#but…I guess understanding a story/character decision isn’t the same as liking it | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

pheavampire · 8 months

Text

Epitaph for corrupted magistrate Astarion

The more I think about it, the more I’m disappointed with Astarion’s plot. Which kind of hurts a bit, because he was the first and main reason I was so hyped for this game.

I’m aware that this in unpopular opinion and everybody loves to help him with his trauma etc. Don’t get me wrong, this is one of the best narrative parts of the whole Baldur’s Gate 3 - if not the best. Well written, nice, interesting psychology and objectively very good.

But I really, really hoped for corrupted, disgraced nobleman who lost everything because his own greed and who now must deal with it - if you didn’t hear about it, this is what Larian’s CEO said 3 years ago about Astarion:

„A disgraced nobleman who used his position as a local magistrate to serve a vampire clan by feeding them prisoners, he was eventually too corrupt even for them and was effectively sent to serve as the personal slave of a powerful vampire.”

I wouldn’t even mind to be able to „fix him”, but I imagined it would be rather letting him understand what a hypocrite he is. I wanted to see a powerful, selfish person in the place of those who he harmed. A person who slowly realises he kind of deserved what he got.

I also wanted Cazador to be more interesting. Cruel, evil - sure, but not that one-dimentional and pathetic character who’s only function in the game is to be a punching bag the player can joyfully kill with nothing but pure satisfaction. I imagined he particularly enjoys tormenting Astarion, because he understands his ironic position. An abuser who abuses another abuser.

Just imagine you and your party breaks into his palace (or crypt) only to learn from Cazador, that Astarion isn’t only the victim. You’re angry, maybe a bit confused, but your vampire companion already changed, at least partially, and the choice to help him isn’t as obvious as it is now. I suspect it could look like this in the earlier phase of game development - lines like „So Cazador was around just when you were bleeding to death on the street? What a coincidence” or „Some Gurs attacked me because of my decree” strongly suggest some cut content the player was supposed to discover later.

My guess is Larian observed players’ reactions during early access and decided this approach is too risky and made Astarion much more sympathetic. It’s not controversial to feel sorry for the innocent victim and it’s not controversial to adore him, even as a fictional character. But giving to such a popular companion an evil past? That wouldn’t be a very popular decision.

Also, I bet they realised they overscoped some storylines and had to make them much shorter and less complicated. Quite typical for gamedev actually.

So yeah, I’m happy I finally have a tormented elven male vampire spawn I wanted for so long in a (kind of) mainstream story, I’m happy he is so popular. But at the same time… sigh.

#astarion #baldur's gate 3 #larian studios #Good night sweet asshole prince #I will miss you

198 notes · View notes

biceratops7 · 2 years

Text

Let’s deconstruct this…

Ok, so at this point I’ve seen a great many things written on Who Ed is with a capital W, and even I’ve thrown bits and pieces of my hat in the ring. But there is one particular thing I have a burning desire to express, and that is, respectfully, Edward’s softness is his own damnit.

There’s a pretty popular notion gaining traction in the fandom that Ed’s softness is just as much a performance as Blackbeard. That him embracing it fully in those brief moments of episode 10 before “the kraken” was unhealthy actually, and he wasn’t being true to himself. In summary: Ed requires Blackbeard to be whole. And my question is: why do people find Ed an unreliable narrator in his softness, or more specifically, why do people think he lacks autonomy of it?

It bothers me when people say that Ed is trying to be like Stede to gain approval in these moments, because the only major similarity I see is aesthetic. Guys a huge theme of the show is older queer men finally finding ways to escape varying forms of toxic masculinity, and understanding that their queerness does not exclude them from manhood. Homogenizing two effeminate gay men and implying that one is “losing himself” to the idiosyncrasies of the other goes directly against this goal. In fact it actually perpetuates negative gay stereotypes, but I’ve made a video essay where I discuss that at length.

Edward writes and performs a song on deck when he wants to process and share his feelings openly. Not only is this waaay more emotional honesty than we ever see Stede express (on purpose at least), but this is a creative outlet unique to Ed. Theatrical story telling is an established motif in Ed’s character the same way literary storytelling is for Stede’s. Edward’s not only dealing with his hurt in a way Stede definitely wouldn’t (he didn’t, Stede went out of his way pretend everything was fine in episode 8), he’s also doing so through an established passion of his.

The Swede wasn’t full of shit when he said that performance can simply be an expression of you. This is not Ed trying to put on a new mask when the old one proved ineffective. This is him finding comfort and even joy in finally using performance to reveal himself instead of hide. I don’t understand why the credit for this beautiful moment of self discovery must be ripped from Ed and used to accuse Stede.

It’s the same with the “SiLk GoWn”. This is the same person who lovingly touches every piece of nice fabric he lays eyes on, and lit up like a fucking Christmas tree the second someone said the word “fashion.” Ed has had a deep love and longing for such a soft pretty thing since day 1. These were ingrained and suppressed in Ed all long before Stede came on the scene. That robe may literally belong to Stede, but just as he wore it as a sign of his newfound boldness under the safety of someone loving him for who he is, Ed’s choice to wear it symbolizes the blossoming autonomy of his own identity. To continue enjoying the things Stede made him feel safe enjoying even without his presence.

Now let’s move on (or backwards I guess?) to the academy. Something I’ve seen a lot is people decrying that Ed is sacrificing his authenticity to play a housewife for Stede. Guys… he just folded some socks, calm tf down. Saying something like this about a gay man just trying to do something small and sweet for someone he loves, again, really seems to perpetuate the toxic masculinity this show hauls ass to deconstruct. Yes the answer to toxic masculinity isn’t just “effeminacy is perfect and good”. But Ed can be genuinely content with finally being able to partake in the domesticity he never got to experience without perpetuating that.

And you know what, he can be unsure of the best way to fulfill that desire and change his mind. I don’t quite like the disregard for Ed’s autonomy when people say his decision to stay at the academy or find an escape is driven only by whatever he thinks Stede wants. He is taking Stede’s feelings into consideration because that is perfectly healthy when you love someone and want a life with them, but his choices are still absolutely driven by his own needs moment by moment too.

I think people really take Ed understandably not wanting to be subjugated by the British and run with it. Like yes he is visibly uncomfortable with the soldiers treating him like an exotic animal they’ve tamed because no shit. But I don’t know how many times Ed has to blatantly state he does not want to be a pirate anymore for it to be believed.

Edward is not an exception to this. Even if he managed to thrive emotionally in this line of work once upon a time and there are aspects of it he enjoys, Ed still became a pirate out of desperation. He didn’t choose it any more than Oluwande and Jim did, he was fleeing poverty and abuse.

It’s not that piracy is a net bad and that Ed should want to distance himself from it. It’s that he assumed piracy is the only option he’s ever had in life even when it hurts him, and the realization that he has the freedom to choose differently is empowering and a net good. Him wanting to run to China with Stede, or take the crew’s funky acts on the road, whether they’re practical or not (especially in this show) is beside the point. The point is Ed’s absolute unbridled joy in their possibilities, the pure delight in discovering that you are not chained to a series of decisions you made under extreme duress 30 years ago.

No, Ed is not doing a complete 180 of his personality during his NoBeard era. He’s been forced to sacrifice his personhood for decades, and is now finally wrestling it out the grasp of thousands of people… at the age of 50 and during two of his darkest moments no less. How absolutely amazing.

#this is probably gonna flop cause it’s a mile long but I’m passionate about this damnit #it’s about autonomy over one’s own identity babes #ESPECIALLY in the context of queerness #biceratops meta #ofmd #meta #our flag means death #analysis #Edward teach #Blackbeard #Stede bonnet #blackbonnet #gentlebeard #1x09 #1x10

561 notes · View notes

bluedalahorse · 9 months

Text

So here’s the thing: I’m not sure if Lisa Ambjörn and the YR Powers That Be intended for us as viewers to understand and interrogate August from a safe position of moral certainty about his ultimate fate.

