#watershed adventure | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

utilitycaster · 5 months

Text

Dimension 20's Failed Genre Experiments

(This is the "Has Dimension 20 lost its touch?" post I’ve alluded to; please enjoy some genuine criticism masquerading as a riff on those sorts of articles for other shows.)

Dimension 20's debut and flagship burst onto the scene with a simple and elegant premise. What if a John Hughes movie were set at a high school for D&D adventurers? Its next full length pre-recorded season was the similarly strong urban fantasy The Unsleeping City, which in turn was followed up by the channel’s most ambitious outing yet: the Game of Thrones in Candyland mash-up, A Crown of Candy.

Widely considered to be a watershed moment for the show, A Crown of Candy explored darker themes on a famously comedic platform, was the first on the channel to have permanent player character deaths, added new mechanics and limited what the players could choose to fit the world to support this more serious tone, and on a structural level, was a welcome departure from the prior rigid alternation between episodes of combat and episodes without. It was filmed prior to the pandemic but went to air in early April 2020, when many livestreamed actual play shows were on pause and even some podcasts were scrambling to figure out remote recording. D20 introduced their talkback show as a way for the cast to hang out remotely and chat about each episode, and Adventuring Party has remained a companion to the main show. The channel had hit its stride.

Its House of the Dragon sidequest, The Ravening War, aired three years later. Despite a complicated reaction to its announcement, it was a well-received outing, but one on what had by that time become a noticeably bumpy road.

Sidequests like The Ravening War are what D20 calls its shorter, 4-10 episode seasons that do not feature the main “Intrepid Heroes” cast in full nor necessarily feature Brennan Lee Mulligan as DM. We've seen everything from the perspective of the villains in both a Lord of the Rings clone (Escape from the Bloodkeep) and a Dracula homage (Coffin Run); to a Regency romance in the Feywild (A Court of Fey and Flowers). In addition to Mercer, Jasmine Bhullar and Gabe Hicks have each run a sidequest, and Aabria Iyengar has run three. And while the Intrepid Heroes' only venture outside D&D so far is the D&D-inspired Star Wars 5e, sidequests have been run in various Kids on Bikes hacks and Hicks' own Mythic system, as their shorter format makes it even easier to experiment with the parodies, pastiches, and mash-ups the channel is known for.

There have however been two notable failed experiments, and their close proximity (both released within the past year) could be a hiccup, or could be a sign that D20’s ambition, while admirable, could use some serious reining in. They are Neverafter and Burrow's End.

Marketed as the horror season, crossed over with fairy tales, Neverafter started out strong. Only three episodes in, there was an unprecedented (for D20) total party kill. The subsequent episode is the zenith of the season, in which each character is brought back, most of them changed and twisted by the experience, playing out an analysis of their role as an archetype within these stories: Sleeping Beauty and the classic roles of The Princess (introducing such NPCs as Cinderella and Snow White), for example; or Puss in Boots as The Trickster.

Unfortunately, the quality dropped soon after. It was revealed that the darkness spreading across the fairytale multiverse was due to the influence of The Authors, and the story began to be one about the concept of stories...while still trying to incorporate not only the plotlines of the fairy tales the main PCs were from, but also an intertwined conflict between the fairies and the princess NPCs. With this, the horror, with a few exceptions, melted away: violence and monsters are standard D&D fare, and when heroes race to save the world and victory seems not only possible but likely, any distinction between horror and a typical D&D heroic fantasy is lost.

It’s not the first overstuffed campaign, but it certainly is the first one that fails to land on several levels. Starstruck Odyssey is similarly chaotic and rushed at times, but it consistently sticks to a broad message of personal autonomy and freedom within late-stage capitalism. Mulligan is famous for his capacity to spin endless dense lore off the cuff, and if it at times overcomplicates the plot of the packed and colorful comedic space adventure, at least it contributes to the baked-in excess of the setting. But Neverafter's postmodern flourishes against a horror backdrop desperately needed an injection of sparseness and silence it never received.

This is enhanced by the nature of actual play: with a few exceptions, even when filmed and even with the elaborate production values of Dimension 20, it is first and foremost primarily an auditory medium. We only know what is narrated to us. Neverafter did not permit its audience the time and space to fear the unknown. The existential horror of the metanarrative, of being a character doomed to a specific ending, while touched on by some of the cast (particularly Siobhan Thompson’s Sleeping Beauty), took a backseat to models of giant spiders and tales of undead dwarves. The story lacked the room to build real tension, but also failed to adequately create the claustrophobia of being truly trapped within its narrative. It feels more stuffy than unsettling.

Burrow's End is far less airless, but profoundly disjointed. Neverafter thought it knew what it was, but Burrow's End went through multiple identity crises by the halfway mark, and the marketing for the series reflects this.

The initial trailer makes it seem like a cute if dramatic story about a family of stoats - think Redwall, think Wind in the Willows. The first episode was excellent, however, and sold many who had been unimpressed by the trailers on the series, with its well-played setup of the clear Watership Down/Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH parallels with a unique twist in the form of The Blue.

The promotion took a strange turn, however, with the second episode and its infamous bear carcass battle map. It was hyped as uniquely horrifying, with a teaser video posted of the cast shrieking as the map, unseen by the audience, was wheeled past them. This seemed rather cavalier of the channel once the episode was posted, accompanied by a gore content warning covering a period of well over an hour...which was then further undercut by an exquisitely crafted, but ultimately rather tame display of a bear's innards. It was left out on the table during Adventuring Party as well, further reducing the idea of any meaningful shock factor (or any attempt to accommodate those in the audience who were triggered). The combat this map was for was a creative one, and the episode itself high quality, but it furthered the sense that Dimension 20 itself was unsure of what they were trying to get people to watch.

