas a gift exchange, everyone sitting together in the living space with extended family talking about anything and everything. When I talk to other people about their holiday experiences it all seems like a similar story to that one, the way Atlantic Canadians celebrate the holiday season seems fairly universal for those of similar backgrounds. Celebrating these traditions and doing things the way we do is important, it is about spending time with family, reliving old memories and honouring those that are no longer with us, as well as creating new memories with those that are still here. Less a time about friends, more for family. The traditions have been passed down through past generations, combined with similar cultures from western Europe by our ancestors. Sharing a meal during a holiday is a guarantee and it has been for some time. The tie in of all these traditions is certainly religion, traditional holidays celebrated in a traditional way.  

#3 Jan. 28th  

There are many ways that we learn about our own culture, the most common being lived experience within it and participating in it. My experiences with my family are what shaped my own culture and personality the most. Regular family dinners and the importance of sharing them together was engrained early on and while that is relaxed slightly now due to changing circumstances it is still present. Both the immediate and extended family are regular churchgoers and the teachings there have influenced how we all act, our beliefs and how we perceive those around us. The educational system back home growing up was small schools and classes. The schools themselves were very involved in the communities and that connection persisted through high school, leaving a very community-oriented educational system. The most important influence though is entirely the time spent with my parents and their experiences that have been passed on to me. Their morals and way of life I have and likely will continue to stick to for my entire life as it is what I have always known and agree with. I do not think this is a bad thing at all as I have many important life lessons from them, and the time spent with our parents is quite impressionable and will affect most people in a comparable way.  

#4 Feb. 2nd  

I would certainly say I am not too globalized but aware of the world. I have not made it far from home, an entire five-hour drive. On the other hand, I have more awareness of what is happening in the world than most people I come across on a daily basis. I do pay attention to the news, while not the most uplifting source of daily reading I find it quite interesting to try and understand the situations from someone else’s perspective. Social media does open me up to seeing other traditions and practices, but it is not something I personally see very often. Through university and sports I have been in contact with plenty of people with different backgrounds and experiences that have been more impactful than any social media post. Personal stories and shared experiences are the most impactful and impressionable ways culture can be shared. While seeing something on TV can be interesting the biggest impact is living a new experience.  

Things are really rough and I’m honestly surprised that I haven’t fully snapped.

I currently am unable to relax via artwork because I potentially have either tendonitis or carpal tunnel. Its my dominant hand, and so if I were to try and relax by doing artwork then I’d just be causing pain that would eventually lead to me being annoyed because of said pain and I’d need to stop drawing. I already did this to myself three times in the last few days when I did my comfort drawings over on my main blog. Only one of those drawings, the first TLK pic featuring Kovu, really gave me a sense of ease despite being in pain.

On top of the physical pain, there’s emotional pain. My grandma’s dementia is worsening. She’s confused more and more, she’s unable to dress herself and when she does then her pants are usually wrong in some way and she tries to put her head through the sleeves of her shirts and sweaters. She’s more recently become incontinent and has to be taken to the bathroom. I’ve been getting advice from coworkers and friends, and it’s... becoming more apparent that she may not make it to the end of this new year. I’m trying to emotionally prepare but its hard as hell, especially knowing that when she goes it wont be long after that my grandpa goes. Its how lovebirds tend to pass, anyhow. One goes and then the other half follows... and once they both go, I feel like my family will stop talking to one another outside of “getting together” for the holidays.

Work also is just... trash. I’m not happy in food service anymore and it shows. No matter what, it shows. I’ve hit that point where the motto of “fake it ‘til you make it” no longer applies, I can’t hide the fact I’m not happy. I try to seem happy and it doesn’t work. I end up seeming off. My coworker even said it seems like I no longer care, and I don’t blame her. She isn’t entirely wrong. I’m trying to leave the department and go into a new one, and my main worries for it would be that I’d be losing the health insurance offered to full-time positions as I’d be going down to part-time, I’d be taking a $1 cut in pay ($18 down to $17 per hour), and the fact I’m still the sole provider for my household.... and haven’t said a word to my mother about any of this. The upsides would be though that I could attempt to get my anxiety under control, as it’s been getting worse. I could actually have days off to relax along with one or two other days depending on the schedule where I’d be able to help actually clean up the house. I also wouldn’t directly be dealing with the public anymore, which is a big boost to my mentality as being in a position currently that puts me in direct contact with people day in and day out has been making me less and less of a people person and thus more bitter as my energy levels are depleted.