Of course, authorial intent only matters so much, and the author can’t tell you how to engage with their story. This we know from many years of being in fandom and doing whatever we please with canon.

That said, when analyzing the show, I can’t ignore the choices that Lisa et al made when constructing the Young Royals world, and how that plays out in everything from the craft elements involved in writing the scripts to the camera angles to the set design. The YR creative team has done everything they can to present a universe with a complex moral framework, where characters are nuanced and influenced by the systems they live in, where some characters may do more harm than others but everyone is capable of both good deeds and bad ones. Young Royals is constructed very differently than something like Disney’s Snow White or Sleeping Beauty, and deliberately so. It is meant to make us ask larger questions about justice and morality.

I think August is meant to be uncomfortable for us, in a way where we can’t just easily divide into binary teams of “Lock August in a dungeon for a thousand years and never mention him again” and “Malte is pretty so I guess August isn’t that bad and should get away with everything.” (Does the latter team exist? I have heard of such things existing in an uncharted-by-me corner of the internet, but I have never encountered them with my own eyes.)

I think August is meant to make us ask complicated questions. Questions like:

If someone has harmed other people, do they still deserve to heal from their own trauma once separated from those they harmed? If so, who is responsible for that healing? Is it the state? Someone else?

To what extent does the age of the perpetrator of a crime impact the legal process around that crime? (Sweden and my own country have different answers to that question. It’s likely that neither answer is perfect.)

What makes meaningful consequences for someone who has committed harm? Who gets to decide what those consequences are?

How do we reconcile the positives a person has brought to our life with the negative things a person has done? How do we sit in that place of emotional dissonance? A question for Sara, and for anyone else with a loved one who has done harmful or abusive things.

To what extent is it worth interrogating the widespread culture of voyeurism that enabled the spread of the video after August released it? (This is not to draw a false moral equivalence between releasing the video and watching the video, because those things aren’t morally equivalent. But I do think the show is asking is to think about this culture of voyeurism and the ways in which we are complicit. Think about the internet comments we see flashing on the screen after the video is released, and the fact that we get the curtains closing so decisively in 2.5. August is an engaging character in part because he plays upon our own voyeurism as viewers—in season 1 he’s constantly leading Wille into new secret layers of the Hillerska world, and we follow Wille into that, wanting to know more.)

Do we trust a legal system that would take down August, knowing those in that legal system could use the same tools to prosecute Simon and Wilhelm?

To what extent can a person’s actions also be an indictment of the system? Even if August faces consequences for his actions, can we really rest easy knowing the systems that created his worst traits are continuing to operate as usual?

And the thing about asking these questions is that I think they are more likely to yield additional questions than grant us simple answers. That can be a valuable thing, and fiction that encourages us to ask these questions is worth engaging with. I also think that you can condemn August’s actions and advocate for him facing consequences while still asking yourself these questions and not always coming to a place where everything feels resolved. August is written that way on purpose. He is meant to make us feel conflicting emotions.

(And if you don’t feel conflict and have a set opinion of him, that’s good and valid too. See what I said before about the author’s intentions only going so far. We all engage with characters in the way that’s right for us.)

I also want to make it clear that engaging in these questions around a work of fiction and a fictional character does not mean that we are condoning revenge porn and blackmail in real life and letting perpetrators of such get away with it. In real life, these things should be condemned and prosecuted. And in real life, sometimes the people who do these things are people close to us or in our general circle. Sometimes people end up thinking through these questions anyway as a result of just being a human on this earth.

Anyway, I’m hitting a crucial part of August’s arc right now in the fic I’m writing, and I find myself bumping up against these questions constantly. It’s an emotionally meaningful part of the process for me, being able to sit in that and write about it and dramatize it. And I want to offer discussion space for those in fandom who want to have that conversation—I feel like I’m always creating space for people to have that conversation in smaller group settings, but it can be harder to have a conversation like that on my public dash, because of the way discussion plays out on tumblr.

I also reserve the right to change my mind after season 3 drops. Developments could happen there that make me feel differently, but for now I just wanted to state my piece.

As much as we long for the sword of justice to cut cleanly, it almost never does. Sometimes it’s good to have stories that wrestle with that. I’m really glad that YR does.

#young royals #august young royals #august horn of årnäs #my meta

46 notes · View notes

yvtro · 1 year

Note

Two questions that I'm genuinely interested in your answer for (bc I love your metas ngl) but I totally get it if you don't answer.

What's your biggest unpopular opinion on Jason, and your least favorite popular/fandom opinion on him?

disclaimer: i’m moving blogs. still here to go through my askbox, but you will find me at @boyfridged most of the time.

i'm very flattered, thank you!! and sorry this took me so long to answer. and it did take me so long 1. because it’s really hard to tell what is actually an unpopular opinion (i did thankfully find myself in a circle of mutuals who mostly share the same intuitions when it comes to his character) and 2. because I mentally put a label on it “asks to get me assassinated.” and I guess the take that i have requires quite careful wording.

so, my unpopular take is that from in-universe point of view, jason shouldn’t be a vigilante, and it would be best for the storytelling around him to focus on this fact. and i’m not saying that in a mean, moralistic nor diminishing way. i just think that jay’s storyline is a story of everything that can go wrong with a sidekick, and of how vigilantism can traumatise people into oblivion, and completely annihilate their ability to function normally. part of it is a result of the fact that imo jason isn’t naturally suited for vigilantism (that is not to talk about his skills nor efficiency in it, i will get back to it shortly), and part of it is a result of the circumstances in which he was introduced into it, and of course the subsequent trauma.

you could say “uhm every superhero story is like that, he’s not special,” but typically, when you think about characters such as bruce wayne or dick grayson etc., the event that comes to mind when you think about their biggest trauma is something that… pushed them into vigilantism? and vigilantism supposedly helped them in some ways? (it can be argued against, but that’s an underlying assumption) (+even without a tragic backstory, characters usually have much more agency in their decision to become vigilantes). and in case of jay, his biggest trauma isn’t anything that came before robin, and his life was awfully fucking sad, so i think that it says something. his biggest trauma is associated with what he went through already as robin and then retraumatising events that followed his resurrection.

it’s really puzzling to me that this distinction is never deliberately written about nor truly brought up in comics…? i think the closest we came to this was, ironically, starlin’s run (when alfred straight up suggests that maybe robin just isn’t good for jason) and countdown (where jay intends to leave the superhero community altogether).

okay, so you can say: vigilantism is kinda shitty for you. breaking news, we’ve known this already.

except there's something, in my opinion, that makes jason’s case special and more nuanced. it seems, at first glance, that with all the love and compassion jason has, he should be great material for a vigilante still. but he clearly isn’t. why is that?

the crushing proportion of other characters have moral systems, coping mechanisms, and understanding of vigilantism that make this life at least possible for them. on the other hand, jason’s personality, his lived experience, and his moral stance makes vigilantism extremely unsustainable. i mentioned it before in my post about eoc, but most (especially 1st gen, but not only, i’d argue that most former teenage superheroes also came to this point as well) vigilantes, even if associated with love and compassion as the core of their actions, have understanding of vigilantism and moral codes that jason doesn’t possess. (for a long while i was on a “jason has a moral code but it’s casually bastardised by most writers” team but since then i have thought about it a lot and my current take is that he was good at following orders as robin, and has some provisional rules as the red hood, but they’re nowhere near an actual code. as i said in the linked post, i think morality is more of an on-going emotional practice for him). and it all makes sense! let's circle back to bruce for a moment. of course, the reason for which he doesn’t kill is grounded within his own beliefs, but he is also very painfully aware of the thin line that vigilantes walk on when it comes to the law and being trusted by the public. i'd argue he is very conscious of the fact that being a vigilante comes with responsibility of cultivating a certain ethos. he had a lot of time to think about it! in many ways, he invented it. and it’s practical. it's what makes this life possible.