The series continued on with two more excellent episodes as it reached Last Bast, a clearly man-made structure full of thousands of stoats, with a strong dash of the police state. The actors immediately clocking the flaws of this society, but their stoat characters having no similar sense, led to a fascinating tension. However, the Blue (called the Light in Last Blast), previously described as some animating force and driver of magical power, and mysteriously concentrated in the brain of the dead-but-animated bear, was then revealed to be ionizing radiation.

At this point, the details of my own life become relevant. My career is in the field of health physics. I hold a master’s degree in this specialty and have served as a radiation safety officer, though not at a reactor. I don’t think that this background is a requirement to understand the structural issues of this season; but it certainly made me particularly attuned to the flaws.

Before you claim that this is just a show and who cares: In addition to my love of actual play, I am also a fan of comics and all sorts of speculative fiction. I am well aware that Spider-Man’s “radioactive blood” would not realistically grant him spider powers; I know that going into a high radiation field would not create Doctor Manhattan; I know that Superman does not actually have ‘x-ray vision’, and I know that radiation creates neither kaiju nor rad roaches. This is fine. In comics, radiation is a shorthand for “mad science” or “mysterious powers” with a sense of the lethal and the eldritch and the hubristic. The story is not so much about the source of these powers, but rather the great responsibilities they require. Godzilla, meanwhile, is clearly a metaphor for the very real nuclear devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Fallout is an anti-proliferation and anti-war message with nuclear annihilation as the set up for its post-apocalyptic setting. These works understand that radiation is a limited-use plot device, and, wisely, they keep it simple.

Burrow’s End, by placing radiation front and center, has lost the message. The themes of the story are irretrievably muddled: what seems like a tale of family displaced by human intervention now positions a man-made hazardous material as both sinister corruption and divine boon, and engages neither with a fitting narrative of both the pros and cons of technology, nor of human and animal symbiosis. The finale establishes the latter in a rushed cut scene reliant on a single persuasion roll, and the two episodes prior to that meanwhile establish that while the humans first introduced radiation to the ecosystem, the first five stoats were the ones who sought it out and disseminated it and built the police state, and their true nemesis was Phoebe, one of their own. This culminates with Phoebe, the previously unseen fifth of the first five stoats (who have by now already been killed by the heroes), piloting the body of a 20-years-dead human, threatening to somehow cause global radiation contamination as her grand Evil Scheme. Unnecessarily, from a narrative perspective, I might add; this occurs after the final combat has already begun and she is magically controlling two of the party members. They’re already going to kill her. It’s a hat on a hat on a hat, and the humans are incidental.

When I was a child, I was enamored with the sort of stories in which children are sent to another time or place and then return with seemingly no time passing, and at one point excitedly told my mother I had an idea for a story, of what happens back while you’re time traveling. My mother, a fan of speculative fiction herself, and never one to coddle, told me “nothing, honey, that’s the point.” I wonder if something similar happened here; an attempted deconstruction of those radiation-granted superpower tropes, focused so hard on being clever it overshot into something anything but. Other elements of the story - particularly the weak pun of “copper” to hammer home the already obvious theme of population support being the arm of the police - make me think this was indeed an attempt at cleverness that missed the mark.

I am happy to elaborate on the flaws of the science elsewhere but I think the most succinct way to put it is that while the biology and habits of stoats sans radiation has been considered with what seems to be at least a modicum of love and care (their use of pre-existing burrows, Viola’s pregnancy), the radiation science/understanding of recent nuclear history can only be described as abysmally neglectful, in and out of game. They let a Loss of Coolant Accident go on for three days with a remarkably casual attitude? This disaster was sufficient to result in what appears to be an exclusion zone (of which there have been three, ever, in human history; two of which are the immediately recognizable Chernobyl and Fukushima) and yet it isn’t being monitored closely enough for someone to notice that there’s been penned animals next to the building for years (let alone that the building itself is teeming with stoats)? For that matter, they’re opening the site only twenty years later? After the “radiation dust”, apparently present on the fully maintained roads by the reactor, but neither within nor in front of the reactor, just now made 14 people bleed out (not how Acute Radiation Syndrome works; also 14 deaths from ARS in 1982, when the series is set would in fact be an unprecedented disaster. In our world, Chernobyl - which had not yet happened in 1982 - is the only nuclear accident that exceeds that ARS death toll.)

Radiation becomes an all-purpose plot engine with no internal consistent logic: it kills humans swiftly and brutally (though based on statements by Dr. Tara Steel and the fact that she seems fine in only a hazmat suit - which shields from contamination but will stop neither gamma nor neutron radiation - only via inhalation). But it infects chipmunks and bears with corruptive and bizarre neurological effects, turns wolves into horrifying but loyal hybridized monstrosities, and conveys to stoats not just human intelligence, but mastery of human language, magic spells, and the ability to come back as a revenant through force of will…though it also can immediately kill them, but also extend their lifespans, but also cause them to slowly mutate into wolves (but not through DNA splicing transfer, that would be silly). It kills 14 humans nearly instantly with off-site dust, but another survives a fiery attempted core meltdown with no apparent ill effects.

There is an excellent and thoughtful story about family, generational trauma, and political structures somewhere under here, and the incredible cast does its damndest to sell it, but it is all but lost beneath a sci-fi whodunnit that would make Ed Wood cock a skeptical eyebrow.

