#i get it (the purpose of his character in this plot device) but... he a square to me

[nururu]

I realized my disconnect when it comes to talking about one piece, and why I always say I like talking to dudebros more even if they're the worst... Is, I like to analyze literature. I like to analyze the source material and the canonic information. Shipping and stuff is for fun but I see it separately. The intersect bc canon inspires fanon but fanon CANNOT change canon.. I don't mix the two things especially not when I'm doing analysis... So I'll say things that are factual and ppl who are stuck in their headcanons or personal biases will think I'm saying something bad. What I'm saying isn't good or bad. It's not judgmental of the character I'm talking about. Nor is it a bias bc I like them/dislike them. I'm analyzing odas writing and his intentions as an author and what he's trying to say and portray. Most ppl online are too caught up in headcanons and personal bias while having no media comprehension and they think that I'm attacking their made up fanon stuff..... Noooo..... You're over there playing pretend and I'm over here doing analysis. We are not doing remotely near the same activity. They don't always need to intersect. Anyways it's hard to have genuine analytical conversations with ppl fully indulged in fandom and fanon. The only group of ppl who doesn't do that are dudebros but also... They get hung up on other stuff that doesn't matter too. Idkkkkkkkkk.

[unproduciblesmackdown]

the way this is just lighting up the board hitting the Winston (Billions) points. the way it's from a survey about autistic experiences with perceived dehumanization.

[yonceknowles]

You the only person outta 4 on this website that watches Bel Air and I need a expert opinion on this: Jazz or Lamarcus (??? whatever his name is)

this is so fucking funny for so many reasons LMAO but jazz. i would like lamarcus if he wasn't so... boring to me. i believe jazz makes her grow and push herself (positive or not) and get out of her comfort zones. jazz needs to grow up tho and stop being a sissy but still

[thewistlingbadger]

I'm going to be honest: I think one of the ways you fix season 2 is by getting rid of Warwick

Act 2 was more or less entirely dedicated to Warwick, a new character who really isn't that new bc he's actually Vander from s1. Despite the fact that he plays a heavy role in the act, his character isn't explored at all. Warwick is used in act 2 for the main purpose of reuniting Jinx and Vi. The sisters end up basically ignoring all their problems and differences and become family again solely due to Warwick's presence. If you get rid of Warwick, then the sisters don't reunite. They either stay on opposing sides or they end up reconciling later in the show, most likely due to them developing some sort of understanding for the other and by actually exploring their baggage.

Warwick is tied to Singed in this season, and through him and Viktor he's tied to Ambessa. Half of the plot in act 2 is Ambessa trying to find Warwick by using Singed to turn Warwick into the ultimate weapon. This part of the show was kinda weird and it definitely took away from the plot. If you get rid of Warwick you can actually focus on ambessa and her motives, or on ambessa and Caitlyn since their relationship is established but not developed.

The sisters end up bringing Warwick to Viktor's commune, which is how Viktor gets reintroduced to the story after not being seen for several episodes. Viktor decides to attempt to heal Warwick, but it isn't said why. We learn that Viktor's powers are suffering and that the commune isn't all that it seems, but we never get to learn anything further bc this segment isn't focused on Viktor- it's focused on Warwick. If you get rid of Warwick, you could actually focus on Viktor, his powers, his commune, his relationship with sky and the hexcore, and his motives.

At the start of act 2, we see that Vi is in a really bad place. She's fighting a lot, getting wasted, and isn't taking care of herself. We see that she has a friendship with Loris as well. However, we're not able to explore Vi's friendship or her current situation or her character bc shortly after Jinx asks Vi to help her with Warwick. If Warwick is gone then you can actually focus on Vi as a character and unpack all the shit the show has built up.

At the start of act 2, we see there's a lot of unrest in zaun. We see zaunites starting to band together and view Jinx as a symbol. This is a really cool concept that isn't explored because instead of Jinx spending the act with other zaunites, she spends it with Warwick. If Warwick is gone then we could actually explore the current politics between zaun and piltover and the effects they have.

It really doesn't make sense to have Warwick be the center of the act when he's not a main character. Hell, he isn't a character at all. He's a plot device. Literally almost everything that happens in act 2 is somehow related to him, yet he has no arch in the season. Everything he does just adds to the plot, not to the value of the story. We end up getting the most random piece of lore dropped in the middle of the season because of him. Lore that literally wasn't relevant at all to what was going on in the show and was never brought up again. I understand that season 1 hinted at Warwick being Vander but if it were up to me I'd be prioritizing the other, much more important shit that s1 set up. Not fucking Warwick. Especially since he's just Vander, an excellent character that we were done with at the start of the first season. There's no reason for him to be back. Since act two is so centered on him, the other acts had to condense and become jammed packed full of shit. But if you get rid of Warwick, you give the story space to breathe. You could have things stretched out longer and in more detail because now you have the time to! You can go into the gray and Caitlyn's dictator arc in detail because now you don't have to worry about wrapping it up before Warwick shows up.

Warwick was literally so big in the show that he took away time and development from literally every character, but especially mel, jayce, ekko, heimerdinger, and Viktor, who were rarely seen this season despite being key players from season 1. If Warwick was gone, you could actually show what happened to ekko, Jayce, and heimerdinger before act 3. You could give ekko some much needed depth and screen time. You could actually explain the black rose, which is never explained throughout the entirety of the show. You could have had Ambessa's backstory be in the show and not its own separate music video. You could have showed Mel more. If Warwick was gone, you could actually explore the characters of Caitlyn and Vi and their relationship. You could explore Sevika's character, who got pushed to the side despite her promising start. You could explore Isha as a character. You could explore lest as a character, who was introduced and then completely forgotten. You could have expanded on the chem barons instead of glossing over them.

In general, if Warwick isn't around you just have more time to do more shit. Like holy shit this is actually crazy.

[lover-of-mine]

I've been thinking while chilling in the they cast Ryan with a plan delusionland, but specifically what it would take to give Buck the most satisfying love story possible. Because Buck was written as the love interest. His purpose in season 1 is to give something to the main character. And ever since, he's been there to provide something to his love interests even though he's the main character now, he gave Ali a place to stay, he gave Taylor professional advancement (and this one is made worse by her book), he gave Natalia inside information on death, so he's constantly providing things without getting anything substantial in return, much like with Abby and the way that he was just a device to make her feel better about her life. And the main thing here is that Buck is being pursued in order to offer something. He's never the one to go after them, he's the one being chased in a sense, Abby calls him, Ali calls him, Taylor kisses him, Natalia asks him out, Tommy kisses him, so these people want something from him and they take it, most of the time without giving him something in return, Abby forces him to get closure by himself, Ali leaves him because she can't handle the job, where do I even begin with Taylor. So if you think about it, considering the initial way Buck was written, and the way they expanded this to the point that he was literally born to offer something to someone who provided him with nothing (in this case his parents), or the way Maddie shows up because she needs the safety he could provide (I'm not saying Maddie doesn't provide him with anything, I know she does so much for him, but she did show up because she needed a place to hide) his main love interest needs to be someone who's not asking him for stuff. And that's been Eddie since he was introduced. Under Pressure is about Buck choosing Eddie. Eddie tries, but when he realizes Buck is serious about not liking him, he validates Buck's feelings, granted in his sassy way of his, and backs off until he has a chance to give Buck the choice to let him in. You can have my back any day. The phrasing of this is great for the whole Eddie trusts Buck to take care of him, he's not saying he will take care of Buck, he's giving Buck the option of taking care of him. But the thing there is that he puts the choice in Buck's hands. Buck could've walked away. Even Buck's reactions to the way Eddie says it shows a moment where Buck is considering before offering the or you can have mine. The metaphor surrounding the rescue in this context is interesting because while Eddie is choosing Buck right there, he's not forcing Buck to step in. Much like the ambulance, Eddie is offering himself, but he's not forcing anyone to go into the ambulance and risk getting blown up with him. Buck needs to volunteer. And he does.

I know the fandom loves to say Eddie baby trapped Buck, but Buck was the one who took one look at Eddie and said I'm stepping in with you whether you like it or not. Eddie never demanded anything from Buck beyond for Buck to be himself. He never asked for help with Chris, Buck chose to talk to Bobby to clear him being at the station, Buck chose to trick Eddie to offer him help in the form of Carla. Sure, when it's convenient for the plot, Eddie will just decide on things, but like, even the lawsuit of it all, when Eddie is inserting himself into the conflict, Buck is ready to be forced to provide Eddie with something to be forgiven "so whatever it takes for you to forgive me" but Eddie is instantly "I forgive you" because he doesn't need for Buck to prove himself. Over and over again, the show puts Eddie in a position that shows that he just loves Buck. No matter what. He never asked Buck to provide him with something. I think even the will and the way Eddie hides it plays into this. He doesn't want to ask for Buck to do this. Eddie knows Buck will do it, he knows how much Buck loves Chris, but the will reveal is not really about Eddie asking Buck to do something for him, taking care of Chris if he can't because the episode already showed Buck doing that without knowing that was what Eddie wanted, but to give Buck that shock that he does have something to live for, that he matters, that someone loves him. Eddie exists as the person that allows Buck to make his own decisions. He does push back when he thinks Buck needs that push but he doesn't make the choice for him. Even if Buck ever decides to walk away from him, he'll let him if that's what Buck really wants, because ultimately it will be Buck's choice and he respects that. And ultimately, with the archetype they had in mind when they created Buck, that is what Buck needs for him to be in the most satisfying romantic relationship narratively. Buck needs someone who loved him before they were in love with him. And that is the work they have been putting towards buddie since Eddie was introduced. And that's also why Buck is the one who needs to start his endgame relationship. It's never gonna feel right until Buck chooses to do something about it because everything about him is about someone else making the choice.

