mindlessrelieve

[mindlessrelieve]

Franchising Stranger Things was a mistake... Some thoughts since I need to get this out of my head

Stranger Things season 5 is coming out, and that has driven me to kind of rewatch and reminisce on previous seasons of the show... and pretty much all the things that I find annoying about it.

Now I don't want to come off as a hater, that's 100% not the case. I really like this show, and it's a Netflix must-watch for sure. However, there are quite a few things that I think should be addressed more often, but they are not for some reason. Note: all of my complaints stem from seasons 2-4; season 1 is near perfect in my book.

I think a lot of the issues I have with this show all come down to the writing. The Duffer brothers are good writers, but a part of me believes Netflix has inflated their heads by making them believe they are more skilled than they actually are. This show is filled with inaccuracies, inconsistencies, a lack of character development, and retcons here and there.

It's to my understanding that this show was initially thought out as an anthology, which means Hawkins' story was planned out only for one season, and oh boy, does it show... During my rewatch, I couldn't help but notice how they removed an entire scene and added elements to connect it to season 4, and I hate to be that person, but isn't that kind of cheap? Considering it's only possible due to it being available on a streaming platform, because if this were physical media, they would be cooked.

The character writing in this show ranges from alright to completely abysmal. Season 4 was a mass character assassination fest, and only very few characters were spared. Not to mention, these characters have been going through the same character arc every season, but in different fonts. The most glaring example is Eleven, who is consistently trying to find emotional independence from the male figures in her life, only to realize how powerful she actually is and save the day at the end - the only difference is that every season the male character changes (Papa, Hopper and Mike taking turns) and the scale of the enemy grows too (Marvel style).

The cast is simply too big lol. I am a firm believer that a show or a movie needs to have one (1) main character, supporting characters, and a plot, that's literally it. This show does not have a clear main character; instead, it has an ensemble cast made up of no less than 15 people (Avengers style). The problem is, while the Avengers each have individual films to develop their characters, Stranger Things is forced to cramp hours of character development for like 15 cast members into just a few hours of television.

The result of their undying love for character creation and a large cast is inconsistent characterization across the board, with some being somewhat interesting and others having absolutely nothing to do. For instance, Mike was arguably the protagonist of the very first season, since the story is being told from his perspective pretty much. But in later seasons, his impact on the plot is simply dismissed, and even his character motivations are all over the place. The problem is, the writers do not seem to realize this, resulting in some unearned moments later on the show. If they want to have a big cast, that's okay, but instead of having so many different plots every season, each having their own tonality and inconsistent character writing throughout, they can focus on a few things to make every climax and resolution feel earned.

Instead of individual development, they go for group development, but in my opinion, it just turns the whole thing into a mess because now you have characters that only make sense within specific scenarios... how can you have sympathy for characters that are simply plot points?

What's interesting about this is that, given enough time and care, they are capable of writing neat story arcs, but they do need to focalize certain characters and struggles to be able to pull it off, which I think is where they fall flat: they try to give irrelevant characters their moment to shine and end up dismissing the main plot line.

There is not enough breathing room. I'm pretty sure there's a word for this, and the Ghibli films are the best example of it, but every piece of media needs moments to breathe and allow your audience to sit in the (dis)comfort of what has happened and is about to happen. Season 1 had plenty of these, like Eleven going through Mike's house, or the kids/teens having normal conversations between them, it does not necessarily serve the plot, but it does make the characters and the world feel more alive and real.

Stranger Things is a show with such a triumphant season 1 that it ultimately suffers from having the longest victory lap known to mankind. Every problem I have with every other season does not belong in season 1. And every element I liked about season 1 is not present in later seasons, like the contained yet larger than life storytelling, the kids v. the world trope, the dysfunctional yet endearing Byers family as a focal point, sci-fi horror where the children's innocence and naivety are the driving factor in their success.

