i think the worst part for me about the entire death engine debacle is that i like to think they used to be friends. solaris and anna.
i like to think they're both pretty rough around the edges until you really get to know them... that they both keep to themselves and do their work- and take great pride in the work that they do... i don't think their fields intersected very often for the two of them to be considered close. but i think they appreciated each other's company.
neither of them put zoraxis- or zor- above themself. even though solaris was beneath anna in regards to official ranking, that never mattered to either of them. they held themselves with enough self respect not to let others step all over them... and if they were going to be the only two employees not to relent to zor's power hungry behavior, then at least they could confide in each other.
i think solaris knew that anna wanted to leave... but i don't know if she would suspect that anna would ever actually try. she's an indispensable asset. she has a seat at zor's head table... they would notice in an instant. they would come after her if she left. they would kill her just to make a statement.
she figured anna knew that.
i can't help but wonder when solaris actually figured it out... when she connected the dots between anna's disappearance and the agency getting critical information on a project kept completely secret. did zor tell her while she was still in orbit? or- god forbid- did she need to learn post the death engine? in the hospital?
since first class and seat of power seem to be set relatively close to each other- and since solaris is canonically in space during seat of power- who's to say she even knew that anna was ‘dead’ until she woke up post atmospheric reentry.
what a fucked up thing to wrap your head around... that your friend is the reason you almost died. that she threw you under the bus to save herself...
and that it didn't even fucking work.
she could have killed the both of them, for nothing... and even though solaris is alive- thank god- she has to live with the fallout.
12 notes
·
View notes
Looking back on Batman (2022)
Enough time has passed now that my initial adrenaline rush )and then later afterglow) over Batman 2022 has resolved itself at least enough that I can look back on the film a bit more critically.
I enjoyed this movie, I enjoyed this Batman, but and this is a big but, this movie did not like Batman.
The thing about Batman is that he's a grim dark fantasy where a hero who's in pain can use that pain as a motivation to help people, to change things, to strive for a better Gotham because he just can't fucking accept the Gotham that allowed his parents to get killed while coming home from the movies, that kills so many other parents and children and sucks the people that remain into a mire of corruption and austerity. This is not that Batman, this is a Batman that's utterly oblivious to the problems with wealth inequality until the movie rubs in his face and even then has his inaction in his role of Bruce Wayne while letting his Batman role monopolise his every waking thought presented as his main problem. This is not a Batman that announces to a dinner party, “Ladies. Gentlemen. You have eaten well. You've eaten Gotham's wealth. Its spirit. Your feast is nearly over. From this moment on...none of you are safe.”. That attacks violent crime on two fronts by giving legitimate jobs to ex cons by day and solving kidnapping or murder cases by night.
And most crucially this isn't a Batman that ... succeeds. By that I mean yes he solves the grand mystery, yes he saves people in the flood, but the classic Batman would have saved that man he interrupts the bomb disposal squad to answer Riddler's phone call for. The classic Batman would have saved Falcone, evil doer that he is, not because he deserved to live but because Batman is a hyper competent hero who's comic gimmick was that he was quick witted enough to stay ahead of the crooks and always save the person in front of him as a result, perhaps it's only natural for that to be subverted with the Riddler as his enemy (a character invented with the intent of putting the detective hero to the test when it came to his cerebral limits) but because this is a stand alone film, which as the name says has this Batman stand alone with the contents as the only basis to judge him with it has the effect of making his presence as a hero less warranted. After all, does Batman's presence in this film really save anyone besides the flood victims and Selina?
Yes the only victims who really get killed are all bad people but... that's not the point of Batman, the point is that he saves everyone he can.
The film also does the whole 'batman creates his own villains and actively makes the city worse because he espouses vengeance and violence' thing which egh, slightly more palatable with the transition from vengeance to hope, but I really don't fucking like it all the same. And besides that I dislike the idea that vengeance can't be hopeful, that a man who lost everything in one terrifying night, who got no justice, whose loved ones and personal loss and whose innocence remain unavenged saying to himself "I am justice, I am vengeance, I am the night!" as a way of reclaiming everything that's happened to him and everything he wants to be for the people of Gotham whose cries go unanswered by corrupt law enforcement and an even more corrupt bureaucracy, is presented as invalid, as somehow immature. When Batman was always crafted as a mature hero in the mold of the Scarlet Pimpernel and Zorro and James Bond, of Sherlock Holmes! That was part of his central appeal! He's the cool mature down to earth, detective hero.