jason doesn’t have it. jason’s idea of vigilantism isn’t carefully designed nor sophisticated, jason’s idea of vigilantism is that he is in the field and he has power to do things, so he has to do them. he has to trust his moral intuitions. and in many ways, he’s not wrong – it's not a flawed view to hold, especially not in the ordinary life. but that also means that there are no lines that he won’t cross if he thinks he can help or fix the situation. but in the world that batman introduces us to (a world in which, to quote le guin on an unrelated matter, there’s no ends, but only means), it’s self-destructive. to compare him again to bruce, bruce is self-sacrificial, but his conceptual understanding of vigilantism and his moral code protect him in some ways. jason’s moral judgements and actions are unrestrained and radical (not to say that they’re reckless or inefficient; he’s still a great strategist and can be even overly careful if it’s required). and that is set in a world where evil never stops. we already know that the joker will always come back, for example. what does it mean for jason? he will try to match the energy, of course, and he’s not stopping either. bruce is similar in that aspect, yet he has a whole insurance set that helps him deal with extreme situations. there's an offset. and jason doesn’t have any. he won’t ever hit the breaks. i think you know where i’m going with this metaphor.

so i guess my take is that… bruce’s outlook on vigilantism is, against the popular opinion, very rational. but jason just brings his heart into it and nothing else. and that’s just catastrophic.

this is really me just pushing the “love is his fatal flaw” agenda again tbh, but with additional emphasis on why the same trait isn’t that tragic for other characters who share it. also this is why it’s so crucial to me that he should have a civilian arc…

and as to my least favourite fandom opinion on him, i can't think of anything very specific right now, but my general pet peeve is anything that divorces his characterisation from his 80s personality. i think you can tell that i really dislike painting him as resentful towards dick, and all takes that indicate that he's always been cynical and distrustful toward the world. i think a lot of people want his storyline to be one of someone who has, from day one, been full of rightful anger, but the thing is that it has not been his story to begin with. he had to be pushed really far for this to happen. and this is what makes him so special compared with most anti-heroes – that his story starts from a genuine place of innocent and naive hope and love despite all he suffered.

#dc #this is a mess but it's been in my drafts for a while. and i don't think i have energy to say anything else #btw i think that my *actual* unpopular take is on batman!jason but i already talked about it lots

119 notes · View notes

disco-troy · 2 years

Note

it shouldnt be contriversal that u cant just murder people sdkfjhsadjksahf and yet- True you also can't go out and beat up criminals. All super hero comics are about the idealization of violence. Many are about the idealization of violence as a trauma response. Also revenge stories are a cornerstone of human art so even with all that being true it is still a useful, worthwhile, healthy, and helpful type of media. See for example the Count of Monte-Cristo.

Okay, I can see where you are coming from, but I hope this response helps you understand where I'm coming from as well. I will be mostly talking about preboot Jason here, because that contains most of the moments that bother me, and also I refuse to read anything written by Lobdell anymore.

Murder in the DCU is, in general, frowned upon. Like I understand where you are coming from with the whole suspension of disbelief bit, but while heroes and fighting villains are a part of the constructs of the universe, murder, really isn’t? The moral line of not killing is very much still present in dcu, especially for heroes, and in Gotham. Death is still a big deal, and most people don’t come back to life, and when a hero kills someone (or thinks they killed someone - like in the case of Black Lighting) it is very often a big deal.

I think Jason has a lot of interesting facets as a character, and things that people can engage with that are super interesting. He is a character who was a victim, and a hero, and remembered in a distorted way. And that hurts. But at the same time its not fair to put this on the batfam either; the mourning process is for the living, and you are not expecting them to come back to life! In addition, Jason took that pain and anger and hurt and killed a lot of people. I think we should be able to acknowledge that Jason is hurting a lot, and it is sympathetic that he is lashing out but it does not justify the actions he is taking. If have a different interpretation, all the more power to you! But unfortunately, canon does not really back up this interpretation, and by trying to make it canon, it lands in some pretty unfortunate implications.

In canon, Jason: - Is a drug lord - I have a lot of thoughts about this decision for Jason - especially with Robin!Jason being against drugs and his own mother dying from overdose, him profiting from the sale of drug is a little uncomfortable (upwards of 40% of all drugs trade ://). In addition, people act like Jason is some perfect drug lord, when in reality UTrH, Jason is never seen making rules against selling to addicts or anything. He does make rules against selling to kids, which, I guess if they just turned 18, or if an adult buys it and gives it to them that’s okay then? He also preforms CAPITAL PUNISHMENT on people who haven't committed much of a crime other than selling drugs to a 17 year old or whatever. - Blows up a school to prove a point (?) to a teenager - Kills like 81 people? to escape prison - Breaks into a tower to beat up a teenage hero - actually lets just make this one bullet point shoots and attempts to murder a lot of heroes, and like his actual family a bunch of times

I see this pattern in the fandom of defending these actions - Jason being a drug lord, Jason demonizing and murdering common criminals just because they committed a crime, and that makes me really unconformable. Its dehumanizing poor and marginalized people when you dismiss every henchman Jason murders without a second thought. They don’t deserve to die just because they made bad decisions, and especially in terms of drug dealers comes uncontrollably close to war on drugs propaganda.

Its a general feeling I have about putting antiheroes on a pedestal because they can "do what the hero can't" or whatever, without properly engaging with the text and realizing these actions are wrong.

I understand what you are saying about revenge stories, and if UrTH was about Jason killing just the Joker or people who hurt him, I could see your point more. But Jason hurts people totally unrelated to his revenge quest and he doesn't want to kill the joker; he wants Bruce to. Numerous times Jason can kill the Joker, he can stop him from killing, but he decides that his vengeance, him feeling avenged is more important. Jason will not kill the Joker; he wants Bruce to to do it, even though he knows it will hurt Bruce and so many others. He just wants absolution. He just wants to know he's loved, and he doesn't care who he hurts in the process. Its understandable! Its sympathetic! He's been through a lot. But at the end of the day, this isn't behavior that should be glorified and defended and justified. That's what I mean by it shouldn't be controversial that murder is bad. In count of Count of Monte Cristo, you aren’t supposed to think that Dantes blind revenge is good - there is a part in the book where he reflects and realizes that he’s hurt innocent people. And though he eventually goes forwards with his final revenge or whatever, there is an acknowledgement that he’s hurt people - innocent people (he ended up hurting his first love and her son Albert for instance). Jason never has that, in canon or otherwise, and a lot of people talk about him as if he has nothing to apologize for. In addition, Dantes only targets those responsible for his imprisonment, and they are taken down by their own vices which is what makes his revenge quest satifsying; Jason targets a lot of people that have nothing to do with his death. And this isn't to say you can't like him or that characters should never do bad things; Jason is a super interesting character to analyses and go in different directions for! Its just important to remember he isn’t a reliable narrator, and to not blindly justify murder. Anyways, I hope this initial dump of words helps you understand what I'm saying more? I'm in the process of writing a longer more comprehensive post on this topic for another ask, specifically what war on drugs rhetoric entails and its history, but that probably won't be out for a few months.

#asks #asked and answered #im really sorry if my inital tags were aggressive in any way #i was just frustrated about the way a lot of people portray jason and engage in this sort of rheoric that harms real people!!#dc comics #dc meta

197 notes · View notes

wibble-wobbegong · 2 years

Text

i have talked about it six hundred billion times but guess what. i’m gonna do it again! i’ve talked about it in timeline format, but i wanna dig deep into the 3 most pivotal points in mike’s relationship with will romance-wise

Point 1 - The Best Thing He’s Ever Done

this was the first time mike himself draws a line between everyone else in his life and will. sure, the line was there before, but he knows it’s there for the first time in this scene.

in S1, mike refers to lucas, dustin, and will as equals in his life; they’re all his best friends. in his mind, he thinks he’d be acting the same way if dustin or lucas had been the ones to go missing because “a friend is someone you’d do anything for.” there’s nothing different in his relationships with his other friends than will. there are moments that prove mike and will’s relationship is undoubtedly different from either of their relationships with lucas or dustin (“it was a seven”, their behavior at hopper’s interview, the hospital, mike being the main character while will is the main goal).

mike never acknowledges that difference. even as he starts to become aware of it in S2, it doesn’t really click for him. his obliviousness didn’t disappear, so he didn’t really register that only being able to open up to will, having those heart to hearts, and being more protective of will than he is of his other friends might mean that there’s a reason behind all that.

