magician-shaped

Eyes of glass and night of cold. I once foretold my end would come in nothing but my own hands, a death of sorts brought by a soul hidden in this cryptic mind. Impossibility for it to find a companion. Iris fixed on watery surface below a balcony, the window on my back opened in a swipe. Eyes of light and night of warmth. I raised my hand to this familiar silhouette of red. "Mind a dance, sir?" i said. A smile grew on my silent face, reflecting what i never thought could exist in this pit of mine. Maybe "impossible" wasn't a suited word, after all.

lately my gender's been running from nonbinary but in an agender way towards almost a guy but not quite and i've absolutely no idea what to do about it

On the left, the Pixie! 5e made them around 1 ft, or 30 cm. They're pranksters, they turn invisible, can entangle you with vines, and create an illusions/sensations which your body treats all aspects of as real!

On the right, troglodyte! Sadistic human-sized reptile people! They may be rough and have weaponized body odor, but look at that confidence and thirst! Literally, abs that defined typically note dehydration or starvation. Though I'm sure that's just the designers wanting to indicate their sizeable strength.

is it so hard to imagine

that the predator was once the prey?

Seaon 16 Supernatural will be the new PDF

To the ask i accidentally deleted 😔😔😔 I'm so sorry

But anyways yeah my take on drawing Scar is less "You're cancelled if you don't draw him in a wheelchair" and more "Hey! There's a ton of implicit abelism in this community! Do you understand WHY you don't draw him in a wheelchair?"

Like do what you want but I'm BEGGING yall to consider why an able-bodied man is more attractive/badass/powerful to you. Like we're all guilty of this abelism society has taught us. It's gotta be a conscious choice to analyze and criticize it

I think about them from time to time. Gay old men 💖

Topolino celebrates its 75th Anniversary (in digest format)!

The first issue was in fact released on April 10, 1949. And this week's issue #3567 celebrates the miles stone with this beautiful double sided cover by Andrea Freccero and Andrea Cagol!!!

And now for the late doodles

Starting with clavis!!!:3 hehe heh I love him<3

I saw someone repost a snippet of Christina Ricci’s interview about the S2 finale and what caught my eye is her saying “Natalie is the original Antler Queen,” implying that there is more than one Antler Queen throughout the rest of their time in the wilderness. I honestly could see that because I don’t think Natalie, after a while, would feel comfortably constantly being the leader. With that in mind, it makes Misty’s loyalty to Natalie even more impactful. No matter who else becomes the Antler Queen, Misty answers to and respects only Natalie. Though, having the loyal knight accidentally kill her queen is so twisted in the way that keeps me on edge, in a positive way.

Also didn't think this had to be said but I'll clarify

Just because I ship Dreammare doesn't mean I always ship Dreammare.

I have complete and utter control over how I view content and when I decide to ship two fictional characters. I make the decision when to ship and when not to ship.

When something isn't tagged as a ship, I don't look at that content as a ship. When I reblog it, I'm not reblogging it as a ship.

When something is tagged as a ship, I look at that content as a ship. When I reblog it, I'm reblogging it as a ship.

When the creator of that content says it could be a ship or could not be, then I decide as I like. When I reblog it, it keeps the initial intent of the creator and could be either depending on who is viewing that content.

I take full responsibility over my internet experience that I am curating. I decide what I want to see, what I don't want to see, who I want to interact with, and who I don't want to interact with. I am not perfect and I acknowledge that, if mistakes are made I will do my best to immediately rectify them as they are made known to me.

Not everything has to be a ship or about shipping. Most content about these characters will not be in a shipping context. I enjoy that content as much as I enjoy ship content.

I like Dreammare. I will continue to like Dreammare and be proship.

This is your warning.

a poogle & his lil fren

God is anyone else so fucking tired of seeing people shit on their younger selves and the fandoms they were in, thereby shitting on everyone who is still in those fandoms who find genuine enjoyment in it by proxy?

Like please... please just shut up.

Okay. So I was comfort-re-watching good omens (as per fucking usual) and ofc now I feel the need to rant about the particular scene that broke my heart into tiny little pieces THIS time round.

So. First up. We all know that Crowley hates Jimbriel, right? Like absolutely fucking despises him to the point where everything he does irritates him (same tbh). Like. He tells him to jump out a window. He REALLY hates this guy.

BUT. When Jimbriel asks him that question about gravity, he puts away his annoyance. He does his best to explain it to him, and eventually ADMITS THAT HE DOESN'T KNOW THE ANSWER. And this is probably all self-explanatory, but it's just hit me why that hurts so much (positively).

In season 2, Crowley is in a position of power over Jimbriel. He could literally just choose to throw him out and let him fend for himself against heaven and hell. He's in a position that's ODDLY REMINISCENT of how Crowley fell; mostly powerless, dependant on someone else, and asking questions.

And Crowley clearly sees that, because he makes a conscious effort to do the exact opposite of what God did to him. He ignores his hatred for Jimbriel, he accepts that it's a valid question. He does his best to answer it, and (here's the big one) HE ADMITS HE DOESN'T KNOW.

And that scene just hits SO HARD because despite the situation he's in, and his history with Gabriel, he stays true to what he believes heaven should've done. He listens, and he does his best, and, unlike God:

Crowley would never punish someone for asking questions.

Let it stand alone

Saw "Wonka" with the nieces way too late, because I thought it was a cash grab franchise milking faux nostalgic manipulation move, and I guess it was, and I still had a good time.

Now, if I were Roald Dahl, I'd likely object to this sweetheart of a Wonka. Wonka's a mad borderline dangerous maverick in Charlie. But this isn't the book, it's an adaption. If you don't know Wonka isn't a sweetheart, him being one doesn't ring false in the film. And books get adapted all the time - various adaptions aren't necessarily a commentary on one another.

So why tie this so deliberately to the Gene Wilder version? It isn't the same Wonka, and that's OK! It isn't Dahl's Wonka, and that's OK! It's another take on Wonka that works fine for what it is. Do they really think audiences would not have gone to watch a lovely romp about a sweet chocolatier anyway? That Oompa Loompas aren't fun without green hair? Look, this setup could have worked as "The Corruption of Willy Wonka" too, but that isn't what it wanted to be. Tying it too closely to another film for the parents' sake is the only thing that suddenly creates plotholes and ooc moments when there weren't any before.