#i'm on board though | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

chirpsythismorning · 1 year

Text

Noah saying, "I don't think Mike likes Will back" doesn’t equate to him not knowing about byler being endgame, and here's why.

Noah and a majority of the main cast have been given a rough idea of how the show will end, broadly in terms of the entire story, but also more specifically in terms of their personal character arcs.

Actors are out here acting. This is nothing new.

Any of the the main cast insisting they have no idea how the show ends at all, are lying. This is because their safest bet is playing dumb.

There's nothing safe about them revealing they know how the show ends, least of all to an audience that is dying for any spoiler they can get their hands on. It just puts them in a position to have to think very carefully about everything they say, which is something they already have to do regardless.

It's a lot easier to just say you don't know, because then you can give vague answers or even just flat out lie and get away with it, as opposed to saying you know and then having everyone take whatever you say as gospel since you admitted to knowing what's coming.

David is pretty much the only actor who goes around explicitly saying that he knows how the show ends, which is something he's been doing consistently since s2 premiered back in November of 2017.

Something David has also mentioned on a few occasions since then, is how much input the Duffer's let him put into his character. He's literally praised them for having a collaborative process, because it allows him to play Hopper more authentically.

And so yes, I do think it's safe to assume that the Duffer's extend this approach to their other cast-members as well, at least among the main cast-members. I do not at all think this is some exclusive treatment only David gets, because this seems like more just something the Duffer's do out of respect to the actors. How else can they expect them to portray their character accurately if they don't know what they're going through or what their motives are or what's right for them going forward?

We obviously won't know all the details about who knew what at what times or how long they've known certain things, until they themselves come out and reveal after the fact, if they even do it at all.

Still, I do think that when it comes to byler actually happening, it's going to be very satisfying for fans who saw it coming.

This is because we're dealing with something the Duffer's are predicting a good portion of the ga will be bitter about, with the main argument at the forefront being that Mike and Will came out of nowhere.

And so, how do you think they're going to combat that?

With the literal proof.

They have David, who has been used happily as their main scapegoat through the years, whose words are literal proof that things were planned for quite some time. We have him saying all the way back in 2017 that there are easter eggs in the first season which we won't understand until the end, how it's beautiful and surprising and it will explain why certain characters acted certain ways...

Not only that, but there's just no way people are going to be able to use the whole 'it came out of nowhere' argument (at least without looking like idiots), because we'll have the Duffer's themselves out here confirming shit like blue meets yellow in the west and other theories that were entirely intentional (as we predicted).

And because of this, I think I can guess roughly how things will go moving forward and it's honestly already panning out in some ways I expected.

Because while season 4 ends in a way that seems to be leading towards Mike and El ending up together from the perspective of the ga, there are numerous details in the subtext and just outright in the literal text that's trying to tell us this is not actually the case.

And so now the Duffers and everyone who knows are in this limbo of tricking their audience in plain sight, hoping to keep this act going for as long as they can, and that's obviously not easy to do.

What I think makes it most difficult is that they want to surprise fans, but they also want them to be satisfied and happy with the ending.

And that is why the whole Milkvan straight bait is indeed very near its end.

If they want ST to live on as a cult classic with rewatch value, they can't keep this straight bait going on into the last season.

They'll want Mike and El to definitively give off platonic elmike for s5, with byler being endgame and Willel being wonder twins.

This is why Mike and El's dynamic HAS to blatant in a way that will come across as platonic to the ga in s5. And the shift needs to be immediate, otherwise byler will not be satisfying.

I feel like a lot of bylers already predict this, which is why a lot of us assume that the milkvan breakup with happen (or be acknowledged as having already happened) as early as 5x01 or 5x02.

Honestly, I do think that Will's painting being plastered on merch recently was one of the big moments which is representative of a shift we're already seeing start to happen. We're going to continue to see milkvan be promoted as elmike, while byler is being promoted in a way that is, well byler.

What I think is most noteworthy in terms of how they're approaching this conflict going forward, is how the actors themselves have talked about it when asked.

For example, there was one Con specifically that I remember Noah attended right around when Vol 2 dropped, where he mentioned byler at least 3 times. Two times when asked and one other time unprompted.