[twilightkitkat]

Thinking about the role of the "love interest" in superhero media and how poolverine subverts this.

The "love interest" in most movies is just a placeholder. Boring. Tame, Predictable.

This is especially true in action media, wherein romance takes a backseat and is often seen as an add-on rather than a main plot point. Romance is either a source of conflict or motivation that serves to drive a character arc forward, but no more or less.

Take, for example, Vanessa. I love her character. Her personality and character are fascinating. However, especially in Deadpool 2 and 3, she serves more as a device to move the plot forward rather than a genuine character. The first movie established her character and importance, so it's understandable why Wade chose to hide his identity and how he slowly came to terms with his new identity. She helped move his character arc of self-acceptance forward, yes, but she also existed as her own entity.

In the movies after this, she isn't treated with the same care. She's used as a central motivation in Deadpool 2, a force that drives Wade to save Russel and confront Cable when his character motivations aren't easily tied to morals. However, that's it. She isn't fighting alongside him or given the same treatment as the other important "family" characters. In Deadpool 3, she's treated with even less care, only having short scenes at the beginning and end of the movie to give Wade a representation of "home."

This isn't to say Vanessa isn't an important character and shouldn't be treated as such. However, the purpose of having a "love interest" in an action movie's plot isn't just to have someone to love. It's almost always to have someone who can be kidnapped or killed to spring the main character into action. It's someone who fades to the sidelines so the main character can show off while showcasing their relationship success.

Consider this: in all of the Marvel comic universes, Deadpool and Wolverine have had many different partners. Different names, different faces. It's common for the "love interest" of a superhero to be seen as an accessory that changes shape depending on the comic artist or franchise. After all, they don't need a cohesive identity to serve their purpose as a "general, digestible reason for the main character to act."

Everyone understands how love can cause people to do crazy things. There is no further elaboration needed, even for morally grey or black characters. It's an easy way to make an understandable motive for the audience. Suspension of disbelief.

And yet, the superheroes remain the same. They get to keep their identity throughout different media. It's always Wolverine and Deadpool. Logan and Wade. Even if they have slightly different plotlines, their core characteristics and intrinsic identity are constant.

Logan could have Jean Gray. Or Mariko. Or Silver Fox. He can have anyone play the role of "love interest," a role that can be shapen by a ball of clay and changed entirely to fit the narrative.

But his "rival" and "best friend" in the multiverse will always be Deadpool. They're notorious for being referenced in each other's media. For fighting. For working together. They are A Set.

This is why I'm so much more drawn to Poolverine than other ships. Wade has different love interests depending on the media type. So does Logan. I can't tie in knowledge from different interpretations into the romance because the love interests are fluid. But with each other, they interact in almost every universe. Have a consistent bond. A "standard." They're soulmates, in a way, forever destined to meet and be important to each other.

This is setting aside how female love interests are treated in male-oriented media in general. They're normally seen as someone to be protected, to stay at home, and welcome back the hero when they return. Some are allowed to be strong, to have abilities, but rarely ever do they stand on equal footing with the male main character. Not where it matters.

This is exhibited in both Wolverine and Deadpool's movies. Vanessa is introduced as a "badass," someone who's part of the underworld and knows how to fight, yet she's often placed in the damsel in distress position. She could match Wade before his mutation, maybe, but after he dons the mask and becomes Deadpool, his work is over her pay grade. The same happens with Mariko in the Wolverine movie: she's initially introduced as someone who can fight, but Logan ends up protecting her almost entirely and is responsible for rescuing her from her kidnapping at the end.

It creates an emotional rift between the side of the "hero" and the side of the "love interest," because it feels like they aren't fighting together for the same cause. It feels like the love interest is treated more as a "reward" for the hero to come back to after saving the world rather than a person.

When the entire movie follows the perspective of the main character as they fight, and action scenes are primarily used to invoke emotion, it feels lackluster to have the love interest stay at home. The most intense moments of emotional connection are typically portrayed between the hero and someone else who understands their suffering who they're trying to reach, such as a villain or rival or friend.

Love interests are never on the same "playing field" as the main character and thus can't relate to their struggle. The director tells the audience that they should be happy or sad when a love interest is on screen, but they don't show the same level of emotional depth when the main point of an action movie is action. The entire premise of the main character is action, and yet the love interest is absent from it. Or a victim rather than a player.

This is why Poolverine subverts this trope. You have two people, each with their own franchise and life. Each with their own skills. Each with similarly powerful abilities.

They are equals and are treated as such by the narrative. They take each other seriously and have an emotional connection because they understand each other's suffering. They both are out on the battlefield, fighting the same war and overcoming their differences. They both are allowed to have "cool" scenes and "sad" scenes and "funny" scenes. They both are given the spotlight to experience character growth and have their own unique internal conflict because they both are strong characters who are narratively important.

They both have chemistry. Which is nearly impossible to attain when the love interest isn't even in the lab.

[raayllum]

What is Zym's Purpose?

Zym is one of both the most and least interesting characters in The Dragon Prince.

While he is the titular character, in the first three seasons he is mostly a frightened, occasionally helpful plot device, if not outright macguffin for the heroes to escort and protect. In arc 2, he's more along for the ride and his relationship with his mother gets more development, with him playing more of a role in season 4 and season 7, but beyond that Zym doesn't impact the plot too much more, and usually serves as a support / way to develop Ezran further.

This is understandable for a few reasons. In arc 1, Zym was barely a few weeks old, and in arc 2, he's often times facing problems that require different skills than the ones he has on hand. The fact that he couldn't communicate directly with anyone outside of Ezran and Zubeia also hampered his ability to develop. The fact he can now talk (and is voiced by Dante Basco) as of the end of S7, in addition to being the Last Archdragon and new King of the Dragons, have all greatly subsequently elevated his role and importance. It seems likely that arc 3 will be "The Dragon King: The Return of Aaravos" after all.

But... what exactly is Zym's role in TDP, from both an in-universe perspective (i.e. what Aaravos and/or others) expects of him, and from an overarching narrative lens?

Well... let's get into it.

Weird Narrative Setup Shenanigans

To begin, I'm going to start with what Aaravos thinks, or seems to think, of Zym, because there's weird narrative setup in arc 1 compared to arc 2 that I think retroactively make sense. What do I mean by weird? Well...

As Aaravos lays out in 3x07, Zym is of the utmost importance to 'their' plans:

VIREN: So what is the plan? AARAVOS: To fulfil your wishes, of course. [...] And this bright future will require us to conquer Xadia? VIREN: Yes. Yes, perhaps. AARAVOS: The key to achieving your noble aims for humanity is simple.

AARAVOS: Yes. You must take down the Dragon Queen, and capture the baby dragon. Then you will have the attention of all the world, and the power to do what you want.

It's... a little vague, but we know the draconic royal family at this point is Important, and that Zym is accordingly the hope of healing the rift between humans and Xadia, as Rayla says "it could change the world" in 1x06. So Aaravos and Viren assigning similar importance — whatever happens, or is done to Zym, having an impact on The World — isn't out of line.

(It does, however, represent how Aaravos has framed things to validation seeking Viren — "Then we will have to get [the Pentarchy's] 'attention'" in 2x09 with the smoke assassination scheme — but also Aaravos in 7x08 to the stars: "Are you watching?" Do I have your attention?)

Aaravos gets a little more specific in 3x09:

AARAVOS: When you capture the dragonling, I will show you how to take his power, how to imbue yourself with all his magic and potential, so that you will transcend the limits of your human form. Then none will dare stand against you.

Viren asks disturbingly few questions about this, and given that we don't get to see the spell come to fruition, we don't exactly know what he means. However, there are some things we can pull from:

In 3x07 (and again in 6x08) Aaravos is able to possess, control, and tether his energy to Pharos' body, speaking freely through and entirely controlling him. (He does the same with Sir Sparklepuff in 5x09 and with a smaller version of himself in S7, stating "this body is a Vessel".) While these possessions seem temporary, he implies that he can control Callum indefinitely post re-corruption in 7x09.

The spell he uses to consume Zym is channelled through the Staff of Ziard (which was also required to free Sir Sparklepuff, and has a quasar diamond in it) and has some interesting incantations, to say the least: "I swallow your heart, I swallow your mind, I swallow your power" (sometimes with one of these, such as in TOX, being switched out for "I swallow your soul").

We also see a similar idea of imbuing take place in 3x07 with the 'gift' hearts of cinder spell: Viren says he will inoculate his armies with great power, so that the dragons cannot strike them down with fire. So we have one spell already on hand, that Viren purposefully passed on, in making himself (temporarily) immune to enemy dragon fire. So whatever the endgame plan for Zym was, it'd make Viren even more powerful than that.