“the best thing i’ve ever done.” that’s mike drawing a line, separating will from everyone else. it’s not ‘being friends with you, lucas, and dustin has been the best thing i’ve ever done’. it’s ‘being friends with you is the best thing i’ve ever done’. will isn’t being put in the same category as his other friends anymore and he can see that. if will isn’t like his other friends who are his best friends, then what’s more than a best friend? and it hits him. it hits him as he’s telling this story to will.

the thing about the story he’s telling - the memory of meeting will - is that the things he’s saying aren’t really about the first day of kindergarten at all. they might’ve been true back then too, but what he’s talking about directly reflects their heart to heart on halloween.

“i was just so scared and so alone”

mike has been dealing with seeing el and not feeling like he could talk to anybody about how he was feeling. he was acting out while dealing with his grief and the guilt of surviving. he was seeing and hearing things, and that’s scary for anybody. it’s not like anyone else was close with el like he was, so they wouldn’t get it.

“you were alone too”

when they sit and talk, mike realizes he isn’t alone. will feels like he’s going crazy too.

“i asked if you wanted to be my friend”

well, if mike’s going crazy, then they could go crazy together, right?

“you said yes. you said yes”

“yeah, crazy together”

what mike’s monologue really addresses is more than just the moment itself. will has always made mike feel less scared, less alone in the world. nobody else is able to do that for him and that makes mike feel something that he doesn’t feel with anyone else. it’s something that makes him think that being friends with will is the best thing he’s ever done. something that makes will different than everybody else.

will is more than a friend. more than a best friend. he’s the best thing out of everything and everyone.

Point 2 - The Basement

when i talk about the moment mike realized he was in love with will, i’m counting lucas on the line as canonical to the main storyline.

it’s not really one decisive moment, but it happens over that period of time where mike isolated himself. if you don’t know what i’m talking about, here’s the excerpt from the book

please go read the book. there’s so much important information about lucas’ experience with racism and it’s super important for understanding his character in s4. also the lumax will make you bawl like a bitch

how does this show that mike has realized he’s in love with will? well, i’m sure everyone remembers the rain fight. there’s a line from mike that connects directly to this paragraph:

“what, did you think we would never get girlfriends? that we would sit in my basement and play games for the rest of our lives?”

understanding the context of why he said that is important to understanding how that month of isolating himself is when he came to really understand the depth of his feelings for will. that line isn’t an accusation, it’s a projection. he says that because it’s the very thing he’s been trying to run away from as it wouldn’t fit with this idea of normalcy he’s built in his head. he needs to grow up, outgrow those feelings for will because they’re childish, and since will is directly associated with DND it must be childish too.

he isn’t expecting will to say he wants that life. once again, mike realizes he isn’t alone because will gets it even if that isn’t ever directly addressed.

here, there’s regret. there’s also a bit of an ‘oh’ moment happening here.

jumping back to after the byers move, mike is refusing to leave his house. he spends all day sitting in his basement play games. alone. after will left, mike hides away and does the exact thing he always wanted; that will always wanted. except now he’s doing them alone.

will has never not been in mike’s life. at least, not for long. as far back as he can probably remember, will has been there. his basement is covered in will’s drawings, their dnd sets, will’s costume is probably still there too. his favorite places like the arcade and the movies are drenched in memories with will. now that will is really absent for the first time in mike’s life right after he had learned that will wanted to spend forever with him too he’s realizing just how much of his life and the things that made him happy involved will.

for will to be suddenly removed from mike’s life like that, it becomes incredibly obvious just how important will was in almost everything. from the things that made him happiest (games) to every day life, there’s now a huge hole that cannot be ignored. based on how severe mike’s reaction was to the move, it seems as though he recognizes this too. he knows he thinks of will as more than a friend, knows that he’s started to feel attracted to him on a physical level too, but he can’t suppress how deep these feelings for will run. how necessary will is in his life. how will is almost always involved in the things that made him happy, the things that made him safe, the things that made him feel like he wasn’t alone.

mike wasn’t alone in the way he felt. but, now, he really is alone. will isn’t there to make that go away and no one else is able to pull him out of this depression he’s found himself in (not until eddie).

there’s also the piece about girlfriends. mike spends time in his room, writing to el. he even starts locking himself in his room and refusing to leave. he’s hiding, writing to his girlfriend, but there’s also a prominent change in mike’s room that we see in S4: he put will’s drawings on his walls, maybe even brought the binder up from the basement.

in order for mike to be able to hide away in his room like that, he had to bring up one of his most treasured pieces of will. also, lucas’ perspective is unreliable because he doesn’t actually know what mike was always doing in his room. he did write to el, but mike’s letters to el never even filled an entire page. he only wrote a total of 5-7 letters in total if i remember, so he definitely wasn’t spending all that time in his room writing to el.

he’s going through a severe amount of depression after the byers move. there’s only one person who’s able to pull him out of that depression - eddie munson. eddie munson, who hated conformity and normalcy with a passion, who loved playing games and being a freak. mike was able to start being himself again because of eddie. if his isolation were really due to anything other than the crushing realization that he’s in love with his best friend and how much he misses him, why would they make the man who helps mike entirely representative of nonconformity?

dating a girl is what’s normal, what he’s been told he’s supposed to do. el is normal for him. finding someone who wasn’t normal and was proud of it is what helped mike.

Point 2.5 - The End of Season 3

i wanna throw this in there too because of how widely accepted it is that this was the moment he realized he was in love with will. i’ll explain why i disagree with that and what i think this ending actually implies for mike

i don’t think i need to elaborate on this scene too much. he’s trying to reconnect with will. he’s asking will not to leave him behind, and will responds that saying it isn’t possible.

the importance of the way mike is acting here isn’t in the scene itself, but what has changed for him. he’s been broken up with el for 4-ish months, he’s realized he’s in love with will, and he’s had a person in his life who he admires and who tells him that being a freak is good for 3 months. for the first time, mike had space to think about his feelings and what they meant without any pressure to keep up his straight boy act. he had someone encouraging him to embrace his differences.

mike is reaching out to will again, having at least some level of acceptance, asking will not to leave him behind. he didn’t forget that will said he wanted to play games in mike’s basement for the rest of his life. he didn’t forget that those wants he had, which he now knows are tied to his love for will, were reciprocated.

he has hope.

this wasn’t mike realizing for the first time that he didn’t like el and that he liked will.

what happened in this scene was el coming back to mike after they’d been broken up for months and telling him she loves him as if they’d never broken up at all. mike is realizing he has to play the straight boy again, the perfect boyfriend. i won’t get into it here, but mike basically promised el a relationship in S1 and one of his big rules is that a promise is something you can never break so he can’t back out of this relationship. he can’t break that promise to her. there’s also a fear of losing her involved.

mike had hope. now, it’s been taken from him. we see the way that hurts him in the way he hugs will.

just look at his face. yeah.

Point 3 - The Van Scene

oh boy. this one hurts me so badly.

the big question around the van scene is about whether or not mike knew that will was talking about himself. the answer is yes. he did.

how am i so certain? well, there are two big things to consider here.

1. everything will is saying is in direct contradiction to what mike knows about how el feels about him.

