#barbie's appearance is... a product of it's time | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

astoundingbeyondbelief · 5 months

Text

Kaiju Week in Review (December 3-9, 2023)

I made a frame from this shot Wikizilla's Image of the Week. No regrets. Monarch: Legacy of Monsters, I love ya. When I was a teenager, explicit queerness was anathema to most big-name franchises. Those dominoes have been slowly falling, often in lower-profile tie-ins first, and to me this is a huge one: 69 years without a queer live-action Godzilla character are over. And Cate's the main protagonist of the show! I'm not under the delusion that media representation will cure all society's ills, but it sure doesn't hurt. Now, the non-Tumblr parts of the fandom are being completely normal about this, right? Right? Whatever, that's why you'll never get rid of me here. Cate had a couple more sweet moments with May in this episode, and Mariko Tamaki wrote episode 7, so don't expect her to stop kissing girls. Hopefully she's learned a valuable lesson about cheating though.

"The Way Out" is also another gift to those of us who have always wanted to see more of the ramifications of a world where Godzilla exists, from underground towns for the super-rich to ruined cities where federal troops shoot looters and harass people experiencing homelessness. And the show continues to find ways to use kaiju to talk about COVID, from Cate and Kentaro's exchange about San Francisco truthers ("It's easier than waking up every day and thinking, at any moment, the same could happen to you") to the blink-of-an-eye speed at which the threat went from on the news to her front door in the flashbacks.

youtube

As I foretold, we got a Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire trailer, an amusing contrast to the weighty Toho flick and Apple show already fore of mind. It's Adam Wingard unbound, that's for sure. The human cast seems pared back, a longstanding Monsterverse problem, and the kaiju fights were far and away the best part of Godzilla vs. Kong, so hopefully this approach will play to his strengths. But that movie also had excellent VFX, and some of the shots in here are rough. There's time to fix them, at least... which probably can't be said of Godzilla's design. I like that he's pink (did some Warner Bros. executive take the wrong message away from Barbie?) and sporting a thagomizer on his tail, but his proportions are uncanny. And I see Kong found the Infinity Gauntlet; good for him.

I am, of course, not done talking about Godzilla Minus One. It added over 200 screens and made $8.3 million in its second weekend in the U.S., a minuscule drop considering that its $11.4 million opening "weekend" spanned five days. Almost a third of all tickets sold this weekend were for Godzilla or Hayao Miyazaki's The Boy and the Heron, remarkable in a market so allergic to foreign imports. That brings its total to $25.3 million (more by the time you read this). With an avalanche of Christmas blockbusters on the way, its grip on premium-format screens is about to slip. Still, I see it hanging around theaters for a while. I have never seen the fandom so united in praise for a film before, and it's making plenty of new fans.

Some of those fans are in high places. Variety leaked that it's on the 20-film shortlist for Best Visual Effects at the Oscars (to be narrowed to five nominees), something I, again, never expected to read about a Toho Godzilla film. Alas, it's locked out of this year's Best International Film category due to the quirky nomination period.

Much has been made of how great the film looks on a $15 million budget. I have two caveats, one in each direction. No one is quite sure where the $15 million figure came from; Yamazaki said at a recent con appearance that he only wished he had that much to play with. (He has yet to divulge the actual budget, just that it was above ¥1 billion.) Now, unions in the Japanese film industry are much weaker than in Hollywood, so a given production budget goes a lot further in Japan. All the same, I doubt that alone explains Minus One looking better than most superhero movies made for twenty times the cost. I'll offer a couple more reasons: Yamazaki has extensive visual effects experience (he's been the VFX supervisor of all but one of the live-action films he's directed), and the film's big effects scenes aren't as busy or lengthy as many of the Hollywood counterparts. I don't know if Disney will ask Yamazaki to direct the next Star Wars movie (that would require there to be a next Star Wars movie), but the studios here should be taking notes.

the sphinx, a blog with a ton of American Godzilla rarities to share, has outdone itself—behold a continuity and dialogue script for the U.S. version of King Kong vs. Godzilla! Included in the download is a detailed comparison with the film. No huge differences, apart from the script giving the secretary added to the U.S. version a name, but a fascinating piece of history all the same.

The Minus One incarnation of Godzilla (MaiGoji?) has joined Godzilla Battle Line, accompanied by [SPOILER]. To be honest, my enthusiasm for this game has been flagging, and I'm not caught up on the strategies developing around these two, so I'll just refer you to Sir Melee's channel as usual. This Godzilla's also doing a collaboration with the Japanese mobile game Fleet of Blue Flame.

Tiffany Grant, Asuka's original voice actress, will narrate the audiobooks for the Neon Genesis Evangelion: ANIMA light novels which explore an Instrumentality-free path for the show. Seven Seas Entertainment published them in English from 2019 to 2021, which, to be honest, was also news to me.

This one's for my fellow library workers: the obscenely popular Who HQ nonfiction series for children is publishing a book about Godzilla next June. I don't know if this will have quite the same impact on today's young Godzilla fans as the Ian Thorne tome had on Gen Xers and Millennials, what with the Internet and all, but it's certain to be more factual. Expect illustrations instead of licensed photos, and not just because of Toho.

I can finally talk more about the Godzilla x Kong: Titan Chasers mobile game without fearing a DMCA. Not that there's much to talk about; it's freemium through and through and I'm not sure I know a single person who's excited for it. Interesting to see some critters from the comics break into another medium, at least. Here's the trailer.

#kaiju week in review #godzilla minus one #monarch legacy of monsters #godzilla x kong the new empire #kaiju #godzilla

82 notes · View notes

barbielore · 4 months

Text

I've alluded to it a few times, and I don't know how common knowledge it is, but I wanted to talk a little bit about Malibu and Brooklyn.

This is all relatively new stuff in the Barbie lore so I hope I haven't got any of this wrong! As far as I am aware, Brooklyn was introduced as a character in 2021, debuting first on Barbie's YouTube channel in a vlog, and then in the movie Barbie: Big City Big Dreams. She has subsequently made multiple appearances on YouTube, as part of the series It Takes Two among other media appearances, and in the doll line.

Brooklyn is a Black woman whose name coincidentally also happens to be Barbie Roberts. When she befriended the Barbie Roberts we know, to distinguish themselves from one another, they referred to each other by their home town - Brooklyn and Malibu.

(Even though Barbie's hometown is actually Willows, Wisconsin - but that's a whole other thing).

As a marketing choice, this appears to be with the motive of establishing a Black Barbie as her own distinctive character with a personality distinct from the white blonde Barbie, as well as to showcase diversity in their non-doll line products by featuring both a Black woman and a white woman as co-leads in their products - as opposed to a white woman lead with diverse friends.

I specifically want to talk about the Barbie: Life in the City doll pictured above for one other reason too - and it is completely unrelated to Malibu and Brooklyn.

One of the accessories Brooklyn comes packaged with in this travel set is a pink face mask!

I don't actually know off hand of any other Barbies (excluding doctors and nurses) who come packaged with a face mask. That's super cool.

#barbie #brooklyn roberts #malibu roberts #barbie life in the city #barbie lore

29 notes · View notes

100gayicons · 11 months

Text

GAY ICONS ANNA MAY WONG

As a young child living in Los Angeles during the early 1900s, Wong Liu Tsong dreaming of being an actress (Liu Tsong meaning "willow frost"). At the age of nine she pestered film crew to hirer her… so much so that she gained the nickname "C.C.C." or "Curious Chinese Child". Two years later she came up with her own stage name (Anna May Wong) - a combination of her original Chinese name and the Angelisized name used in school.

Despite her father’s objections, she was cast as an extra in The Red Lantern (1919) - her film debut. Soon, this and other extra roles motivated her to quit high school and pursue acting full time. She later said of her decision:

"I was so young when I began that I knew I still had youth if I failed, so I determined to give myself 10 years to succeed as an actress."