Neverafter and Burrow’s End’s respective collapses under the weight of ambition coincide, perhaps unintentionally, with some of the more dubious film editing choices on Dimension 20. Filmed actual play can be visually unexciting, and Dimension 20 has used simple shot/reverse shots, as well as some sound effects (notably for critical hits and fails) throughout its run to break it up. Neverafter, however, is marked by deliberate hisses and glitches, fractured split screens, echoey vocal effects, and nails-on-chalkboard screeches. This did not add to the atmosphere as intended; at best they were irritating and for many made it actively harder to hear key dialogue. Burrow’s End’s editing has been simpler, mostly relying on some, to be fair, well-placed cuts to black and voice distortion to indicate taped or radioed segments; but a key moment - Jaysohn’s potentially fatal rush into radioactive waters - is undercut with a frankly cheesy montage. Others I spoke to compared it to Indian soap operas, 1960s Doctor Who, The Oscars In Memoriam video, and reality show farewell reels. It takes what could be a tense potential character death - something D20 already handles wonderfully with their iconic Box of Doom - and makes it cheap and tacky, particularly jarring given the beautiful and haunting shadow puppet animation the season had previously delivered to convey the stoat creation myths. (And then, when Ava falls into the waters herself saving him, she merely comes back as a revenant with no ill effects. The stakes were never there to begin with in this smoke and mirrors season.)

Praise for Dimension 20 often hinges on its original innovative structure; most actual play shows skew towards more longform storytelling. However, the short format comes with a price. The fixed length of D20 seasons and the elaborate, custom made maps require a deft GM that can guide players to the exact right place without it seeming forced. Threading the needle is harder than it looks; even the otherwise iconic Fantasy High debut season stumbled towards the end when the players were too good at uncovering the mystery, and Mulligan had to place their characters in an inescapable prison in order to pad out a pre-scheduled episode before the finale. Perhaps the strain of this constant need to live up to a reputation as high-concept innovators, rather than simply create something good and cohesive, is beginning to show. The higher production values in Neverafter and Burrow’s End cannot hide their messy plots and confused messages, and indeed only highlight them. One interview said that for Burrow’s End, Iyengar wants the audience to trust her; after Burrow's End, I can’t say I do.

The next Dimension 20 season after Burrow’s End is a long-awaited return home to the flagship: Fantasy High Junior Year. Let’s hope this reminds the channel where they came from, and what magic they are capable of making when they keep it simple.

#long post #d20 spoilers #burrows end spoilers #d20 tag

162 notes · View notes

fatehbaz · 1 year

Text

A thing that I love to do is to intentionally unlearn English common names for plants and animals. Ascribing of strict formal names to living things for processing through institutionalized knowledge systems is an act of capture. And I am not interested in capturing, possessing, any creature.

What do some English common names teach us about a creature? Names are powerful. These are things that I often contemplate together in relation to each other: “folk” taxonomy, animal naming conventions, erasure of local environmental knowledge, the theft and extraction of Indigenous language and knowledge, and rare and endemic species with specific microhabitat preferences.

---

You might come to find that a creature, like a frog in the tropical Andes, is named for a museum curator in London who had never visited the Andes, or the frog is named after an eighteenth century plantation owner who contracted the European land surveyors to map the area.

There are so many creatures named after racists, eugenicists, violent colonizers. Of course, Linnaean taxonomic naming conventions were being established alongside the height of European maritime dominance, plantation slavery, and colonization of the American hemisphere, Australia, South Asia, the tropics.

A frog might be named after an imperial British adventurer who recorded the creature for audiences at European museums. They called “dibs” on the frog, despite the fact that local Indigenous communities may have had an ongoing relationship with the creature for centuries. So instead I’m interested in trying to learn a “folk” name for the creature, or instead I would apply a new name for an animal based on the geographic area, ecoregion, plant community, or ecocultural region that the creature was most closely associated with.

---

Here’s a situation:

There is a relatively little-known salamander species. It is superlative. The terrestrial adults are enormous, and can be purple-ish in color, marked with gold speckles that seem to glow like glitter. They’re one of the only salamanders on the planet that can vocalize. They live in habitat alongside grizzly bears, mountain lion, wolverine, moose, unique lichen-eating mountain caribou, land snails, big ferns. The aquatic larvae can reach lengths of over 30 centimeters (1 foot), and they live not in still water like ponds and lakes as most other salamander larvae, but instead they swim around in fast-flowing streams.

It’s an endemic species. It lives in just a few small rivers’ watersheds, mostly in small, fast-flowing, cold, clear mountain streams in temperate rainforest ecosystems in the Columbia Mountains of the Northern Rockies, almost entirely within the arbitrary political borders of the US state of “Idaho,” on the traditional land of Nimiipuu (Nez Perce) people and Schitsu’umsh (Skitswish/Coeur d’Alene) people.

And it’s official common name: “Idaho giant salamander.” Not cool. Does the salamander have a meaningful reciprocal relationship with a political entity less than 200 years old, or does the salamander have a relationship with the ancient cedars of the rainforest? Which has existed longer: the arbitrary political entity of Idaho, or the Nimiipuu people? What do some English common names teach us about a creature? Names are powerful. Is the salamander named after the streams, the source of its life? Is it named after the temperate rainforest ecoregion, this safe harbor of fertile vegetation? Does its name refer to the endemic tailed frogs or other aquatic creatures that it relies on for food? Does the name reference the Nimiipuu, who have known the amphibian for centuries? Even the region’s name (”Columbia Mountains”) is a reference to one of history’s most notorious celebrities.

---

Here’s something from Robin Wall Kimmerer:

In the English language, if we want to speak of that sugar maple or that salamander, the only grammar that we have to do so is to call those beings an “it.” [...] In Potawatomi, the cases that we have are animate and inanimate, and it is impossible in our language to speak of other living beings as “it”s. [...] [W]hen we name something, often with a scientific name, this name becomes almost an end to inquiry. We sort of say, well, we know it now. We’re able to systematize it […]. It’s such a mechanical, wooden representation of what a plant really is. And we reduce them tremendously if we just think about them [solely] as physical elements of the ecosystem. […] This comes back to what I think of as the innocent or childlike way of knowing. Actually, that’s a terrible thing to call it. We say it’s an innocent way of knowing, and, in fact, it’s a very worldly and wise way of knowing. That kind of deep attention that we pay as children is something that I cherish, that I think we all can cherish and reclaim, because attention is that doorway to gratitude, the doorway to wonder, the doorway to reciprocity.

