#Bullshit film

[daincrediblegg]

OK THIS IS NOT A FUCKING DRILL EVERYONE FUCKING REPEAT AFTER ME. THIS IS WHAT YOU WILL DO WHEN YOU WATCH MUPPET CHRISTMAS CAROL THIS YEAR:

You will navigate to the page on disney plus (and it has to be here. Unless someone has actually uploaded the REAL movie anywhere else you cannot get it elsewhere)

BUT YOU WILL NOT HIT PLAY. You won’t do it. Because it’s NOT THE REAL VERSION OF THE FILM AND DISNEY IS FUCKING LYING TO YOU AS IT ALWAYS DOES

You will scroll down HERE. To EXTRAS instead. You MUST GO HERE. This is non -negotiable

THEN YOU WILL SCROLL DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF THE EXTRAS AND YOU WILL THEN HIT PLAY ON THIS BAD BOY: THE FULL LENGTH VERSION

And you will watch it. And you will thank me for having been so blind and led astray by that stupid fucking mouse. You’re welcome.

[kickmuncher3]

i fucking hate everything.

[airlocksandaviaries]

OK TUMBLR PRETEND WE'RE ALL ON SET TOGETHER PICK A JOB

if you actually work/have worked as one of these pls select it and tell me in the tags im curious

if you've worked as multiple, pick your favorite

everyone else, VOTE ON VIBES ALONE!!

[mayhasopinions]

this line fucking hit. but it's true.

queer people for years, centuries, have been oppressed for being their most authentic selves, by the people who call themselves heroes and us the monsters, even nowadays with the most recent law for allowing discrimination against queer people in America. They call themselves the good guys, the saviours, the ones completely in the right and justified for hating against people just trying to live their lives. And apparently we're supposed to be the bad guys in this story.

i'm so glad that this movie came out when it did, the world really needs it.

[worblewobble]

after all it's not easy, banging your heart against some mad bugger's wall

[demadogs]

some of you need to hate ai way more than you currently do

[hedgehog-moss]

French TV journalist having a hard time trying to get woman in the street to comment on Macron's latest speech yesterday

Protesters organised casserolades (aka banging on pots and pans) in front of city halls across the country at 8pm, when Macron was speaking, to symbolically drown out his voice. Later that evening, Macron was filmed singing a song with some 'random people' in a street in Paris, trying to show he can go out and meet people and have fun because protesters don't exist. The people he was singing with (members of a choir, some of whom are 'alt-right-leaning') were using a folk song app created by far-right activists that was criticised a few months ago for hosting a Spanish fascist anthem & Third Reich military marches.

The government's response was that the President "couldn't know the background of the people he met that night." Maybe if he wants to avoid being associated with the far-right (that's a big if, I know), Macron should keep in mind that with the kinds of strategies and positioning his government has adopted lately, people in the street who welcome him with open arms and are proud to be filmed with him have a higher than average likelihood of supporting fascism.

[userscully]

You used what he wanted against him. That's a nice move. It is what you would have done. And this, this is what you would have done. It was only logical. STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS 2013, dir. J.J. Abrams

[darius-1]

We've been robbed!

She could have looked something like this in the 2000s! Hair dyed black and a red bandana! Then Jennifer Garner would've easily been passed as Greek by every die-hard Marvel fans! Fuck!

[even-in-arcadia]

Barbie (2023) // Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead (1966)

[beautifulhigh]

Welcome to the next edition of Jen's meta ramblings

I have watched the movie at least once a day since it came out and I kid you not, I see something new every time. The fact that this is Matthew López's first directoral debut is just... I'm in awe. And you can tell how much he loves the story because of the way things like this are set up and played out

In the novel, Henry and Alex are skinny dipping in the lake at night, and so I absolutely got the change in both time of day and also attire. But let's talk about that little island shall we?

No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea

Every single one of us is not meant to be alone, without connection and without a link to someone else. We are parts of a whole and if we lose that... well. It's not good.