Her first screen credit came in 1921, when Wong was cast as Lon Chaney’s wife in “Bits of Life”. The next year she appeared in “The Toll of the Sea”, one of the first movies filmed in color. Variety singled out her performance as being “extraordinary”.

But unfortunately, despite her talent, Wong was primarily cast in stereotypical Asian roles. And if a film with a well rounded Asian character was available - Hollywood cast a Caucasian actress in “Yellow Face”.

For a time Wong had better success when she movie to Europe. There she befriended Marlene Dietrich and (pre-Nazi Propagandist) Leni Riefenstahl.

When Wong returned to Hollywood, she costarred with Marlene Dietrich in “Shanghai Express” in 1932. Although it was a supporting role, she played an important and heroic character.

During WWII, Wong focuses her efforts on raising money to help the Chinese cause against Japan.

In 1951, Wong starred in “The Gallery of Madame Liu-Song”, a 10 episode TV series where she played an art dealer turned detective - a major breakthrough as the first US television show starring an Asian-American.

Wong had planned to appearing in the film musical “Flower Drum Song” (1961) but died of a heart attack before production began.

The United States Mint announced in 2021 that Anna May Wong would be one of the first women depicted on the reverse of the quarter coin. This made her the first Asian American depicted on American coin.

Anna May Wong never married. When asked why not, she would answer:

“I am wedded to my art.”

She lived in an era when gay men and lesbian women dare not reveal themselves. But rumors persist that Wong was a lesbian. She has been linked to Marlene Dietrich, Leni Riefenstahl, Alla Nazimova, and Cecil Cunningham.

Whether Anna May Wong was a lesbian or not, her story deserves to be told.

UPDATE: Mattel released an Anna May Wong Barbie doll in May 2023!

#gay icons #Anna May Wong #Asian American #secret lesbian #marlene dietrich #shanghai express #stereotypes #Leni Riefenstahl #us mint #flower drum song

109 notes · View notes

dragon-sentinel · 9 months

Text

I have already seen my fair share of

"Barbie is great because it teaches girls they can be hyperfeminine and pink and glittery etc. etc. and still be empowered. Barbiecore!! It has nothing to do with pleasing men. Men hate the movie, see?

Also, it's not bad if girls are taught to "have fun" with make-up from an early age on."

And I just get so tired. I wish people would understand the effects and the role of femininity (even the version that "supposedly does not revolve around men and is hated by them") in our larger cultural context and how femininity is part of a gendered hierarchy.

It does not exist in a vacuum and cannot be divorced from the damaging history of femininity's social function as a reinforcement of sexism, patriarchal dynamics and gendered hierarchies.

It doesn't just go away because of a fun movie.

Don't get me wrong. Barbie is a good movie and I am not saying it has no value or doesn't also teach women many good things.

But two things can be true at the same time.

Barbie can reinforce good messages (women can have great careers, STEM jobs, be successful, call out sexual harassment etc.) while also reinforcing harmful messages with regard to other cultural facets such as beauty standards, make-up culture and the alienation of women's natural faces (and this being pushed onto young girls too), fear of aging, having to embody a set of pleasing "aesthetics", wearing clothing/looks that can be unpractical restricting and demand lots of self-monitoring (increasing a woman's cognitive load because part of her attention always has to check whether her skirt didn't go up too high to prevent flashing her underwear, whether her make-up smudged, whether her hair is in place etc.) and spending lots of time, money and resources on beauty and fashion-related products and practices.

Those things ARE harmful femininity. And only because you think a subset of men don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't reinforce and teach these basic concepts of women being valued immensely for their decorative appearance.

(Also, more on that whole "men don't like these aesthetics" down belove because I think this claim also needs to be looked at with more nuance.)

These messages are not mutually exclusive. The same piece of media can absolutely provide very good commentary on one topic while giving bad commentary on another.

"But pink is just a color and there is nothing wrong with glitter."

I agree! But Barbie's aesthetics are the full package of femininity.

Because it is not just about glitter or about pink. Barbie's default isn't running around in pink sweatpants with a glittery oversized hoodie and purple crocs with messy hair and no make-up. Or some funny fantasy clown make-up.

Barbie generally looks conventionally stunning.

She wears carefully selected, perfectly designed beautiful and feminine outfits, styled through and through from head to toe.

And even if there is some ironic twist somewhere in the movie, its entire advertisment and PR are very explicitly focused on those hyperfeminine aesthetics.

Her event and PR outfits referencing iconic Barbie looks and the hyperfeminine aesthetics in trailers and promotional material to grab people's attention are a core part of their campaign.

That is also socialization. It still presents these things as attractive and desirable, as it reinforces that people should find these things appealing and direct their attention towards them.

I am aware that the movie also comments on body odor or cellulite.

I know it has moments like America Ferrera's monologue and I appreciate these things but this doesn't erase the rest of the aesthetic narrative of the movie, which does want you to enjoy and have fun with those pink hyperfeminine aesthetics. It is part of your viewing pleasure.

Despite the good points it makes it simultaneously also wants you to be positively and genuinely entertained by the aesthetics.

When it comes to this, the movie has an "eat your cake and have it too" mentality because they want to (rightfully) criticize some damaging expectations superimposed on women by feminine gender roles, i.e., femininity. But they clearly also want to keep others. They think some of them are not actually harmful but fun, empowering, even though a thorough look at the femininity they promote as worth keeping will uncover that they still have disadvantaging effects on women and keep crucial parts of the patriarchal hierarchy intact.

And in some regards their messages are even contradictory. Because on the one hand they do want to criticize unrealistic beauty standards (see Gloria's monologue) but at the same time even "self-centered" femininity, wanting to look good, feminine, pretty "for yourself", expressing your "identity" with a certain type of feminine fashion, still has the aforementioned mental and material effects (altered relationships with our bare faces because of make-up, even if your "eyeliner that is so sharp that it can kill a man, is for yourself and yourself alone", spending lots of time and money on restrictive clothing and make-up products, placing a significant amount of value on your looks, constantly monitoring your outward appearance).

As women we have learned to lie to ourselves and live with this cognitive paradox constantly.

"We don't need to shave. But we do it because we "want to", because even though "we don't have to" for some reasons we all collectively still think it is unattractive and unfeminine. But hey we "choose" to shave so it's different!

Aging is totally fine! Women are allowed to age! But at the same time we invest lots of time and money in anti-aging products and routines but this time under the guise of self-care. We don't have to of course. We are perfectly fine with wrinkles! It's just an (odd, collective) "personal" preference that the majority of women would still rather look youthful forever. But this time it's different! It's a choice!"

Materially we are doing the exact same thing that we are conditioned to do by patriarchal norms but thanks to the rhetoric of positive femininity, choice and personal preference we do not need to actually change our behaviour. We can let the words, the impressive-sounding monologues, do "the work for us" to absolve us, while our actions remain the same.

At the end of the day, the movie doesn't really deconstruct the entire cage of femininity, its roots, and all the aspects that harm women. Instead they reframe and rename some of the same things as a celebration of positive femininity.

But simply keeping something damaging in place and renaming it doesn't remove its negative material effects.

It just serves as a dazzling, soothing paint job to distract you and make you feel better about liking it, even if it doesn't serve you.

Hence, it's clear that the movie wants you to think that these aesthetics themselves are or can be, on some level, still fun and good.

(Again, that doesn't mean that it doesn't also promote good messages at other moments.)

And the public reception proves it. Otherwise we wouldn't have those aforementioned takes on how "Barbiecore is empowering because it doesn't revolve around men and "women-centered" hyperfemininity is good."

(Though it has to be noted that whereas pink and glitter are inherently neutral, they have been assigned certain meanings, hence when they are used they do serve as social signifiers and messengers for certain ideas. They are like a condensed proxy or short-form of femininity that quickly and efficently evoke certain gendered ideas in the viewer just by having them look at it.

I think sub-cultures are a good example: Goth and emo fashion for women is not considered attractive by many average people, including average men. And I am pretty sure most goths and emos would tell you they wear this kind of fashion for themselves, to express themselves and not to fulfill any gendered (mainstream!) expectations.