Moreover, given that Aaravos' first goal in the series was to get out of the prison, it is possible that the intention was to use Zym to combine with Viren, and make himself a new body. However, this runs into two potential problems:

If Aaravos' spirit could be distilled in that manner, Sir Sparklepuff + the quasar diamond could've been used from the start to give him a new body. The prison and locating his specific soul was therefore a necessary step still not covered in S3.

Regardless of the manner the quasar diamond is used for, and how much that person may want it to work (Claudia in 6x08), love is still a necessary ingredient for the spell with the diamond to function (as are the other physical properties).

Now, it is possible that Zym being an archdragon could override certain things (their bite can destroy a Startouch elf's mortal vessel after all, which is undeniably OP) and that Zym in particular is a Weird Archdragon (more on that later). "Transcending the limits of your human form" could very well mean becoming a suitable permanent body host for Aaravos in ways that possession just wouldn't suffice for.

But "then none will stand against you" makes me think otherwise, precisely because who is included in those 'none'? Aaravos has already heard the story of how Viren took down Avizandum, "the most powerful creature in the world" (even if Aaravos is definitely stroking Viren's ego with some of that one). Zubeia is in a coma and the other Archdragons are MIA; the Sunfire stronghold just fell; who is left to seriously stand against? Well...

But how does Zym + Viren (or Staff) = power to stand against the Cosmic Council? Well, it comes down to what I think Aaravos' endgame is with Zym, in some ways, which is:

A Weapon of Vengeance (In Theory)

Zym being a weapon is one of the first things we see the series refer to him as, and his duality—partially shared with dragons as a whole—between a weapon vs a child/baby, or a god vs a person, is present throughout.

AARAVOS: Avizandum was no person. Avizandum was the great King of all the dragons. (3x06)

HARROW: Thunder is the most powerful beast the world has ever seen. How can we hope to kill such a godly creature? (3x06)

This is brought home, of course, in 3x06. Viren and Harrow make a weapon of vengeance to kill an archdragon... and then create one anyway (in their heads) in orphaning his child. Viren then decides to go clean things up, of course, by destroying it... But this just leads to Xadia's revenge on Katolis, nor does Viren actually go through with it either.

But this dichotomy of weapon vs child continues. Claudia and Rayla remind us of it in 2x02, stating:

RAYLA: Whoa, what happened to 'it's not an egg, it's a powerful weapon?' CLAUDIA: Still true. One day it could bring death and destruction raining down on all of us. But for now, he's so widdle!

Now, this makes a lot of sense. Most TDP characters are informed by their respective dualities, and a good chunk of those dualities have to do with whether they will be dehumanized (Ezran as a child vs a king; Rayla as a person vs a monstrous elf) or dehumanize (Soren as a crownguard vs Viren's tool; dark magic use, etc) themselves or others. Zym's slots neatly into the first one, which is why I — admittedly — hadn't thought too much of it before. Zym might be the titular character, but he's hardly one of the more developed main characters and holds less plot importance in arc 2 than he did in arc 1, as Aaravos' prison replaces him as the prime macguffin.

But to be fair, this is TDP, where everything is on purpose, and oft more literally than we first expect. And, as of arc 3, we are going to see Zym be decidedly grown up, given how much bigger he'd gotten in just two years. How big is he going to be after another seven?

With the previous two sections in mind, I want to posit that Zym's primary narrative question in arc 3—and indeed, quietly building throughout the series—is whether or not he'll be a Weapon (of Vengeance).

Specifically, of Aaravos' vengeance.

This would explain the focus on Zym's duality, S7 continuing to highlight it further, re-contextualize Aaravos' plans for his pawns + what he was going to do to Zym, and why he believes the Dragon Prince was the Key to Something, if not something still.

So, what's up with that?

Soft Rewind: The Snags in the Plan

In season 6 and a little bit in season 7, we get an idea of how being timeblind works. It's still not exactly precise, and it seems that Kosmo's prophecy fills in the other blank. When in proximity, Aaravos can see how certain choices may turn out (i.e. "If you tell [Claudia] the truth, you will lose her"). When far away, much like the prophecy, he can 'see' certain fixed points: they will need Claudia soon; Callum will turn to dark magic again; and Ezran getting the Nova Blade is ultimately a win, even if it's not entirely clear why yet (more on that here).

We also know that these fixed points are not quite so fixed as Aaravos or others believe. Aaravos seemed very confident that Rayla would never bring herself to kill, but she very much proved otherwise; he wasn't prepared for Callum asking Runaan — another Moonshadow assassin — to kill him; Callum assumed the prophecy in S7 was about himself, but it was actually about Avizandum, a betrayal that Aaravos never saw coming either.

With all these things in mind, this is the following argument:

1) Aaravos knew ahead of time that he needed a Dragon Prince — heir to the Draconic Monarchy — to bring down the Cosmic Council and dismantle the Cosmic Order. Could be prophecy, could be timeblindness, but it was something he was waiting for (and we know storm dragons — possibly all Archdragons — only lay an egg every thousand years).

This will either end with A) Zym helping to bring down the unjust Cosmic Council, but not in the way Aaravos expected; B) Zym subverting his supposed destiny (also see point A); or C) referred to Sol Regem, whose actions incited Aaravos' anger and led him to "deliver their fear" of chaos and destruction.

2) Aaravos assumes, therefore, that Zym was that Dragon Prince when he was born, since he knows things he shouldn't even from trapped within his mirror (Rayla sparing Marcos; the Orphan Queen taking the Nova Blade to her grave post-imprisonment).

3) Aaravos believes accordingly that Zym is meant to be / will be forged into a Weapon of Vengeance. Whether this was grafting his essence/power onto Viren's body and/or staff of Ziard to make one to literally wield (just the tooth of an archdragon can kill a Startouch elf's mortal vessel, after all). We've seen the Staff of Ziard be directly compared to a weapon (sword) elsewhere, for example, with the staff taking the place of Harrow's sword in Viren's nightmares.

But of course, Aaravos planning to "torch Zym and Viren and/or Staff of Ziard to make a weapon" doesn't make complete sense (he'd still need the quasar diamond to get out) and might be unnecessary, given that a full grown Archdragon Zym on his own would function perfectly fine as a weapon.

Alternatively, Aaraovs might've seen in the future that Avizandum would die, leaving his son ripe to perpetuate the cycle ("you have set the wheels of history in motion and one day, my child will avenge me"), both are tangible.

And in many ways, that is what could've happened in 3x06. If Harrow and Viren had left the egg, Zym would've grown up mourning his father even more deeply than he already does. It is unlikely that Zubiea would've fallen into a deep slumber (Zym is enough to drag her out of it, literally and emotionally) and it is unknown whether she still would've sent assassins. Her child's murder, it seems, was the insult to injury she could not bear; however, given that Harrow and Viren sought out Avizandum just over Sarai, it's still possible. Regardless, Zym would've had every tangible reason to hate humans with very little reason to think otherwise (this is true of the princes, too, with Xadia, yet they don't... but bear with me).

So far, then, it seems our hypothesized "Aaravos' plans for Zym" are going off without a hitch. Even from the pearl and without his direct influence, Aaravos' Staff of Ziard dark magic wielding human favourite(s) are doing exactly what he'd want them to do. Or are they?

VIREN: His destiny will be the destruction of humanity. [...] Now, you may witness history as I end a dynasty by destroying that dragon's egg.

Let's call this Potential Snag #1, then, wherein Viren decides to go one step further than perhaps seen ahead of time, and wants to destroy/kill Zym outright before he can even hatch. It's very quasi-Cosmic Council of him — the belief in absolute destiny, the assumption of inclination towards others' being violent without question, wanting to / being willing to kill a child, period — and, through our current lens, would completely halt Aaravos' plans in its tracks.

But Viren, of course, doesn't.

In comes Potential Snag #2 with a steel chair, emphasis on potential, as well as whether it counts as Viren or Tiadrin or Viren-and-Tiadrin's snag.

After all, if Aaravos' plans need Zym to live, this checks off that requirement. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it's eventually indicated Aaravos saw this moment ahead of his first meeting with Viren, and therefore knew how to entice him — not all mages (Claudia, Callum) can be drawn in by a thirst for outright political power the way that Viren — "too curious, hungry for knowledge and power" — was hook line and sinker. The fact it doubles as "You won't hesitate to use an innocent creature/child to further your own ends and desire for agency/power" neatly bookends Aaravos' expectations and surprise when Viren rejects the blood of child ritual.

Either way, Viren decidedly doesn't kill Zym, puts the elves in coins for unknown personal reasons (perhaps to maintain as a threat, or soul fragments can be useful for future spells), and spirits him secretly back to Katolis. This, still, persists in not being an entirely a snag. Viren blatantly hoped to use the egg, hatched or otherwise, to be a weapon.

Then we get near-definitive Snag #3:

While it's plausible that the kids finding Zym was something Aaravos wanted — or canonically is something he's willing to work with — there's no doubt it would've been simpler if the egg had stayed in Katolis, ready for his mage-turned-warlord king Viren to utilize now that Harrow had been disposed of. If Aaravos' plans depend on the perpetuation of the cycle ("[the Mage Wars were] a violent, terrible cycle"), given how he uses dark magic and weaponizes grief to sometimes literal degrees as well as his various pawns, returning Zym does more harm than good to his plans and ideals. Viren (2x04), Rayla (3x09), and Callum (7x08) are thus far the only people to fundamentally surprise him: who's to the say the trio didn't do so from the start?

