#acting without words

[sherlockianscholar]

From The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes dir. Billy Wilder, 1970

This scene absolutely kills me. The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes broke barriers depicting Holmes as gay. Here, Mycroft is referring to Holmes' and Watsons' female client, implying that Holmes and the lady were ~involved~. As soon as Mycroft says that, Holmes' (portrayed by the lovely Robert Stephens) entire everything changes. It's hard for me to describe in words what Holmes is thinking/feeling at that moment, but every time I watch this scene, my heart breaks.

His face slipping from amused to suspicious to askance to landing on unsettled. His head freezes and looks out with staring, un-blinking eyes. The way he carefully unfurls himself, walking slowly forward with a controlled reserve. Unintentional I am sure, but the lighting in this scene casts a shadow directly over Holmes' right eye making it look bruised. An almost physical representation of how Mycroft has wounded him.

The movie is unclear (or maybe, I just wasn't paying enough attention) on whether Mycroft knows that Holmes is gay. If he does know, it lends an amount of cruelty to this scene.

[superbat-lmao]

Jason travels to an alternate universe where Bruce only cares about being Batman. He took in each of his kids to serve the mission, not be his children.

Now, faced with alternate versions of his family, Jason has to grapple with the fact that his Bruce does care, that he is his father. Because the man in front of him now, trying to send him home, isn’t even close.

[wistfulwatcher]

I'm serious, that was absolutely the worst.

[lucabyte]

Different standards

[meamiki]

silly comic based on a time i struggled to read live on stream :thumbsup:

context clip compilation below ASDASDFASA

(cw for brief mention of hospitals/strokes)

[nothatsmi]

2/4

One wears a "drug" mask and the other a "safe" mask. Pills and contatcts. Pipe dreams and hidden scars.

Then they played hide and seek, and I'm not sure if any of them won or lost the game. Anyway did I say I love Muse-

Midly unrelated stuff: I am falling back into The Raven Cycle I think. I want to draw them so bad. I also want to draw Percy Jackson stuff (I began the second book hehe)! And I need to finish these. Also I started an aftg animatic jkclvqlh why can't I be normal for once-

[casualavocados]

#he doesn't want to fight with you ai di, he wants to Kiss🙄💘🥺

Nat Chen as CHEN YI KISEKI: DEAR TO ME (2023)

[al-luviec]

I got so insanely mad while drawing this

+ closeup and normalness

[the-meme-monarch]

(shamelessly stole these screenshots from this post) but so does this mean fp has other siblings besides void and clover? 'most of' implies to me that At Least One of their siblings was activated at this point, but if their only siblings were void and clover that wouldn't be Most Of them still asleep, that'd be Half Of. or it’d make more sense to say ‘one of’ my siblings is still asleep

also if it was one of the two we know of, who do we think was the sibling who was awake? I would think clover since it theyre the same model and they’ve been likened as twins, it’d make sense to me with fp being friend_program01 then clover would be friend_program02, but being robots, being made/activated in relation to one another doesn’t have much bearing on their ‘age’ im pretty sure. like clover could’ve been activated years later but would still be fp’s twin based on being technologically related and the same model. (also it’d be a little funny to me that the one who’s awake is Clover but the one who’s asleep is the one who’s Lucky. heehee)

it’s entirely likely void hadn’t even been built yet and clover was asleep and the sibling(s) who was awake was neither of them. another Earlier-in-the-game-than-this⬆️-one game over report says they made a new model so it wouldn’t make the same mistakes fp did, probably being the first of the newer models like void is but not about void specifically

(the rest of these⬇️ screenshots are from the official playthrough here) also something I guess I’m just not sure of, did fp know clover was their sibling before clover discovered it themself when they were both on automatic mode? we know clover and void didn’t know Beforehand

since void says they Had family, ofc talking abt fp, but it sounds to me they’re implying fp was their only family. and clover straight up says they’ve never had a sibling. and then fp says this⬇️ abt clover

(and then void shows up, implying that They were that one sibling they liked)

I don’t really have a point to all of this. I just think it’s interesting that fp seems to know all of this and just kept it to themself. I’m pretty sure since they're stated to be loveless they’re implied to be afamilial and thats why, but still.

also I find it funny void and clover never put together that since they’re both siblings with fp they’d be siblings with each other. it just never comes up HDHSJSNDJ

there might be stuff I’m forgetting, i did just skim the playthrough for these scenes i Did remember off the top of my head

[existingingrey]

Noh Sang Cheol will always be Goh Jeong Woo's safe haven.