I’m also struggling with being irritated by the smallest things. I have that standard ginger temper, so when my mental health takes a massive dip like it has been then I’m easily irritated. The most innocent question could make me thing I’m being made fun of and I get irritated, as this happened on my main blog this morning. I’m a temperamental, Cancer-signed ginger. I’m an emotional clusterfuck.

I’m also stressed as fuck financially because of our vehicle situations. One vehicle (our truck, the primary source of going to the dump) is essentially totaled and needs at least $1000 worth of repairs if not costing more than that given that it needs a new radiator, new hood, new grill, radiator fluid, and a new passenger headlight setup. The other vehicle just cost $700 to have a new oil pan put in and all the fluids flushed and put in anew. It still needs to have the transmission gasket checked for a leak, and if it is actually leaking, then that’s even more money having to go to it. I also tried to to my taxes myself as always and it showed that apparently, both federal and state combined, I would only be getting $66 back, so I’m having to bite the bullet and go in when I get paid again to have a tax expert do them for me in case there was something I did wrong.

My mental health just fucking sucks atm guys.

News fews 2016

I traveled with two adults in the back and they were very comfortable. The Jeep Grand Cherokee can fit three, but the Nissan Murano can’t quite manage it. My test model didn’t have the optional third row, so my family of five couldn’t fit because three car seats do not fit across the second row. The Sorento comes standard with a second-row bench captain’s chairs are not available. Overall, passenger comfort is exceptional, with plenty of headroom and legroom in the two front rows. Juice-box-proof stain-resistant fabric from YES Essentials is the standard upholstery. The lone premium touches in my upscale SXL test model were optional patterned leather seats they look and feel high-end and are very long, making for good thigh support. The black-on-black plastic theme in my test car was broken up by bits of matte chrome and glossy black paneling, but the overall look was uninteresting. The cabin’s materials feel pleasant, with plenty of soft, textured plastic on key touch points, but the design is nothing special. While the Sorento’s exterior is bold, the interior plays it a little too safe. Maneuverability is also good around town a tight turning circle makes it easier to park than several other vehicles of its size. The Sorento’s ride and handling have come a long way this generation maintains better composure over bumps and takes corners with less lean. Sport mode supposedly firms it up, but the Sorento still exhibited a nonspecific feel in that mode. I found it light and imprecise, requiring too much correction, though other editors weren’t bothered by it. On the highway, the cabin is impressively hushed. The default is Normal mode, which should be called “Comfort” everything felt just right in terms of responsiveness and smoothness. Eco mode goes in the other direction entirely: Plunge the pedal and the needle barely moves it’s lethargic both in overall acceleration and transmission responsiveness. In Sport mode, transmission upshifts were abrupt and harsh, and the accelerator pedal was too touchy. A standard selectable drive mode system alters power steering assist, shift points and acceleration response. All the engines team with a six-speed automatic transmission, the performance of which is hit or miss. There’s a third engine choice, an optional 290-hp, 3.3-liter V-6 that’s rated 18/26/21 mpg, lower than the Nissan Murano’s 3.5-liter V-6 (21/28/24 mpg) but a touch higher than the Jeep Grand Cherokee with its 3.6-liter V-6 (17/25/20 mpg).įront-wheel drive is standard and all-wheel drive is optional on all Sorento models except the base L. The Ford Edge with its turbocharged 2.0-liter is rated a touch higher at 20/30/24 mpg. The 240-horsepower four-cylinder is EPA-rated at 20/27/23 mpg city/highway/combined with front-wheel drive, good for a vehicle this size but down from the standard 185-hp, 2.4-liter four-cylinder’s 21/29/24 mpg rating. Even loaded with adults, it never felt strained around town or on the highway. Power from the new, optional turbocharged 2.0-liter is surprisingly robust once you get past a minor acceleration delay, aka turbo lag. The brand’s newly redesigned minivan wears the same styling (actually, from the front, it’s hard to tell the Sedona from the Sorento), giving both vehicles a commanding presence. Sculpted body sides add some muscle to its profile. The SUV’s new face is dramatic, with an upright, studded grille available quad-LED fog lights and sweeping LED-accented headlights. Twenty-two years later, the automaker has arguably one of the best-looking lineups in the industry, with the eye-catching Sorento in the flagship SUV spot. market in 1993, style was not on the brand’s radar the Sephia didn’t have much going for it aside from a rock-bottom price. If you want a third row, compare the Sorento instead with the Chevrolet Traverse and Honda Pilot, though the Kia is smaller than those models. The Sorento competes against two-row SUVs like the Ford Edge, Nissan Murano and Jeep Grand Cherokee compare all four here. Like its predecessor, the new Sorento is available with standard seating for five, and it can seat seven with an optional third row compare the 20 models here. The 2016 Kia Sorento is an all-star family-hauler with standout styling and a comfortable, feature-filled cabin pleasant road manners are marred by minor imperfections.įor 2016, the Sorento is bigger, has a revised control layout and a new, optional turbocharged four-cylinder engine. Kia’s newest SUV blends attributes of all these with versatile seating for five or seven, a generous cargo area and plenty of creature comforts for carpooling, road trips and everything in between. When shopping for a large family vehicle, you have more options than there are germs in a preschool classroom, from two- or three-row SUVs to what’s likely the subject of many marital counseling sessions: the love-it-or-hate-it minivan.