There's also one more major snag in mind but before we can talk about that, we have to talk about:

More of Zym's Weirdness (power-ups)

Zym is a weird little guy. Some of this, of course, is because Ezran is also a weird little guy (and more on Ezran and Zym in the next section), specifically when it comes to their telepathic link with one another. They can mutually see through each other's eyes, taste things (4x06), and communicate feelings/words. This is less weird, of course, because Ezran can do the latter with animals of all sorts, not just Zym. But the elevation of their bond is definitely weird, and deus ex machina's (not in a bad way) Zym's flight problem in 2x09.

Of Zym's abilities, we see a few that are typically normal. He can fly, the way thus far any dragon with wings can. He can generate lightning like his parents, with accordingly zappy kisses. But there are some things that have been odd about Zym from the beginning, such as:

The aforementioned psychic bond with Ezran since it's not just Ezran's weirdness.

His rainbow electricity, which neither of his parents seemingly have and we have not see any other dragon have anything similar towards.

This one is extra weird to me because often times the electricity he generates or channels will start off (or sometimes remain) blue, but then it switches to the rainbow lightning.

And last but not least, whatever the ever loving fuck THIS was??

Like, sure, sky magic could have something to do with sound and being able to travel fast as fuck... But like, even when we see Avizandum's comparative 'power up' in 2x06 when he was in his prime as the Dragon King, the closest we get is the eye glow, and even then it's pretty radically different.

I can't fathom personally why Zym would have powers his parents don't have, but it seems like beyond being the Dragon Prince turned Dragon King, and now the last Archdragon period, Zym is an outlier. Maybe it's because he was hatched with a primal stone or out of love or something, maybe it's some kind of prophecy or other special circumstances, but there is something Weird about Zym from both a Narrative standpoint (weirdness #1) and an Abilities standpoint (weirdness #2) that we probably only going to fully understand by the time we get to arc 3.

Maybe weirdness #2 is the reason for weirdness #1 if, as in the proposed theory, Aaravos had to wait around for Zym, and for Zym o be a weird little guy specifically, in order to be a proper Weapon.

Now let's talk about why Zym in arc 3 ultimately won't be.

The Last Snag: Ezran

Outside of season 3, the majority of Zym's screentime is devoted to his bond with Ezran. Callum and Rayla have their moments with him in S3 and a couple in S4, as does Soren in S6 (and Zym by proxy through Zubeia in S4/S5) but, while Zubeia might've been Zym's most important relationship emotionally, his relationship with Ezran is the most important for him in the show overall.

It is interesting, therefore, that S7 sets up a thread of conflict for them, specifically in Ezran growing to understand dragons as 1) weapons, if only in the vein of something he needs to defend against and 2) worth building weapons to combat.

AANYA: With these, we can build weapons to protect the human kingdoms, even from dragons. EZRAN: Thank you, Queen Aanya. This may be exactly what we need.

He's convinced, of course, that they won't have to use them... until they do indeed use them against Aaravos a few episodes later. Whether Ezran will ever use them personally against dragons remains to be seen (especially after the Archdragon sacrifice), but it seems inevitable that someone will in the future, whether it's a character we already know or a new antagonist of some kind. Ezran's actions will come back to hurt him and Zym and barring that, Zym's people — the other dragons of Xadia, many of whom are not nearly as powerful as the Archdragon(s) that torched Katolis in the first place.

The creation of the ruby fire weapons also cuts to the core of dragons within TDP: if they can inherently destroy, should they be treated inherently as weapons? Does their unique capacity for destruction mean other regulations or precautions be put in place? Or should we sit and hope on the grace of goodness that — thus far Sol Regem being the primary 'unprovoked' exception — dragons won't attack just because they can?

There's not yet a straight forward answer in general, but when it comes to Zym specifically, I think TDP has already given it to us:

Zym is not a weapon, or even primarily a king, because he is first and foremost Ezran's brother.

CALLUM: But I couldn't let the bad feelings stick, cause we were going to need each other. Because we're brothers. I still need you, Ezran.

DOMINA PROFUNDIS: Hold onto each other.

Ezran is the one who found Zym in the dungeons, and believed he should fetch his brother and decide what to do together; he's the one who dived after him in the water and taught him how to fly; Ez is instrumental in teaching Zym to become the dragon and person he was meant to be; and will continue to be.

Ezran is Zym's biggest remaining link to his family and his true self. While the two will likely have conflict, and even temporarily at odds, their connection is too strong to be entirely broken. They are twin souls, and Zym's bond with Ezran is, I think, ultimately what will mean not playing into Aaravos' hands, and choosing his own destiny... the same way that Ezran's other brother, Callum, will ultimately not be a weapon of Aaravos and forge his own path.

Zym may be a kind of chosen one, but he still has a choice so long as he has Ezran.

King of Kings / Closing Thoughts

Zym's full name — Azymondias — has always been of interest to me. It's a reference, after all, to one of my favourite poems in general and quite a well-known / famous one I got to study in undergrad: Percy Bysshe Shelley's Ozymandias:

I met a traveller from an antique land Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone Stand in the desart. Near them, on the sand, Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown, And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command, Tell that its sculptor well those passions read Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things, The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed: And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!" No thing beside remains. Round the decay Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away.

It's a beautiful poem, inspired/written about Ramses II, about how nothing lasts forever and that the pursuit of immortal power is ultimately futile. Time chips away at everything till nothing more remains, and memory likewise does not last forever.

It was always something I was curious about in relation to TDP in terms of... why, and why use it for Zym in particular, and not another character? It could, like Finnegrin's Wake, be a reference to literary work in little more than name (and I do not miss reading James Joyce).

But the A-Ozymandias connection always felt more purposeful to me. Even in S1 or arc 1, it was so close to being involved in TDP's theming, since the show had multiple monarchs running around.

Arc 2, I think, then steadily paved the way forward towards creating a place for the poem to be more relevant. We see a greater emphasis on lost history; we see characters play out that chasing royal power / glory is futile (Viren, Karim) or that immortality (Viren, Kpp'Ar) is not worth the price; that the burden of near immortality is not necessarily one you should want; and I expect we'll see even more of those things in arc 3, particularly that pursuing power/knowledge > love is wrong.

But I don't believe Zym is Ozymandias, at least directly. I think it's the Cosmic Council and their unending time and unbending rigour. Presumably, their Cosmic Order was meant to last forever and did the opposite, collapsing in on itself within a few thousand years.

Because — as foretold or forged striving against the stars — Zym will be instrumental in upending the Cosmic Council. He is set to take a bigger role in arc 3 as the Dragon King, particularly now he can talk and make his own arguments, and in having conflict with his brother Ezran. Zym is set up to be a weapon — like a corrupted Callum; like an increasingly dangerous Claudia, who's become more of a dragon like him than ever — and instead to choose to be a symbol and bringer of hope and peace for all of Xadia, the stars included. Perhaps the Cosmic Council feared him, and they will again, but not for the reasons they expect. He'll be part of their downfall, but not in violence — in justice. Because he's not a weapon.

Instead, he will always be Azymondias, king of kings.

[Image of Zym in the intro's starry clouds, with his head in the bottom right curve of the circle.]

[nqueso-lies]

I saw a BoB on here claim that it makes more sense for Gerrard to be a pallbearer than Tommy and I’m just.. I’m astounded quite honestly.

I can’t fathom how you can let your hate of a character (bc they stand in the way of your ship) let your perspective of the show and the characters become that warped.

Let’s imagine- if Bobby was making the choice between having Gerrard or Tommy be part of his own funeral, who would he choose? Who would he choose to stand alongside his team as they’re grieving and need support from those around them? Gerrard who historically led his team with hate and consistently berated them regularly up until very recently (when it also benefitted him to do something for the 118)? Or Tommy who we know Bobby knew and liked well enough to go out to after-work drinks with. Tommy, who swooped in to save one of his firefighters back in season 2. Tommy, who was the one that enabled he and Athena and all the other cruise passengers be saved. Tommy, who helped get the antidote to save his team. Tommy, about whom Bobby told Buck “was good people and good for you.”

And funerals are truly for the friends and family who lost the loved one. Can you imagine anyone at the 118 wanting Gerrard in that spot over Tommy??? /nothing/ we have ever seen in the show would suggest anyone would prefer that. (In fact, bts clips of Chim clapping back at Gerrard after being berated by him again suggests he’s still awful to them.)

Even to try to give that BoB the benefit of the doubt that it’s bc of work/118 history… Bobby and Gerrard didn’t work *together* as a house/team. They replaced each other. Tommy and Bobby worked together. And to a flimsy argument that “we haven’t even seen Bobby and Tommy interact since Tommy’s been back” …but since Tommy’s been back, we have seen Bobby tell Buck (who he loves as his own son) “Tommy is good people. And he’s good for you.”

And I find it funny that for all the headcanons and missing scenes and things they can concoct up for buddie, they can’t imagine a world where just because we haven’t *seen* Bobby and Tommy interact on screen, that they wouldn’t have possibly interacted when Tommy was getting awarded a medal in Bobby’s firehouse alongside his team for the crucial role Tommy played in saving all the people on the cruise (Bobby and Athena included) while risking his life. Or that it’s impossible to believe Tommy and Bobby would have interacted when Buck dragged Tommy into that full hospital room, beaming, toward them to be part of Maddie and Chim’s wedding celebration. Or that Bobby and Tommy wouldn’t have had any interaction when Tommy showed up to sit alongside his team in the hospital waiting room for a 118 member’s kid.