But. Within these scenes there are very often STILL very distinct differences in the type of fashion men and women wear. And oddly enough they often align more with traditional gender expectations than they like to admit (even the higher degree of androgynity in male fashion in those scenes doesn't undo those dynamics - the sexualization and pornification of women in those scenes is very prominent).

Funny. One might wonder why this is the case.

So you still have feminine, pretty, sexy, lady-like goth and emo girls who might not appeal to the general public's taste. But within the scene they very much appeal to that scene-related male gaze.

So the basics of femininity are still taught and lived.

And in addition, if for some reason a woman were to change her style and leave those scenes she might let go of her specific fashion sense but she will most likely take the basic teachings of femininity with her: that there lies immense value in her being decorative (for men).

I honestly think many women are in denial about the fact that yes, even their "self-centered" femininity benefits men as it consolidates certain tranditional gendered roles. And I also think that women are often taught to lie themselves (amongst others by liberal feminism) with regard to how much they actually appreciate men's positive attention and feedback (and I don't blame them for wanting those things, that's how we are socialized, even on purely platonic levels. As a lesbian even I notice how much I often value and unconsciously want positive (platonic or professional) feedback from men in particular. We as a society value men's opinions and attention deeply.)

Coming back to Barbie I think all of this can be applied as well.

First, just as with non-mainstream femininity in alternative scenes "Barbiecore" still teaches the same basic concepts of decorative femininity, encouraging many of the aforementioned damaging behaviours connected to femininity (money, time, resources, cognitive load, value of external attractiveness/appeal), even if women believe they do it for themselves.

And if a woman moves on from pink, glittery Barbiecore to another type of feminine fashion these fundamental values will probably remain with her. At best they have not been challenged by Barbiecore, at worst they have been reinforced, but this time under the pretense of "self-love", self-care or focusing on one's self, ostensibly not serving the male gaze.

Second, it is naive to believe that no man finds Margot Robbie's Barbie and her looks attractive in the movie (just like there are enough men who think unconventional, i.e., non-mainstream, displays of femininity like gothic/emo etc. are attractive).

Given Margot Robbie's attractiveness and the fact that beyond the pink color palette, Barbie's feminine fashion itself is not really "outrageous" (vs. some scene clothing) I wouldn't be surprised if the number of men who are attracted to her movie character is actually higher than the "men hate barbiecore" idea wants to make one believe. They may say they don't but in my opinion it's an act to save face and demonstrate ostensible superiority, just like when they call beautiful women "mid". (Also as we know men are very well willing to fuck what they hate; it's just another display of "dominance").

I am actually very convinced that there is a significant amount of men who would totally dig the very same looks she is sporting if her behavior was different.

I believe they hate her despite her good looks because her personality does not align with their gendered expectations of what a woman should be.

So out of spite, as a punishment, they call her and her aesthetics ugly and childish - because they know beauty is one of the things women are primarily valued for in our society, hence it's an effective target to attack.

If she kept the look but acted like a 50s house wive I'm pretty sure many men would openly say how they are attracted to her (and objectify her).

And even if a portion of men may find the focus on pink genuinely childish they can still like the overall femininity the look reinforces. If you kept the same outfit but changed the colors and removed the glitter it would still be the same basic type of femininity. So with regard to fundamental gendered concepts nothing is really challenged here.

So yes, I genuinely think men hating on "girly" femininity is a lot more aligned with the "Margot Robbie is mid" defense.

They are very clearly attracted to her but they try to paint themselves as not interested, as above that, to display their "superior status and power" over her, because they hate her as a person now. (Or use it as an attempted power play to make girls insecure and - as another post said it perfectly - withold beauty from women because women are taught it's their social currency; so if even women like Margot Robbie are relegated to "mid" they feel self-conscious and weak and will try to win the men's favor to receive their approval - and thus be granted some of that withheld beauty.)

In essence, I really don't buy that men don't actually benefit from "women-centered hyperfemininity" and that it is the looks that don't appeal to them as a class (obviously individual tastes vary).

I am not saying that everything that received the label "feminine" is inherently bad. Compassion and empathy come to mind of course and in an ideal world we might also have separated the harmless parts of the aesthetics (cute fabric patterns like flowers etc., soft but also relaxing and practical cothing) from the harmful practices that reinforce regressive gendered ideas and also lead to increased cognitive load, self-image issues (esp. regarding our bare faces), spending lots of time, money and resources on these things etc.

But we do not live in this ideal world.

We need to treat femininity as the thing that it is in the real world right now. It already has a meaning and this meaning won't be deconstructed by elevating all of it and saying that the harmful parts are actually empowering, too, which is what is happening with those celebrations of barbiecore and pink hyperfemininity.

Your celebration of femininity does not occur in a vacuum.

You cannot pretend the social context in which you do this simply doesn't exist because it spoils your fun and pretend it doesn't actually have any unfavourable consequences for women.

It does.

Gender is a hierarchy, in which femininity is an active tool to place women below men.

That is the reality we need to deconstruct.

-----

A little extra that just came to my mind:

The gothic lolita scene used to have (and perhaps still has) the same kind of rhetoric, too: "We do it for ourselves. Not to appeal to the male gaze. Men don't like this kind of fashion anyway." But a) this is clearly…not true. Gothic lolita, including the non-revealing styles (which make up most of the styles actually), is still popular and fetishized by certain groups of men, precisely because of its (distinct interpretation of) feminine appeal. And b) it still ingrains many core believes of classic femininity into women that transcend the fashion style and reflect accepted and desired ideas about feminine gender roles in broader society.

So the mindset of "doing something that is in line with our sexist society's expectations "for yourself", hence it's different and does not reinforce the same sexist ideals" that women often adapt is a common, recurrent cognitive strategy to justify these preferences to ourselves and others.

Barbiecore is therefore not unique and suddenly above reproach. On the contrary. It perfectly fits a commonly found pattern.

#barbie #radfem #radical feminism #femininity #beauty #Again I'm not saying the movie is bad or has no value.#Not at all #I'm just done with the “feminity is super great actually” takes #my post

60 notes · View notes

jasminewalkerauthor · 9 months

Text

Deep dives into folklore: Mermaids

I have heard in many places this year that 2023 is the year of the mermaid, with rise of ocean inspired fashion, release of the little mermaid and one could even say with dua lipa's mermaid barbie. Before the now wholesome representations of the mermaid, they were represented women's sexuality and vengence.

The origins of the mermaid can be traced back to ancient civilizations, where tales of sea creatures with human-like features appeared in various cultures. In Mesopotamia, the goddess Atargatis was depicted with a fishtail, while the Babylonian deity Ea was associated with water and wisdom. In Greek mythology, the sirens were alluring, half-bird, half-woman creatures who lured sailors to their demise with their enchanting songs. Though not exactly mermaids, these early figures laid the foundation for the concept of human-fish hybrids.

The mermaid we are more familiar with today has its roots in medieval folklore and maritime legends. One of the earliest written accounts of mermaids can be found in the ancient Syrian tale of "The Story of Simbad," which dates back to the 8th century. In this story, the protagonist encounters fish-tailed women on an island, emphasizing the allure and danger associated with these creatures.

During the Middle Ages, mermaids increasingly appeared in European folklore, often portrayed as seductive beings who used their beauty and mesmerizing songs to entice sailors to their doom, possibly taking influence from the sirens of greek mythology. These mermaids were seen as symbols of temptation, warning against the dangers of desire and the unknown depths of the sea.

The Renaissance period brought a shift in the perception of mermaids. As exploration and trade expanded, sailors returned with exotic tales and souvenirs, including depictions of mermaids. Artists of the time were inspired by these accounts and started to portray mermaids in their works of art. Renowned painters such as Hieronymus Bosch and Hans Christian Andersen's iconic "The Little Mermaid" further fueled the mermaid's popularity, embedding her in the realm of literature and art for generations to come.