fantastic mr fox: humanising animals, animalising men, and an exploration of masculine identity

‘this story is too predictable.’ / ‘predictable? really? what happens in the end?’ / ‘in the end, we all die. unless you change.’

mr fox, the titular character of wes anderson’s 2009 stop-motion adaptation of roald dahl’s children’s book, is a portrait of two conflicting manifestations of masculinity. he is built to demonstrate the crossover between tradition and modernity, between wild and civilised. characterised as a charming gentleman, almost renowned for his recklessness, mr fox combines his undomesticated instincts with a carefully crafted domestic life. he appears to spend more time manufacturing a perfect home and family than he does actually participating in it. the events of the movie serve to strip away his facade and present both the audience and protagonist with a harsh reality to deal with: the juxtaposing aspects of his identity that he must contend with in order to survive his situation. these aspects are demonstrated through the use of anthropomorphic animals. in essence, the text attempts to convey the message that while you can associate your actions with animal or human traits in order to characterise and frame them, you cannot change their value and their consequences. it serves as a critique of how the nature of male identity is exploited to shunt responsibility, and the movie specifically promotes a more collectivist mentality.

there are four key scenes that mark mr fox’s journey in terms of his identity. initially, we first see his identity openly questioned once he has moved into a new home (a large and expensive tree), just prior to him revealing his ‘master plan’ to kylie, who becomes his assistant of sorts. he asks, ‘why a fox? why not a horse, or a beetle, or a bald eagle? i’m saying this more as, like, existentialism, you know? who am i? and how can a fox ever be happy without, you’ll forgive the expression, a chicken in its teeth?’ he attributes his identity with the ability to fulfil his base desires, like he could in his youth. aspects of his later life such as employment, family, and safety restrict his ability and leaves him feeling untethered from himself. the movie opens with his youthful vibrance and recklessness, and is quickly contrasted with his dissatisfaction with his job, home, and life in general.

MR FOX

i dont want to live in a hole anymore. it makes me feel poor.

MRS FOX

we are poor, but we’re happy.