The overall uniqueness of the show... all of it, just forgotten. Only to be replaced with generic, franchise-level storytelling.

[mindlessrelieve]

I started Andor expecting everyone was going to die. And that was ok, because they took the main point of contention for this show - who cares about a prequel for a character who died in Rogue One? - and turned it on its head. They wield the symbolism like a sword. The main soundtrack is a funeral march. A dead woman speaks from the grave and wishes she'd fought before the end. Everyone here is already dead, fighting for a future they'll never see.

But Bix? Bix is going to live. And somehow that's worse.

She's going to live. She's going to make it home to Ferrix. This show will end with her laying bricks for them all.

[mindlessrelieve]

Andor Appreciation Day 2 - Everyone Has Their Own Rebellion

@andorappreciation

[mindlessrelieve]

So I watched Andor...

....and oh boy!

Without a shadow of a doubt, the best Star Wars project I've ever seen and one of the best TV shows of the decade.

The first trilogy will always be the heart of Star Wars. Will always be (one of) the most impactful sci-fi movies ever made. Will always carry meaning beyond its years. Will always stand the test of time.

But a part of me is almost completely certain that when George Lucas first conceived the story, this is what he wanted to see: a well-thought-out critique of authoritarianism and fascism -but make it galactic!

And that's what Andor is, a gritty spy political thriller with intelligent characters that understand war is won outside the battlefield. The "faceless" heroes history books don't write about because their achievements can't be reduced to specific moments. The Empire's true evil, and what has driven so many creatures around the galaxy to take a stand against an impossible enemy.

There's not enough honey in this world for this show. I witnessed a miracle, and I can't help but be sad I might never experience anything like it ever again.

[mindlessrelieve]

For Those Who Come After

This truly is a generational quote, and it could've had so much more impact if not for the third act. I think this embodies everything I hate about Act 3: all the sacrifices, all the pain, all the lives, all for nothing. It's all pointless in the end. And while phrases like "when one falls, we continue" truly stand the test of Act 3, this one loses its meaning.

REAL BUMMER. Because few phrases carry as much meaning and emotion as this one.

[mindlessrelieve]

While this is a great point, there are a lot of things that simply do not make sense in the story, and I guess some people would be ready to have a more open conversation around the morals and ethics if the story made sense all the way through.

But unfortunately, there's so much you can excuse with "it was up to interpretation."

i think a problem is some people are way too focused on having the most **morally correct** opinion on the endings of expedition 33 rather than just accepting that your interpretation and what you took out of it is going to undeniably be different from anyone else’s and that’s great. Thats art baby

Because the game doesn’t even give you enough literal information on how the world *actually* works to even fully understand what the morally and ethically correct opinion is. For instance the conclusion that the people of the canvas are sentient vs. not sentient is something the game EXPLICITLY AVOIDS ANSWERING for probably this EXACT reason. I have my opinion on it but it is literally just an opinion and im not morally superior for it, it’s just what i think.

Is a *literal* piece of Verso’s soul being kept within the canvas because that’s how these pocket dimensions are created, like fucking horcruxes? Or is it just a thinly veiled metaphor for healing your inner child and putting the last vestiges of someone’s memory to rest? I hesitate to say “it doesn’t matter” but the point isn’t being right or wrong about that, the point is that it’s up to you. Let it spin around in your head for weeks and months on end, that’s the intention. Not to have concrete, tidy answers.

Anyway i love narratives that openly ask you “well what do you think?” instead of telling you what to think and we should all be grateful this caliber of storytelling is still alive and well

[mindlessrelieve]

More thoughts on COE33

Another very interesting thing I've noticed from the Expedition 33 reaction is how themes will always beat execution.

Feeling sympathy for the devil

I've seen so many people talking about the Dessendre family with actual sympathy because they're a grieving family: tragic, they just lost their son and can't figure out a world where they let him go.