Words of Robin Wall Kimmerer. Interviewed by Krista Tippett. “On Being with Krista Tippett - Robin Wall Kimmerer: The Intelligence in All Kinds of Life.” February 2016.

---

It’s also important to me to clarify that, when referencing an Indigenous name or term for landmarks, places, plants, animals, etc. I only really feel comfortable doing so if the name is explicitly used by and/or confirmed to be accurate by speakers, researchers, knowledge-holders, etc. from that Indigenous community. And I also don’t want to use/share a name/term if the name/term was “collected” (appropriated, extracted) by a chauvinistic white academic or paternalistic Euro-American “ethnologist” or reproduced in a 1950s ethnobotany book or something. I especially don’t like relying on the testimony of, like, Euro-American missionaries or “traders’ who recorded terms in their personal journal in the 1750s or something.

How were those terms encountered?

How were they “extracted”?

Under duress?

Were these names, this environmental knowledge, willingly shared?

What ethical implications are there, of accepting secondhand information from an invading “pioneer”?

Many times, I’ll be reading a paper, maybe a “contempoary” paper from the past 10 years, and see references to a cool-sounding place-name or alternative name for a creature, and I’ve thought “wow, the connotations of the name sound really interesting, I wonder where this was learned,” and I’ll check the bibliography, and the “Indigenous name” was taken from a 1965 academic article, which itself was taken from a 1922 ethnology article sponsored by the F0rd Motor Company in pursuit of stealing local plant knowledge and land titles for rubber plantations or something, and that info itself was taken from an 1874 report from settler-colonial surveyors interviewing “locals” while traveling in company with an ex-government employee “cowboy” who had previously murdered at least 5 of the “locals.” So that, often in Euro-American “Knowledge” or “Science”, when trying to determine the Source Of A Fact, there is this blatant lineage of theft and violence and roundabout superficial self-referencing.

Even in relatively modern academic journals. Let’s say, in the 1990s, a European academic does “field research” in Amazonia. Maybe they record an “accurate” term, and I read about it in a paper. The academic says that they have a “profound respect” for “the culture”. Does this make it OK to “take” their terms? Does this make it more acceptable to “extract” a language as if it were a resource, a possession? Does it change the fact that the sponsoring academic institution or the publishing journal are both entangled with corporate extraction and ongoing (neo)colonial financialization, dispossession, debt, etc.?

So (1) you’re presented with names/terms which are probably inaccurate and which you have no way of confirming because of the convoluted way the term was passed down through settler-colonial knowledge-systematization institutions; and/or (2) more importantly, you’re presented with names/terms stolen, often at threat of violence; or (3) even in “good” scenarios with an accurate term and a so-called self-professed “respectful observer”, you’re presented with names/terms which have great power, connected to a specific culture and landscape, which should be treated with reverence and deep care, but which can easily be stolen and appropriated by popular media, wielding the power of the name in contexts where it doesn’t belong, a betrayal to the people, place, and/or creature.

---

Names imply or explicitly reveal the life of a creature or place, and also imply the connections between the creature/place being named, and the other worlds and relationships it influences and interacts with.

If i am not from the community that conceived the term/language, (1) it doesn’t feel honorable appropriating their language for myself, especially if I don’t have ongoing personal connection to people, places; (2) it doesn’t feel honorable, or all that reliable, to accept at face value the accuracy of a language/term if it’s being reported secondhand by a Euro-American academic intermediary, especially if that language was recorded during periods when Euro-American observers were actively engaged in colonization; and (3) it doesn’t feel honorable to use what might even be accurate Indigenous language/terminology if it was recorded/learned/stolen/promoted by Euro-American observers, unless there is explicit permission from native speakers to use the word, or unless native speakers actively encourage the acknowledgement of the words, maybe for purposes like language revitalization.

There is power and knowledge in a name. using a name involves serious responsibility. i feel that some names aren’t for me to invoke.

---

I think that maybe no name can do justice to the entire rich existence of a creature, but we can really do better than some English common names, especially in those cases when an animal is named after a lone individual human. And so, in naming, there might be a difficult decision to make. Do you name a creature for its behavior, its location, its appearance, its season of activity, its prefered habitat, its companion species? Maybe you have your own, personal, relationship with the creature. A living thing has so many interweaved relationships with others. Maybe its “meaning” changes with context or season or emotional state of the human observer. Maybe I will sometimes call the “Idaho giant salamander” something more fitting. Maybe I’ll call it “the cedar salamander” or the “guardian of the waterfall pools” or “the giant of the stream” or “moss dragon” or whatever. Depends on the mood, context, whatever.

We are all of us, salamander and human, more rich and complex than associations with mere behavior, appearance, habitat preference, or the surveyors that try to capture and catalogue us. And sometimes, I’m uncomfortable enclosing us with a singular denomination, with a strict name. I don’t assume that I know enough about a living thing to possess it through formal naming conventions.

#this is all just copy pasted and slightly edited from older posts of mine on this site #but the naming conventions of the frogs in Ecaudorian tropical Andes had me thinking about this #abolition #interspecies #ecology

224 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 2 months

Text

Moscow CNN — Two years ago, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, I was among the many long-time observers of the Kremlin who got it wrong.

Few could fathom why Vladimir Putin, Russia’s calculating leader, would embark on such a risky military adventure, especially when the mere threat of a Russian invasion was already yielding results.

In June the previous year, as Russian forces massed near Ukraine, US President Joe Biden met Putin at a superpower-style summit, describing the US and Russia as “two great powers” elevating the Russian leader after previous US administrations had sought to downplay Russia’s influence.

In the days before the 2022 invasion, Washington offered a “pragmatic evaluation” of Moscow’s security concerns, signalling openness to compromise.

Pitching Russian forces against one of the region’s biggest standing armies seemed uncharacteristically reckless and, therefore, unlikely.