MR FOX

comme ci, come ca...

does anyone actually read my column?

having been moved out of the hole and into an expensive tree, mrs fox asks her husband:

MRS FOX

do you still feel poor?

MR FOX

less so.

constructing the ideal domestic space for himself and his family does not satisfy mr fox and he yearns for more, which is where is existentialism and ‘master plan’ come into play. domesticity was never going to satisfy mr fox, as he yearns for something youthful and risky and dazzling, adjectives not usually applied to a quiet and content home life. the consequences of this dissatisfaction are drastic and almost immediate.

soon, having been forced out of his new home and underground by an attack from the farmers, mr fox is faced with a situation he cannot charm his way out of. he attempts to apologise to his son and recite a speech to raise the morale of his family, and both of these attempts are shut down by those around him. the facade of his elaborate home, his monologues, even his suits, are abruptly stripped away leaving him with only his actions which he cannot charm his way out of. the reality is that he and his family, his neighbourhood, is stuck underground with no means of food as a result of his selfish actions. this prompts yet another key scene; his argument with felicity, which begins with her viciously hissing and scratching his face.

MRS FOX

why did you lie to me?

MR FOX

because im a wild animal.

MRS FOX

you are also a husband, and a father.

MR FOX

im trying to tell you the truth about myself.

MRS FOX

i dont care about the truth about yourself. this story is too predictable.

MR FOX

predictable? really? what happens in the end?

MRS FOX

in the end, we all die. unless you change.

mrs fox’s physical attack on her husbands face serves as a display of genuine animal ferocity, making mr fox’s claim to being a ‘wild animal’ appear as a flimsy excuse for his behaviour. his chicken theft, which he was insistent upon regardless of the consequences, was motivated not by animal instincts but a selfish desire to feel a particular version of his own masculinity. disregarding the safety of his family actually seems like a natural byproduct of his master plans because he is trying to reclaim his masculinity from a time before his family existed, and in his eyes, restricted him. the very recent loss of his tail, combined with this conversation with his wife, is a harsh reality check for mr fox in terms of the dangers of his masculinity.

the audience sees the outcome of this conversation later on, in the waterfall scene. here mr fox admits to his insecurities and suggests sacrificing himself to the farmers to save the local community.

MR FOX

darling, maybe they’ll let everyone else live!

…

MR FOX

foxes traditionally like to court danger, hunt prey and outsmart predators, and that’s what im actually good at…i guess at the end of the day im just-

MRS FOX

i know. we’re wild animals.

the difference between this admission to animalism and the one from his argument with felicity is that here, both parties gain some acceptance of their animalism without using it as an excuse for their behaviour. the inclusion of others in animalism – ‘we’re’ wild animals, rather than ‘i am’ a wild animal – contributes to illustrate how wildness is not specific to masculinity. it is not femininity vs masculinity but animals vs man.

the movie also questions the nature of an animal in the final key scene known as ‘canis lupus.’ wes Anderson referred to this scene as ‘the reason im making this movie.’ throughout the movie, mr fox alludes to his ‘phobia of wolves’ and shuts down any conversation surrounding them:

MR FOX

scared? no, i have a phobia of them!...a wolf? what’s with all the wolf talk? can we give it a rest for once?

arguably, these reactions are representative of mr fox’s aversion to competitive masculinity. he shuts down any opportunity for those around him to discuss something he sees as more masculine than himself in order to feel secure in his own masculinity. critic shana mlawski argues that ‘the wolf is described as the wildest, most frightening, and yet most beautiful creature in the world. mr fox fears the wolf and yet wants to be exactly like him. we can thus say that mr fox fears pure, wild masculinity yet also yearns to own it himself.’ the scene holds an eerie familiarity to it; mr fox is recognising something that he thought would be a reflection of himself, but the wild animal is no longer familiar to him anymore. he now accepts his role as a husband and a father and no longer fights to overtly express his animalism in the same way as the wolf. the most he can offer the wolf is raising his fist in solidarity. he calls out to the wolf, ‘i have a phobia of wolves!’, which is an interesting moment to admit this in. it’s his acceptance that allows him to admit this. the scene is entirely compromised of male characters: mr fox, kristofferson, ash, kylie and the wolf. mr fox’s admission to his fear allows him to be vulnerable in front of these people he cares about, and to use this as a teaching moment for the young boys.