For all they crow about Tommy being a plot device that will serve his purpose and be gone soon, they sure do let the threat of him against their ship fuel irrational levels of hate toward his character that skews their view of the show to truly astonishing levels.

They about to get WHACKED. Bet.

[viquipo]

Chaos theory s3 spoilers. It's just me talking about some pet peeves I had with it yk

Ben and Gia. I feel like I have to preface this by saying that I DON'T HATE GIA. I DON'T HATE THAT BEN IS WITH HER/A WOMAN. He can get nasty with whoever he wants he's not real also I get it Italians are hot I'm hot. Also no she's not "getting in the way of the ship" that's ridiculous and childish and misogynistic. I just think. None of the nublar 6 should be with anyone outside of the n6 HEAR ME OUT ON WHY:

Regardless of who you ship in the fandom, canon or not, you like the pairing cause it had build up. We're like at 7-8 seasons now I honestly can't remember, you've seen characters grow to love and hate each other in about every way possible. I think it's fine introducing characters in CT like Zayna and Soyona, they have a narrative purpose and they serve it until they're no longer needed.

I feel like with Gia being Ben's girlfriend, that'll be harder to do in the future. Zayna was only in season 2, they left her in her country cause it wouldn't make sense to crowd up the cast and, as much as I love her, she was a plot device (I'm not saying that's a bad thing, a lot of characters in so many stories exist to get the protagonist from one point to another, and that's perfectly ok). Gia seems like a 'Zayna character' is what I'm saying. They kind of wrote themselves into a corner with giving one of the n6 a love interest outside of the group, cause now they have to stick with her because what Ben's just gonna leave his girlfriend and we'll rarely talk about it again??? Dude that's your GIRLFRIEND. And if they bring her into s4 as a more prevalent character, people aren't gonna like her. Cause they don't know her. It'll be the nublar 6 and Gia. And I'm gonna be like fuck off who are you I don't know you you weren't on the island with us you never even saw the butter knife.

So in my humble opinion, Ben shouldn't have had a girlfriend at all. Gia could've been an online friend of his and help them either way. Also godamn they were annoying I didn't know seeing Ben pincus kissing someone that wasn't a dinosaur would be so gross Jesus he makes me sick

Aside from that I think this season was mehhhhhh. Loved Soyona and the handler tho toxic yuri solves all my problems

[buddieisgoingcanon25]

In reply to that ask:

Tim has not implied Tommy will stick around, he has implied the exact opposite over and over again. He directly said Buck was just using him to get over Eddie.

The Texas scenes are not filmed at Fox Studios, they are filmed in Thousand Oaks and Santa Clarita.

Oliver does not like that man LMAO.

Buck said that he has feelings for Eddie and not Tommy. He told Maddie he was just using Tommy. There is no BT.

Every single friends to lovers ship has a scene where they deny their feelings. I have not seen a friends to lovers ship that didn't do that scene. It would be weird if they accepted it immediately. I've also never seen a "What nooo we're just friends!" scene where it was actually true. Lmao can you imagine a scene in Psych where Juliet says she broke up with Shawn because she saw Gus as competition? That is not how you write platonic friendships. Which is clear from Buck already accidentally admitting to having feelings for Eddie earlier in the episode.

"There is no reason to bring Tommy back" 1. They brought Taylor and Abby back. 2. His purpose is to move the Buck and Eddie story along as it always has been. Like Tim said he has his "function."

Plot device characters are not there to be liked. The audience wasn't supposed to particularly enjoy Teddy in B99 or Emily in Friends or Zach in The OC or Louis in Gossip Girl etc. They are there to move the story along. If the audience is screaming in disgust over Buck hooking up with his racist ex and then cheering and relieved when Buck says he has feelings for Eddie and not him, that's all the better.

Ryan has talked about Eddie having a personal journey in Texas and it has been set up since 8A. He is not going to spoil the show. He also said Marisol and Eddie were going to last immediately before they broke up.

Tim just said he loves Buddie fans and we've been right to view Buddie as romantic all along. Why would he be saying fuck you to Buddie fans? That man is a Buddie fan.

TLDR plot device gonna plot device Buddie canon

👆 👏 to all of this…

[toedstool]

Andor is groundbreaking for so many important reasons, but I want to talk about one that's important to me.

TW: sexual violence, Andor Season 2 spoilers

Let me start by saying I am very, very opposed to sexual violence in media. I don't think there's any place for it, I can't think of any reason why it's necessary, and I am very sensitive to it in all forms. Incredibly, despite this, I find myself feeling understood, inspired, and deeply appreciative of how the show handled Bix's assault.

Watching the scene filled me with fear and dread, and I thought for a second that this show would be like all of the other "real-life" shows that use gratuitous sexual violence for character development or as a plot device.

However, as I watched and reflected afterwards, these were my thoughts:

I desperately wish it hadn't happened to her - that her suffering would not have to be compounded in such an impactful way. I wish I could take the pain of the experience from her, and any woman that has experienced such evil.

My discomfort, though, is the intention. The violence in this show, sexual or otherwise, is the opposite of gratuitous. All of the violence, suffering, and death in this show is all meticulously written and carried out deliberately to make specific commentaries about the suffering and loss brought by war.

Andor has always been a show that is frank, clear, and critical over anything else.

Bix knows what's happening from the get-go, and so do we: the insinuations that Bix's 'husband' should be worried, the attempts at a date, the subtle displays of power. Bix knows it too. Right away, the show is displaying something I have never seen: the microaggressions. The red flags. The tone that makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up. We are all relieved when Brasso arrives back.

When Krole returns back to the trailer and confronts Bix, the show does what it always does: they say the quiet part out loud. Krole announces that that he knows they're illegal and that he holds their fate in his hands. Right now in our world, someone in the same situation is being told the same thing. Immigrants, particularly immigrant women, are being coerced, abused, kidnapped, raped, murdered every day because they are vulnerable and unprotected. We are not left questioning why this is happening, or why it has to be Bix.

When Bix decides to fight back, she is aggressive and capable. She uses her skills, the resources around her, and her environment and fights hard. I found myself wishing that Cassian or Brasso or even Wil would come save her, but the writers wouldn't allow it - they let Bix save herself and kill her abuser, like they both deserve.

Possibly most impactful at all, they let her claim what happened to her: "He tried to rape me." Bix is not gaslit about what happened, and neither are we. There is no excusing or talking around what happened or why. Just like many other moments in the show, atrocities are called out plainly with no room for interpretation. Genocide is genocide, slavery is slavery, and rape is rape.

As much as sexual violence is triggering, sickening, and terrifying to watch, anything less would be unjust. Anything less would be inadequate. Anything less would be censorship.

The show has not victimized Bix for the purpose of character development, plot, or conflict. The show has not featured sexual assault to be sensational. The show has given us this terrible scene because it's imperative we don't forget about the women who have been in Bix's shoes, or know someone who has. I am deeply grateful to everyone involved in Andor for their commitment to being thorough. They've left no stone unturned, and illuminated every dark and despicable crevice.

[keepingeahalive]

Miss Rosabella Beauty: The Queen of Wasted Potential

Okay, I'll admit it. I do ship her and Daring. I'm a sucker for Beauty and the Beast, and I couldn't help myself. That said, objectively, this ship and Rosabella's character.... yeah, it kinda sucks.

Maybe I didn't want to admit it because Beauty and the Beast is my favorite fairytale. But the more I look into her character, the more I realize she embodies virtues that contradict her own story. Epic Winter was more about "fixing" Daring's supposed selfishness than addressing the real elephant in the room, and Rosabella was a plot device to push that narrative. I think she could have been an interesting character with flaws and a lot of depth. But she wasn't, and I am very very disappointed.

Her Character

The first time I saw her, I was really rooting for her. She's an animal rights and monster activist. She could have been great friends with Cerise for that reason. She could have even had interactions with Ramona in the past. But she comes off as self-righteous and preachy.

I get she's an activist and that's the joke; activists are inherently self-righteous. But this is Ever After High. Where's the nuance? She could be an animal and monster activist because she's experienced prejudice herself. She's the daughter of Beauty and The Beast. Look me in the eye and tell me she doesn't have any Beast genes. I dare you!

It's canon that Beauty and the Beast is considered a bad destiny story, with the stigma of the heroine falling in love with a creature most fairytales would pin as the villain, and a handsome prince carrying the stigma of being of being a beast even after the curse is gone. She should understand that better than anyone. And yet, this kindness and compassion she tries to convey comes off as condescending. She inserts herself into situations because she feels she's needed when nobody has asked for her help.

2. DARABELLA

Rosabella was only introduced in one minisode and suddenly gets a big role in Epic Winter? She and Daring hadn't had a meaningful conversation up until that point. Really, she barely knows Daring.

For the daughter of Beauty and the Beast, she's so .... judgmental. She's supposed to have the ability to see people's true intentions, but why does she get it so wrong? She immediately assumes Daring is self-centered and narcissistic. On the surface, I can see where she's coming from. But, that's only on the surface.

