I find it very telling that the people suggested to me after I decided to return to/revamp my Twitter are people who talk about rizzles and Red Sox beat reporters 😂

if and when the tomgreg sex scene happens it will not be hot in the slightest but rather will feel akin to seeing an awful car wreck and for some reason being unable to look away

You can always like my posts and not reblog them btw I really don’t mind

we talk about Tim being the "emotional support Robin" but I am once again thinking about the Young Justice cartoon and how Bart is the Emotional Support Speedster

Day 20: This special HELMET, with its patented head-screw technology, will stay on in any battle! #art #drawing #illustration #sketch #doodle #ink #day20 #october #drawingchallenge #octoberdrawingchallenge #prompt #prompt3 #helmet #counterintuitive #silly #screws #headscrews #strange #weird #macabre #irishart #irishartist #dublinartist #dublinart #lorcancassidy (at Glasnevin) https://www.instagram.com/p/Cj7fIQnMqln/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

i kinda dig the idea of no pronouns actually

Yeah okay

Another thing that's a mixed bag is the fact that so many people who know me on Discord follow me now. So many of the things I used to vent about here were related to my Discord happenings but now I can't talk about that stuff because. Those people are here. Following me.

As a film person, this is the most f*cked up thing that happened in all of Good Omens

Forget about the final 15. If there's anything that should convince you that there's something really wack going on in season 2 of Good Omens it should be this cut. I literally gasped when I saw it for the first time. It's SO BAD from a technical perspective. Because you've probably been watching TV and movies your whole life, you might instinctively feel there's something weird happening with this cut, but not be able to put your finger on what it is.

I am here to tell you: they sacrificed continuity of action to *change the main character of the shot in the middle of the scene*. I won't do a full theory course on filmmaking here, but basically, when you want a fluid-feeling sequence of shots, especially when there's quite a lot of movement on screen, you have to conserve the direction and intention of that action to feel like it's all one take, and time is moving forward like we're used to in real life. Here, Crowley, Maggie and Nina all leave the Bookshop together, with Crowley and Maggie flanking Nina, who is centred in the shot. They are moving towards the camera as the camera is walking backwards, but at a slight curve camera-left. Crowley even turns his head and swings his arm left, making us feel like the camera will keep Nina center, and pan left or even cut wider to see more of the left of the street to watch them cross.

Well SURPRISE, idiots!

Forget everything you learned in film school because we're cutting immediately to a second medium length shot of the 3 characters from a slightly more camera-right perspective for no reason whatsoever, in the *opposite* direction of where the action is going, WHILE THAT ACTOR IS SPEAKING A LINE. This is so counterintuitive to the blocking of the scene that Maggie literally gets shoved out of frame while we're supposed to be reading her reaction to Crowley's dialogue. I can't stress enough how weird it is on a fundamental level. When a camera is moving and a character is talking, conserving continuity of action is THE ONE thing you don't sacrifice. It pulls people out of the moment, and makes it extra obvious that multiple takes have been stitched together. Which leads me to think that this is intentional, and sets up what I hinted to at the beginning of this whole "The More You Know" moment : Nina is the main character of the scene we're watching, until, suddenly, Crowley is. If you separated those two moments before and after the cut and watch them as two different scenes, you can see the camera following Nina and keeping her center before, but directly following Crowley and keeping him center *after* the cut. We've switched narrators in this moment. And to top it all off, they're making it pretty obvious that, while Nina is listening and reacting to both Crowley and Maggie, Crowley does not give a rat's ass about the two humans (not either not really in frame, or cut off behind him).

Louis knew about Euphoria. He was in on it. It helped him get an interview with Guardian, I think? There was a lot of buzz about Larry Stylinson again. E! News covered it. It was all planned. And Louis had to appear pissed because what else would he do? It was all for PR. It made people look into Larry…and then Louis…and oh look, he has an album coming out. They are together and they use Larry when they want to for promo. Just like You are Home.

I just don’t know.