MR FOX

what a beautiful creature. wish him luck out there, boys.

here mr fox openly admits his admiration for someone else’s masculinity in front of others without showing signs of his own insecurity. he can admire the wolf for what he is without seeing him as competition. the scene allows the audience to see and directly compare two forms of masculinity and animalism, and to understand that there is no one true expression of either of those traits. the wolf has connotations of violence and ferocity, whereas mr fox and his suit and display of multilingualism are entirely modern, but both are masculine animals who are valid in their own right. either way, both animals rely on violence for survival at times.

kupfer frames violence in three ways: symbolically, structurally and as a narrative essential. there are various forms of violence within this narrative, namely mr fox killing chickens and squabs, and the three farmers’ attack on the animal community. symbolically, mr fox’s chicken theft is attributed to his masculinity. while it is often presented as thought-out ‘master plans’, his desire to enact this violence in the first place supposedly stems from his ‘wild animal’ instincts. he associates a time where he felt secure in his masculinity with his actions at the time (violence). structurally, we see the potential for this violence in the opening scene, where mr fox takes his wife chicken-stealing and they become trapped. he is stuck in a fox trap with his wife when he receives the news of his impending fatherhood, a relatively obvious symbol for his view of fatherhood in general. the news of his wife’s pregnancy disrupts his ability to continue stealing chickens, not just on this specific occasion but through the coming years as well. mr fox appears to view family life as an unfulfilling, less raw expression of his masculinity, and is shown to be wholly dissatisfied with his life.

the violence on the farmers’ behalf is almost always in reaction to mr fox’s violence, already giving it a structural framing. boggis, bunch and bean are referred to early on in the film as the ‘meanest, nastiest and ugliest farmers on the side of the river.’ their violence against mr fox and subsequently the local animal community is an attempt to gain back power and status. mr fox’s actions are “humiliating’ and the local news coverage of this exchange between the farmers and animals raises the stakes as now the reputation of these farmers is on the line as well as their power. violence here serves as a narrative essential because it drives mr fox into a situation that forces him to confront his issues with masculinity and splitting between his animal and human traits, giving the text/movie a fulfilling arc. violence is

introduced as inherently masculine, but is decoupled from masculinity by the ending. mrs fox also plays a small but significant role in this; at various moments in the movie she exhibits her own displays of aggression equal in intensity to the men around her, suggesting to the audience that forms of violence should be categorised as human vs animal rather than male vs female. examples of this behaviour include her clawing at her husband’s face, and a parallel between her and a male human character wherein they both connect two wires and shout ‘contact!’, causing an explosion. while this moment is brief, it highlights a distinct difference between animals being violent and men. humans’ aggression is driven by the need for power, whereas that of animals is driven by the need for survival. the man paralleled with felicity only sparked the explosion to destroy mr fox’s home and assert the dominance of the three farmers, while mrs fox used the same form of violence to enact a plan to save her nephew’s life. petey’s song even alludes to this sentiment: ‘well he stole, and he cheated, and he lied just to survive.’

mr fox’s tail becomes a symbol of power; bean wears it as a necktie, and mr fox feels emasculated by his loss.

MR FOX

one of those slovenly farmers is probably wearing my tail as a necktie right now.

…

BADGER

i cant even imagine how painful, even just emotionally, that must be for you… oh but foxy how humiliating, having your tail blown clean off by-

MR FOX

can we drop it?

the use of the tail as a necktie is a symbol of the power that mr fox and the farmers end up jostling to achieve: at first it belongs to mr fox, then to the farmers, and is eventually reclaimed once more by the fox.

MR FOX

you shot off my tail.