Daring is more complex than she made him out to be, and Epic Winter wanted the audience to think she was in the right. We know this isn't true. Daring loves being a hero and saving people. He loves his siblings and does what he thinks is best for them. He certainly cared about Lizzie enough to respect her wishes. He's chivalrous to a fault!

Daring is clearly going through some things, and it doesn't seem like anyone's paying attention to what's really bothering him: He has no purpose anymore. He's been brought up his whole life thinking he would be King of Ever After, and now his world is shattered. He's not coping well. And Rosabella thinks he's full of himself when she's barely met this guy.

Having him become the Beast from Beauty and the Beast felt natural to me in the story progression, but Rosabella's inclusion felt forced. She gives him the same old advice from her original story when she should be hinting at something greater. This should be the turning point in Daring that destiny is malarky, and he can break away from the expectations his family and peers put on him. But she doesn't understand that. She only sees that he's obsessed with his looks because his main form of coping is gone.

He's not really upset about his looks. He's upset that his destiny is gone, and either that's not as important to her as him getting over his looks or she doesn't know him well enough to know what's been put on him. Assuming it's the latter, why wouldn't she try to find the root of the problem instead of fixing what she thinks needs fixing?

Daring is the victim here, even if he has issues to work out. And it doesn't seem like she's really listening to him.

3. The Cousins No One Talks About

Yeah. Rosabella and Briar are cousins. And there is very. little. BACKSTORY!!

We know their dads don't get along. Briar's is a monster hunter. Rosa's is The Beast. Their moms are sisters. That's all we know. What's her relationship with Briar? Is it a tragic sisterly bond? Or did the two drift apart/fall out because of their family conflict? Rosa's mom is likely the black sheep of the family, so do she and Sleeping Beauty still talk anymore?

How does Briar feel about all this? Does she have time to feel anything about it at all? She has her own family and her own destiny to worry about. What kind of influence did Briar's parents have on her views on beasts? She hadn't even been to Rosa's home until they were both well into high school. How much do they even know about each other?

We know so little about their dynamic. Family conflict shapes a child, and both of them probably have some deep-seated trauma relating to their families. But did the writers forget that they're cousins?

4. How I Would Write Rosabella (and maybe Daring)

First, give her the ability to transform into a beast. It's not hard.

She's advocating for people like her to exist. She wants people to see both sides of her and those like her to be seen as more than monsters. But she's had her fair share of prejudice, even within her own family. Her uncle is a monster hunter, so a half-beast niece would be considered an abomination. Because of this, she suppresses her anger to better the image of beasts. She doesn't want to, but she feels like she has to, for her own safety and to make herself more palatable in society. However, the more anger she holds in, the less control she has over herself. Her judgment becomes clouded, and this makes her jump to conclusions about people's behavior. She wants things to be fair so much that she gets in trouble for it. She wants to be understanding and patient, but having a hair-trigger temper gets in the way of her goals.

Give her a backstory with Cerise and the Hood-Badwolf family. Her family would know more than anyone the hardships that a human-beast family goes through, and they should be very good friends because of that. Her growing up around Cerise and Ramona would give her more of a reason to protect the beast population.

If any sort of relationship with Daring were to work, they would both have to learn from each other. Daring would learn to let go of people's expectations of him, and Rosabella would learn to let her anger out in a healthy way and pick her battles. Daring can't be the only one learning from her, and Rosa shouldn't see anything to fix in him. She needs to accept him for who he really is, not just preaching about appearances.

She should be embodying both Beauty and the Beast, all the kindness and grief that comes with it. She's not meant to be a paragon, and the writers should not have portrayed her as such. She needed to be a character with her own development. She needed to be portrayed just as in the wrong as Daring was when they met, not about appearance but about each other. She needs to admit her mistakes and acknowledge she is not always right about everyone. Or, at the very least, have her see right through Daring's facade about looks and realize there's something deeper going on.

The writer's dropped the ball on this ship, and they did Daring so dirty here. But they also did Rosabella a disservice by making her so two-dimensional and preachy, almost not even her own character. There are so many routes they could have taken with her. She could have been great, but she wasn't.

[deliajackson]

I saw on the PJO side of TikTok cause I was trying to find some book Percy Edits.

And I saw something saying about Annabeth that said "Annabeth is too good for Any Man, Annabeth Is too good for Percy".

And I just started laughing, like I wanted to comment something but I honestly knew that if I did I was definitely gonna get Attacked.

But I found that TikTok very funny because they seriously thought Annabeth was too good for Percy when In Reality it's the other way around.

Like she should be Lucky she's even dating Percy cause if Percy even had a ounce of Self-worth he would know that he deserves better than Annabeth and CAN do better than Annabeth.

Like most of this fandom doesn't understand how much of a Catch Percy is and it annoys me so much

Like he's So far out of Annabeth's league it's not even funny

Imo he's way out of Everyone's League but what do you think about that?

.... What I think is a little bit sensitive.

Look, I really don't like how media portray "feminism" and how that media actually shaped how people especially girls herselves should act and behave.

From early 2000 to here, "feminism" media is about making the woman be a badass/extra intelligent/rude - while passing rude as girlbossing - who doesnt need any help - especially if it comes from a man - and reduce the man to either "stupid boyfriend who cant do anything without her"/"in dark romance they are sanctified because they would commit genocide but he wouldnt harm the girl and do everything she pleases"/"vile stupid idiot sexist who needs to be beaten up by the strong girl mc"

It is literally 50/50. Men are not equal to his partner in those relationships. They are bellow their girlfriend in literally... everything. In other words.... They are used as plot devices to prop up the female mc. It is as boring as the girl being only there to be what drives a man in the narrative.

Like. Their entire personality is reduced to that. And while sometimes that may work in the story, as you know a character in which the purpose in the story is especifically to haunt the narrative like how Epic treats OdyPen - all the new media is streaming this kind of thing and yelling "we are feminist".

No. You are just playing with sexism and believing you are being woke.

It is annoying. It is bland. It is cheap.

Why that long discourse? Because Fandom and Riordan since HoO is making Percabeth and especially Annabeth fall into this category. Where her flaws are not treated as flaws, actually they are praised. She doesn't grow, she acts worse then when she was 12 in many ways, especially regarding her treatment of Percy. Percy is always at fault, and Annabeth is always in the right. The entire dynamic of Percabeth is basically Percy trying to appease Annabeths feelings and insecurities and fears while they are in supernatural adventures, and when it comes to Annabeth, Percy always has to sacrifice something for her, while all of his own traumas are put in second place and in return Percy is mocked, disrespected and physically assaulted, guilty blamed many times by someone that should care for him as much as he cares for her.

For godamm sake, Riordan made Percy incapable of tying his own shows and Annabeth needing to speak up for him, because according to Annabeth Grover and Percy were in awe in Hecates presence because she was a goddess in WoTG.

(You know, the same Grover who is the lord of nature and lived around Dionysus since he was born. The same Perseus who fought gods, titans and giants, who looked at the face of many gods and treats them either as friendly (like Hermes) or openly passive agressive. Perseus who was named Praetor and directly responsible for the fall of Typhoon in the Last Olympian. The same Percy who saved her life from primordials and monsters down in Tartarus. It is the first time in my entire life I see a MC be devolved so terribly on page only to prop up his own girlfriend in the narrative) I will stop here because talking about wotg is bad for my mental health.

In a relationship both people have to deserve each other. It is not about who is stronger. Who is smarter. Who comes from which family. It is about what they do for one another, what they do with each other and put it on the balance. They have to respect each other. They have to cheer each other up. They need to be each other safe place. Where they can be themselves free of cruel criticism, but still be able to grow and envolve to the best versions of one another. (I am highlighting "cruel" because that is important. I am not meaning construtive criticism.)

I will say it till my dying day: PJO Percabeth (the five original main books) it had everything to be a great couple. There were problems, of course, but they could easily - and I mean easily - be solved with the right narrative decisions. They had everything to be as great as hiccstrid in term of the relationship development and (as important as the other) individual development.

From HoO ahead: Annabeth doesnt deserve Percy and Percy deserves someone better.

[teambuddie]

when i started to watch 911 i already liked buddie, but i wanted to give b*ckt*mmy a chance, i really did, but honestly, i just couldn't and i'm gonna explain why.

1. eddie was haunting the narrative.

after watching 6 seasons of buck dating women i'm not gonna lie i was pretty excited to see him flirt with tummy because yay bisexual buck!!! and the very first scene i was filled with joy until... eddie was in every corner of the relationship. i know, the writers were using buddie as a diversion, they wanted to surprise us that hey he was jealous of tummy not eddie! but then they kept eddie haunting the narrative through the whole relationship. every bt scene eddie was there or was mentioned and obviously the writers did that on purpose, because we're supposed to keep thinking about eddie, we're supposed to know buck is still thinking about eddie even if he's dating someone else. to me the writers made bt impossible to exist separated from eddie and buddie and that made it impossible to me to truly give bt a chance even if i was already biased.