There were others, though, who rightly saw the invasion as inevitable, better reading the Kremlin’s intentions, and confidently predicting a swift Russian victory at the hands of Moscow’s vastly superior forces.

Two years on, I like to think that those of us who doubted the Kremlin’s resolve were wrong for the right reasons.

What Moscow still euphemistically calls a Special Military Operation has been a bloodbath of catastrophic proportions, unseen in Europe for generations. Even conservative estimates put the number of dead and injured at hundreds of thousands of people on each side. Small gains, such as the recent capture of Avdiivka, have come at enormous cost.

Russia’s once revered military has shown itself painfully unprepared and vulnerable to modern weapons in the hands of a determined Ukrainian resistance. Even if the war ends tomorrow, it is likely to take many years for its strength and numbers to recover.

And the past two years of brutal war have twisted and distorted Russia internally too.

Hundreds of thousands of its citizens have fled abroad to avoid conscription. Frustrations with the way the war was being fought provoked an armed uprising in which gun-toting Wagner mercenaries marched on Moscow, posing an unprecedented challenge to the Kremlin’s authority.

International disdain has made Russia the most heavily sanctioned country in the world. Even President Putin has been indicted for war crimes at the Hague.

And now Putin’s most vocal critic – Alexey Navalny – is dead. Amid a broader crackdown on dissent, this country has plunged further into isolation and darkness.

Take a longer view, and the direction of travel seems tragically clear.

I was in Chechnya when, in 2000, a newly installed President Putin brought that rebellious Russian region to heel, unleashing a relentless Russian military. We will bomb them in the outhouse, he remarked, in a crude but popular refrain.

In 2006, a leading Russia journalist, Anna Politikovskaya, was murdered, on Putin’s birthday. Her brave dispatches from Chechnya struck a chord. Other critics were silenced at home and abroad.

By 2008, Putin was intervening in neighbouring Georgia, carving out pro-Russian regions from the Georgian state. Before the territory of Crimea was annexed from Ukraine in 2014, Russian forces had for years successfully propped up the Syrian regime in that country’s own brutal crackdown on rebellion, despite international condemnation.

But February 24, 2022, was a watershed.

It’s not just that Putin miscalculated in his ambition to conquer Ukraine, although what was meant as a limited campaign is very much now an open-ended war.

Rather, his full-scale invasion of Ukraine was the moment Putin finally abandoned all semblance of cooperation with the West, and all pretence that dissent and criticism inside this great nation would be tolerated.

And there is currently little sign of any change in course.

In fact, two years into his Special Military Operation, Putin is tightening his grip on power with opponents silenced and elections in March set to confirm his fifth presidential term.

Privately, many Russians remain quietly hopeful that there will, one day, be a change in course. But few believe it is unlikely to be now or even soon.

10 notes · View notes

cooledtured · 1 month

Text

From the Screen to the Edge of Your Seat - The Top 5 Moments from 'The Boys'

Since its release, "The Boys" has hooked audiences all over the world with its shamelessly outrageous storyline. The announcement of a new season has fans buzzing with excitement, so now is the time to revisit some of the most heart-stopping moments that have defined the series. Buckle up as we count down the top 5 moments from "The Boys" that kept us thrilled and on the edge of our seats.

The Shocking Plane Crash

Our list begins with the jaw-dropping scene from Season 1, in which a commercial airplane tragically crashes, showing Homelander's horrific power as he shows his true nature.

In a display of power, Homelander swoops in to rescue passengers aboard a hijacked plane. However, the shocking twist comes when he intentionally lets go of the plane's controls, causing chaos and destruction. This scene serves as a chilling reminder of Homelander's true nature and unpredictability. The sheer intensity of this sequence, paired with its unexpected twist, set the tone for the series and astounded fans.

The Butcher's Revelation

One of the most surprising scenes in "The Boys" is when Billy Butcher realizes the truth about his wife, Becca. The Butcher's Revelation is a watershed moment in "The Boys" that not only changes the direction of the plot but also goes into the depths of love and treachery. For Billy Butcher, who has been consumed by revenge and grief since his wife, Becca, was assumed dead, the discovery that she is still alive and appears to be involved in raising Homelander's son is nothing short of shocking and heartbreaking. The truth comes as a devastating shock, destroying Butcher's world and leaving viewers astonished.

Stormfront's Identity Revealed

At number three, we have the reveal of Stormfront's true identity. When her true identity as a former member of a militant group and extremist youth organization was disclosed on the show, it sent shockwaves through the audience. The revelation not only adds a new layer of complexity to the character but also serves as a sobering reminder of the dangers of unchecked power and extremism. This key moment in Season 2 also reveals Vought's cruel and torturous underbelly and lays the groundwork for future battles.

The Compound V Exposé

Sliding into fourth place is the spectacular reveal of Compound V in Season 1. When the truth about Vought's secretive Compound V studies is revealed, it not only exposes the company's dark secrets but also shatters the superhero industry's illusion of heroism. This discovery has far-reaching consequences, altering the public's conception of superheroes as benevolent defenders while also exposing Vought's morally problematic methods. Compound V's discovery disrupts the superhero world's power dynamic, exposing Vought's manipulation and exploitation of individuals for profit.

The Deep’s Actions

The Deep's Encounter is arguably one of the most dreadful and affecting scenes in "The Boys," putting light on the widespread abuse of power in the superhero industry. When The Deep, a member of The Seven, uses his position to sexually abuse Starlight during her initiation into the organization, it shocks both the characters and the audience.

This alarming action shows the dark underbelly of the superhero universe, where corruption and exploitation thrive beneath the cloak of heroism. The Deep's abuse of his authority exemplifies the toxic dynamics at work among The Seven and the larger superhero community, where people like Starlight are prone to dishonesty and abuse.