I’ve been having some Thoughts™️ about the weird meta paradox of gerri kellman’s sexuality. as basically The Older Woman on the executive floor she’s trying as much as is possible to blend in with her male colleagues while also not being perceived to be doing so. muted colours and understated makeup. a competent filing cabinet. her husband is dead and her daughters are nameless. she was sexual once but that’s out of sight out of mind and now it’s just the work. it must be a relief in some ways to become finally unfuckable because you’re over 40. she can finally be taken seriously, but only if she toes the line between being too female and not female enough. trying but not too hard. desirable in the past tense only. an honorary man but still in a skirt. and while the men around her can fuck their much younger assistants and get sports massages and run a sex trafficking ring on a cruise ship, she is the job and only the job and that keeps her safe. for a bit anyway.

the irony of gerri saving the company from the full legal extent of a sex scandal by dating someone from the DOJ??? like i’ll never be over it. even filing cabinets have to flatter and please and fuck when called upon. i genuinely don’t believe any of the other execs could have swung it because they’re not women. she dated laurie (generally unseen unless framed from another man’s possessive perspective) to save the men from going to jail for covering up rape allegations. the irony is delicious. and even though she did that, she’s discarded once she’s framed sexually. Dick Pic Gate was out of her control and yet when confronted with any element of gerri’s sexuality (even her PASSIVE sexuality, even after using it to save his company), logan dismisses her as weak or impractical or failing or whatever other excuse he uses to justify his disgust.

i would argue that roman’s interest in gerri is not in spite of but BECAUSE of her asexual framing. it’s a challenge that he’s never going to win which is ideal for his impotency issues; he can push and push and get the thrill out of it, out of the fucked up power dynamic, but he knows he’ll never have to actually fuck her. it’s all hypothetical: down a phone, through a door, half-joking, covered in sensible skirt suits. gerri’s deliberate lack of sexualizing is counterintuitively a turn-on for roman. and i bet the game of chicken they play is freeing for her too because the fact that she has to be professional and cannot be sensual is part of the fun of it. “roman is weird about gerri”. “it’s fucking disgusting”. not because of their family history, or their professional positions, but because she’s old. because the absence of her sexuality is enough of a presence to be off-putting. shiv patronising her about it as a power play is so weird because she’s talking to her simultaneously like a child and like an old woman, and gerri, agency-less, just has to keep reassuring her “i can cope”.

BUT it’s worse than that because it’s so meta. Because gerri is hot. her actor is attractive and like roman, many people watching find her sexless, no-nonsense framing to be titillating. me included. what if roman likes gerri not because of oedipal issues but just because she’s hot and god forbid we find a woman over 50 hot? but whether or not gerri is hot in the context of the show shouldn’t be a big deal, she should have been able to escape this by now!!! she’s in her 60s she’s a widow she’s tired stop sexualizing her!!! but don’t NOT sexualize her either because that’s problematic too and old women can be hot and old women shouldn’t have to be hot and suddenly i’m making gerri do what waystar does and exist as something sexual and non-sexual at the same time. she has a huge plotline in which she’s essentially a sex object. whether or not gerri is fuckable is talked about as much in the show with mildly-disgusted fascination as it is in the real world!!! she can’t win she’s hot she’s old she’s sexually framed she’s deliberately trying not to be she wants sex she doesn’t want sex she’s covering sex with sex and she’s telling roman to leave her alone so she can just do her damn job because she knows that this is what will bring her down!!! sex scandals historically don’t get men fired but an unsolicited dick pic knocks gerri off her podium in logan’s head forever. even now i’m talking about it at such length because i’ve given it so much thought!!! she’s the only woman in the old guard and she’s one of the most sexualized characters in succession. but only as a joke. in the abstract. never actually. because that would be weird. right?

why do you think earthbound was THE progenitor of so many inde rpgs? was it just that it was an rpg that did something new with its setting published by a big name?

(With reference to this post here.)

The big-name marketing engine and where it happens to be situated in time is certainly a big part of it, but something that's easy to overlook about EarthBound if you're not familiar with the timeline of console generations is that EarthBound is so frequently name-checked by weird meta retro games because EarthBound is, itself, a weird meta retro game – one of the very first of its kind.

It's funny to think of a Super Nintendo game from 1994 as "retro" from the perspective of 2022 – isn't that just what games were like back then? The thing is: no, they weren't. Most Super Nintendo RPGs did not look like EarthBound.

A big part of EarthBound's aesthetic boils down to juxtaposing current gen flash and spectacle (understanding that "current gen" means "for 1994") with deliberately shitty graphics and audio, and mechanics that are janky and counterintuitive in a calculated way to create a very specific experience.

This is apparent in everything from the old school pick-a-verb menu interface that you literally never have to use because the game also has a context-sensitive action button, to the soundtrack's whiplash-inducing transitions between NES-style bleeps and FM synth (wait for it at about 0:53), to the American localisation's script being a blatant spoof of the frequently genuinely terrible translations of the game's NES predecessors.