2. tummy is BORING.

look, i was so happy buck was gonna date a man and figure out his sexuality, i really was, but holy shit tummy made it almost unbearable to watch some scenes. how can a man be so boring??? he has zero personality, zero charm, zero everything. every LI from both buck and eddie had at least SOMETHING going on, you know? even natalia and ana had more personality than tummy and that's a bit insane like how a character who showed up for like 5 episodes is more well developed and interesting than you?? and again, to me the writers did that deliberately, they wanted us to feel like something was missing, they didn't want us to get attached to tummy because he wasn't going to be a constant, he was a plot device and he was treated as such. no personality, no complexities, nothing, a blank state.

3. the acting.

this is probably gonna sound mean, but i have to be honest. one of the things that made it even more impossible to enjoy bt was l*u's acting. imo 911 has fantastic acting, like ANGELA BASSETT is on the show, the bar is high guys! even side characters act really well throughout the show and yeah sometimes there is overacting, but mostly is really good and expressive. and then there's l*u... he's so stale, so unexpressive, so bland is like watching a sixth grader acting on a broadway production (but a sixth grader would do a better job probably). i can't take tummy seriously as a character because not only is he boring but i don't feel like watching a "real" character, just a person pretending to be a character and i know that's what acting is but good acting makes you forget that what you're watching is fiction and makes you feel for the characters. l*u's acting achieves none of that.

4. b*ckt*mmies.

i understand when b*ckt*mmies say they can't enjoy buddie bc of the fandom, i do bc they just pushed me even further away from bt. the way they reacted to the break up was... something. some of them had valid reasons to be upset and ofc they were gonna be emotional about their ship breaking up, but the whole "this is homophobic/biphobic" discourse was too much. first they decide to simply forget michael was also an elder gay and say that bt was the only gay couple that showed someone older can be happy... like, are you serious???? "oh but michael wasn't a main character" but his storyline was very well developed and it just as a representation as bt. even better than bt bc no one was saying how he wants the other to have daddy issues (that irked me so much god WHY WOULD HE SAY THAT????). calling ostark biphobic bc he said he wants buck to sleep around again??? as if he said that bc he's bi when it's obvious he said buck should sleep around bc he's buck. ostark showed nothing but support to bi buck and he was always so excited about the storyline, but since he wasn't too onboard with bt and said he'd like for his character to sleep around a bit suddenly he's biphobic???? the way they decided to interpret what tummy said as him saying buck isn't sure of what he wants when it's clear he meant that buck should explore more his sexuality not to be sure but because that's what he probably did and he knows it's healthy and normal to get with new people to figure out what you like and what you want. nothing about the breakup and what ostark/tim said was prejudiced and while i understand feeling hurt and interpreting some stuff with a negative light, i don't think they were being fair to the writing and the crew.

maybe i'm biased bc buddie was already my ship even before i watched 911, but honestly i think if they wanted us to root for bt they'd make their relationship more compelling, they'd give tummy more personality, they'd not make eddie haunt the narrative, but that's not what they did and you may think that's "unfair" to bt and tummy, but honestly it was a warning sign b*ckt*mmies ignored... the sign that said: "this is not meant to be". when tummy called buck evan it wasn't without a deeper meaning, it showed us he was the odd one out, it showed us he didn't belong. and so, he's gone.

[celeborne]

the writers have purposefully made so many parallels between will and el (as individual characters and their relationships with mike) that it would make no sense if nothing happens with byler

before i start, i need to make it very clear that pointing out the fact that el pretty much came out of nowhere and, in a way, unintentionally ruined a huge part of will's life, is NOT bashing el as a person or character. she was just a child when she opened the gate and it wasn’t done on purpose to hurt will. also, she did not intentionally "steal" mike away from will. she loves him so much and he loves her too, and she did not plan for any of the pain he’s suffered.

BUT, the writers did.

and this is something we need to acknowledge, because if they plan to keep mike and el together after EVERYTHING they've done to will, that is extremely cruel and horrible writing, and i'll explain why.

the writers wrote their story in a way that will was basically replaced by el since the beginning.

there were SO many other ways for them to introduce el as a character without hurting will and ruining his life, but they didn't. and to cause extra pain, they decided to:

- make him gay and in love with mike

- make him get kidnapped because of a mistake el made

- have him stuck in an alternate dimension cold and alone while mike and el develop a relationship and start a romance when he’s literally not there

- be forced to watch mike and el be all lovey dovey in front of him while they CONSTANTLY ignore him (this happened throughout BOTH season 3 and 4, there was NO growth from either of them whatsoever)

- and then had the audacity to use him as a plot device to force mike and el back together while he suffers all alone… AGAIN.

here are some more examples and details of how will has been "replaced" and why mike and el's entire relationship is a slap in the face to him:

season 1

will goes missing because of the gate el opened and disappears from mike's life. el comes along and appears in it, essentially "replacing" him in the party and filling the empty spot he left behind.

they also chose to make el show up in the woods, close to where will’s bike was last seen, and many people in town actually thought el was a boy and mistook her for will.

there are so many parallels between them, like they are two sides of the same coin, but the writers chose to ruin will's life and then have el practically "replace" him in his party AND get the boy he loved first (again, not her fault directly because she didn't plan to do that on purpose, but the WRITERS did).

to make things even worse, will is traumatised and scarred for the rest of his life because of this gate being opened, but many people don't want to acknowledge that.

i constantly see comments like "will owes el his life! she helped save him!" and it's infuriating because he wouldn't have needed saving in the first place if she didn't open the gate?? like obviously it was kind of her to help save him and she risked her life which was a massive thing but it was also kind of what she owed him considering it was her fault he got taken in the first place! he was in danger BECAUSE of her mistakes. also, will's life didn't suddenly become good just because he was rescued. in fact, it got WORSE. he suffers with ptsd, anxiety and depression, and he already suffered with these things because of his childhood, but now it's even worse. he literally has a part of the mind flayer INSIDE of him even now and he also has to watch the boy he loves fall in love with someone else.

copying mike and will’s story + parallels

all the selfless and compassionate things mike did for will FIRST were essentially copied and pasted, and the writers made mike do the exact same things for el (but of course, because el is a girl, those gestures are automatically "romantic" now).

we haven’t seen mike do anything like this with dustin or lucas. this shows is that his relationships with will and el are different to his other relationships, but i just find it interesting how they had no creativity for mike and el. they just basically copied mike and will’s story, which makes it even more insulting to will.

when mike first met will, he:

- walked up to him and asked to be his friend

- saved him from being alone and ended up becoming will’s safe place

then in season 1, he:

- cried and hugged his mother after he saw his “body”

- looked through something that reminded of him (his drawings) in his basement when he thought he lost him

- tried to talk to him on the walkie talkie because he heard his voice

- never gave up on him and did whatever he could to find him

does that sound familiar? because they did the same thing with el.

- mike met her when she was alone and gave her a place to stay

- after she sacrificed herself, he cried and hugged his mother

- in his basement, he looked through something that reminded him of her (the star wars ship) on the couch in the SAME SPOT where he looked through will’s drawings first.

there are so many parallels between mike’s relationships with will and el. parallels can be beautiful and meaningful sometimes, and i love the similarities between will and el as individual characters especially because they've both been through so much and end up becoming closer when they become siblings, but i do NOT like that the gay character is the one that stays alone and has to suffer the entire show.

obviously if this is all leading up to byler being endgame, then it would make so much sense and these parallels would be extremely smart, especially if viewers go back and rewatch and pay close attention to every little detail.

but if they plan to keep mike and el together after making will suffer AND copying so much of mike and will’s relationship to use for mike and el, that’s absolutely horrible. there are too many parallels between them and the thing that people need to remember is that everything between mike and will happened FIRST. all the beautiful, meaningful, emotional things that make these relationships so special happened with mike and will long before it happened with mike and el. THAT is the difference here. mike met will and saved him from being alone. he lost him and then never gave up on finding him. he became protective of him once he returned. these are just a few things, but notice how mike and el’s story basically goes like that too?

the only difference between byler and m*leven is that they forced mike and el to be romantic because they’re a boy and a girl. people always try to use “but mike called el every day!” as proof of him being in love with her, but he did the same with will when he was missing. in fact, he did even MORE. he physically went out of his way to try and find him. he told everyone he was still alive. he wouldn’t listen to anyone that tried to stop him from finding will. even the cops warned them to stop, but he didn’t. he didn’t even do any of that with el and just kept everything to himself. i understand the situation with el had to be more secretive and was difficult for many reasons, but he didn’t even mention it to dustin and lucas who were also close to her. and yeah, he called her for a long time, because she was missing for a long time! they found will fairly quickly so of course he wasn’t searching for him as long as he was searching for el? but if will was still missing, of course he never would’ve given up on him either. he still went out every single day searching for will.

season 2 + season 3 + season 4

mike became extremely protective over will after he returned.

- he stayed by his side and made sure he was okay

- they had beautiful, meaningful scenes and heart-to-heart conversations where they would be there for each other

- he even got a bit defensive whenever someone else would come near him

- when will was possessed by the mindflayer, mike said a beautiful monologue where he told will about the day they first met

- he said he walked up to will and asked him to be his friend and that it was the best thing he’s ever done

again, does that sound familiar?