As scientific knowledge advanced, mermaids gradually lost their mythical status and were relegated to the realm of superstition. The Age of Enlightenment and the rise of rationalism questioned the existence of such fantastical beings. Exploration and scientific discovery revealed the true nature of marine creatures, and mermaids were exposed as mere products of human imagination.

However, the mermaid's allure persisted even in the face of reason and skepticism. In the 19th and 20th centuries, the mermaid took on new forms in pop culture. P.T. Barnum, who you may recognise from the greatest showman, capitalized on the public's fascination with the unknown by exhibiting "The Fiji Mermaid," a grotesque hoax of stitched-together animal remains. Mermaids also made appearances in literature, such as "Peter Pan," where the character of Mermaid Lagoon adds a touch of enchantment to the story.

In the 20th century, mermaids experienced a renaissance in film and television. The original Disney Little Mermaid (1989) transformed the mermaid into a beloved and relatable heroine, providing a new narrative that focused on themes of personal agency, self-discovery, and true love. This reinvention not only delighted audiences but also cemented the mermaid's status as a cultural icon.

With the advent of the internet and social media, mermaids have experienced a resurgence in contemporary culture. Mermaid subcultures have emerged, with enthusiasts participating in mermaiding activities, donning elaborate tails, and engaging in underwater performances. The mermaid has also been adopted as a symbol of environmental activism, reminding us of the delicate balance between human activities and the preservation of marine ecosystems.

Overall, the concept of the mermaid has undergone a remarkable transformation over time. From ancient myths and folklore to modern-day popular culture, the mermaid has evolved from a cautionary tale of temptation to a cherished symbol of beauty, adventure, and environmental consciousness. The enduring fascination with mermaids serves as a testament to their enduring appeal and their ability to adapt to the ever-changing currents of human imagination.

48 notes · View notes

thejakeformerlyknownasprince · 7 months

Note

So continuing on the theme of my last question (the one about A town and the slug eating scene from AniTV), do you think A-Town has their own shitty crossover merchandise like the Animorphs Transformers, that somehow manages to be an embarrassment to both franchises?

[For those of you just tuning in: A-Town is the shitty postwar sitcom inspired by the life of Jake Berenson, to the eternal annoyance of Jake Berenson.]

Oh man, I know nothing about toy marketing, but I can speculate:

It's not really a kids' show, so there wouldn't be a lot of children's toys like with Animorphs. But I could see Spencer's Gifts stocking "talking dog" models of Mopsy that make rude jokes and fake-pee on the floor.

There would be a cheap under-coded video game; most levels would be puzzles that hinge on your ability to sneak past adults. You'd have a variety of morphs that you'd have to use some kind of continuous key-smash to deploy, meaning they're really hard to keep up for any length of time. Controller NPCs will kill you if they spot you morphing, civilian NPCs will put you in detention or jail if they spot you out of morph, and they're all coded to appear exactly the same on the surface. That means that the game's strategy is almost entirely about hiding and deception, which gamers complain about but Marco openly loves.

Pop figures. So many Funkos, so little money. Trina. Trina-in-lion-morph. Trina-and-J.J. Trina-and-Liam. Trina's new haircut. Trina's old haircut. Trina-in-pigeon-morph. And that's just Trina; wait'll you see Crystal.

Daisy/Zeptron is the obvious one to make into a Barbie, as the show's resident blond bombshell who wears lots of frilly pink dresses. But there'd be ridiculous controversy over how to market the Barbie: the character that Ash Lewis plays 99.99% of the time is Zeptron 420, but the body is named Daisy, so which name is less confusing? Eventually it just gets released as "Sitcom Barbie," with Ash Lewis's face and tiny replicas of Zeptron's favorite outfit.

Please note that the minifigs of "Gina's True Form" available online are not considered show canon, and are purely the product of fan speculation.

#animrophs #animorphs crack #animorphs merch #a-town #OBVIOUSLY it's fan speculation; no duh #everyone knows that gina's *canonical* true form cannot be beheld by human eyes without the person's face melting off

25 notes · View notes

roo-bastmoon · 11 months

Text

Roo is a bit of a party pooper here. (But Roo does not poop at parties.)

A GENTLE WORD OF CAUTION REGARDING STREAMS, ALBUMS, and SYMBOLS

First and foremost, streams are dropping like hell this weekend. So please run playlists on all possible devices (I'll put links at the bottom of this post). PLEASE DO NOT NEGLECT STREAMING as we are in the red.

Of course we need to focus on Angel right now. However, Like Crazy, Face, and Jimin himself are predicted to be nominated for song, best album, and artist of the year for MAMA. Actual trophy awards at a broadcast year-end award show! But the digital points are low for song and album, so we need to work on CONSISTENT global streaming for Jimin in addition to all our boys every single day!

Second, a Naver article stated that Jungkook's album will drop on July 14th. Another Naver article reported on that article, and then a bunch did. We've been here before, where the media ran with a bit of gossip and then got clowned later.

What the company SAID was:

“The schedule is yet to be finalized, and is to be announced subsequently.”

Now, JJK1 could very well drop in five weeks. But I've heard no chatter anywhere about final touches on post-production, album design, distribution plans, or promotional schedules... they don't just put the songs in a can and then press a button and it's out in the world.

Plus, a year ago, there was a strategic plan shared with investors that mentioned Q4 for him (though that was more of a road map than a firm commitment).

JK did say during last year's Festa that he'd go after Yoongi. So maybe it will happen as soon as July? That would be wonderful, because it seems like Jimin still has music to release, so maybe they can be supportive of each other's projects this summer and fall, before enlisting (hopefully at the same time!).

But I hope JJK1 doesn't go up against the Barbie soundtrack on July 21st because that has so many heavy hitters, my lord, we never catch a break!!

I will just say that JJK1 is one of the most anticipated global releases of the year. It will require a lot of logistics and likely heavy in-person promotion. So I just want to caution folks in getting too emotionally invested about a mid-July date.

It could be. It could not be. Best to wait for an official announcement, which will likely come at least 3 weeks before drop. So let's keep our ears perked after Yoongi's last concert on June 25th...

Third, some folks are reading into a lot of symbols these days. Which is fine! But I'd like to ask that we just be careful with it.

Personally, I only subscribe to a number theory if the timestamp or the numbers that the members write/say are in exact order and we can draw a straight line between that and a known special date. I do not use addition, subtraction, division, or re-ordering of numerals to get to a desired outcome. I don't know K-ARMY who do that either. But I'm not out to crap all over people who do!! It's fun to theorize!

For me, it's fun to look at number stuff the same way it's fun to read tarot cards. We tinker, we point out possible coincidences or patterns... Just please, I gently ask you to keep to theory and not fact. The last thing we want is for someone to cherrypick a screenshot and drag things out of context.

Speaking of symbols and theories becoming fanon facts...

Jimin posted old photos of him looking ADORBS with a tangerine today (which Tae helpfully commented to make sure we'd all understand it was a tangerine, lol). So Yoominners rejoice:

While Jimin's social media DOES feature plenty of Yoongi (D-Day, Suchwita, possibly photos where Yoongi's shoes appear in a mirror) and TikTok dances, plus he did come on live (FROM HIS HOME!!) on Yoongi's birthday... Jimin's social media also has Hobi, Jin, Joon, and Tae on it! But predominantly it's Yoongi who shows up on Jimin's Insta. We haven't had any Jungkook on his Insta since White Day of last year--interactions with Jungkook seem reserved for WeVerse lives and posts.

Make of it what you will.

To my mind, it does seem like certain "soft" subunits were paired up since Festa of last year. (Hobi spread love to everyone, then there was Namjin's DeliciouSeoul commercials, Yoonmin's Busan [??] tourism commercial, Taekook as yet to be determined but it feels like it's coming...) So the lines between work posts and relationship posts also begin to blur a bit for fans, especially since the members all adore each other anyway...

Whether there was a strategic plan in place or not for how what I perceive as soft subunits promote, I don't know.