As we eagerly await the new season, these amazing moments serve as a reminder of the thrills and excitement that "The Boys" never ceases to provide. From surprising twists to astonishing confrontations, each moment creates a lasting impression on viewers and generates anticipation for what comes next. So grab your popcorn and prepare for another thrilling adventure with "The Boys"!

Parleen Kaur | Writer POP-COOLEDTURED SPECIALIST cooledtured.com | GROW YOUR COLLECTION

#TheBoys #Homelander #theDeep #Stormfront

4 notes · View notes

hansolostrickedoutweedvan · 4 months

Text

Doctor Who: Edge of Destruction

Edge of Destruction

This is a 2-part serial following on directly from The Daleks. The Doctor sets the TARDIS in motion and it all goes wrong. People keep getting knocked out either by the TARDIS bumping or the console electrocuting someone, the doors keep opening and closing, The Doctor, in his most asshole move yet, decides that clearly Ian and Barbara sabotaged the ship and they can’t be trusted, Susan gets overwhelmed by…something? And ends up hysterically stabbing a mattress, the Doctor literally drugs Ian and Barbara with some hot cocoa, Barbara realises everything that’s going on is the TARDIS trying to send them a message, and eventually they realise that the “Fast Return Switch” the Doctor pressed is broken because a spring came loose and the button won’t depress.

It’s…interesting, as far as Dr Who goes. This is probably as awful as the First Doctor gets, and as much shit as later Doctors will get for things done in the heat of Regeneration sickness, this one did all this sober and clearheaded. It does feature Barbara giving the Doctor a righteous scalding, how everything bad that’s happened so far is basically his fault and how he needs to back the fuck up. It does act as a sort of watershed moment for the TARDIS crew, allowing them to transition from grudging antagonists to sort of friends. Carole Ann Ford is making some choices here involving her “overwhelmed by the void” acting, and honestly, she was probably just glad to have something to do other then scream Grandpa or fall over.

Notable Firsts: First indication that the TARDIS is sapient, first time a companion really lays into the Doctor, first time we had a serial that explicitly confirmed there are adventures in between the ones we see on television, and first use of the Fast Return Switch. Big serial for Big Finish writers, I guess.

Rating: Peter Davison out of David Tennant

Small note- I won’t be reviewing Marco Polo, because those tapes are lost (hooray for the BBC’s terrible media preservation practices) and…honestly, I’m good, apparently it had some real questionable depictions of asian people and I’m good. We’ll pick up next time with “Keys of Marinus”

#dr who #edge of destruction #ian chesterton #william hartnell #1st doctor #susan foreman

3 notes · View notes

thevindicativevordan · 1 year

Note

I find it strange that Superman fans and some writers still cling to John Byrne's ideas about how Superman should be written - How Clark Kent is the true identity and Superman is the mask, how Superman shouldn't care as much about his Kryptonian identity because that's how Byrne wrote him. How is it possible that one writer's interpretation of the character can overwrite the literal decades of how the character used to be written ?

Because it got adapted outside of comics. Lois & Clark went with that take, the DCAU went with that take, Smallville too. The DCEU was trying to go that route, it just executed it even worse than Byrne did. More people saw those than have ever read any comics. To many, stripping Superman of anything fun makes him more relatable (I would argue that his drop in popularity compared to Batman disproves that). Plus it fits with the perception that Superman is perfect. If he actually enjoys being Superman, enjoys flying, going on crazy adventures, and having cool stuff like the Fortress of Solitude, well that's a bit arrogant isn't it? None of us can do that. Some would see that as a sign he needs to be taken down a peg, so he remembers who it is he's here to serve. But if he's a humble guy who hates being different from us in any way, well that's just further proof of how great he is.

And, much as I'm loathe to say it, Byrne's reboot was a huge sales success. Superman's comics had sold terribly for a while, and Byrne reinvigorated his sales. Much like Injustice I would contest that a story with Superman in it can both sell well and be bad for him, but it did sell. Under Byrne, Superman finally managed to reach a new audience which he had been struggling to do for a while. Look if even Mark Waid, a diehard Pre-Crisis fan who hates most of the changes Byrne made, makes allowances to the Byrne mold with his rebooted origin in Birthright because he knows that's what people expect from Superman, you know that Byrne was a watershed moment for the character.

Hell, Waid may have even helped feed into the perception of Clark being the "real" one unintentionally with Kingdom Come. Other than Byrne's Man of Steel and the Death of Superman Saga, Kingdom Come is one of the most influential Post Crisis era Superman stories. What's one of the major takeaways from that story? Without Clark Kent, Superman's moral compass is off. He needs Clark Kent. Obviously Waid didn't intend for that to support Clark being the "true" identity, but I'm sure plenty of readers did come away thinking that based on the events in the story. Finally, kids who grew up reading Byrne are now in positions of power at WBD/DC, like our new head of DC Studios James Gunn. No surprise then that his influence is still felt, even if it's not just Byrne in the mix anymore thank goodness.

#superman #john byrne

14 notes · View notes

pellinni-photo · 11 months

Photo

ukrainian carpathians watershed ridge adventures. terrain with stones and rocks of pikui mountan. green slopes beneath a blue sky with fluffy clouds. wonderful summer vacations on a sunny day - ukrainian carpathians watershed ridge adventures. terrain with stones and rocks of pikui mountan. green slopes beneath a blue sky with fluffy clouds. wonderful summer vacations on a sunny day

#grass #rock #landscape #nature #beautiful #outdoor #travel #background #summer #sky #mountain #green

4 notes · View notes

graciedart · 7 months

Text

one more party member- dwarf who was trapped inside a glacier

#art #dungeons and dragons #dnd #dwarf #cleric #paladin #fighter #i do not remember man #hjanir #watershed #watershed adventure

371 notes · View notes

yestolerancepro · 7 months

Text

Jumping the shark the Tolerance Project and the Jaws Franchise.