- the writers decided to make mike become protective over el after she returned at the end of season 2

- but in season 3, instead of beautiful, meaningful moments where they had heart-to-heart conversations and comforted each other like mike and will did, they just… made out and excluded all their friends. real nice

- anyways, in season 4 when el is being choked by vines, mike is basically pressured into a monologue where he tells el he loves her (because he knows that’s what she wants to hear since that was what their fight was about) and he talks about the first day they met

- he claims his life started the day he met her in the woods, which we know isn’t true, because he was a traumatised 12 year old searching for his missing best friend and he knew nothing about romantic love. he also doesn’t believe in love at first sight and didn’t fall in love with a stranger he barely knew. he was literally planning to send her to pennhurst the next morning

- anyways, it’s obvious they tried so hard to copy mike’s meaningful monologue to will but totally failed. most of the audience thought mike’s monologue to el was extremely forced and cheesy. it’s even more insulting because they chose to make will have to sit there and listen to it while being heartbroken.

more from season 4

in the airport scene, will is extremely excited to see mike (he looks even more excited than el). he has his painting in his hand and he’s ready to hug him, but mike doesn’t hug back because he’s clearly struggling with his own personal issues and feels like he needs to push will away. will doesn’t know why he’s acting so cold though, and this makes him feel insecure and upset. his mood changes from this point forward, and rightfully so (el notices all of this too).

now here’s where it gets so infuriating. mike and el cling to each other and el says “i want today to be about me and you”, right IN FRONT OF WILL WHEN HE IS STANDING RIGHT THERE. like are you actually kidding me?! mike was will’s best friend FIRST. he has known him much longer than el and he was just excited to see his best friend. why couldn’t el even TRY to include him? she saw he was upset. she saw he just wanted to spend time with mike too. “they’re dating and were just excited to see each other” is no excuse to treat will so horribly. you can date someone while still including your other friends. the way they had the audacity to hold hands without even looking at will in the roller rink was just immature and selfish. if mike has internalised homophobia then at least that KIND OF explains his behaviour and allows us to understand him more (it still sucks but still), but el has no reason to treat her brother like that. he was literally comforting her and asking if she was okay the previous day when she was alone and upset. but when will is alone and upset? absolute silence 😭

anyways, the only reason mike said “i love you” to el was BECAUSE OF WILL. yet another example of will being replaced, and this time, the writers made will do it to HIMSELF. the van scene was supposed to be a special moment between mike and will ONLY. that painting was something will worked so hard on for mike.

since the beginning, will’s artwork has always been very personal and special to both of them and no one else. mike collects his art and has it all over his basement walls. will saw that mike was feeling insecure and upset and decided to sacrifice his own feelings for him just to make him happy, because THAT is how much he loves him. he used el’s name as a disguise, replacing his own in the process, to help mike and el’s relationship even though he didn’t have to. this is what led to mike telling el what she wanted.

so in the end, will gets hurt and suffers alone, el gets told she’s loved, and mike is just… the same. literally the same. basically just reduced to el’s boyfriend and nothing more. it’s so frustrating.

anyways, the writers have basically “replaced” will with el in so many scenarios, and they’ve also copied so much of mike and will’s relationship and used it for mike and el. it’s even worse because they’re doing all of this to an abused and traumatised gay character who has suffered almost his entire life. i know almost every character has trauma in this show and i genuinely want them all to be happy too, but the deliberate things they’ve constantly done to will is actually ridiculous.

if they wanted mike and el to be a couple, they didn’t have to drag will into it and make him go through so much pain because of them.

[yannaryartside]

A REVIEW OF SYDNEY'S JOURNEY INSIDE SYDCARMY

As a person who profoundly yearns for sydcarmy, I would like to say…

Syd can love Carmy despite everything

But she cannot stay with him despite everything.

Not despite the problems in their relationship, not despite his inability to resolve his issues. And more importantly, not despite her own mental health, happiness, and dreams.

this is kind of an open letter to the writers of this show...because I have concerns of how they will rap this up, particularly for Sydney. It all got worse because of that Mattew interview.

PART 1:THE LOVE IN THE STRUGGLE

I understand what the show is doing with Carmy and Syd, showing the reality of loving someone with mental illness and (metaphorically) loving someone recovering from addiction. The struggle to do right by each other, coming from both sides, is excruciating and frustrating to watch, but it is beautiful (to a certain extent).

They are also playing into all of Carmy’s insecurities of never being good enough even when he tries his best. So what better way to heal that than showing Carmy that he was good enough for Sydney to love him despite him failing her (as a partner and friend). The love triangle thing is salt to injury until Carmy decides to stop ignoring all the ways Syd affects him. But that has to be in unison with him leaving behind all his bad coping mechanisms: the work addiction, the self-sabotage, and a toxic relationship.

I get it. But you have to show the other side of the coin. How can you love someone despite everything (despite how they hurt themselves and you) and still decide to do what’s right for you? To keep your side of the street clean, as the character in the anonymous meeting said.

Syd has been a punching bag (emotionally) for the majority of her screen time. Even her trying to discover her culinary voice in s2 was framed in the context of Carmy’s abandonment. I was pissed off after s2, but now I am baffled and angry.

Some time ago, I interacted in this fandom with someone who said Syd would be a prop for Carmen's growth; in all fairness, I think they meant a plot device. A character whose sole purpose in the narrative is to show the main character “the right way” (with a romantic relationship or not), like Gandalf or something. A character is never explored in depth and, therefore, absent of agency besides the elements of the character that favor the path of the main character.

I am not saying every element of Sydney's character has been crafted to favor Carmen. But the show has shown some intent of never giving her any agency besides sticking with these people in this broken system because she loves them all, Carmy especially.

I understand why Syd would choose to stay; she has found a place where she belongs, I just wish she didn't have to sacrifice a good opportunity to achieve her own creative vision, to have more financial security, and even her heart (now broken) in order stay at the Bear. Because that is the narrative, the show is feeding you. Do you want me to applaud her for being loyal despite letting go of all her dreams and sitting by a man who has rejected her in multiple ways just so she can prove she is the one? No, respectfully, fuck you.

If Syd is in love with Carmy despite everything, that's fine; that's just life, and you can do nothing about it. If she lets go of her chances to pursue her dreams waiting for him, that's on her.

Not to mention, this show crafted this character in a particular way. She is insecure about her talents, and despite having great people skills and exemplary leadership, she doesn't believe she can manage it all on her own, walking to the sound of her own drum and her will. I need that for her. That growth, just because it really feels like they have been building up to it. The character that never saw themselves in a leadership position but by doing it discover they are meant for it.

CALL YOUR HERO BY IT'S NAME

I also need her to have credit for everything, right there on the screen: the recognition, the opportunities, the adventure, and the self-exploration, the love.

Why are we trying to make peace with the fact that Sydcarmy may be open-ended? and (in that same context) that Syd's culinary success could also be open-ended, or just a brief plot point in this show that nominated Ayo as a "lead" in award shows?

Regardless of creative decisions, even if you want to make a show solely about closing bad chapters before opening the good ones, it could be done better. This is not a shipping or a fandom thing.

Sydney gets to be the peace (the real one), but that will never be acknowledged by the other characters and only firefly by the man she has loved for all the show's runtime? Why is it that the audience cannot explore/witness Carmy's desire for her? To see him dream of her and call her his actual peace? To pursue her and trying to be better, especially for her? Why does that only get to be a glimpse in your narrative? You already decided that was what you wanted for your main character, you could at least tell your audience that's what you want.

They spend a lot of time and energy deceiving us, but they have to put in (if not time) an equal amount of effort to show why Sydney is the right choice.

Also, why is that only the black woman, the one whose culinary journey we don't follow and explore? Particularly in her getting credit for it and feeling good about her chosen profession? Marcus got to go to Copenhagen, Ebra and Tina got culinary school, and the shows have followed them in their journey to gain confidence in this craft. We got a whole episode of Carmy's journey (and Luca's).

You have four young chefs that we follow so we can get a journey inside the paths in this industry: Luca, Carmy, Syd, and Marcus. Three of these young chef characters (the three men) had the opportunity to travel and have mentors who valued them and recognized their potential; what about Syd?

This point keeps pissing me off. When Matty Matheson decided to open his mouth to say, "Sydney doesn't have professional training," it hurt extra because I am sure some people were watching who, even if they watched the show, may doubt that he was incorrect.

Syd is the only restaurant member who actually went to culinary school. The fucking CIA. The only acknowledgment the audience has of her culinary experience is that line of dialogue of Carmy being impressed by her resume in the fucking pilot. Besides that, the only element of her journey being brought up in dialogue constantly through the seasons is Sheridan Road, her most recent and painful professional failure. It also doesn't look good that Syd is the only one not " European trained" of the young chefs and is precisely the one whose recipes and creations are never properly acknowledged or explored.

The worst part of all this is that Sydney is the only woman in the main cast whose childhood dream was cooking professionaly. Tina, Marcus, and Luca discover this passion later in life, you could even say Carmy didn't dream of fine dining before Michael cast him out of the sandwich shop. But Sydney likely grows up dreaming of this as the only daughter of a single father (who is likely a first-generation American), a girl who lost her mother quite young; therefore, she is conscious about time and how she decides to use it.

So, dear Bear writers, please let Sydney win; at this point, I am begging you. Out of dignity and craftsmanship, if I cannot ask for more. You may resolve this in s4, or whatever time you are thinking for this. Let me inside her heart, her deep motives, to find her courage, let her shine. Follow her. She will love Carmy still, and if Carmy comes from her, let her be his.