But meanwhile, certain other "promotions" seem to organically play out: JK sings all his members' new feature songs, but hypes Jimin's the most (on random lives he does without permission). JK came on live often, but a pattern is emerging where that typically happens when Jimin is away or busy. JK hangs out with Tae and went to the Harry concert with other members, but calls for Jimin to join him most often.

Again, it's fun to speculate what this might mean.

Meanwhile, today Joon posted a gym whiteboard workout in which the initials JK and JM appear, and so folks assume minimonikook are getting swole together. I like the mental image, not gonna lie.

And hey y'all! Maybe Jimin is summoning Min Yoongi with a tangerine. Maybe Jikook did hit the gym with Joon and draw on his whiteboard. Maybe Tae did grab a bite with JK in the one day before he dyed his hair and allegedly went to Spain to film a music video. It's fun to speculate. It's what fans do.

I just want to caution folks from stating things the members do or feel as if they know for sure.

Those are cult tactics and, for me at least, the lines are starting to blur a little bit these days between Jikookers and Taekookers... in that folks are more than happy to assume that secret private couple getaway trips are pure fact, that words mumbled off screen say exactly what we want to hear, that the company has a clear-cut nefarious plot to hype specific members and bury others... and that there are hints of Signs and Wonders everywhere.

And maybe these things are shaking out and really happening. But we don't know. So I feel more comfy discussing this sort of thing when people include "I think" or "it seems" or "maybe" as we talk about it--I like to have a little wiggle room--because when I see my fellow Jikookers start to "witness truth," it comes off far more like a religion than a supportive fanbase.

I say this gently because at some point we've all done it, especially when we are in a hurry and speaking casually or joking around. I'm not judging, just cautioning.

Words matter. Believe me, I learned my lesson, and words matter.

And when it comes to Jikook, we don't really need to grasp at straws. While our boys are a lot more private these days, they still have exclusive, intimate tones and touches and interactions that we glimpse.

And the circle around them still heavily imply they come as a package deal. For example...

Fourth and finally, we got this awesome interview with Polyc, who had some wonderful things to say about Jimin and the members:

youtube

And it was sort of implied that Jimin spoke many times with Polyc about the membership tattoo over the five months that JK was getting his arm retouched--maybe while they were in the shop together? Maybe while his moon tattoos were getting done? Or maybe not.

But Polyc basically said Jimin was the one to usher each member through the process. (Which is a bit of a different impression than I got last Festa when Tae said "I will go with Jungkookie!" because back then it implied it was JK who acted as the conduit between the members and his tattoo artist, but here's some strong evidence that it was Jimin all along who bounced around ideas and made it happen and comforted each member's anxiety. Interesting.)

It's almost as though Jimin and Jungkook are the soft subunit that never gets official promo but keeps bubbling up everywhere.

Okay so that was my long-winded way of pooping on the party just a little, but hopefully not enough to dampen anyone's spirits!! No one is doing fandom "wrong" -- I just want to keep our hearts and intention pure, and our actions honorable, that's all.

In conclusion: speculation is fun! But assuming is not.

And now? Please STREAM!!

AND PRE-ORDER TAKE TWO WHILE YOU'RE AT IT!!

I love you all so very much! Be well, puppykitties!

Love, Roo

#jimin #jungkook #jikook #Spotify

37 notes · View notes

ultrahpfan5blog · 9 months

Text

Barbenheimer Part 2: My thoughts on Oppenheimer.....

After a 50 min break after Barbie, I settle down to watch Oppenheimer in IMAX. I am a big fan of Nolan's movies. I haven't seen Following, but I either like or love every movie he has made. He's one of the few directors who is the star of his own movie, whether the lead actor is someone as famous as Leonardo DiCaprio or some unknowns like in Dunkirk. So I went in with high expectations and Nolan lived up to those expectations again.

Oppenheimer is a movie that leaves you shaken. I genuinely can't believe how a 3 hour movie which is all talk, ended up being so gripping that it just rushed by. This summer has seen its fair share of long movies, with a majority of summer blockbusters clocking in around 2.5 hours, but I felt the length with all of them. Not with Oppenheimer though. While I would hesitate to call it Nolan's best, its easily one of the best of the year.

What is amazing is the film is essentially two films at once. One is a movie about the construction of the bomb and the Trinity test and subsequent deployment of those bombs. The second is a courtroom drama of two legal proceedings happening at different points in time. Both movies are riveting and the structure of the movie is enthralling. The first act of the film basically acts as the first 2 acts of both movies. It sets up the characters, the various dynamics etc.... Then the second act is essentially the final act of the first movie, and the third act, if the final act of the second movie. It was a genius way to keep audience enthralled throughout.

The film is just filled with extraordinary work by everyone involved. The cinematography, costume design, product design, the practical effects, the performances, the directing etc... is all superb. I fully expect this film to get a lot of Oscar nomination come Oscar season. The characters are extremely well realized, and not just Oppenheimer or Strauss, but every single individual. There are so many known actors that appear in this film, sometimes just for a scene or two, but somehow every character is a fully realized character. I also like that Oppenheimer is portrayed as man. He has flaws, but he also has traits to be admired. Even Strauss is not portrayed as evil, just vindictive. Also, as someone who is in the Engineering field, the construction of the bomb was just fascinating to me. I loved watching legendary 20th century scientists, who are rockstars of the scientific community, depicted as people and I loved a lot of their individual interactions. The scenes between Oppenheimer and Einstein for example, were terrific. The final scene between them is genuinely terrifying. In general, the way Oppenheimer's mind is visualized is awesome.

There is not much in terms of flaws. The film is talky. For some, that may be boring. I can maybe say that the actual portrayal of the explosion, while exciting, was not as bombastic and horrifying as it could have been. There are moments in the courtroom drama part of the film, where it feels like it could have been edited down a little. And it took me about 15 minutes to get a handle on the structure of the film and the back and forth time jumps. But honestly, can't think of too much else apart from that.

The performances are incredible across the board. Cillian Murphy should be a top contender for best actor. The guy has been excellent in supporting roles for a while, but he kills it here. Apart from scenes from the Lewis Strauss confirmation hearing, he is on screen for every scene. RDJr finally breaks out of his Tony Stark skin and delivers a superb turn here. He really bursts into top gear in the final act of the film. Emily Blunt is lovely. She is largely in the background but she shines superbly when she has to be front and center towards the end. Matt Damon is immensely likable as Leslie Groves, one of Oppenheimer's true supporters outside of the scientific community. The film is littered with so many other excellent performances. Benny Safdie as Edward Teller, Josh Hartnett as Ernest Lawrence, Kenneth Branaugh as Niels Bohr, Jason Clarke as Roger Robb, Tom Conti as Albert Einstein, Florence Pugh as Jean Tatlock, and David Krumholtz as Isidor Isaac Rabi are all highlights in the movie. Casey Affleck walks in for a couple of scenes and sent chills down my spine with his performance. Alden Ehrenreich has a superb mini arc of his own as aide to Strauss and he has some of the most satisfying scenes in the movie where he converts to an Oppenheimer supporter as he figures out the things Strauss has done. But there are so many excellent performances in this movie that I could go on and on.

As a director, Nolan has really outdone himself. I can't make an assessment as to where this film lands in Nolan's filmography but it is towards the top of an already excellent set of films. I suspect nothing will outdo TDK trilogy and Inception for me, but this might land right behind those. All in all, a 9/10 movie.

37 notes · View notes

ariel-seagull-wings · 5 months

Text

@shelleythesapphic @oncexinxmyxdreams

@princesssarisa @the-blue-fairie @themousefromfantasyland @angelixgutz @amalthea9 @thealmightyemprex @faintingheroine @grimoireoffolkloreandfairytales @softlytowardthesun @tamisdava2

Each movie studio executive will tell that marketable story of having an eureka moment about the creation of an iconic character or a franchise.

Walt Disney had the legend of creating the first draft of Mickey Mouse during a train ride.