Jaws is a 1975 American thriller film directed by Steven Spielberg, based on the 1974 novel by Peter Benchley. It stars Roy Scheider as police chief Martin Brody, who, with the help of a marine biologist (Richard Dreyfuss) and a professional shark hunter (Robert Shaw), hunts a man-eating great white shark that attacks beachgoers at a summer resort town. Murray Hamilton plays the mayor, and Lorraine Gary portrays Brody's wife. The screenplay is credited to Benchley, who wrote the first drafts, and actor-writer Carl Gottlieb, who rewrote the script during principal photography.

To read an article from the website Movieweb about the 10 biggest differances between the book by Peter Benchley and the Jaws film click here https://movieweb.com/jaws-biggest-differences-between-movie-and-book/

Also Do sharks really grow to the the great big size that we see in the Jaws film click on the article bellow for your answer https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/do-great-white-sharks-really-get-as-big-as-jaws

Why does the shark in the Jaws film attack Amity island ?

The answer to that question is answered in this article from the fan website The Daily Jaws https://thedailyjaws.com/blog/extremely-rare-for-these-waters-why-did-the-shark-in-jaws-choose-amity-island

Shot mostly on location at Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, Jaws was the first major motion picture to be shot on the ocean and consequently had a troubled production, going over budget and schedule. As the art department's mechanical sharks often malfunctioned, Spielberg decided mostly to suggest the shark's presence, employing an ominous and minimalist theme created by composer John Williams to indicate its impending appearances. Spielberg and others have compared this suggestive approach to that of director Alfred Hitchcock. Universal Pictures' release of the film to over 450 screens was an exceptionally wide release for a major studio picture at the time, and it was accompanied by an extensive marketing campaign that heavily emphasized television spots and tie-in merchandise.

Regarded as a watershed moment in motion picture history, Jaws was the prototypical summer blockbuster, and won several awards for its music and editing. It was the highest-grossing film of all time until the release of Star Wars two years later; both films were pivotal in establishing the modern Hollywood business model, which pursues high box-office returns from action and adventure films with simple high-concept premises, released during the summer in thousands of theaters and advertised heavily.

Jaws the perfect Horror film

I myself don’t class Jaws 1975 or its sequels as a horror film feel free to disagree with me the Callider film website wrote an article called 25 movies that are perfect from start to finish Jaws 1975 was on the list at number 1 Callider explained why Jaws was number on their list.

Predating Star Wars by two years, Jaws is often considered the original Hollywood blockbuster. It was a movie that established an already accomplished Steven Spielberg as an undisputed master filmmaker, and it remains his most exciting thriller. As far as the plot goes, it almost couldn't be simpler, as Jaws follows three men who set out to kill a monstrous shark that's been terrorizing a seaside town during the summer holiday season.

No dinosaur movie has ever been as good as Spielberg's Jurassic Park, and similarly, no other shark movie has ever come close to touching Jaws. It's a movie that works wonders with a direct premise that in lesser hands would feel generic, underwhelming, or predictable, and every minute here proves engrossing. It's a movie that's perfectly cast, perfectly paced, and perfectly directed by a remarkably young Spielberg (he wasn't even 30 at the time of its release). In essence, Jaws is - without a doubt - simply perfect.

Jaws the Music and creating that theme

John Williams composed the film's score, which earned him an Academy Award and was later ranked the sixth-greatest score by the American Film Institute.[75][76] The main "shark" theme, a simple alternating pattern of two notes—variously identified as "E and F"[77] or "F and F sharp"[78]—became a classic piece of suspense music, synonymous with approaching danger[79] (see leading-tone). in the film the theme is simply discribed as Main title / First Victim to listen to it click here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX3bN5YeiQs&list=PL17vqAEJv6CV1syq4_fFKgBwSqGdJzH9z&index=343

Williams described the theme as "grinding away at you, just as a shark would do, instinctual, relentless, unstoppable."[80] The piece was performed by tuba player Tommy Johnson. When asked by Johnson why the melody was written in such a high register and not played by the more appropriate French horn, Williams responded that he wanted it to sound "a little more threatening".[81] When Williams first demonstrated his idea to Spielberg, playing just the two notes on a piano, Spielberg was said to have laughed, thinking that it was a joke. As Williams saw similarities between Jaws and pirate movies, at other points in the score he evoked "pirate music", which he called "primal, but fun and entertaining".[74] Calling for rapid, percussive string playing, the score contains echoes of La mer by Claude Debussy as well of Igor Stravinsky's The Rite of Spring.[78][82]

Steven Speilberg explains in this article for Fandomwire why he began to laugh when he first heard the famous Jaw theme https://fandomwire.com/i-began-to-laugh-steven-spielberg-thought-john-williams-pranked-him-after-first-hearing-the-iconic-jaws-theme-only-to-admit-his-mistake-later/

To watch a video called JAWS (1975) - WTF REALLY Happened To This Horror Movie? about the original Jaws film click here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lW9MyhZGg8&list=PL17vqAEJv6CV1syq4_fFKgBwSqGdJzH9z&index=318

The slash film website recently published a list of the top 10 best Jaws knock off/ spoofs reading this list which you can see by clicking here https://www.slashfilm.com/897480/the-best-jaws-knock-offs-ranked/#:~:text=The%20Best%20Jaws%20Knock-Offs%2C%20Ranked%201%201.%20Tremors,8.%20Grizzly%20Film%20Ventures%20International%20...%20More%20items

What do you think are the best films in the Jaws Franchise ?

The orignal Jaws film from 1975 was included on a list of film published by Screenrant of Franchises that peaked with their first film they said about Jaws.

One of the most important releases in movie history, the original Jaws, was credited with starting the summer blockbuster as audiences know it, and forever changing cinema. The highest-grossing movie of all time when it came out in 1975, Steven Spielberg’s epic tale of a killer shark who terrorized beachgoers was a sensational piece of action filmmaking that was as thrilling as it was terrifying. Three sequels were released, and its legacy can still be felt in recent films like The Meg, but the series peaked with the original. It is a classic horror film that cannot be replicated in any way or form.