So, thematically, this family deserves sympathy; everything they do, they do it because they love each other. Thematically, they are a tragic and beautiful mirror of grief taken to a different level. Thematically, they take the narrative to new heights.

But factually speaking (execution-wise), are they not selfish creatures who view the lives of others as inferior just because they created them? Factually, didn't they neglect their daughter because "she was to blame for the death of their son"? Factually, was Verso not continuously lying and misleading every expedition he came across just to achieve his goals?

I'm all about complex character development and family trauma, but when the resolution came at the expense of the main plot of the first two acts, I was just incapable of feeling any empathy for these people

Themes over coherence

Themes will always be more relevant in any story than the execution. A lot of stories that are poorly executed will get a pass because of whatever themes or symbols they use.

Expedition 33 suffers immensely on Act 3, and even though I've been trying to think of ways it's able to achieve telling all the stories it wanted to tell satisfyingly, I just can't think of anything: either you throw the first two acts overboard, or change the entirety of Act 3.

Which is a shame because both the premise and the resolution are soo interesting in their own ways, but they genuinely don't mesh well at all.

[mindlessrelieve]

Opinion - Clair Obscur: Expedition 33

I will say out front that I didn't finish Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 (I stopped playing mid act 3). I didn't like it as much as I'd wanted to. However, I do think it is objectively a good game. A game of the year contender, in my opinion.

It's just… not my cup of tea.

My woes with the game started pretty early on in the shape of the accessibility of the combat system and the exploration.

The combat system is refreshing, a nice addition to the turn based genre. I loved how unique each character's fighting style is. I loved exploring the different team compositions. There's good variety there, and none of the characters felt like a waste.

The combat itself is, however, not very accessible for the less experienced/skilled players. The game relies heavily on the parry/dodge system, and while you can — mostly — work around it with a good strategy and/or some grinding. Some battles force you to parry. Most of those battles are optional, at least one of them is not.

I'm not new to parrying/dodging, but I'm not good at it. I found the timing for dodging okay in the normal difficulty (expeditioners), parrying on the other hand was hit or miss for me. This didn't become an issue until the second act, where I encountered those fights that REQUIRE you to parry. I struggled with those, and found them annoying.

Having a retry button would've made a world of difference…

Expedition 33 has autosave only. No manual saving. No retry button. A lot of dying by trial as you learn to dodge/parry any specific foe. I was stuck in a cycle of dying to an enemy, having to walk back to them, sometimes skip cutscenes, only to die again and go through this process all over again. The wasted time and repetition in-between deaths. Drove. Me. Crazy.

I eventually gave up and switched to easy difficulty (story). The timing for parrying/dodging became easier. It made fighting the particularly annoying mobs/bosses less stressful, but some of my enjoyment towards the combat system was lost in the process.

There's a lot I love about it; there are some things I'm neutral about; and then there's the lack of a “Retry” button. I honestly think it's inexcusable in this day and age.

Just as bad as that, is the lack of a mini map. The overworld has a map, the confined areas do not. I spent a lot of time lost or retracing my steps. Especially after coming back from a break.

It wasn't fun. It was frustrating. It made exploration a lot less welcoming, which is a shame because the design and art direction of this game is BEAUTIFUL. There's a lot to explore, but you need a good sense of direction and patience to fully enjoy it.

As the game progressed, ignoring the things above became harder, but for 2/3rds of the game the story managed to carry me through those annoyances.

Until it couldn't…

You could start seeing the cracks in the writing appear as early as act 1, but it was in act 2 when they became impossible to ignore.

I already had a pretty accurate idea of what was going on halfway through act 2. The game is designed so the player can piece things together from the information given. And yet the game is also designed so that the characters themselves remain oblivious until the very end. Whenever something suspicious happened they were quick to sweep it under the rug and move onto the next objective…

At times the characters felt very complex, but at times they felt like marionettes to the plot.