“you think i’m a monster too” ≠ “you make her feel like she’s not a mistake at all”

will also says that el needs mike. the script tells us that mike knows that isn’t true (the scripts are an official interpretation, so i’m taking them as canon even if they are heavily edited).

sorry about the quality

mike has no reason to believe what will is saying. especially considering

2. mike used el as a front too.

mike and will often talk through code, or use others to soften the impact of their emotions. in S3, it was the party. in S4, it’s el.

in rink-o-mania, mike tells will that he’s frustrated that will was being a douche to el. let’s be real, mike was not concerned about how will was acting in regards to el and will knew that. he saw right through mike.

their code this season is el. mike knows that.

so, when we actually look at mike’s reactions to what will is saying in his confession, it makes a lot more sense that he does know.

i’m running low on photo availability, so this set-up might be a little awkward. also, sorry about the quality again, idk why it does that when i put the photos together 💔

ANYWAY

1. “you’re scared of losing her”

bringing back the idea of will making mike feel understood and less alone. will just understands what mike is feeling through all his rambling, and that’s a throwback for mike

2. “el basically commissioned it”

here, he looks actually confused. he doesn’t understand how the painting connects to el because of how clearly it doesn’t. let’s please remember that mike isn’t stupid. even if he’s an emotional mess, it doesn’t take a genius to know that el wouldn’t commission a dnd painting if she wanted to express her feelings for mike.

3. “you make her feel like she’s not a mistake at all, like she’s better for being different and that’s what gives her the courage to fight on”

this is where it starts to click. the confusion fades, his face relaxes and his eyes are much more open. what will is saying doesn’t match the el mike knows. he now knows that will is talking about himself and using el as a cover.

4. “and if she was going to lose you, i think she’d rather get it over with quick, like ripping off a band-aid”

now, the confusion is gone but there’s concern here. will’s talking about losing mike and ripping off a band-aid, ending it. of course he’s concerned about that, he just got will back. he’s worried will is trying to let go.

5. “she needs you, mike, and she always will”

relief and happiness are written all over his face. he’s not going to lose will. no, will needs him and he always will (sitting in his basement, playing games for the rest of their lives)

6. “yeah?” “yeah”

that boy looks head over heels. completely in love. he looks like a boy who now knows those feelings from way back before the byers moves are still reciprocated. that hope he had way back in october has returned, because he’s basically broken up with el and all he’d have to do is talk to her. maybe that promise would be worth breaking if it meant them being happier as friends and mike getting to be with will.

at the end of the van scene, mike knows his feelings are reciprocated. he’s not stupid, but by god is he in love.

Point 3.5 - You’re the Heart

i kinda have to talk about what happens to mike’s hope here.

we go into this scene with the knowledge that mike knows his feelings for will are reciprocated. or, he thought they were. he really thought will was talking about himself.

the moment that will makes the callback to his speech, mike realizes will actually was talking about el and it breaks his god damn heart.

he’s confused, but you can see the realization come across his face. he doesn’t have time to process that. he just starts spewing out a confession to el because he has to in order to save her life and he uses ‘her’ feelings as a blueprint.

i wanted to mention this so i could say that, going into S5, mike has lost hope in having his feelings returned. when that painting gets revealed, he has every reason to be confused and frustrated

i wrote way more than i planned on writing. oops? also i didn’t beta this so sorry about any mistakes. thanks for reading!!! :)

#got kinda carried away with this one #i tried to stay on topic as best as i could #byler #mike wheeler #mike analysis #<- I’m tagging these now

150 notes · View notes

hot-take-tournament · 10 months

Text

HOT TAKE TOURNAMENT:

PRE-PRELIMINARY #1

Submission 142:

"Fallout 3 is just objectively a terrible game and people are too blinded by nostalgia/franchise loyalty to understand how deep it goes"

(Pre-preliminaries will be used to judge whether this submission qualifies as a hot take. Propaganda is encouraged!)

Submitted justification under the cut:

Every Fallout game since Bethesda took over has had a very distinct central theme. New Vegas is about the past vs the future, Fallout 4 is about personal identity/truth, and Fallout 3 is about ✨morality✨. Every choice in the game boils down to “I’m such a good person, just an innocent little vault baby who wants to help people 🥺” or “HAHAHA MURDER IS FUN I WANT TO EAT BABIES”. (And don’t get me wrong, cartoonishly evil actions can both be very fun and have always had a place in the Fallout series, but this particular installment both prides itself and is propped up by its fans as being a “dark, gritty, mature” on the Fallout setting). It’s always so annoyingly black and white, the only exceptions being when the main story forces you to be evil to progress. And it’s not in a grimdark way, the game seems to genuinely see no issue with it. The two major factions are a replica of the U.S. military that hates mutants and thinks they should be killed via eugenics, and a replica of the U.S. military that hates mutants and thinks they should be killed via genocide. Guess which one is the “good guy” faction! You literally can’t because they’re both basically the same thing and they’re both equally awful. Turns out the hero faction is the genocide one, but they saved you from some hostile mutants one time so actually they’re okay 🥺. Ignore the fact that the mutants are very provably sentient and the only actually selfless and good NPC is, himself, a mutant. It’s fine.

And brief sidebar here to mention that the main story LITERALLY ISN’T COMPLETED UNLESS YOU BUY A DLC. Like technically there’s an “ending”, but you just get to the eleventh hour and then either: a) Die or b) Have the game call you a coward and a bad person because you opted to have someone who is RESISTANT TO RADIATION step into a HEAVILY IRRADIATED AREA instead of killing yourself by doing it because… “thematic parallels” to when they fridged your dad, I guess? So then say you bought the rest of the story for enough real world money to get you like. A nice meal. Or a better game. Then what’s the new ending? Well, it seems at first to be a morally challenging decision! You’ve been sent by the Brotherhood of Steel (aforementioned genocide faction) to infiltrate the base of and then redirect a nuke to the Enclave (aforementioned eugenics faction). Yes you are their most important soldier now. The main character of this game happens to be the only Fallout protagonist with a concrete age (that being 19), but an adult’s an adult I GUESS.

You get to the terminal and prepare to direct the bombs, but you’re presented with a choice as to where to send them. You could direct them at the base you’re in right now, eliminating the Enclave (including innocent non-combatants), or you could choose to disobey your orders and send the, to Megaton, Rivet City, (two major settlements), Project Purity (your father’s life’s work, a lab meant to distribute clean water to the wasteland which has since been blockaded by the BoS because they want to turn a profit off of it), or the Citadel (the Brotherhood’s base of operations). If you choose Megaton, Rivet City, or Project Purity, the game will inform you that those were actually just false choices and you were supposed to pick something else. If you pick the Enclave base, then you get a little good ending cutscene where you’re informed that the Brotherhood is preparing for it’s next mission to go kill a bunch of mutants in the city. Yay! Fun! +100 karma points! But if you instead bomb the Citadel, then you get back and find it’s ruined remains. Grr. Bad. -100 karma. You’re evil now. And yes there was a child soldier there (technically a scribe, not a soldier, but Veronica from NV was also a scribe and she was 27 and killed people so yeah.), but in Fo4 we learn that that kid, as well as that whole branch of the Brotherhood, survived anyways! And need I remind you that there were also noncombatants in the Enclave base. So what’s the moral here? It’s good to be loyal to the racist technofacists that indoctrinated you into joining them when you were barely an adult and just lost your lifelong home? And that’s just the main story.

The karma system for companions is so dumb, really companions in general in this game are awful. But I’m going to get to karma first so that it’ll make more sense why they such so much. Karma fills a role similar to what reputation would later in the series, measuring how much people are inclined to like you based on your previous actions. Except instead of being faction based and measuring how people feel about how you’ve directly interacted with the specific groups they’re affiliated with, it just measures if you’re generally a Good Person or a Bad Person. Very nuanced. To be a good person, give water to homeless people, donate to the church, and take positive actions for the BoS. To be a bad person, steal things, kill non-combatants (oh wait), and take negative actions against the Brotherhood. So if you want to maintain a specific karma, you have to take actions that suit it. The game pushes you towards good karma at certain points in the story, and generally it’s very hard to maintain a neutral score without spilling into good or evil. Anyways, back to the companions. Your fun, unique cast of traveling partners are a series staple, so who do we have? A military robot who will only side with you if you have neutral karma. Your childhood bully who will only side with you if you have neutral karma. A retired raider who claims to be better now, but still does some really awful stuff (and who will only side with you if you have evil karma. A slave and an indentured servant who you can *buy the contracts of.* These are TWO SEPARATE CHARACTERS. They did this TWICE. Plus the slave (who is an asian woman) will constantly fawn over the player (who would have had to have evil karma to buy her) and act romantically towards them. YIKES. I could get into so much more but I’ve been at this for an hour with no music or anything, just venting/ranting. Thanks for putting up with it being so long, by the way, it was kind of cathartic. Just to close things off here: The gunplay is really clunky and unfun, the world is bleak, ugly, and blocked off by a ton of invisible walls that make it a drag to explore, almost all of the characters are a pain to sit through interactions with, and the graphics (though not a dealbreaker), aged really poorly. I’m begging you to just play New Vegas or Fallout 4 instead PLEASE. If you already have then try out the original isometric games. Or the so bad they’e kind of funny spinoffs. Or the mobile game. Or the board game. Or the tabletop roleplaying game. Heck, even 76. Just please don’t play Fallout 3 and stop acting like it’s good.