[through gritted teeth] i’m not leaving here without that necktie.

when he reclaims his tail towards the end of the movie, it has been torn to shreds and needs ‘dry cleaning twice a week’ to maintain itself. this can be interpreted as a symbol for his evolved definitions of masculinity and power: his masculinity is no longer defined by impressing people or stealing or killing chickens, but in the quiet satisfaction of having a family. the final scene reveals that mrs fox is pregnant again, and instead of her glowing and her husband giving an awkward grin like in the opening scene, both of the spouses ‘glow.’ the structural framing of these pregnancy reveals bookending the events of the movie allows anderson to demonstrate mr fox’s growth and change in his priorities. the domestic life appears to be enough for him, and he no longer seems to find it emasculating,

what stands out as particularly modern about mr fox is how he unconsciously separates himself from both his wildness and his suburban self in his effort to combine them. he uses his ‘wildness’ as an excuse for his violence and selfishness, but is ultimately not willing to participate in truly wild forms of violence and selfishness, such has hunting. his chicken thefts always include infiltrating a human site, like boggis, bunce and bean’s farms, and the fun of it is in outsmarting them, rather than finding those animals himself out in the wild. the local animal community essentially functions as we would expect a rural village occupied by humans to function: everyone knows everyone, there is one local school and various small and quaint homes. while the setting reflects anderson’s signature style, it is also reflective of dahl’s framing of the community in the original text.

mr fox comes across as an individual who believes himself to be above the somewhat backward mentality of his village, that he is the most civilised and dazzling and original, and he exaggerates these traits in himself out of insecurity: ‘if they arent dazzled and blown away and kind of intimidated by me, then i dont feel good about myself.’this is also reflected in his consistent ‘trademark’, his whistle-and-click combination that he uses to set himself apart from other foxes. his home is also a reflection of this:

MRS FOX

you know, foxes live in holes for a reason.

MR FOX

[grunts and tilts head in disagreement]

yes and no.

this insecurity and desire for outsider approval and individuality is inherently human, a quality of his that cannot really be associated with his animalised parts. this precarious sense of identity and self doubt separates him from his ‘wildness’ as it stands, which is only intensified by the fact that he compensates by exaggerating his human traits in order to be liked and feel worthy, as those are the traits he believes have the most value. towards the end of mr fox’s character arc, he is forced to admit that his need for external validation is flawed and unsustainable. when the façade of carefully constructed grandeur is literally washed away by bean, he is left with nothing but his actions and their implications for those around him. foxy reconciles with the relative insignificance of an identity based on other’s perceptions of you when rat dies soon after, reacting to the suggestion that he redeemed himself last minute by revealing ash’s location:

MR FOX

redemption? sure. but in the end, he’s just another dead rat in a garbage pail behind a chinese restaurant.

this moment is also used to inadvertently allow the audience to evaluate the significance of motivation and intention to the value of an action. although rat did reveal useful information to aid the group in saving Kristofferson, mr fox recognises that he only did so because he realised he could not win this fight.

MR FOX

would you have told me if i didn’t kill you first?

RAT

never.

mr fox’s own motivations throughout the movie have devalued his actions as they have mostly been self-serving. as his motivations evolve to centre around his family, he gains the perspective to understand why one’s intentions are so important. while intention does not entirely dictate how good one’s actions are, they certainly characterise the person who’s action it is. your actions have value and consequences as they are, and that cannot be changed by dressing them up or animalising them to distance yourself.

in essence, fantastic mr fox is a lesson in the value of including those around you in your mentality and worldview. it paints masculinity as something that is inherent and complex in nature, but promotes the idea that it is not stuck with its traditional connotations of violence and egoism. mr fox’s emotional development throughout the text mostly centres around his own insecurities surrounding his masculinity and how that causes him to overcompensate in ways that harm those around him. by the end he recognises that more tame and domestic forms of masculinity are just as valid, and that basing his self-worth on how ‘dazzled’ his peers are by him is immature and not constructive. his family now liberates him and allows him to be vulnerable rather than restricting how he feels he can express himself, and as a unit the animals beat the farmers in their game of power-seeking. mr fox recognises and appreciates both his human and animal traits, without using them as a means to excuse his behaviour or to feel bad about his worth.