And no one ever talks about this, but full serious you guys, it was dead silent at that con whenever he mentioned byler. There were maybe a few hoots and claps, with Noah literally looking kind of worried. It was obvious he noticed the silence the first time it got brought up, and so he felt the need to mention it a second time when asked about what he shipped and then AGAIN, with a note of defensiveness in his voice:

"Byler is just, at it's peak right now, okay, so definitely ship that--"

And while in the background, all you hear is maybe 2 bylers supporting him, otherwise, it's mostly crickets...

Let's try to remember that while Byler is a lot bigger now undoubtedly, unless you're active online, most of the ga does not see it coming. And so byler is by no means fan-service. If anything it's show-runner service.

This means Noah had literally no obligation that day to go all out with referring to byler in a positive hopeful light, nor does he still. And yet he did and he hasn't slowed down much since.

His approach makes sense. Because his character has been revealed in canon to be in love with the other, he can freely say he ships it and even take the opportunity to hype it up in an attempt to open peoples minds to it, who might not have considered it before. And he can also do this because in canon, Will assumes Mike doesn't love him back, so Noah can just co-opt Will & the ga's assumption that Mike doesn't feel the same, and get away with it, without anyone whose close-minded giving it a second glance as evidence.

If they wanted to avoid queer-bait and get people to not look at byler that way, they had the chance to. A majority of the ga didn't read byler romantically and so they could've just kept things casual by not bringing it up, nor humoring it at all.

The byler tag didn't even hit 30k followers until AFTER vol. 2 dropped! Most people were oblivious (including bylers).

Undoubtedly, Noah in particular around that time, was a big part of why people started to look deeper on their own and it's how a lot of people ended up here, now with 277k of us.

Like seriously, listen to me ya'll, Noah would NOT put himself in a position to broadcast his support for byler like this and the Duffers would probably be begging him not to, knowing he would be subject to a lot of criticism in doing so, if byler was not in fact where the story was going. Point blank, period.

His tweet "vol 2 got me shipping byler over everything' has to have been the most obvious stunt of all. He was not saying that to be quirky or to appease a few thousand people, he was saying it to wake up the hundreds of thousands that might be open to it, and who just need a push to see what's right in front of them.

Then we have Millie's approach. Her approach for a long time has been to say stuff that she thinks the audience wants to hear, that being anything pro-milkvan. And up until Vol 1, she was still mostly on board with referring to it in a super positive light.

She also insisted during s4's run that she has no clue how the show will end (lies, Millie is a good actress pls give her more credit), and this also explains why she's tended to feel somewhat comfortable lying about milkvan positively...

Though as Vol. 2 neared and ever since, a shift has started to happen, where in interviews Millie is getting a lot more into depth and real about El's personal arc. She mentioned right before Vol 2 dropped that El was insecure in her fight with Mike at the start of the season because she thought he only considered her a superhero and didn't see her as more than that.... Then more recently she has doubled down saying that she is her own superhero, having been shaped a little too much by the men in her life.

SHE IS OUT HERE SAYING WHAT WE'VE BEEN SAYING FOR MONTHS (SOME YEARS)! SHE KNOWS HER CHARACTER BETTER THAN ANYONE!

Honestly, even though I understand they are trying to trick people into thinking they're clueless and so I guess I'm happy for them that they've succeeded in that, I can't help but admit I feel a little disappointed upon hearing some bylers say that they are convinced Millie doesn't know, but that Finn does and even Noah does, but that she's entirely in the dark about it and that they're okay with this I guess?

First of all, why would anyone be okay with that? Why would we be okay with Millie not having insight into where her character is going. What, do you guys think they're just going to pull up on her at the last minute like, "yeah sorry we didn't tell you sooner, but this is where your character is going to end up. anyways back to byler!...."

I don't care, it would seriously be fucked up to keep her in the dark about this because El IS important to the story and Millie, just like everyone else, deserves that closure so that she can understand her character better and therefore perform to the best of her ability. She also deserves a say somewhat in where she feels her character should go, just like David has said the Duffer's afford them.

Now lastly, when it comes to Finn, I think most assume at least he is aware of byler, and I do agree he knows, so let's start there.

Again, we don't know when they found out and so for now I don't feel like going too far into guessing the exact point and so I won't. However, I do think that Finn also as of late has had an approach that manages to somehow be very different from both Noah and Millie's, and for reasons that also make a lot of sense.