I know from act 3 and the ending (which I eventually spoiled for myself), that this might be an intentional flaw in the characters. [spoiler] It's a way to question the painted people's humanity. How much of them is real and how much of it is the will of the painters. [spoiler] But the game is quite wishy-washy about it, and didn't gain my suspension of disbelief, at all.

The final blow to my enthusiasm came in Act 3.

The game's overarching theme is how to deal with grief, and it pulls the rug from under the players many times to make them experience grief alongside the characters. I think the devs achieved their vision successfully in that regard. But the way this is executed is sometimes… questionable.

You spend most of your time learning about characters and things that become — more or less — irrelevant after act 2. I think the game wants you to let them go as part of your own “grieving process”. And while that idea is thought provoking and even poetic. In practice it made ME feel like 2/3rds of the game were pointless and it became hard for me to care about the final resolution. It didn't help that I didn't find the characters and the story of act 3 very likeable. Particularly not when compared to the characters the game was asking me to give up.

And that's how I end up here. Unable to finish the game because the lack of certain quality of life features make the gameplay frustrating, and the story no longer grips me in a way that makes up for the annoying parts of it.

I do think this is a must try for anyone that likes deep mature storytelling and turn based RPGs. You might be better at parrying and navigating than I am, and not be as frustrated by the gameplay. Acts 3 might click better with you. Honestly, even the music and art alone is a good reason to check this game out.

The game is good, even if I didn't enjoy it as much as I hoped I would.

Who knows, maybe they'll eventually add a retry button and a mini-map. I would definitely give it a second try if they ever do. For now, I'm happy to stop where I am and play something else.

[mindlessrelieve]

It felt like one of those movies that swap genres mid-film, but it's so abrupt it ends up feeling like two different movies where neither sticks the landing

Thoughts on Expedition 33

Okay, finally finished the game, gonna put my thoughts under the cut for reasons of spoilers and criticism of the game.

Idk how I feel about the ending, if I'm being completely honest. I think primarily because the first and second halves of the game feel like completely different stories.

The first half of the game is a story about the struggle of a world, its about activism, about planting a tree in a garden that you will never see. It is about sacrifice and what we owe to the generations who will come after us. Its about 'for those who come after' and 'when one falls, we continue'. Its about a suicide mission to try save future generations. And I actually thought this was quite a novel game plot.

The second half of the game is a story about grief and family trauma. It is about how we run from trauma, and how sorrow consumes us. It is about the difficulty of refinding your life after loss and escapism.

And they were both excellent, wonderful stories. They just kind of... didn't fit together?

I got what people generally are calling the 'bad' ending which is siding with Maelle to ensure the survival of the canvas (read: the people and world of Lumiere). They're both bittersweet endings, but generally this one is seen as the worse one.

But like??? I don't know how I feel about how it involves the sacrifice of an entire world?? To ensure the happiness of one person??? It just seems so much the opposite of what they were going for in that first half.

Like the way I saw it, it shouldn't have been about 'verso's canvas', it should have been about 'the people of Lumiere'. I'm not fighting for the preservation of Verso's canvas, I made my choice of ending based on the survival of the people of Lumiere. I get the story of family trauma, but like.... its an entire world?? And just...the people of Lumiere are just never given importance by the story. Its not even about agency, its just that the story just kind of, idk... stops caring about their survival??

Because like, the beings of the canvas are people (though the game doesn't really address this fact at all). And idk, it just feels very out of touch from everything they set up in the first half?? What happened to the idea of 'for those who come after' or 'when one falls, you continue'??

Like, both very cool ideas, and if you've been around me for long, you know I love stories of generational trauma. It just...idk felt like they need to be two separate games. They deal with completely different sets of ideas which just don't kind of mesh imo....

[mindlessrelieve]

Thoughts on Expedition 33

Okay, finally finished the game, gonna put my thoughts under the cut for reasons of spoilers and criticism of the game.

Idk how I feel about the ending, if I'm being completely honest. I think primarily because the first and second halves of the game feel like completely different stories.