Andy Mooney has the tale of getting the idea of marketing a line up of Disney Princesses for the young women demographic during a Disney on Ice line-up:

"This was back in 2000, soon after Mr Mooney, a Scot, had been appointed head of Disney's consumer products division.

Joining the company after 20 years at Nike, he was working hard to bring himself fully up to speed on every facet of the business. This included going to see a production of Disney on Ice, where figure skaters portray Disney characters.

While queuing to get in he noticed that a great many of the young girls - and also their mothers - had dressed up in generic princess dresses, to look like Disney heroines, such as Snow White, Cinderella, and Aurora from Sleeping Beauty.

Disney didn't sell such dresses at the time, but Mr Mooney immediately realised that the company was missing an incredibly lucrative trick.

"I was standing in line with mothers and daughters, all dressed head to toe in princess regalia that they had made at home," says Mr Mooney, 63.

"I said to a few of the mums 'if Disney made official dresses like this would you buy them?', and they all replied that they'd buy lots.

"So I rushed back to [Disney headquarters] in Burbank [Los Angeles], and we launched the Disney Princess series pretty quickly."

Not only did Mr Mooney and his team introduce dresses based on those worn by Disney's best-known female characters, they set to work on everything from books to lunchboxes, dolls, magazines, computer games, pyjamas, and tie-ups with food producers.

The idea was to start selling basically everything that female Disney fans, both young and old, might like to buy, all featuring one or more Disney princess."

Wheter the story of the Disney on Ice line up is true or not, the fact is that you can feel a sense of... territoriality. Originally, women in the audience (specially mothers and young daughters) would either buy the costumes of their favorite royal or non royal heroines on more afordable stores, or make by hand the costumes at home, and maybe dress up whatever doll they already head as the character they liked, out of love of movies they probably revisited many times.

An executive like Andy Mooney couldn't loose an oportunity to destroy this perceived competition, so a merchandise had to be quickly created in a manner similar to Barbie.

Even tought not everyone tought this was a good idea...

"Not everyone thought his idea would work, one person in specific who had trouble with it was Walt Disney’s own nephew Roy E Disney. The reasoning for his disapproval: he didn’t want the princesses to appear together outside their own film franchise’s. He thought it would ruin the magic. To appease Roy it was decided that for all marketing, none of the princesses would look at or interact in any way with each other.

In the beginning the original line-up was Snow White, Cinderella, Aurora, Ariel, Belle, Jasmine, Pocahontas, Mulan and Tinkerbell. Tinkerbell was soon removed and in 2004 she started up the Disney Fairies franchise.

In order for a character to be given the title of a Disney princess the character must fulfil just one of the following:

1. Born Royal

2. Marry Royal

3. Perform a significant act of heroism

The third requirement was created just for Mulan who is the only one who isn’t born royal or marry royal.

They need to fulfil all of the following:

1. Be human

2. Be the female lead in an animated Disney movie

3. Not be introduced for the first time in a sequel

The unwritten but also most important rule: Their movie has to do well at the box office.

As they have not met the criteria some Disney characters have not been included in the line up. For example: Kida from Atlantis and Nala from The Lion King are both princesses in their films but don’t fulfil all of the requirements.

The reason why Anna and Elsa are not included in the Disney Princess Franchise is because Frozen was such a hit at the box office and Anna and Elsa have reached a level of fame on par with Mickey Mouse that it would have been a step down for Anna and Elsa to have been grouped with the other princesses. In other words, Anna and Elsa are so popular that they make more than enough profit on their own that they don’t need to be associated with the other princesses in order to sell merchandise."

While the Theme Parks, old Disney books and comic books, movies like Fun and Fancy Free, Who Framed Roger Rabbit and Mickey's Christmas Carol and cartoon TV shows like Walt Disney's Disneyland, Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color and House of Mouse extablished that, with careful writing and cohesive worldbuilding a crossover between Disney animated characters from different animated features is possible, there was fear about this line up putting the designated Princesses to interact with each other in a narative context. They could at best pose together statically in pôsters and comercials.

And then there is the contradiction of the name Disney Princess with the characters in the actual line-up. There are characters who fit in their criterion who yet are excluded, and characters who mostly break from it (even activelly being called Princesses in their movies) yet are forced under the Princess label anyway.

"The question is, if Disney has ever used criteria like this as guidelines for choosing Princess candidates, does the company really care about them? Tinkerbell, who was neither royal nor particularly heroic in Peter Pan (although she did save Peter’s life) used to have Disney Princess status until she was removed from the line-up and given her own book and movie series.

While she plays a significant role in Aladdin, Jasmine is more of a supporting character than a main one. Then there’s Merida, who has a spot on the list even though she’s a Disney Pixar character rather than Disney Animation Studios.

Yet supporting characters like Meg from Hercules, Jane Porter from Tarzan, and Esmeralda from The Hunchback of Notre Dame remain excluded from the list.

Supposedly Mooney called the Princesses and the worlds they originated from part of “the Princess mythology.” This was his reasoning for removing Tinkerbell from the line-up, having decided she just didn’t fit.

So perhaps what matters to Disney is not a bunch of criteria in a list, but instead whatever characteristics they think will be marketable to their audience. As great as characters like Esmeralda and Meg may be, it’s the shimmery dresses, quests for love and adventure, and sense of magic that spark a child’s imagination."

So... Between the late 1999/2000, Andy Mooney and other Disney marketing executives hastily decide to create the Disney Princesses as a form to compete with Barbie and smaller costume makers who were selling cheaper interpretations of Princess Dresses for audiences of mostly young women to play their favorite Disney Ladies.

While animated movie characters were already proven possible, there was no idea on how to make the Princesses interact with another that felt cohesive, so for a long time the marketing chooses to present them in ways that are static, mostly focused on how pretty they look, rather than exploring their personalities and the dynamics of their worlds.

A Criterion about doing heroic actions is added to justify including characters like Pocahontas and Mulan, who aren't from royalty nor marry into royalty, based on the box office popularity of their movies and merchandise sails.

Meanwhile, other heroines who are equally heroic, main characters and/or even royals themselves, like Elonwy, Esmeralda, Meg, Jane and Kida are excluded because their movies (if not complete failures at the box office) aren't as popular with audiences at the time of their releases.

Non-humanoid female main characters who are also very popular with audiences, like Minnie Mouse, Lady, Duchess, Maid Marian, Miss Bianca and Nala are excluded.

Female characters are sometimes present, other times not, like Alice, Tinkerbell (before staring in her own franchise, the Disney Fairies) and Giselle, without ceremony.

Merida, the anti-Princess who is from a Pixar produced movie rather than a Disney character, is put in the label.

Then in recent years, Elsa and Anna from Frozen had been so popular, both in terms of movie tickets and merchandise sails, that while ocasionally they appear along with the other Princesses, the two are mostly sold as representatives of their own world of Arendelle.

And Moana, who is another anti-Princess character, this time from a movie produced by Disney itself, was also put under the Princess label.

IN CONCLUSION:

Compared to something like the Disney Fairies, which was built slowly and with attention to detaille and consistency in terms of criteria, the Disney Princess label has a trajectory that even to this day, 23 years after its foundation, its messy.

Characters who should be part of it, are excluded, while characters who activelly rejected the label, are forcet into it, with different reasons invented for why, but clearly selling points being the only thing that matters.

Maybe they should stop to rethink again, and consider this alternatives:

Either not having a label for all the lady characters at all, for they are so different, and let them carry their respective franchises (like it worked with Anna and Elsa).

Or try again, this time with a different name other than Princess, since it doesn't really represent the majority of the heroines they created, and this time, include everyone, from every movie, rather than constantly excluding.

#disney #andy mooney #disney princess #disney princesses #marketing #western animation #franchises

11 notes · View notes

nothinggold13 · 10 months

Note

Dunno iffen you've commented on this yet but: what, if any, are your thoughts surrounding Netflix's Narnia?

I have dropped a few thoughts here and there since it was announced, but I'm not sure I ever gathered the entirety of my thoughts into one place.