Because Finn's character is assumed to not return Will's feelings, he has to be more careful than all of them. This is arguably why he goes to the least cons out of everyone (most recently everyone attended a con in person, with Millie present over zoom even, but no Finn or Noah... seems very intentional at this point).

Why I think they need to be more strict with Finn in particular is because he's in the exact opposite situation as Noah.

His character is assumed to not return Wll's feelings, and so he can't go very far with what he reveals. What we've got up to this point is actually quite revealing enough as it is, which is why that's all we're getting for now.

What I find interesting is that Finn's approach is quite similar to David's. I know Noah is known for spoiling things, but arguably Finn is just as bad, he's just a lot more sneaky about it. He has a harder time lying, which is why I think he actually looks uncomfortable when asked milkvan questions. Not necessarily because he doesn't ship it like lots of bylers assume, but because he's having to dance around and lie outright and he probably feels bad.

His most common approach though is that he likes to make jokes and say things that could be looked at from multiple perspectives, where it could be looked at now as milkvan evidence, while simultaneously being looked at from the future as byler evidence. Him saying 'I think everyone knows how Mike feels about Eleven' was him quite literally gaslighting the audience just like Mike did with El in s4:

'I care for you so much" "I say it" "You know how I feel about you--"

But do we? Do we really? Or does the audience THINK they know, and so Finn can get away with saying something cryptic and vague like that? When really, in the future, everyone will be laughing looking back because to Finn and all the cast, it was actually abundantly obvious Mike's feelings for El were platonic and his feelings for Will were romantic.

Same for his response when asked if El and Mike would be together and happy in season 5. He dances around it, doesn't deny it, but also doesn't confirm it. Instead of just being like yes they will (which is what we're being led to assume is inevitable at the end of s4, and so he has no reason to dance around it), he starts by deflecting, talking broadly in terms of the stories overall ending, only to say he hopes they find happiness... Again his answer fits with the ga's assumptions now, but it also fits with the surprise of byler in the end as well.

Also important to note that Finn and Noah are the ones to repost about the show most out of everyone from the main cast. A LOT. In fact, they were the only main cast-members (besides Brett LOL) out of everyone to repost about the episode title name for 5x01 being released on ST day...

And it's because THIS is their character's big revelation going into the final season and they had a say in it going this direction. Even if it's what the Duffer's wanted all along, they still gave them and everyone to an extent, a say in things. And now that it's all slowly happening, they are front and center standing by that decision, because they insisted they could do it and wanted to.

I can't say for certain that things will just be smooth sailing from here on out though, by no means is everything just going to shift completely.

There is still undoubtedly this element of the Duffer's and everyone wanting to have the pleasure of tricking the audience. In an industry where everything that happens is usually expected and predictable and therefore rarely exciting, and with an audience that is always figuring stuff out before their supposed to through leaks and stuff, byler is something they have finally been able to successfully trick most of the audience to think will never happen. And that is fucking impressive when considering the heaps of evidence.

And yet still, they don't want to be yet another show that is considered to have a bad ending.

So, going forward, I think things will continue the way that they are, but we'll slowly see them be more comfortable in this element of acknowledging endgame in a way that will be easy to look back on positively when everything is all said and done.

Because if byler is endgame, IF they want people to look back and go oh Oh OH during all those moments where they misread things, but now they can see the other side of it, there needs to be more of an approach that gives Byler equal playing field and allows the ga to actually start to appreciate it and even want it and root for it. Which means buh bye predictability and heteronormativity and hello surprises and gayness (but also be open ended about it so the homophobes will stay tuned until the last second).