Screenrant recently published an article called 10 films that deserved better sequels Jaws was included on thar list this is what Screenrant said about the Jaws sequels

Directed by Steven Spielberg, Jaws has been cited as one of the films that created the summer blockbuster, and set the tone for the success of Spielberg's career. It makes sense that producers wanted to capitalize on the attention that Jaws was receiving, but the many sequels that followed were consistently less effective than the original film. Though not the worst sequel overall, Jaws 2 set the tone for how filmmakers would approach the legacy of the franchise, and this should've been treated more carefully. Like many sequels, Jaws 2 falls prey to the mistake of following the same plot as the original, but not doing it as well.

I like Jaws I and 2 they are about the best the frachise has to offer.

Jaws 2 secretly has the most realestic shark screne according to this article on the ScreenRant website https://screenrant.com/jaws-2-realistic-shark-scene-diver-scare/

Talking about Jaws 2 the film celebrates its 45th Birthday this year The remind website published this article to celebrate its birthday https://www.remindmagazine.com/article/3744/jaws-2-1978-roy-scheider-john-williams/

Did you know that the first 2 Jaws films are number 2 and 3 in the list of highest grossing horror films of all time behind the 1973 film The Exorcist I know this sounds funny but I wouldn’t class the Jaws Franchise as Horror but thats just me you can read the full list by clicking here https://www.visualcapitalist.com/the-highest-grossing-horror-movies-of-all-time/

JAWS III or is that JAWS 3D ? 1983

Jaws III aka Jaws 3D (depending on which version you are watching the 2D Television Version or 3D version) which people saw at the cinema is a bit of a mess.

You can read about Producer/Directors Joe Dantes orignal plans for Jaws III amd his unmade sequel Jaws 3 people 0 by clcking here click here https://theplaylist.net/joe-dante-unmade-jaws-sequel-20230721/

If anybody is reading this a question has anybody seen the orignal 3D version of the film what was it like? I imagine it was a rather strange expeireince the only 3D film I have seen was Captain EO at Disney land in California in 1989 and again at EuroDisney in the early 90s.

Jaws 4 The Revenge 1987

The follow up Jaws 4 The Revenge is a little bit of an improvement on III but not by much . I find Jaws 4 the Revenge a rather strange title I never knew great big white sharks had such strong emotions.

I saw the film when it was shown on the television the best thing in it is Micheal Caine who played Hoagie Newcombe in the film. and as the story goes he accepted the part in the film to pay for his mothers house lol

There was even a Jaws computer game to tie in with Jaws 4 the Revenge it wasn’t very good by all accounts you can find a video about it here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb-ILuDLuUk&list=PL17vqAEJv6CV1syq4_fFKgBwSqGdJzH9z&index=319

For more context on what makes Jaws III and 4 so bad watch this video exploring those terrible Jaws sequels by clicking here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3ta3vhzIfE&list=PL17vqAEJv6CV1syq4_fFKgBwSqGdJzH9z&index=336

Did you know that Jaws 4 the Revenge has the Dubious honor of having one of the lowest scores ever on the film rating site Rottern Tomatoes the Game rant website published the story here https://gamerant.com/jaws-revenge-0-rotten-tomatoes/

Jaws and the the Tolerance film

We didn’t see the famous great white shark in the Tolerance film but we did hear him

We used the famous Jaws theme twice in the Tolerance film once when Robert is nearly knocked over by a passing car only to be saved by a passer by

And the 2nd time time as a spoof with a slight nod to Jurassic Park to introduce the man with a hellium voice Mr Grosenberg played by actor Tony Green see the pictures below.

According to this article on the Collider film website you can tell how good a Jaws film is going to be by watching the first kill you can read it by clicking here https://collider.com/jaws-movies-opening-kills/

And some films that use JAWs motifs don’t even feature water according to this article by the CBR.com website click here https://www.cbr.com/tremors-nope-best-jaws-rip-offs/#:~:text=That%20said%2C%20the%20following%20decades%20would%20lend%20themselves,didn%27t%20even%20have%20sharks%20or%20water%20in%20them.

I met Jaws myself when I went to Universal Studios in 1989 as 12 year old he decided he wanted to take a chunk out of a tour bus during a studio tour I was lucky to survive ha ha lol.

Apprently this was part of something called Jaws the Ride you can find out more about it by clicking here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdQLmkmnmb0

To watch a video about Most Ridiculous Jaws Moments click here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf8n-DjLQkc

As this blog is titled the best Jaws Knocks I thought I would include this video I found on Youtube titled Borrowing Blockbusters: Jawsploitation - The Best, Best Worst and Weirdest Jaws Knock Offs you can watch it by clicking here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFQuI95b9TA&list=PL17vqAEJv6CV1syq4_fFKgBwSqGdJzH9z&index=342

Extra Material

Documentaries

To watch a video about the making of Jaws 2 Click here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5LM57GBIAA

To watch a video about the making of Jaws 3D click here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqV3aU_-NN0

To watch Jaws 3D a video retrospective from the Oliver Harper Youtube channel click here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsarUFfuWRY&t=20s

To watch a video called 10 things you didn’t know about Jaws 4 the Revenge click here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9IFgf6enyw&t=38s

Jaws Trailers

A collection of trailers for all 4 of the Jaws films click here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_G0RoRbEEw

Thank you to the You Tube Channels Minty Comedic arts for the video shorts on Jaws the Ride and the making of videos for Jaws Jaws 2 Jaws 3D Jaws 4 The Revenge and Most Ridiculous Jaws Moments and the Indie Dairy for the Jaws film trailers

Here is how the Screen Rant website rated the Jaws films from worst to best click on the link to read more https://screenrant.com/jaws-movies-ranked-best-worst/