The short of it is that I am both scared and hopeful.

I am extremely defensive of Narnia, and have been since the moment it caught hold of my heart; there are a million things that could go wrong, and I'm never unaware of them. The sanctity of Lewis' world and vision is extremely important to me, and I'd be both heartbroken and furious if Netflix produced the series in a way that directly dishonoured it. And, if that happens, I will be first in line to complain.

But I also hate how dismissive and unhopeful everyone is being at the mere concept. Since Greta Gerwig was officially announced as a writer/director, there's been even more complaints of "how about Netflix just keeps their hands off???" and I honestly find it exhausting to read that much negativity. Personally, I've never seen anything Greta's directed. I know some people love how she did Little Women, and other people hate it; I know that I'm feeling cautious about the new Barbie movie, but I also admire the care she put into making it real with practical effects rather than CGI everything. I think there's potential in that kind of vision, especially as long as Douglas Gresham retains an important role in production, and if there's other varied creative minds behind the project as well. Right now, there's still more we don't know than there are things we do. I think a lot of us could afford to take a step back and save complaining for when Netflix has actually done something inarguably wrong with the series, and instead spend our time trying to make sure Netflix hears what the books are valued FOR, so they know what we want.

It's easy to be scared. But you know what else? I LOVE visual media. As a Narnia editor, I love the idea of having canon images to use to edit books and characters we've never seen on screen before. I love the hope that maybe we could get a more accurate production timeline this time around. I love the mere thought that maybe this time they could give us a golden-haired Lucy. And I am OBSESSED with the idea that we might finally get ALL SEVEN BOOKS ADAPTED.

I have been dreaming about seeing The Last Battle on screen for years. I have been dreaming about the design, and the colours, and the music, and the moment that all the faces we have known and loved since the series began appear before us again, all sparkling with joy and eternity, because we have reached chapter one, and for us its the end, but for them it's the beginning. I love reading those final chapters. But I am aching to see them brought to life. Can't you just IMAGINE IT? Dreaming of the soundtrack alone gives me butterflies. It could be. so. good.

And if Netflix fails to deliver, I still won't be giving up on that hope. I'll just be crossing my fingers and praying that the next company that purchases the rights to adapt the series finally sees it through. (Or that, by some bizarre opportunity, I will be able to adapt it myself. Honestly, Netflix, just hire me already.)

Again: I am scared. There is so much they could do wrong, and if they do anything directly disrespectful to the books and their role in Lewis' legacy, I will be picking up my torches and pitchforks with everybody else. I've got plenty of anger. I will direct it that way if they deserve it.

But right now, we can still have hope. And I am clinging to it until it is no longer deserved.

#narflix #netflix narnia #netflix #narnia

26 notes · View notes

agentnico · 7 months

Text

The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar (2023) Review

As the new dawn broke, my eyes fell upon the streaming interface of my Netflix account, and at that moment it was that I noticed it. "What's this?" I cried. "Another Wes Anderson film already?" I drank my cup of water to catch my breath. "But it's only been a month or two since his last one!" I thought. I stood up and slowly applauded Mr Anderson for his dedication to his busy schedule. "Right then, let's get to it." And with that, I sat back down and happily sighed in preparation for the unorthodox piece of storytelling whimsy that awaited me in the next 38 minutes.

Plot: Henry Sugar, a wealthy man, decides to take on an extraordinary challenge - he wants to master an extraordinary skill in order to cheat at gambling games.

I'm in the minority when it comes to my opinion of Wes Anderson's most recent film release - Asteroid City. Even though I enjoy Anderson's uniquely symmetrical and colorfully vibrant directing style, I did find that movie came off a bit too obnoxious and pretentious for my liking. That has not swayed me away from the talented director though, as The Grand Budapest Hotel is still one of my favourite indies to come out this century (if you're a collector such as myself seek out the superb Criterion release of this) and by the way managed to make the colour pink look cool before the Barbie blockbuster came about, and Moonrise Kingdom is an innocent coming-of-age comedy that used humour to deliver its internal message about 'the end of childhood', but presented not as a loss, but more-so a compromise. Wes Anderson is a tour-de-force with his own distinct vision, so individuals such as him should be cherished in modern-day cinema that is saturated with unoriginal mediocrity. So for Asteroid City, I forgive you, kind sir.

With The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar Wes Anderson returns to adapting Roald Dahl's works, and seeing as how in the past he so fantastically brought to life in stop-motion Fantastic Mr. Fox, it seemed like the return is a welcome one. And indeed Henry Sugar is a most delightful little Netflix short film, that very much reinstates the fact that Anderson and Dahl are a match made in heaven. This starts right with the title, as with The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar Anderson sets out to tell a story literally. In the film, all the characters also narrate everything they do and say, as such at times you feel like you're listening to an audiobook. You can literally watch this movie with your eyes closed and you'd still know exactly what happens. Ironically, seeing with your eyes closed is a primary theme of this short. But also you would be doing yourself a disservice keeping your eyes shut. The production design is impeccable with the entire thing feeling almost like a live theatre performance. With the set design and scene transitions, Henry Sugar exudes a distinct theatrical vibe, adding a layer of whimsical charm. And the moving sets are wonderful to look at, with the colors and detail nothing short of superb. The entire thing is simply overflowing with creative charm.

This is Benedict Cumberbatch's first entry into the Wes Anderson verse, yet it is shocking that it took this long to happen, as the Sherlock alumni is known for his fast-talking swift line delivery, and with the amount of dialogue Anderson always gets his actors to churn out in every scene naturally makes Cumberbatch appear right at home. Even at this short's rapid 38-minute runtime, Cumberbatch manages to add layers of depth to the peculiar Henry Sugar, from the small facial expressions as his character processes certain revelations. The rest of the ensemble does their part to add to the whimsy of the whole piece, with Dev Patel shining especially with his delivery of the fourth-wall-breaking narration, fast-talking his lines of dialogue with brisk elegance, and in the same breath managing to throw in the "I said" and the "he cried out loud".

All in all A Wonderful Story is a mesmerizing dance of wit, wonder, and whimsy that is aesthetically pleasing, and the story itself is an enjoyable little bedtime tale that, though not particularly deep. Look, cynically speaking it's a story about a man who reads a book and then learns a technique that allows him to easily make money. That's about it, however, it's the overall presentation and Anderson' touch that makes this the delightful piece of tapestry that it is. If you're a Dahl and Anderson enthusiast, I mean, there's really no excuse then for you to miss this.

Overall score: 7/10

13 notes · View notes

scotianostra · 6 months

Text

Happy Birthday the lovely Scottish actress Sharon Rooney who was born 22nd October 1988 in Glasgow.

Sharon Rooney is one of the most in demand actresses from Scotland, she attended Knightswood Primary and secondary Schools and was brought up in the Temple area of Glasgow, she left school at 16 to pursue a career in acting, but it all started for her 13 years before, as a determined young lady, aged just 3 she set her sights on becoming an actress after a visit to see the pantomime Cinderella in her hometown of Glasgow. She was even being noticed back then, when an elderly lady in the audience commented “Look at her, she’s in her element” Sharon danced away to the songs in the aisle of the theatre! From then on she want to be Ella Mint thinking, I am, you’re right I’m Ella Mint!”

It must have been a daunting and exciting time when Sharon enrolled on a 3-year performing arts course followed by a degree in drama at Hull University. But I am sure a lass from Glesga took it in her stride. She graduated with a BA Hons in Acting, her early appearances were with Harry Hill and in the Tony Roper play The Steamie.

Rooney began performing stand-up comedy, and toured with a play in various schools across Britain. She also starred in the play Direct Devitt: Mammy, a comedy drama production with an all female Scottish cast which ran at the Edinburgh Festival in 2011.