#stranger things #byler #rambles #stranger things 5 #st5 headcanon #even though i think it's weird so many bylers are convinced everyone in the cast is clueless #i don't blame yall #that's what they want everyone to think #and they're mostly succeeding #i'm not going to go too hard in messing up their approach here #bc this is how they want it to go down #believe what you want #regardless i would hope that considering the hate that is going to follow #they're going to feel obligated to state the obvious and admit that bylers were right #either they'll be honest about everything and lay it all out there #or they'll be vague and tell people to look into it themselves #idk if they're going to go the cryptic approach #but i seriously doubt it seeing as they're the type to hold a master class explaining their thought process #and also literally give out entire white boards revealing the entire inspiration of their series #so like... i know bylers are stressed and tired and annoyed being called delusional #but trust me i think it will be worth it in the end #you will be vindicated and validated

289 notes · View notes

lunanoc · 5 months

Text

first tentative meta post about wu xie my beloved, more specifically about his characterization in his less than stellar moments, sparked by a discussion with @thelaithlyworm about whether or not the lost tomb 2.5 is in character for wu xie according to the books. i figured i'd take the rest of my thoughts to a separate post since our exchange was clogging up poor OP’s replies, and because i feel like a difference in opinion like this is worth being made public if only so people can get both sides of a rare discussion about the books and reach their own conclusions, so for those who are interested here’s a link to the original post where this discussion takes place in the replies if you'd like the full context. sorry in advance for how long this will likely be, and i hope there's no problem with me directly tackling some of the arguments that were made in favor of lost tomb 2.5 being an accurate adaptation of book wu xie's characterization, which is a take i strongly disagree with

i think much of the problem in the discussion simply lies in the fact that we seem to have fundamentally different interpretations of wu xie’s character in the books, because as i see it, none of the insistences that were quoted prove that wu xie has ever acted the way he does in 2.5 in the books—if anything, they disprove it. the quote from ch. 92 of sand sea that was brought up goes as follows:

this is where i believe the problem of different interpretations is at play, and to be fair some of it is ambiguous so there is some leeway, but i read this recollection very differently from how @thelaithlyworm seems to. as i see it, wu xie is recalling a time where pangzi, understandably concerned about his friend because he sees the toll the sha hai plan is taking on wu xie, and the lengths he’s having to go to in order to set it in motion, tells him it’s not too late to stop and turn back. to which wu xie replies that even if he had decided to stop and live his life blissfully unaware of the extent of the wangs' reach and their machinations, things would have caught up to him eventually given they’d infiltrated the jiumen to the extent they had.

“and at that time you’ll have already left me one by one, leaving me to foolishly face those fists” is the most ambiguous as to what exactly it's referring to, but i personally see it as referencing either the fact wu xie and his friends would have by then eventually drifted apart or they'd have stopped giving him their support should he have decided to ignore the truth and sit around doing nothing, or more sinisterly, would have potentially all been replaced by then if there hadn't been a plan in motion. it's likely a little bit of both. to which pangzi replies that he’s right, conceding and agreeing that wu xie never truly had a choice about his involvement to begin with, which is more or less the entire point of sand sea and the wider narrative of the main story.

no part of this conversation is reminiscent of the open conflict between them in 2.5 in that neither of them here are angry, and neither of them are even aggressive or antagonistic towards each other or in general. this is quite a calm if resigned conversation wu xie is recalling that also fits the overall cynical tone of the chapter itself, and wu xie’s certainly not acting out and pushing his friends away in a bid to deal with everything himself. if anything the entire point of sand sea is to show that despite each character acting independently, the sha hai plan only succeeded because they worked together and not alone, and that wu xie needed his support system to create an invisible yet tangilble network that could take down the wangs. so no part of this particular passage reads as though pangzi is saying he ever considered bailing on wu xie because of his behavior, and even if that were the case, it would still be referring to a hypothetical situation and not their current one.

wang meng's behavior in ten years later is also not the greatest example to use as an argument to prove 2.5 wu xie’s characterization is present in the books, mostly because it's actually wang meng himself who's more so the one acting like that than wu xie himself. wang meng, in his concern for wu xie, tries to guilt trip him into letting go of his obsession with xiaoge, and he is the one who instigates a conflict with wu xie that culminates in him staging xiaoge's "death" as a last ditch effort once spewing bottled up vitriol at wu xie and threatening to take over wushanju don't work.

it's however misguided at best given that not only did all of wu xie's close friends who participated in the sha hai plan agree to do so willingly (i’m of course not talking about li cu and co among others who very much did not consent) and so accusing wu xie of having coerced them takes away from their own agency, but the sha hai plan was a necessity beyond freeing xiaoge, which is something wang meng fails to understand. wang meng makes the mistake many people in the fandom do of pinning wu xie’s determination to see that plan through solely on his desire to free xiaoge, and of course that’s an important part of it, but the narrative makes a point of building up over the course of the main books and tibetan sea flower that wu xie’s entire family was at stake as well, and had been for several generations, so on a personal level it went beyond xiaoge alone. but again, whatever truth there is to wang meng’s words (which is an interesting but entirely different topic) still doesn’t make it true that wu xie was either actively petty or vitriolic towards his friends as a way to vent his own frustrations.