MR FOX

i guess my point is, we’ll eat tonight, and we’ll eat together. and even in this not particularly flattering light, you are without a doubt the five and a half most wonderful wild animals ive ever met in my life. so let’s raise our boxes – to our survival.

i.k.b

You know the whole Baterang to the throat thing that causes a lot of discussion in the fandom? I think Bruce might not have been aiming for the throat

It ricochets

This point in comics Bruce has been through a ringer Steph's died, Barbara and Jim have left, Leslie betrayed him and he's had to send Cass and Tim away and now Jason is back but for revenge so Bruce isn’t at his best and I think Bruce threw the Baterang in a moment of panic and either over or undershot which ended up with well that.

This moment causes a lot of debate but I don't see it as “Bruce harming Jason to save the joker” the way a lot of fics paint it I see it more as he'd been aiming for Jason's arm or something to disarm him but overshot and it’s kind of like a symbolism of their relationship. 

 Which is basically Bruce takes an action to stop Jason from going down a path that he thinks will end up hurting Jason, but ends up hurting Jason in the long-run.

Like when he discussed taking away robin from Jason (because he thought Jason needed time to deal with issues that were becoming more prevalent) which only ended up making Jason feel insecure about his position in the Wayne household, contributing to why he so desperately pursued a stable parental relationship in his biological mother.

Bruce knows that if he gives in and kills the Joker he'll never stop killing we've seen timelines that prove that and I think Bruce also thinks the same of Jason that if Jason kills the Joker he won't stop at all so it’s not that he’s saving the Joker but that he’s trying to save Jason but Bruce ultimately misunderstands Jason’s needs and winds up hurting him.

Bruce is trying to save Jason from what he sees as a downwards spiral, but he ends up hurting him not just emotionally, but physically, and in the most extreme way possible. It's like an even darker echo of how trying to bench him as Robin led to his death.

Bruce has spent YEARS haunted by the memory of Jason’s death his death fundamentally changed Bruce's entire character Alfred said that Jason's death affected Bruce more than his own parents death.

In Underworld Unleashed it's revealed that his greatest desire is to have Jason back, in Hush he talks about how he wanted to put Jason in the Lazarus Pit and how he believes Jason knew he always loved him, and in As The Crow Flies we learn that his greatest fear is Jason coming back as an enemy and then in Under the Red Hood he gets Jason back (his greatest desire) but as an antagonist (his greatest fear) and moreover his belief that Jason 'knew' he loved him is WRONG.

Jason's insecurities from before his death combined with the perceived betrayal of Bruce not avenging him have led Jason to the point where he genuinely believes Bruce doesn't care, and in Jason's eyes, killing the joker is the only way Bruce can prove that he does but instead, in that moment, Bruce's attempt to diffuse the situation backfires.

Bruce misunderstands what Jason needs in that moment like he misunderstood what Jason needed at the start of Death in the Family it's just the ultimate representation of their constant emotional feedback loop. They trap themselves in a cycle of fighting because Jason can't read how Bruce really feels and Bruce can't read what Jason really needs and in that moment both those things are true, with Jason not seeing that Bruce truly cares anymore, and Bruce not knowing how to properly deescalate the situation and show Jason that he still cares.

It's extremely easy to read the batatrang throw as purposeful even though I wholly believe it was accidental but if that moment was explored more, I'm positive that Jason would believe it wasn't an accident, and would view it as proof of his already held view that Bruce doesn't love him anymore after all, that could have killed him, symbolically disowning him in the most extreme way possible.

Heck in Jason's appearance in Green Arrow (2001) Bruce had thought Jason might have died again! Before Jason turned up to mess with Mia.