Sharon started picking up roles on TV in film, her first was the TV movie, Two Doors Down in 2013 as Sophie, she reprised the part in 2016 when it returned as a sitcom. Miss Rooney then got her breakthrough part, the lead role as Rachel “ Rae” Earl in the E4 teen comedy-drama My Mad Fat Diary, it ran for 3 seasons. The series received critical acclaim, particularly for its accurate and honest portrayal of mental illness and Sharon Rooney’s performance. The Guardian’s Sam Wollaston heaped praise on oor Sharon saying “Sharon Rooney’s performance in the lead is natural, effortless and utterly believable; she should win something for it”

And win she did! Picking up a gong at The British Academy Scotland Awards, in 2015, it was third time lucky, having previously been nominated the two years before. Other nominations included Royal Television Society for best actress and the Broadcasting Press Guild for Breakthrough act. Sharon nails the accent in the show so perfect that people found it hard to believe she was from Scotland, people on twitter used to tell her that her Glasgow accent was rubbish!

Sharon was ready to give up her dream of being an actress and take up nursing before My Mad Fat Diary, Appearances in Sherlock and another TV movie, Kerry were crammed in-between My Mad Fat Diary as well as a part in the excellent Peter Mullen film Hector along with Ewan Stewart, Gina McKee and Keith Allen.

I love Sharon’s attitude, of her weight she says;

“Even if I wasn’t fat, and I was smaller, people would then say they don’t like my hair. You will never please everybody. You need to please yourself and as long as you are happy, it doesn’t matter. You will never be perfect or what everyone wants you to be. Someone will always find a fault.”

Being a Glaswegian lassie I doubt if she will get much hassle from anyone!

Back to her career and I must shamelessly admit I have not seen her in the film The Electrical Life of Louis Wain as yet, but as I said at the beginning of the post, she is a busy woman, her TV roles continue to pour in, quality shows like Deep Heat, The Teacher and The Control Room have called on her for roles and she is super excited about a film that she has recently just finished shooting with Hollywood stars Ryan Gosling, Margot Robbie and Will Farrell, Barbie will be out next year. Sharon said in a recent interview with Go Radio presenters Grado and Crofty

"I've just finished Barbie! I've spent so long keeping it a secret that I feel like I'm not allowed to say that but I am allowed to say that!”

Miss Rooney has just appeared in the biggest Hollywood film of the year, Barbie. Sharon said it was is her most empowering role yet.Sharon plays 'Lawyer Barbie' in the rose-hued Barbie blockbuster. Next up for thehigh flying lass is a TV series called Nightsleeper, which co-stars a strong Scottish cast including James Cosmo, Sharon Small, Alex Ferns and Katey Leung. Described as a real-time drama, the series is set on a sleeper train travelling to London from Glasgow in Scotland. Two people who have not previously met before must work together to try to save the lives of the passenger.

#scotland #scottish #actress #television #cinema #Happy Birthday

12 notes · View notes

barbielore · 9 months

Text

I have mentioned Stacie a few times in passing, including on the breakdown of the Roberts family post I made, but I thought I'd do a bit more of a deep dive on her as a character.

Unlike Skipper, who debuted only a few short years after Barbie and is a famous enough part of the line that she got multiple mentions and depictions in the Barbie movie, and Kelly/Chelsea, who has a following as the young child character in the line, Stacie feels like an overlooked character.

Note: not to be confused with Barbie's friend Stacey, who was in production from 1968 - 1971.

Stacie's official debut was in 1992, as the new "littlest sister" of Barbie. She was replacing Tutti, who had been discontinued and whose last appearance was in 1971.

Stacie was marketed largely as being a more tomboyish, sporty member of the Roberts family compared to the more traditionally feminine characters like Skipper and Barbie. Stacie canonically wants to be a professional athlete -typically a soccer player, though she has been depicted playing a wide range of sports or engaging in athletic activities.

When Stacie took Tutti's place in the doll line, she also took Tutti's twin brother, Todd.

And as a part of the "Wee 3 Friends" collection, Stacie branched out into her friendship group, with two besties named Lila and Janet.

(Why are these 10 year olds worried about tan lines? That doesn't feel quite age appropriate.)

#barbie lore #barbie #stacie roberts #stacie #wee 3 friends #todd roberts #stacie and todd

34 notes · View notes

dr-jem-nutcase · 1 year

Text

just some MvA H/Cs. yay!!

Team Monster

Link, BOB, and Dr. Cockroach have been the three main monsters of the prison. There were a few other monsters throughout the years like the Invisible Man [and any monster OCs you have that you're not afraid of killing off], but only Insectosaurus was around by 2009, when the monsters were freed

Lots of inside jokes. The longer you were in prison, the more jokes you have

The more the monsters tried to escape (like in BOB's Big Break), the stronger security became. After the near escape, the loss of that jumbo jet, and the arrival of Insectosaurus, things REALLY got real. The escape attempts pretty much ended not too long after that

For about 2 decades (the late 60s to the mid 80s) the formerly human monsters each were allowed a newspaper from their native countries (IE: Dr C got London Times) until an unpleasant incident happened involving one of the monsters. Never again, said Monger. Never again

Nobody, except BOB, held much regard for Monger until after they were freed

They can go pretty much anywhere they want, but Area 5X is home base

After the monsters saved the world, the budget level was raised, like a LOT, as the monsters were heroes and defenders of the world instead of just prisoners. Hence came the remodel (as seen in the Halloween special)

Link and Insecto bonded pretty much from the beginning because everyone else got under Link's skin and most everyone was scared to death of Insecto when she arrived

Susan and Dr. C have a closer bond than with any of the other monsters because they're the only monsters that used to be humans. LOTS of spectators and fans think that they're a couple, which isn't true

Susan

22 y.o. at the time of the movie, 23 in the Halloween special

Birthday is June 8th

Her middle name is Joanna, after one of her grandmas

A girly girl but also an athletic girl. Likes flowers, dresses and heeled shoes, shopping, chic flicks (Roman Holiday, Legally Blonde and Ever After are some of her favorites), and generally feminine stuff. When she was normal height, she liked shopping malls and spa trips with her friends. As a kid, she was a Girl Scout and played with Barbies and whatnot. She also liked playing sports like dodgeball and volleyball and enjoyed watching the Super Bowl with her family and friends

An only child. Her parents tried for a second child but gave up after about 4-5 years after having her

Learned to rollerskate as a kid and liked it until she fell on concrete and broke her arm. After 10+ years and being chased by a giant robot, she was a bit rusty. Just a bit

Was an average girl in school, not popular but not a social outcast either. Moderately good in gym and athletics

Met Derek in high school. They started dating in his senior year (he's about 2-3 years older). She had crushes in middle school, but he was the only person she dated

Did some college, probably got an Associate's degree

Becoming a giantess and a hero really helped boost her confidence, becoming less of a doormat and growing more of a backbone. Though she still struggles with self-esteem. Her relationship with Derek was a toxic one, sort of like the friendship between Regina George and Gretchen Wieners in Mean Girls, that somewhat forced codependency. So there's some character growth that's finally happening that would've never happened had she married him. She's come a long way since becoming more confident, but there's still a bit of trauma, healing, and inner discovery and growth to deal with

Has appeared in Vogue at least once. In spite of her size and status as a monster, a lot of people think she's pretty

Contemplated growing her hair out. But because of her size and how hard getting hair care products and appliances (ie: shampoo/conditioner, a hairbrush, etc.), even makeshift ones, it would require a lot of maintenance. Even Kirkland/supply from Costco doesn't stand a chance. So she's opted to keep it short. Also the same reason she doesn't wear makeup as much anymore

She gets a dress on rare occasions. Not to mention that it's hard to get any clothes her size. She was fortunate to get her prison uniform as quickly as she did. Regardless, she loves, loves, LOVES her dresses! Has to wear shorts underneath them for safeguard against prying eyes

Her prison suit is her main go-to outfit

The whereabouts of her prison suit from Gallaxhar's ship is unknown to everyone except Monger and a few Area 5X staff

tbc!!

#mva #monsters vs aliens #headcanons #susan murphy #ginormica #dreamworks

27 notes · View notes