several moments in which wu xie objectively does terrible things or acts horribly were listed as a way of justifying that his behavior in 2.5 is in character and in line with how he acts in the books. and of course these moments do happen, and it's very true in sand sea especially that wu xie does terrible things (it's part of what makes him such an interesting character). but again, this argument feels somewhat in bad faith in that it conflates all negative behavior and traits together regardless of what specific shape those negative behaviors take in order to justify that his portrayal in 2.5 is faithful to the books simply because he displays negative behavior in that adaptation, completely disregarding that his less than stellar actions and emotions aren't expressed in the same ways in the books and in 2.5. my dislike of wu xie in 2.5 doesn't stem from him doing unlikeable things, otherwise i wouldn't like wu xie as a character in general. wu xie absolutely does do a lot of terrible things in sand sea especially, but the inherent problem with 2.5 is that none of the things he does or the way he acts in the books ever lines up with the specific way he acts in 2.5.

in the books, even before sand sea, yes wu xie is manipulative (re: threatening bodily harm to himself to force wu erbai into sharing information with him), yes he cut up bodies and sent them to li cu among other extremely morally questionable things, yes he kidnapped li cu and made him go through literal hell, and likely did much the same to other people before him (hence the seventeen scars on his arm). he has and continues to have even in recent book canon re: yucun biji the ability and will to inflict permanent psychic damage on people he deems to be deserving of it or a threat. he’s by no means perfect or even overly kind, and if someone were to say that a number of the earlier drama adaptations especially soften his character and make him much more wide-eyed and innocent than he actually is in the books, i would absolutely agree with them. i would also agree if someone said that gap in characterization is why some people don’t like him much in the sand sea drama. but the fact is for all the negative traits and behavior he displays at varying points in the books, none of them are ever expressed in the very specific way they are in 2.5.

@thelaithlyworm rightfully mentions wu xie's ptsd as justification for much of his more "toxic" reactions to things, and his ptsd is incredibly important in understanding how wu xie works as a character and what his experiences have forged him into, to the point it's a topic that deserves its own in-depth post. but saying we have different definitions of what ptsd is is both accurate to the complex nature of ptsd, and a bit disingenious because of the complex nature of ptsd, because the emotional dysregulation and impaired decision-making it entails won’t necessarily manifest in the same ways in different people.

in 2.5 wu xie, ptsd manifests in the form of vitriol and anger he directs at pretty much everyone in his immediate vicinity, more especially pangzi, because it has no other outlet in that situation than outwards. and i’m not saying ptsd expressing itself like that never happens, because it very much does. what i'm saying is that book wu xie's ptsd, while very real, doesn't manifest in the way it does in 2.5 wu xie.

in book wu xie, ptsd manifests in much more internalized ways, and so he’s far more prone to directing the anger and pent-up emotions inwards through self-harm, both mental and physical (i.e. the scars on his arm, his persistent self-hatred, etc.), and the emotional dysregulation very often comes not in the form of chaotically expressed emotions, but rather abnormal lack of them, as arguably wu xie's bad coping mechanism is emotional dissociation, and when the emotions are truly too strong to be distanced from, they come out in the form of panic attacks he often doesn’t recognize as such (i.e. when he finds xiaoge and believes he’s dead in book 8, or when he has flashbacks on their way to motuo in yucun traveling notes) or of general breakdowns (i.e. wu xie stays numb once xiaoge disappears behind the gate up until he starts crying in the street once he returns to hangzhou).