Go Jun: It was touching. After receiving a good verdict, there’s a scene where we’re talking and drinking in a park-like area, and Yo Han comes over and hugs me. At that moment, I thought, ‘Wait, are we going to kiss?’ That’s how heart-fluttering it was. I realized then what it means when women’s hearts flutter.

[smartzelda]

Sorry guys I gotta speak my truth on this one

I'm not kidding when I say that I think that blaming shit media literacy from fans on shipping/shippers avoids the actual root of the problem to throw people you can easily throw under the bus (simply because it's not unpopular to consider people who post about ships or ship characters in media as having lesser or derivative tastes by default)

And here's why.

I think when you blame people who are "shippers" or "consume media through shipping lenses", the true root of it all is a mindset problem.

In actually, putting on shipping lenses can be helpful when trying to analyze a piece of media. When analyzing media you're supposed to approach it through a number of mindsets and put on different lenses (both to deepen your personal understanding of the media, and to pick it apart and see what you can find there (whether intentional or not on the author's part)), and different ships can be some of those lenses

When it comes to ships between main characters (for those who are genuinely willing to see what the narrative is showing with their relationship and what it's doing), there are times when analyzing it from a shipping lens may be helpful. As someone from KH fandom, I have seen people come to deeper understandings and pick canon apart in the process of analyzing a relationship that is genuinely integral to the story (platonic or not). I've also seen people get into rarepairs of characters who barely interact or who just suffer little screen time, and I've seen them come to better understandings of those side characters and how they potentially fit into the world of the media simply because people are now focusing on these characters and how they fit into the narrative.

Frankly, I resent the idea that the only way to truly objectively analyze a piece of media is by turning off the part of your brain that gets excited over relationships and individual characters. Don't get me wrong, that is a way to approach a piece of media and a valid one at that, but the truth is that we cannot be free of bias.

For instance, I was watching House MD with my parents circa last year. At some point I started heavily tuning into what was going on with House and Wilson's relationship. My parents, on the other hand, were largely watching casually. They're not thinking of character relationships or getting heavily invested in most characters, they're watching because they like watching. One of them in particular did try to analyze things that were happening in the show as they happened. However, when it came to the scene late in the series where House threw out Dominika's letter approving her American citizenship, my parents could understand that he was doing that because he didn't want her to leave, but not much beyond that. I ended up explaining to them that House's fake marriage for Dominika was an explicit parallel to when Wilson was living with House in the early seasons. Both situations started with House being none too happy about it but ultimately letting them stay, spending a considerable amount of effort getting them to leave/getting this situation to be finally over so he didn't have to deal with it anymore, and then by the time a piece of news comes through that would mean the person in question actually leaves, House hides this news as long as he can. Because he doesn't actually want them to leave and has grown attached. And by doing this he became a self fulfilling prophecy. By reacting to the truth of Wilson and Dominika leaving him the way he does, he seals his fate and they ultimately leave anyways. Maybe I ship Hilson, but becoming open to how their relationship was handled allowed me to transition to doing character studies and recognizing patterns/parallels that I wouldn't have noticed if I didn't particularly care about the characters or their relationship.