The first half of the game is a story about the struggle of a world, its about activism, about planting a tree in a garden that you will never see. It is about sacrifice and what we owe to the generations who will come after us. Its about 'for those who come after' and 'when one falls, we continue'. Its about a suicide mission to try save future generations. And I actually thought this was quite a novel game plot.

The second half of the game is a story about grief and family trauma. It is about how we run from trauma, and how sorrow consumes us. It is about the difficulty of refinding your life after loss and escapism.

And they were both excellent, wonderful stories. They just kind of... didn't fit together?

I got what people generally are calling the 'bad' ending which is siding with Maelle to ensure the survival of the canvas (read: the people and world of Lumiere). They're both bittersweet endings, but generally this one is seen as the worse one.

But like??? I don't know how I feel about how it involves the sacrifice of an entire world?? To ensure the happiness of one person??? It just seems so much the opposite of what they were going for in that first half.

Like the way I saw it, it shouldn't have been about 'verso's canvas', it should have been about 'the people of Lumiere'. I'm not fighting for the preservation of Verso's canvas, I made my choice of ending based on the survival of the people of Lumiere. I get the story of family trauma, but like.... its an entire world?? And just...the people of Lumiere are just never given importance by the story. Its not even about agency, its just that the story just kind of, idk... stops caring about their survival??

Because like, the beings of the canvas are people (though the game doesn't really address this fact at all). And idk, it just feels very out of touch from everything they set up in the first half?? What happened to the idea of 'for those who come after' or 'when one falls, you continue'??

Like, both very cool ideas, and if you've been around me for long, you know I love stories of generational trauma. It just...idk felt like they need to be two separate games. They deal with completely different sets of ideas which just don't kind of mesh imo....

[mindlessrelieve]

You're right and you should say it

I think one of the unintended consequences of Clair Obscur writing falling apart completely in Act 3 is showcasing just how effective propaganda can be and just how many people can be made to be okay with attricities by using nothing but simple narrative framing and some emotional manipulation.

It reveals how many people are willing to ignore the horrifying and grotesque atrocities and justify them just so they can feel better emotionally about their choices — ironically an opposite message than the game attempts to present.

It doesn't inspire hope for humanity for me but it does shed some light on responsibility an author has for the themes in their story and why it's important to figure out those concepts first and foremost.

Figure out your endings and thematic conclusions before you even start to outline, people. Or you'll end up like this game.

[mindlessrelieve]

[mindlessrelieve]

CLAIR OBSCUR: EXPEDITION 33 (2025) dev. Sandfall Interactive

[mindlessrelieve]

[mindlessrelieve]

Gustave & Maelle + being there for each other

my Clair Obscur gifs

[mindlessrelieve]

seeing a response to maelles ending where ppl ask 'don't the painted ppl have a right to exist' bc they're autonomous and just as real as the painters. and i think that would be true but... they don't get to live an autonomous life in maelles ending. the ending shows this because she DIDN'T respect verso's request when he said he didn't want to live this life. she remakes him and he's a puppet in her perfect life play. it forces you to ask what if something else happens in this world that maelle doesn't like? is she just going to repaint anything that upsets her?

how can you say they get to live an autonomous life when maelle has shown that her desires are more important and she has the power to make them real? they aren't free. they're all her prisoners the same way they were aline's (it's tragic because maelle doesn't want to hurt anymore.. but it doesn't make it right that she does that to verso)

verso truly has lines that are harsh and true like that painters do whatever they want without regard to how it affects others.

i get feeling like these people don't deserve to die. but i also don't think they deserve to be under maelles thumb either. it's a cruel choice, but i just can't feel that saying they deserve to live bc they're autonomous is accurate bc that's not what they actually get to do

[mindlessrelieve]

'Still can't finish your sentences, can you?' aka Gustave + having a... unique way with words

my Clair Obscur gifs

alt of the first one with Soph under the cut