#hot take tournament #hot take #unpopular opinion #fallout #fallout 3 #fo3 #fo3 spoilers #fallout 3 spoilers #submission #tournament poll #tumblr poll #tumblr tournament #tumblr bracket

19 notes · View notes

esther-dot · 1 year

Note

I think fans didn't realise that Sansa had no choice to enter in relationship with her suitors on her own irrespective of her likeness towards them. Her bethrotal with Joffery happened because of Robert and Ned. Tyrells wanted her to marry Willas but it was more like escape from KL. She forced consent to her marriage with Tyrion. Her bethrotal with Robin and Harry by Lysa and Petyr is some kind of bargain for home and safety. I really want Sansa to chose Jon because it is her choice out of love.

That's what I want too, anon!

I agree that it's important to accept the premise of the world when reading the story, and there is nothing to indicate that Sansa had a choice when her father betrothed her to Joffrey. As a show fan first, I understand how easy it is to muddle the two canons, but in the books it is strictly in her father’s hands and he makes that decision without her even knowing it’s on the table. In the show, she does want to marry Joffrey, but even that isn’t odd to me. She knows she will be married off for the good of her family/to whom her father chooses, why shouldn’t she want to marry the guy she has a crush on, who is handsome and gallant? Who will be king? There isn’t a better option for her personally or to benefit her family. I just don’t think judging her is reasonable if you buy into the way their world works.

It seems that the objective is to prove that Sansa is somehow to blame for her situation, so fans fixate on the fact that she thought she loved Joffrey, but Dany believes she loves Drogo who was a rapist, warlord, slaver, Jon believes he loves Ygritte who coerced him into sex, threatened him, and murdered an innocent man. So, I find the fandom’s judgment of Sansa for believing she’s in love with Joffrey unfair. They aren’t judging all the characters by the same standard, and since I know they feel a lot of sympathy for the other two, it’s odd that they withhold it from Sansa.

I’m not sure why people are so eager to believe Sansa has more power in her situation than she does. Even when Tyrion gives her a choice to marry someone else, the option is Tyrion or a different Lannister, and Sansa knows Tyrion somewhat so marrying him is a safer option in her mind, but it isn't a free choice. To her, it’s the better of two bad options because he is still a Lannister. She has positive feelings about marrying Willas, I would even say she romanticized him more than Joffrey perhaps, or at least, she creates more of an imaginary future with him? Due to her age it’s a little more realized than her initial thoughts about Joffrey? But that’s because a) the Tyrells have been kind to her when no one else has b) the way he is described to her is pretty dreamy c) he would be freedom, just as you said. And I guess I shouldn’t be surprised people want to hold her responsible for Lysa wanting to marry her to Robin, or LF ordering her to...basically seduce Harry, but she is uncomfortable and clearly doesn’t want to be in those situations.

So yes, I do think it will be important that Jon is someone she chooses out of love, just as it is important that he chooses her for love. It might be that this also works to solve the succession issue in the North, or perhaps in spite of how inconvenient it is that they love each other, they choose each other anyway. I like the secret marriage idea a lot for that reason. Whatever the path is for them, I hope it’s for love.

#dot chat

24 notes · View notes

popchoc · 5 months

Note

How do you feel about the Station 19 cancelation news? I’m shocked but not as sad as I thought I would be. Felt like they’d been flailing for a while there. I’m not sure what this means for Greys but I just started liking it again this season and would love to have 2 more seasons with the new interns before they end it. Knowing ABC they’ll try to get to 25 seasons because it’s such a money maker. I try not to compare them too much but I always thought Greys should’ve ended around season 8 but definitely by season 12. And idk if they’ve started filming already but I’m guessing that now Marina’s story will be a rush job about getting kids asap and being a family which is at least a happy if somewhat boring ending. The person I’m really excited to see get a good ending is Vic though. She deserves more than lucklastre relationships and comic relief. Also Jack. Would love for them to do something coherent with him that isn’t just about women either. What would you like to see for your favorite characters?

Hey anon, pfff where to begin?! I sure was surprised, I really didn't see it coming. Rationally speaking, I kinda get it. I mean, this is how it works; just because some shows do get many/endless seasons, it's not the norm, and 7 seasons is actually pretty decent. (One more than Private Practice, for example). Yet kinda understanding doesn't mean I don't have any thoughts or feelings about it! To start with, I feel like it's always better (to accept) when it's a creators decision, not the network's. And something else that isn't helping (at all!!) is the fact that it's all so rushed, with (suddenly) only ten more episodes. Though I do feel that ten x 40 minutes could be enough to wrap it all up (I am glad that at least they have the chance to write an actual ending), it just feels unnecessarily cruel. All in all I would lie if I'd say I'm super upset (with the chance of sounding preachy: if this year told me one thing, it's to upset about real misery and just enjoy everything else!), but it does feel like a pity - I was definitely still on board - and I do feel for everyone who's sad or upset about the news. Losing something you deeply love is never great, and though there will be other shows and ships, that's just not something most people want to hear right now, so to all of them I can only say: hang in there! (And please do enjoy season 7. It's not over till it's over!)

I personally don't think any of this will effect Grey's (PP didn't either). Who knows, it might even mean that Carina (finally) becomes a regular on there? She sure deserves it, though I'm going back and forth with actually wanting this, which has more to do with Maya or more so: Danielle. I wouldn't want her to be "stuck" on some guest appearance once in a while (or worse: them not knowing how to integrate her, like they's been struggling with Stefania/Carina on S19). So yeah, I see options, but I also have moments where I feel like I can actually be okay with.... I don't know... them moving to Italy (pregnant, for all I care, since it ends anyway and I know it would make people happy).

About the others. Well, I think they're getting full circle with Andy as captain, so at least there's that. I'm with you about Vic, I want her happy and not because of some dude. I guess the key for her will be crisis one. Same with Jack, he deserves happiness, and also a lot more acknowledgement (yes he can act like an idiot, but that doesn't mean he is one). When the show started he was actually doing fine as LT and this close to becoming Captain... so maybe he could (also) become one after all, albeit at a different station? I do like some blossoming romance though, this is that kind of show after all, so for that I'm thinking Travis - I would really like to see him find The One.

And besides all this? I just want fire. A whole lot of fire! And fun. Like... calendar and bar nights fun. Thrills and smiles... that's not too much to ask for, is it?

#ask #station 19

3 notes · View notes

sepublic · 2 years

Text

It’s been two weeks so let me get this off my chest;

Why the fuck did they include Maggie in All In. Why did they include the racist white girl whose only purpose is to be racist towards Anne. For a show that’s mean to uplift Thai people and make them feel comfortable in their own skin by telling their story, it’s EXTREMELY tone-deaf.

And for what?! Because I guess Maggie is ‘popular’ amongst people who completely missed the point and the writers wanted to reward that? They STILL had Maggie get Anne’s name wrong, too! Matt Braly why the fuck did you allow this. Why did you let this happen and have Maggie STILL get Anne’s name wrong; Something clearly meant to be seen as a racist move. This show is meant to make Thai, as well as asian kids in general, feel welcome.