The thing that's tragic about Jason that actually leads to a lot of his own suffering is that Jason doesn't really know what a healthy relationship looks like so I'm not sure when his actual 'last straw' would be.

Jason is the kind of person who sees love and acceptance as entirely circumstantial. He believes he must /earn/ love and acceptance, i.e. by being Robin, rather than it being inherently given.

A huge piece of understanding Robin Jason is understanding how much he lacked proper support systems back then. School was his only connection to his kids his age, and he didn't benefit much from that connection, his life was essentially: manor, school, Robin, repeat.

Jason loved school, but his school life was also pretty depressing. Jason kept to himself, he didn't have the time to participate in extracurriculars even when he wanted to and his peers didn't view him very positively. Jason was also really isolated from the rest of the hero community, there was his stint with the Titans, but it was pretty brief. He was also penpals with Kid Devil, but for the most part, he just had Batman.

The lack of support is actually one of the reasons I give for Jason and Steph dying in universe since they were the two Robins without support systems outside of Gotham. When Bruce was a jerk Dick and Tim could be like 'fine I'm going to go hang out with the Teen Titans or Young Justice' but Jason and Steph could only be like 'oh no' plus Bruce would deliberately try to take away Steph's support systems that she did have multiple times like when he ordered Cass to stop training with Steph.

But that's besides the point, I wouldn't be surprised if Jason confused being Robin with being accepted in the manor so when Bruce threatened to take away Robin from him, he might've seen it as his only proper support system being taken away from him, his world felt rocked back into instability once again.

When you look at it like that, it's very easy to understand why Jason sought out his biological mother. He had a hope that Sheila would offer him that stability once more, and that he'd get support and trust and unconditional love.

And that’s what make it all the more heartbreaking to me he came to this woman seeking love and gave her his greatest secret and she repaid him with a horrific death.  Jason’s death is one of the saddest to me because there’s no high stakes 'he died saving the world stuff' he’s just a kid who wanted a mom and got killed for it.

DC’s habit of taking away who he was is so detrimental to his backstory as the Red Hood because the transformation from someone who tried being kind and who did give it their all being killed for it and coming back like ‘no more’ is so much more interesting than ‘we always knew this would happen’.

Robin disobeying orders is nothing new. If that was the core of why Jason died, then any Robin disobeying orders should never be put in a positive light, but often it is. Jason (and Steph) were just the ones unlucky enough to emerge dead and judged for it instead of alive and praised for it.

Jason died because he was a child who just wanted to be safe and loved.

So many times Robin disobeying orders saved lives it’s nothing new and Jason had a pretty solid reason, the story of Jason Todd should be portrayed as the tragedy not make him some warning sign.

This is why I always hated the victim blaming after Jason & Steph's deaths because they died doing what if it had been Tim or Dick a Robin would be praised for, like take Steph for example we've seen constant stories of Bruce firing Robin, them going off on their own & Bruce realising he's wrong & taking them back but when Steph goes off on her own she dies the only reason Jason & Steph died is that the writers forced them to fail where they would have allowed the others to succeed.

But anyway back to my point the thing about Jason feeling like he had to earn love is why he was initially so hung up on the idea of Bruce 'replacing' him when he came back to life, he viewed Tim being robin as Bruce /transferring/ his love for Jason to another person, rather than seeing that Bruce could love Tim while still loving and missing him.

The reason Jason sought out his mother after Bruce benched him as Robin was that he viewed Bruce benching him as Bruce rejecting him and latched onto the idea of finding someone, i.e. a birth mother, who is supposed to give /unconditional love/.

The fact that his birth mother REJECTED HIM and then played a hand in his murder undoubtedly affected his attitude when he came back, if even his mother didn't want him, and then Bruce let the joker live and replaced him, then, in Jason's eyes, OF COURSE Bruce doesn't care and as mentioned previously Jason didn't really have any friends in school or the hero community, believing that the only real close personal connection in your live, someone you spent all your time with, had forgotten about you and rejected you is bound to mess a person up.