Here he is reduced to a naive rich boy who's so ignorant his main approach to crime is to inefficiently beat the shit out of whatever hoodlums he encounters and who literally doesn't have the idea of using his money to fix the poverty or corruption fuelling the crime until Riddler highlights what his parents wanted to do for the city by denigrating it + the politician lady who repeatedly points it out. It's a movie that loves Batman but also passionately declares the stupidity of Batman. Perhaps that's also inevitable because solving crime by beating it up while dressed as a Bat is well, silly, when you approach it with real world cynicism instead of the wish fulfillment, the fantasy of being rich and powerful and smart enough to actually do something about an entire city that's drowning in crime, that has been drowning, suffocating, for decades, and have a hope of succeeding. There is no fun of acting like an airhead so the other rich people and crooks will underestimate and look down on you like they look down on everyone in the city as you use your access to learn things people outside that circle of rich opportunists can't and then use it to reveal their crimes as a vigilante whose identity no one suspects. Instead we have a traumatised Bruce Wayne openly beg Don Falcone for information who indulges him because he owes his father that favour and Bruce Wayne isn't a threat, is it interesting pathos? Definitely! Is it dramatic and fun! Also yes! Is it traditional Batman/Bruce Wayne secret identity shenanigans? Well kind of in that it gets him the extra information but genuinely not so much because it's not really an act. Does it have to be traditional Batman? I really don't know. We can't ever create something refreshing like this movie was if we don't try to deviate from the norm and in that regard I think it deserves respect. And yet. There's a but.
This movie doesn't let Batman succeed at anything but the bare minimum as a vigilante but it does let him try his best, always and it lets him care, deeply. Which is enough that it pulls through as a good batman film. However for all the budget and clever characterisation I don't think it's a great Batman film. After all Batman is a superhero fantasy and in those, the good guys are allowed to save the day.
18 notes
·
View notes
The warriors fandom needs to choose if they’re “just cats” or not.💀 obviously they’re not “just cats” but what I mean by this is people will pick and choose, for example:
“Appledusk didn’t cheat! They’re just cats🥺🥺 they have two mates in the wild”
But the SAME people will go: “Mapleshade babied trapped appledusk!!1!1!1!” as if cats have fucking birth control💀 a lot of thistleclaw apologist pull this bs as well (the cats “sexual maturity” argument, as if that even matters. These are anthropomorphic cats with religion, homes, doctors, etc. Obviously somethings that they can’t do because they are cats (like take birth control, cough , cough..) but to pretend that they don’t have different morals, and such it’s just stupid) and I’m tired of seeing it.
31 notes
·
View notes
beabaseball
The same way it doesn't matter if Roy and Riza are sorry to have killed Ishvalans, I think Scar doesn't think it matters if he's sorry he killed the Rockbells. Nothing will justify it to the family, so he doesn't try to justify it at all. I remember it being really striking somehow. But also, I guess there's no room to regret some things when the only way forward you can see is just going to involve more bloodshed. Like it isn't worth defending himself.
Yeah, he says directly that there's no point in saying anything because anything he says would sound like an excuse. I just think it would've been interesting to see Ed forced to grapple with Scar if he can't paint him as a complete monster.
15 notes
·
View notes
i was tagged by @indorilnerevarine to make some of the oc blorbos in this picrew, thank you so much allegra!! ♡
violante (bg3) || vesper (2077)
selene (oblivion) || moira (fnv)
viper (original work) || feng (original work)
i’m tagging: @arklay @uldwynsovs @morvaris @steelport @swordcoasts @faarkas @nuclearstorms @reaperkiller @montliyets @shepardgf @denerims @shadowglens @druidgroves @virassan @risingsh0t @florbelles @cultistbase and whoever else wants to do this!!
37 notes
·
View notes