It’d be one thing if Maggie was an actual fleshed out character who unlearned her prejudices and truly apologized, who had other aspects to her character besides being racist. But she’s not. She literally had no personality nor role beyond bigotry, and fans latched onto that for same damn reason and I GUESS the crew rewarded that antithetical type of move that goes against the very show’s message. Hell they even reinforced it because I guess Maggie calling Anne “Boobchuy” isn’t meant to be viewed as negatively anymore; It’s not a funny quirky detail it’s blatant racism, or was at least HEAVILY IMPLIED to be, which I then question the decision to reframe Maggie’s misnaming by All In.

I also find it questionable how our protagonist of color ‘gains the approval’ of her racist bully by saving the world, because it reminds me too much of centrist morals where minorities and the oppressed have to justify their reason for existing to their oppressors. Maggie’s fans don’t have to worry about being called out over her character’s racism because she suddenly likes Anne now, they’re validated because the racist white girl fans have been thrown a racist white girl bone by the crew, Maggie is less problematic now!

In interviews, Matt made a BIG deal about the alienation aspect of being Thai in America, and Anne learning to appreciate what her parents struggled with after being the only human in Wartwood. There was the implication that Anne didn’t recognize Maggie’s racism as such, and it’s by Season 3 when Anne finally listens to her mother’s discussion of being Thai in an unfamiliar world, that she really understands.

Maggie’s stupid-ass cameo just feels like an appeal to the lowest common denominator, a legit betrayal of the show’s message that is meant to combat such xenophobia by celebrating Thai heritage, and I hate it. Matt said he was baffled by Maggie’s popularity and I felt bad for him because I thought he clearly had stronger words than that but didn’t want to come across as ‘mean’, but then he allows this to happen?! Did his own crew somehow override Matt on this already tasteless cameo made even worse by its execution or what!? What kind of message does this send?

#amphibia #amphibia maggie #racism tw

92 notes · View notes

adamwatchesmovies · 10 months

Text

Elemental (2023)

The worst thing you can say about Elemental is that it isn’t as wildly original as some of Pixar’s other outings. Although the plot is set in a city of fire, water, earth and air "people", it’s not REALLY about this world of anthropomorphic elements and the story told is not all that dissimilar from Zootopia, among others. This doesn’t make Elemental any less gorgeous or unexpectedly romantic.

In Element City, the fiery Bernie (Ronnie del Carmen) and Cinder (Shila Ommi) own a convenience store they hope to pass to their daughter, Ember (Leah Lewis), after they retire. When a pipe in their basement bursts, a water element health inspector named Wade Ripple (Mamoudou Athie) files a report. Now, Ember has less than a week to figure out why the pipes in Firetown still contain water or the Fireplace will be shut down.

I hadn’t seen many trailers for Elemental and expected what we usually see from Pixar: comedies with some action and drama. Elemental is a romantic drama with a few elements of comedy sprinkled in. As I watched the film and saw Ember and Wade grow closer (the ultimate “opposites attract”), I wondered if the children in the audience would grow bored. None of them did. The screenplay by John Hoberg, KaLiktkel and Brenda Hsueh (director Peter Sohn also contributed to the story) strikes the perfect balance. There’s a little bit of danger to make the stakes feel real, visual gags that come from the characters designs, many emotional developments (there's a chance you'll cry) and a strong romance tying it all together. You know your lovey-lovey movie is doing something right when the audience is on the edge of their seat, waiting for that first kiss.

Elemental is also a story of immigrants making their place in a society full of people who are different from them. You can see why I compared it to Zootopia earlier. Like the 2016 film, this one makes its point/make you think without beating you over the head thanks to its fantasy elements. You can see why Ember and her family might be turned away from a botanical garden. They’re made of flames... but why wasn’t the building designed with their special needs in mind? Why are so many things in Element City inconvenient or even potentially deadly for them? If that doesn’t resonate with you - which would be hard; the film does an excellent job getting you to understand Ember - her story about living up to her parent’s expectations and wondering if their dreams are the same thing as hers will.

Pixar has always pushed the art of computer-generated animation forward. What’s particularly noteworthy about Elemental is that the fire people we see aren't simply emulating what real-life flames look like. The animators made the decision to give the film more personality by choosing to do their own thing when bringing Ember and her kin to life. Then there’s her match, Wade. He's a completely translucent character, which can't have been easy, but you'd never guess it. Elemental offers a lot in terms of the character designs and also in the various products sold in the shop, the posters and advertisements in the background, and the many, many puns found on billboards and signs. You can see a bunch of them during the end credits, along with a rather touching tribute at the very end, so I’d encourage you to stick around for that.

I recognize that Elemental is not as original as it could’ve been and doesn’t quite use the natural abilities of its characters as much as it could have to make them as different from regular people as you’d think anthropomorphic water would be from you and me. Despite this, I got swept away by the romance. I get the feeling this is the sort of movie you might not know you’ve been waiting for until you’ve sat down and watched it. (Theatrical version on the big screen, June 14, 2023)

#Elemental #movies #films #movie reviews #film reviews #Peter Sohn #John Hoberg #Kat Likkel #Brenda Hsueh #Leah Lewis #Mamoudou Athie #Ronnie del Carmen #Shila Ommi #Wendi McLendon-Covey #Catherine O'Hara #2023 movies #2023 films #pixar #disney

11 notes · View notes

whatisthismandoinghere · 11 months

Text

So the Wagon Train episode “The Bob Stuart Story” is one of my favorites because I love the bit of backstory we get on Coop. It’s really good but I also got some beef with it 😂

I guess I should preface this a little bit. I know westerns really play up the back shooting bit and that they treat it like a cardinal sin, but there are times when it’s your only option. So I don’t necessarily hold true to that line of thinking and I honestly don’t know how controversial that is but I mean if you’re in a life or death situation and your potential killer turning their back on you is your only opportunity to get out of said situation, you take it I hope this makes some kind of sense I obviously don't mean that you should just go around shooting people in the back for fun though, there are times where it is a dirty move, but anywho onto the matter at hand

I do not care for Stuart, at all. And it’s not just because Coop is one of my favorite characters and he’s the one that shot him in the back I know I’m quite biased but I promise that ain’t it this time lol Yes range wars were a messy business and so was being a hired gun in one but Coop explained that when he saw the marshal coming that he was turning to tell his men to put their guns down Now while Stuart didn’t necessarily know that, it didn’t give him the right to shoot Coop in the back. It’s the same principle with law enforcement today (AND THIS IS NOT AN INVITATION TO DISCUSS THAT, THIS IS A POLITICS FREE POST, PLEASE DO NO START THAT HERE) but if you’re too scared to do your job, law enforcement isn’t for you. If you’re too afraid that someone’s gonna shoot you and you’re trigger happy at the slightest movement, then you shouldn’t be here Stuart had no right to assume what Coop was gonna do and he could’ve killed him

I also hate that since Coop had to unfortunately shoot his friend in the back he’s supposed to magically understand Stuart now. That’s not how this works. These were two completely different situations. Coop saw that his friend (I can’t remember if it was Felix or Thomas) was about to shoot Stuart who was defenseless at the moment because his gun had jammed. though I will argue that Stuart wasn’t worth saving and I would’ve just let him have it but I digress Stuart on the other hand had no idea what Coop was up to during that range war. Yes he could’ve been telling his men to fire, yes he could’ve been reloading his rifle, but he also could’ve been putting his gun down, or he could’ve been telling his men to do the same (which we learned was the case). With that many different possible circumstances you can’t just follow the philosophy of “shoot first, ask questions later”

Chris made me so mad in this episode too. Coop made the decision to be an adult and make him aware of the situation and Chris flat out tells him that he’ll side with the lawman until he can be convinced otherwise. And he said that right to his face And then two seconds later Chris is like “if it’s a life or death situation, Coop is the man I want in my corner” you can’t have it both ways pally. And the little lecture he gave him at the end about how no man is perfect, well yeah, obviously, that doesn’t excuse Stuart’s actions though!! Coop still has a right to be mad at the man who shot him in the back!! I really wish everyone would just stop trying to convince Coop otherwise and maybe take a minute to listen to his side of the story. Coop told Chris, “He (Stuart) hasn’t done anything to change my mind, Chris.” and he’s right, nothing has changed between them, Coop was just doing his job as the scout for the wagon train. He doesn't owe Stuart anything, whether that be respect, or forgiveness, or whatever