Likewise, I've seen mutuals complain about how people who don't like or don't care about certain characters often overlook these characters (what they're actually like and their place in the narrative), while the mutuals in question (by default) are able to come to deeper understanding of what the writers/story is trying to do because they care about this funky guy

You can't eradicate bias when you're engaging in media analysis, but you can consciously put on a range of lenses and observe the media through different povs with the goal of understanding the media better or bolstering your reading of it. And those lenses/povs can include focusing on specific relationships or the perpective of certain characters

And this is why I say it's actually a mindset problem. Shippers and people who have this one blorbo they like a lot aren't inherently terrible "fandom brained individuals" who are the root of media analysis problems. The problem only arises when people's readings/analysis of a piece of media are inherently restrictive/narrow and self centered. Your problem is with people who view a piece of media through a ship they like but don't keep an open mind about it, and whose "media analysis"/views on canon cannot be split from fanon and their comfortability levels. These are the people whose "media analysis" starts and ends with justifying their fanon as canon, whose views on media revolve around sorting characters and relationships into categories they personally enjoy rather than trying to understand what's going on.

Here's another example.

Here we have a fictional ship we'll call uhhhh...Blanebin. this fictional ship I made up on the spot for characters that don't exist named Blane and Corbin

Person A is super into Blanebin. They're part of the main cast of characters and canonically childhood best friends, so person A (as much as they enjoy fanart and fic) is also enjoying analyzing how narratively important to each other they are. Recently, Corbin started dating another character in canon, but Person A is enjoying watching how Blane is reacting to this. "Is this potentially a tell that Blane is jealous or is having complicated feelings about this? What if he was, how would that contextualize his behavior this season? Here's what I think based on how Blane dealt with explicit jealousy last season in a different situation". It's not impossible that person A is still missing further understanding due to their obsession with Blanebin, but at the end of the day this obsession has allowed them to start picking through the characters both in and outside this relationship. It has allowed them to see potential subtext and theorize on what might happen next with these characters' relationship. Not to mention that with addition of Corbin dating someone else, instead of trying to erase this fact or state that Corbin canonically isn't into that person, Person A is trying to factor in how Corbin's current dating life affects his relationship with Blane (irregardless on personal views on the nature of Corbin's relationship with the person he's dating).

Person B is also super into Blanebin. They really enjoy fanart and fic of the characters, love obsessing over their moments together, and just feel like there's really something between the characters. To person B, every moment between them is just further proof that the writers are ship teasing them. But Corbin getting together with someone else this season? Oh that pissed person B off. They cannot believe that even though Corbin and Blane are CLEARLY gay for each other the writers had Corbin get with someone else this season. Perhaps, they think, it was even a decision specifically made to spite fans. How evil of the writers to tease a perfectly good ship and then have them not get together first? They must have been just doing those teases to get views from Blanebin shippers those scoundrels. To Person B, since Corbin started dating someone when he obviously has some chemistry with Blane (even though the series is far from over) means that Blanebin can never get together now and Corbin x person he's dating is ruining Blanebin by existing. In fact, they think, this is terrible writing for Corbin to be dating someone else because they don't like that relationship and don't see the point. Obviously if the writers were good then Corbin would have started dating Blane instead because this was supposed to be the Blanebin show.

Person C despises Blanebin. Don't get them wrong, they've always enjoyed the character's childhood friendship, but they actually have always thought Blane would have been better off with Victoria. They have a lot of moments too! But they're tired of seeing people ship Blanebin. Corbin just got together with someone else, so obviously that's not gonna work out. Plus Corbin and Blane totally has always given person C bro vibes. In fact, person C thinks, sure Corbin and Blane have a close friendship, but people shouldn't be shipping them. Person C likes Blanetoria and Blanetoria can't be canon if Corbin is in the way of it. So Person C likes to read Blanebin as siblings anyways. Sure they're canonically friends, but obviously their friendship turned into brotherhood. This means that nothing can be in the way of Blanetoria and Corbin can keep dating the person he's already canonically dating. Actually, now Blanebin just straight up makes Person C uncomfortable. Don't the pesky shippers understand that Blanebin are sibling coded because they're childhood best friends and that they're important to each other because they're brothers? It's obvious to anyone with eyes.

