#in which we serve

[normasshearer]

CELIA JOHNSON as Alix Kinross in IN WHICH WE SERVE (1942) dir. David Lean

[thebarroomortheboy]

IN WHICH WE SERVE (1942) | dir. Noël Coward & David Lean (directorial debut)

[womansfilm]

In Which We Serve (1942)

[ulrichgebert]

This is the story of a ship. Noël Coward produziert, schreibt das Drehbuch, führt Regie (mit etwas Unterstützung des Neulings David Lean), spielt den Kapitän und (noch zusätzlich zum wie hier erwähnt fast absurd genau das gleiche machenden Peter Ustinov) komponiert die Musik und bekommt einen Ehrenoscar, in diesem patriotischten und prachtigstem Kriegspropagandafilm aller Zeiten. Der Admiralität wäre es wohl aber lieber gewesen, wenn das Schiff nicht untergangen wäre. Schien mir ein guten Heimkommfilm. "Es ist ein bisschen over-the-top" sagt der Tobi.

[illuminespace]

2025/June In Which We Serve (1942)

[hinamie]

post-graduation trip airport looks

[artbyblastweave]

To be a cynical bastard for a minute- I like Terry Pratchett, I think Terry Pratchett was a good writer, and I think that Terry Pratchett can rightfully be claimed to have been deliberately pursuing empathetic and progressive messaging in a way that sometimes reads like straw-grasping cope when the claim is applied to other writers. But lets be real; the reason he's almost universally beloved on here, and the reason his corpus has dodged getting scrutinized to pieces in the same way as so many other nerd tentpole IPS, is that he died about a decade ago when many of us were children or teenagers, and the dead can't sully their own reputation. The Dead have whatever opinion you need them to have regarding recent developments. The Dead Can't Write and the Dead Can't Tweet Shit That Makes You Go Back And Re-Evaluate Their Other Shit

[teratomatica]

you always land on all fours

[mythalism]

genuinely curious how the writers and larger dragon age audience would treat thom rainier if instead of being appropriately* repentant and putting himself in prison he blew up a major orlesian government building to instigate a chevalier rebellion or tried to have someone do some necromantic blood magic ritual involving uncertain danger and possible sacrifices to bring the innocent children he ordered killed back to life

[thebarroomortheboy]

Theatrical movie debut of Dickie (Richard Attenborough) in IN WHICH WE SERVE (1942) | dir. David Lean (directorial debut) & Noel Coward

[hyakunana]

What do you mean the construction worker never used the construction buckle????

[transmechanicus]

The transgender contrast of loving your parents but also for Trust Reasons longing for an additional external authority figure you can count on more unconditionally to support or protect you that totally doesn’t risk becoming a kink

[scarefox]

[maximura]

[vigilskeep]

i’m very baffled by the logistics of how lucanis’ early act 2 companion quest bloodbath ended. he was unconscious, right? and we’ve all just been fighting waist deep in blood? did we carry him back to the cantori diamond eluvian through the streets covered in that much blood. because i have to believe you’re not getting an unconscious man across those ziplines. did anyone say anything or do people in treviso just live like this. was everyone at the diamond just like yeah another working day at crow hq nothing to see here

[twilight-amber]

One thing that I really enjoyed about the latest Deltarune chapters is how much the reveal at the end recontextualised Ralsei's character and the information he presents to us in his introduction. Below are some disjointed thoughts about that.

When Chapter 1 first released, I remember feeling that his explanation of the prophecy and how battle works (and his encouragement of a peaceful approach to resolving conflicts) seemed almost like an introduction to the rules of the world that might have to be subverted later - sort of in the same way that Flowey in Undertale initially establishes the rules of the world as "kill or be killed", which you then override by choosing nonviolence in order to reach the happiest ending.

This observation created a bit of dissonance between my Undertale player brain ("of course I want to approach all battles peacefully and spare everyone!") and my narrative-focused brain ("is the peaceful approach really the right one in the context of this story? is there some future twist that will completely recontextualise what we've been told about how the world works?")

When Chapter 2 released, I felt the dissonance less - it's painfully clear that the consequences of going out of your way to hurt people are Bad, so I felt much better about choosing the peaceful approach.

But I still wasn't sure what to make of Ralsei - why was he so insistent on us being nice to enemies, if he also believes that Darkners' only purpose is to support Lightners (as per the pre-castle conversation in Chapter 1)? Is it just because the prophecy says it's the way to go? Why does it matter so much to him?

To be clear: I never thought he was like. evil or anything. I figured he was doing the best he could with the information he had. But how accurate was that information? Could he be misguided in some way? He was clearly hiding stuff, and not knowing what he was hiding and why left some uncertainty.

But then we get to Chapter 4, and suddenly Ralsei's motivations become a lot clearer. The prophecy didn't say anything about kindness or mercy - that was his own personal advice, given in the hopes that the prophecy could be changed. He wasn't just acting according to the prophecy; he was genuinely trying to make a difference.

And now knowing that Ralsei has been encouraging Kris and Susie to be kind in hopes of altering the prophecy's narrative... it's particularly interesting in light of the fact that every chapter has a Moment where everyone you've befriended in the dark world shows up to help out - but only if you take the pacifist approach (with the exception of Chapter 2).

There's Chapter 1 with the king being overthrown. Chapter 2 with the Ultimate Group Project (Thrash Machine). Chapter 3's version of this is particularly interesting because it interacts with a part of the prophecy: Susie repairs Tenna offscreen if you recruit enough people to help (or just avoid violence?? reports seem varied on this one). The prophecy about Tenna still comes to pass (he's broken), but it's not the end for him.

And - I just found this out a day or two ago, actually - something similar happens in Chapter 4??? It seems that Jackenstein straight up falls to his death(?) in the scene just before the finale if you choose to be violent, but all the Sanctuary Darkners come to his rescue if you stay pacifist the whole way through.

Susie's comment about being nice paying off seems a lot more pointed in this context. Whether you choose a pacifist or violent approach is starting to have more obvious, more significant consequences.

At the end of Chapter 4, Ralsei makes it clear that he believes his own efforts (in guiding Kris and Susie towards nonviolence) have failed, because he was hoping that what's written in the prophecy would change, and it hasn't. But there's a big difference between "Tenna gets broken and stays broken forever" and "Tenna gets broken but is patched up and can still have a happy ending", even though both follow the letter of the prophecy. Maybe there's more than one way for that final prophecy to play out, too.

Susie's the one who has the conviction to fight against fate, but I want to believe that Ralsei's efforts had some meaning as well, even if we can't see it yet.