All of that complaining aside, I do really like how this episode explores a piece of Coop’s background, and it’s a really interesting one. It really adds another layer to his character and it’s a good bit of writing

#wagon train #cooper smith #my ramblings #i've noticed there's barely any wagon train content here #so i'm doing my part and contributing 😂

9 notes · View notes

incorrecttowerofgodquotes · 1 year

Text

Gundam: The Witch From Mercury Episode 5 Review

-Let’s get into the most important character this episode: Elan. He’s a genetically engineered clone created specifically to handle the strain of using Gundam technology. I always had a suspicion that he wasn’t fully organic due to the gloves he wears, but he’s a full test tube baby, not just part robot. I feel bad for him, all he wants is companionship and sought that in Suletta, but when he saw that she doesn’t struggle like him, he realized he’s truly alone. Of course, that doesn’t excuse making Suletta cry, but his feelings are understandable. I’m going to guess he’ll be a part one antagonist before either switching sides or dying.

-Now for the MVP, Guel! Immediately sliding into the rescue and defending his lady’s honor. But then he got his ass kicked lol. This might be a hot take, but personally, I think Guel is the best pilot we’ve seen so far. He piloted a mecha he wasn’t used to that was stuck in the ground and he still did a great job against Elan. Especially that scene of him dodging the lasers. Once he gets his Darilblade back and learns to control his anger, I expect him to be the Badass Normal of the group. Taking names while not piloting a Gundam.

-Another great thing about Guel is his attitude. It’s clear he’s still struggling with the misogynistic ideals planted in him, but he’s gone from looking down on Suletta to genuinely liking her. You can see his attitude change when he realizes she’s crying. He also went directly against his father once again, but since he lost, I don’t see him getting out unscathed. He’ll probably be disowned and kicked out of the Jeturk House. But then, maybe Suletta will take him into Earth House. It’d do wonders on his personality if he started working and living with more humble people and those willing to call him out. I see Mio and Guel being real frosty towards each other but after a deep talk they both work together to protect Suletta

-This episode really seems to be pushing the Eri=Aerial theory. Suletta apparently has a sibling, and she doesn’t remember her father which is weird since she was four years old when he died, not a baby. Elan also mentions that she might have somebody else’s face, and who else could it be but Eri. Finally, I think the reason Aerial doesn’t put a strain on the user is because it’s the one taking the strain, or more accurately, Eri is taking on all the pain so Suletta can pilot normally. Now of course there are problems with this theory, but I think this is the most probable explanation so far.

-Peil Technology seems to get pass the Gundam argument by making clones that can handle the mecha’s strain. Therefore you can’t say it’s damaging to the pilot and human rights if the pilot isn’t human. Of course I doubt Delling “I say it’s a Gundam” Rembraun would let this slide, but since they’re a big money maker, an under the table deal will get them out of hot water. Ah, the beauties of capitalism

-Finally, I want to talk about the male-centered dueling that this episode pushes. While Guel is trying to help Suletta, he undermines her own agency by creating a duel for her. The story seems to be pushing the same theme Utena did, that chauvinistic males take away a woman’s agency to her own body or soul. I expect Guel to grow out of these themes as the story goes on, but the society as a whole still remains locked in this male-centered combat. Hell, the only female in the dueling committee just sits around and paints her nails. I hope the series takes the route of allowing Suletta to make her own decisions without being pressured, just like what her mother is doing to her.

-I expect the next episode to be Elan and Suletta’s duel. With the title “A gloomy song” I’m going to guess it’ll reference back to the prologue when Eri’s dad sung Happy Birthday. Maybe Suletta will hear that song while she’s fighting and either she or Aerial will go berserk. As to whether she wins or loses, I think there’s a 50/50 chance of both options. If she does lose, I can see her only getting Aerial back on the part 1 finale, with the down time being used to strengthen her piloting skills with other mechas and to bolden her personality.

#in short this entire episode is about ntr #elan currently ntr’ing mio and guel #and he’s about to steal suletta’s sister too #worst boy would punch him on sight #gundam witch from mercury #gundam #g witch

26 notes · View notes

eveningspirit · 1 year

Text

The Ark 1x06 Meta

Watching The Ark feels a little like reading a very badly written fanfic, that includes the trope you desperately crave for. You (me, I mean it feels that way for me) read it, you curse and enjoy it at the same time, and then you comment that you “loved the story, and thank you so much for writing it!” Because, for one, that trope is so rare, so even if it’s not executed too well, it at least exists in the fanfic realm. Secondly, that person wrote the fic in their spare time, right? And maybe they are fifteen or whatever, and just trying their best. Or maybe you’re simply polite.

The TV show creator, who earns real monie for their effort, should try better I guess…

I’ll spare you teh scrolling... ;)

I wasn’t really going to write about The Ark, but episode 1x06 was about the trope I like to read about in fic, and I have thoughts. I’m not saying the show is problematic. I mean, it is, obviously (what media isn’t these days? But that’s another matter. And this one is badly written on top of that), but I want to say something about my personal impression, not so much about general “problematic-ness”. Although it’s probably one and the same in this case. Just. It’s not a general post about problematic things being problematic.

It is personal, from the point of view of a writer. This episode dealt with one issue I struggled with a little, a few years back, while writing a fanfic. Should a person who’s chronically ill divulge information about their illness to their co-workers?

It’s a delicate issue, because in an environment where other people’s lives depend on one person’s ability to perform their duties, well… What should you do? Or what can you do, what would be an okay thing to do, if you’re a colleague of the ill person? Can you demand they tell you all about it? Hmm?...

I think not.

And yet, my first idea was similar to what they did on this show: that the character owes their colleagues an explanation. It took some thinking and re-evaluating my principles to fully understand that the right to privacy trumps other people’s curiosity, or even their concerns. That everyone in this setting is an adult, and they take responsibility for their actions – including responsibility for managing their illness. And their colleagues are supposed to trust them, as they would any adult, about any other thing.

That’s why The Ark reads like a badly written fanfic. There is drama, a lot of it, but there isn’t any psychological or emotional truth to what they portrayed.

James Brice suffers from some kind (fictional) of terminal condition. As he begins to experience symptoms, his colleague, Eva witnesses it and starts asking questions. He’s really rude about how he tells her to respect his “effing privacy”, then he tells her again, in a little more polite manner, to leave it well enough alone; it is none of her concern.

And then the narrative frames it as him keeping secrets, and keeping secrets is wrong, because it may endanger others. Well.

While his actions (keeping it a secret and sort of ignoring it while making decisions) are true to his character – impulsive, risk taking – it also paints him as irresponsible. On a superficial level, but then, I don’t suspect the show of going any deeper than superficial. After the near-miss he, of course, tells Eva the whole truth, and, again of course, asks her to keep this secret from the others. At least the scene cuts there, and she doesn’t promise him anything.

Granted, the show already had the characters have a few secrets (Sharon being a “clone” – read “mutant”; Sanji’s addiction) that were revealed to the whole crew almost right away. So I don’t suspect this will remain secret for long. However, I think they way they dealt with Sanji’s problem, especially, was written better than this. At least it was her decision to tell others.

I wanted to make a note about a little deeper interpretation of James’s irresponsibility – he may actually be in denial about his condition. That would be very human of him, and I could get behind that. It’s a flaw. Heck, irresponsibility is a flaw too, and I like my faves flawed. ;)

So no, I don’t really complain about James Brice and his characterization (at least how I interpret it, lol). I may complain about the science of it all (the symptoms of said condition are… um… doubtful, to say the least), but then, who cares! I will keep watching anyway, and even though I won’t “tell” the authors that they did a great job, I plan to keep enjoying what little of my fave trope I can get. ;)

#james brice #the ark #the ark syfy #evening talks

8 notes · View notes