Sure, ships are involved here, but is the root of this problem shipping? Character A isn't as knowledgeable of other characters in the plot due to this lens they're using, but at the end of the day they're dedicated to analysis. Their love of the characters is pushing them beyond what they like or dislike to try to understand what might be happening through their lens. Not perfect, but they are slowly broadening their horizons. But Person B and C's problems here are their restrictiveness. What is or should be canon to them is tantamount to what they personally like or find comfortable. Is person C actually analyzing the this fake show when they decide to "read" Blanebin as basically canonically siblings (and this all of their moments are totally a bro thing) just because they don't like Blanebin and the idea of them getting together over Blanetoria makes them uncomfortable? Is person B actually analyzing this fake show when their "analysis" of Blanebin goes only as far as asserting it's being ship teased and deciding anything short of canonizing Blanebin is a targeted attack or "bad writing" because it's not what they wanted personally to happen?

This is what I'm talking about. This is the mindset. Shipping isn't the problem. The problem is when people marry fanon and canon to the point where they have a vested interest in superimposing their fanon over canon as "a reading" and trying to make "collective decisions" on what is canon (or what canon is trying to say) based on what does or doesn't make them uncomfortable. The problem is people being restrictive and centering their own likes and dislikes in the conversation, so they can only interact with canon "analysis" wise by deciding what is canon or should be canon "as obviously agreed on by everyone". You can't simply claim you like media analysis. To be able to analyze media and bolster your views on any given canon, you must be open to looking at it through multiple povs, to studying characters without trying to pretend things you don't like don't exist or do like do exist. There is a balance that must be kept between trying to keep objectivity and putting on specific focus/bias based upon the lenses you're putting on. You have to be willing to try to figure out what a media is doing or saying, not saying you're trying to figure out what it's saying while in actuality trying to define the narrative around what people believe it's saying in ways that suit you.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk.

[calypsolemon]

Probably one of the worst effects of the disney live action remake trend is that it's got people talking about the original movies as if they are golden standards of animated cinema, when often they are rife with their own issues, both within the works themselves and outside them. Like many of these movies still function as mechanisms through which disney monopolized the animation industry, monetized poor rip offs of better and yet lesser-known pre-existing media, crafted conservative slop to forcefeed directly into the mouths of children, turned minority groups into marketable caricatures, etc etc. It's just that the remakes are so devoid of even the slightest hint of artistic integrity that the overall bar for what counts as a "good movie" is buried six feet underground.

[cementcornfield]

Some of Tee and Ja'Marr's thoughts on the Tee Situation

Tee said to me 'right now I get to play with one of the, if not the, best quarterbacks in the game, I get to play with one of, if not the, best wide receivers in the game, that opens up so much more for me.' And then he said 'this offense is designed for so many different players to be spotlighted, the way that I am used in this offense so plays to my strengths.' And then he said to me, 'can you guarantee I can have that exact situation anywhere else?'

....

So do I think he's taking a home discount? No. But I do think that he is very very smart, he sees the whole picture out there...

....

It's very easy to compare this situation to what Ja'Marr had at LSU with Joe Burrow and Justin Jefferson. And Ja'Marr has said Tee is very different than Justin Jefferson. That every single minute with Justin Jefferson was a competition. That everything was who makes the more dynamic catch, who has more catches in practice, who runs faster? Everything was that way. Ja'Marr had to speak up and demand the ball a lot at LSU, because so was Justin. Ja'Marr told me that he doesn't have to do that in Cincinnati because Tee, and this is a quote from Ja'Marr, is one of the most unselfish humans you'll ever meet.

[dootznbootz]

So my mom watches Hallmark movies and I was walking past a while back when I noticed this one actor, Travis Van Winkle, is basically IRL Curly from Mouthwashing and lskdjf ks

Like, I doubt this guy would want to be in a HORROR story so dark (nor do I really WANT a live action version of the game) but still. Not only does he LOOK like Curly but I think he has the acting chops to pull off the whole "Golden retriever man who 'looks the other way' and 'doesn't want to rock the boat to the point of detriment'" thing Curly has going on based on the little bits I've seen of him from the movies that were on.

[the-meme-monarch]

reason #15 i can't do a friendship test playthrough to put on youtube even though I'd love to voice act it: ☝️i'll cry

[donnakori]

I love bruce that’s my dad and everyone needs him but I wish he would have stayed dead 🧍🏼‍♀️