it’s incredibly rare that wu xie’s trauma directs itself outwards towards his loved ones, and while he might do so in his head quite frequently (which we the readers see since most of the books are from wu xie's point of view), it's rare he actually externalizes it, and since his comments can only lead to conflict if they're extrernalized, there's rarely ever genuine conflict between him and his friends. one of the only times it happens with pangzi specifically is in tibetan sea flower were he makes an honestly cruel dig at pangzi about yuncai because pangzi’s withheld information about xiaoge from him:

but even this scene, which is the closest to anything that's portrayed in 2.5 between them, plays out differently, not only because wu xie knows very well he’s going too far, his mention of yuncai isn't solely an outlet for his anger. he’s very consciously trying to bait pangzi into telling him what he knows, and so aims at where he knows will hurt most. it's targeted and mean because it's meant to be, but it's also not a gratuitious outlet either unlike his comments are more often than not in 2.5. it's manipulation, and he's certainly not trying to push pangzi away, nor is it driving a wedge between them despite how uncalled for his comment it. and more importantly, pangzi once again proves himself to be the most emotionally stable of the iron triangle by not stooping to that level or making light of the conversation. he knows perfectly well what wu xie is doing, so any conflict is diffused before it can even take root, and stays an isolated incident, whereas in 2.5, conflict is an underlying theme.

ironically there are more examples of this type directed at xiaoge, but even those don't showcase the same blind anger or gratuitous meanness that 2.5 wu xie consistently displays, and it's that specifically that's out of character. while wu xie vents his frustrations at xiaoge in book 4 over being kept in the dark, he's more serious about it than angry, and very quickly realizes his foot-in-mouth comment and backtracks accordingly:

he's at his most openly angry with xiaoge at the end of book 8 when xiaoge leaves them all in banai, and even goes as far as trying to have xiaoge detained by qiu dekao in a last ditch effort to force him to stay (which in itself is the real manifestation of him not being able to control his emotions correctly and reason going out the window where xiaoge is concerned, and it only ever really happens in relation to xiaoge, but that's also a topic for another post):

but again, while he's visibly angry and upset, and is looking for support from others around him to validate his upset at xiaoge leaving, he never actually spews any vitriol at xiaoge himself despite his anger being obvious, never actually calls him names outside of his own head despite the rare quality of his anger, never tries to instigate conflict for the sake of venting his overflowing emotions, nor does he ultimately stop xiaoge from leaving. even later as he follows xiaoge up changbai mountain, his desperation eventually turns into resignation and acceptance, not venting.

this post is way too long, but my entire point here as it has been from the start of this discussion is that while wu xie in the books does get angry, he does have ptsd, it does manifest in the ugliest ways and he's certainly not an angel, his anger in general never veers into extended open conflict or gratuitous vitriol thrown at his loved ones as a misguided form of venting his own emotions like it does throughout the vast majority of lost tomb 2.5, just like a number of the conflicts he gets into with other characters stem from out of character reactions from those characters to begin with (i.e. xiao hua absolutely losing it over wu xie hiding wu sanxing's betrayal of xie lianhuan in 2.5 vs. this information being very casually received in book 7). and that's where my point of contention with that adaptation lies.

i feel as though this is a case of agreeing to disagree as far as interpretation of wu xie's character goes, and that's absolutely fine, but in the same way that it's alright to dislike things simply because, it's equally as alright to like things for the same reasons. it's fine to like lost tomb 2.5, and my opinion of it is purely my own, but liking it doesn't necessarily have to be rooted in whether it's adapting the books correctly, even if it can be.

my dislike of 2.5 stems from how i consider it to be out of character by comparison to the books, and my entire point here has been to explain that different interpretations of any particular source material can exist, and therefore yes, it's entirely possible to view 2.5 wu xie as out of character, just as it's entirely possible to dislike that adaptation for the same reason. and i'm far from the only person to have this interpretation. so no, my dislike of 2.5 doesn't come from not liking it when wu xie’s doing unlikeable things, or else i wouldn't like wu xie as a character, nor is it because i don’t understand what ptsd is given the particular ways in which it can manifest from one specific person to another

#i just have strong opinions about this sorry if it's coming off strong #and i'm perfectly willing to debate with quotes etc #but lbr there's a reason lost tomb 2.5 is more or less unanimously the most disliked adaptation across the board #both in the western fandom and chinese fandom #though tbf the chinese fandom doesn't tend to like the dramas all that much in general #which is valid sometimes tbh given some of the takes i've seen about dmbj as a whole from people who refuse to touch the books but well #still #first wu xie meta #exciting #dmbj #dmbj meta #wu xie #dmbj novels #lost tomb 2.5

38 notes · View notes