Henry is on that island, our prince who belongs to Britain and Henry Fox who thinks he has to belong to himself. The prince is forced into status and circumstance, of appearances and mindless ribbon cuttings. When he does something that means something - like the trip to the cancer ward - then he doesn't do it with cameras. I'd argue he's not the prince there, he's Henry Fox. The man who lost his father to cancer.

But this is not that meta.

Henry has shut himself off, shut himself away. He doesn't date the people he's interested in, he doesn't live his truth (and for very good and valid reasons). He has decided that while Prince Henry belongs to Britain, Henry Fox is an island.

And look who is swimming up to that island. Look who is coming out to Henry, having realised the night before that oh yeah, I do feel forever about him and so Alex swims out to that island.

And the first thing he does? He makes Henry laugh. He is silly and fun and the complete antithesis of the composed and collected Prince of Wales. And then he joins Henry, on his island.

This gorgeous overhead shot shows us that Alex is putting himself on Henry's right (protocol or his good side?) but he's also in the centre of the island. He's not on the edge of it. In the metaphor of Henry Fox's island, Alex is putting himself at the heart of it all. RIght before he lays out his heart to Henry.

The shot that broke our hearts too, along with Henry's. Because we can see the shore in the background now. We're reminded that islands are not - they cannot be fully independent. People cannot be islands and even though Alex is literally and metaphorically planting himself at Henry's side, Henry knows that this island he's formed for himself in his heart and his sense of self cannot stand if Alex is there. If Alex is with him then he is no longer an island. Henry Fox will not belong to himself and the sense of protection and self-preservation we see coming out in the Storming of Kensington is under threat.

So he bails.

The island is submerged, like the mythical Atlantis, because how do you render land useless? Drown it. How do you deal with water? Drain it away. He abandons his island and flees back to the only other space he has left - Kensington Palace - in an attempt to regroup. He drains his life of Alex and what he brings. He has to return to being the Prince of Wales because Henry Fox got too close. Because Henry Fox realised he was being loved by a man who would literally swim out to where he is.

Moment of appreciation for the shot. Matthew, you have a fucking talent and I cannot wait to see what else you do. Because our #imtaller boy looks so small here. So lost. When else have we seen someone look so small and lost?

Oh. Yeah.

When he's curling in on himself in an almost last-ditch attempt to protect himself and his boundaries from what is coming. You can see that he's no longer dry, that Alex's "shower time" has changed him. Alex brought laughter and love and water onto his island and Henry has just realised what this means. This isn't a visitor's visa. This is immigration.

Which is what makes THIS so much more. Back to our boy, drenched from the storm, plaintively asking Henry to talk to him.

Because yes, the Storming of Kensington happens during an actual storm, but by now you know I overead into everything... so once again we have Alex "swimming" out to Henry. He's dived right in and gone are the jokes, gone is the humour. He is here and he is asking to be let in and daring Henry to send him away.

This is Alex, serious and in love and following Henry to whatever landmass he is setting foot on. Henry is trying to be an island and Alex is out here going, "I'll just build another boat you fucker". A true 'ship if you will. He swam out to an island on a lake, he flew to a tiny island across an ocean. He is standing at Henry's borders and he isn't launching an offensive. He's just saying that if Henry wants to be cut off from everything then he needs to do the cutting himself.

Prince Henry felt like he belonged to Britain, Henry Fox felt like he had to belong to himself, and Alex turned up and went "nope. Mine now". (Insert additional historical quip about the English being colonised for once.) But there is still some truth in that: the Prince is part of England, and we should all belong to ourselves even in relationships. Henry just learns that the different parts of him can co-exist. Bit like how water and land can co-exist without one destroying the other.

Henry is Alex's North Star but he's also his solid ground. Insert quip about Alex colonising Henry and claiming him for his own, planting of flag, your innuendo of choice goes here. Pyramus wished there wasn't a wall - Alex straight up scaled Henry's.

There's a divergence between Prince Henry and Henry Fox, but at the heart of them both there's Henry. And this is the man that Alex sees, this is the man that Alex loves. Alex swims out to the island for Henry Fox, Alex pushes through the rain for Prince Henry. Alex holds steady in the storm of talking with King James/Queen Mary and the public.