Plus, the weird meta stuff that modern retro RPGs are known for? EarthBound already has that. It's famous for being one of the first console RPGs where diegetically acknowledging the human player as a separate entity from the player character is an explicit plot point. It even has a clever sleight of hand where it asks the player to fill out a fake consumer survey partway through the game so that it can drop your real name into dialogue later on, prefiguring the way that later games would lift information from your Steam profile to similar effect.

Bascally, EarthBound is a big inspiration for a lot of deliberately janky, insufferably meta retro nostalgia RPGs because that's literally the kind of game that it is.

The funny thing is, tumblr staff probably thought Buggy would go over exactly the same as the crab generator, or the Christmas bells, or the frogs, or all the other weird April Fool's or Halloween gags and widgets they've had on this site, in that people would either interact or ignore it. But because this is an undismissable advertisement of a creepy jumpscare clown (on the anti-capitalist trigger warning website, no less), the response has varied from annoyance to fear to downright confusion. The main comment I've seen is 'how do I get rid of it?' and the answer is 'with an adblocker', so that's largely counterintuitive for them. Don't get me wrong, I'll make anything into a meme, and this dumb meta nonsense was made for me, but surely this was never going to be well received.

Am I the only one that finds it weird that the shoto - dabi fight is the one that has the least child visuals between them toga-uraraka and deku-shigaraki.

I think it weird bc unlike the other two dabi and shoto have a lot of similarities between their childhoods and their anger towards their father so child visuals would have been imapctfull bc it isn't just about saving the other but it's about the fact that shoto understand dabi.

We only got one visual of them as kids but it didn't hit hard bc that wasn't how they were feeling (at least on the outside) at that point the fight was between dabi the villain and shoto the hero

Neither was looking at the other in a sentimental way (at that point)

I disagree that it didn't hit. It's true that it wasn't sentimental, but Touya is different from Toga and Tenko. His child "origin self" is a grumpy 13-year old.

I think in the fight between Dabi and Shoto, the question was whether there was even a "Toya" anymore to dig out or did that boy die on Sekoto peak. Dabi says that Toya "died" when he went home and found no change - which means that this boy who kept believing that his family would look at him if he kept trying lost hope at that point and was living for revenge.

Shoto showing up, making a move for him, forcing him to look his way achieved in the end that we finally saw Toya's inner self come through, we saw that he's still very much just a crying boy desperate to be still seen.

I think that the child selves we see here manifest actually what they are doing in the real world perfectly. Toya is still desperate to prove himself. Shoto is a child fighting for his family. The image is tragic and in the next chapter you see the devastation on Shoto's face - how hard this was for him. And I think it is left on this note because next we go to Endeavor, the man who didn't show up for Toya and who is not there while his sons are engaged in a death battle. So I think this is the mood that this image aims at, and it's not cute or sentimental, but I think it hits really hard. At least for me, it does.

And yeah, maybe it would be easier if we saw them do some kind of cute play-fight or whatever, but because saving Toya is the job of the entire family, we don't get this image until they all show up for him (primarily his father who wronged him). And because Toya is the "family villain", not only Shoto's villain, this child-image gets spread around. Toya sees his child self surrounded by his family and then he also sees Shoto as a child.

I think that means something, and I hope Hori will follow this up later - and it will lead to more connection between Shoto and Toya.

It's harder for them than any of the other "pairs", because while Toga and Tomura sought out Ochako and Izuku and they both just someone / anyone to show up and accept them, that's not what Touya needs.

His inner child is older, and not only he never wanted Shouto, he represents to Touya "Endeavor's masterpiece", the replacement, the reason he was thrown away. Shouto is probably the last person Touya wants. It's not as simple as them bonding over hating their dad. Shouto does validate Touya's anger (but not his methods) and he's trying to find common points between them. But bonding over rage would be counterintuitive to what the narrative tells us about negative emotions. Shouto has been ruled for long by his rage too and took him a lot of work to change. I think that Touya needed to be confronted with Shouto's change - and feel that literally on himself when he copied Phosphor. Phosphor is Shouto's self-expression, his healing, his heart - and Touya being able to copy that I think means that there is still hope for him.

So considering how Shouto had nothing Touya wanted, the fact that he was able to dig out Touya's child self from under Dabi's rage and then make him see Shoto not as a puppet, but as a real crying child / brother as well is hard-earned connection between them.

Not as cute maybe as the others, but to me it really means the world. I think just because the no-jutsu is not easy in their case doesn't mean that what happened is less important.

I still have hope that Shouto will get his narrative reward too in a more direct depiction of connection. If Hori thought Toya was irredeemable, and was planning to make him die full of hate, I don't think he would have drawn Touya as a child at all.