And it started with Alex literally making his way out to Henry on an island: be that England for the Royal Wedding, a pontoon island on a lake, or knocking down Henry's walls.

To this moment. Which is very hard to grab a screenshot of, but Alex asks Henry to "take a walk" with him. This time it's Henry going to/with Alex. The fact that he's there is one thing (and a rant rather than a meta) but at this point they have each other. They belong to each other. Where one of them goes, the other one follows. Independent, together, co-existing.

Anyway. I'm sure there will be more bullshit ramblings and metas at some point. Follow me if you want more of that (but be warned: blank and empty blogs are blocked on sight) because we are not islands in this metaphorical storm of life. Let us swim out to one another, dry off with one another, and live a life with broken down borders and walls.

ETA: I now have another name to add to the thanks. Stephen Goldblatt, from the bottom of my soul, thank you

[todayinhiphophistory]

Today in Hip Hop History:

Notorious B.I.G. released his debut single Party And Bullshit June 29, 1993

[airlocksandaviaries]

*Actor talking to his director* Wow that shot looks really amazing. You made my ass look really great, by the way. That hour you spent setting up the lighting on my ass really paid off. I'm actually getting. a little distracted at this point. by my ass. in the scene you shot. Can we work together on another film sometime

[glittermutt]

[thestalwartheart]

“And, you know, [Ben Whishaw]’s a great fucker. He has a great pelvis and it’s wonderful to show it.”

Okay Franz Rogowski. Okay.

Source.

[dontforgetukraine]

TIFF: And so it continues... 2

Headline from news site The Globe and Mail: "Russians at War is an exceptional documentary and needs to be seen" written by Marsha Lederman (Source)

This is the opinion piece about the film "Russians at War" that gave me incredible psychic damage. Let's explore it, shall we?

Marsha first describes the film as a "brave and exceptional documentary. It shows, unvarnished, the horrors of the war". She then explains the latest situation with TIFF canceling the film. (It's actually suspended, Marsha, according to TIFF, but this inaccuracy is the least of my concerns compared to the rest of the bullshit you wrote.)

While TIFF obviously must keep audiences safe, the anger around this film is unjustified. It is a cowardly move to work to suppress this courageous film. And it is a mistake. This documentary in no way glorifies Russia or its army or its war effort. This film in no way demonizes Ukraine or its people.

Marsha just spat in the faces of Ukrainians everywhere. She doesn't explore why there is outrage over this film or what the Russian propaganda points are (Again, the points are in the damn trailer!). Apparently Ukrainian anger is unjustified, despite the Russian subjugation, imperialism, and propaganda they have suffered, including this film. Ukrainian anger is unjustified despite how they constantly have to fight against Russia's narratives about them.

Protesting something this egregious is not cowardly. Ukraine's fight against Russia and its narratives is not cowardly. This film is not free speech but paid speech. And this film is not courageous. Marsha clearly didn't look into the director, how she has 11 films with RT, how she lied about coordinating with the command to get a military uniform so she wouldn't get shot by the Russians (hmmm, why would they shoot her, I wonder?), or how she illegally crossed the internationally recognized borders of Ukraine and probably violated Canadian sanctions. :)

Also, from everything I have read, not much sympathy is given for the Ukrainians. But what is expressed is nostalgia for a time when Ukraine was denied the right to exist. There is no remorse or examination of war crimes that happened elsewhere, nor is there remorse for invading.

Btw, Marsha missed the part about Russians calling Ukrainians fascists and Nazis, which is one of the major justifications for Russia entering the war.

Propaganda? Please. Triumph of the Will this is not. This is eye-opening and gutting. The only “propaganda” this documentary serves up is an anti-war message that should be delivered as far and wide as possible. The experience of watching the film has something in common with war: you can’t wait for it to be over. It is excruciating.

IT'S IN THE DAMN TRAILER!!!

Marsha is either in on it or is too ignorant and uninformed to recognize it. The end result is the same. She didn't even bother to look up what the propaganda points are! They are so easily to find! Ask an expert like Timothy Snyder for fuck's sake before you post this irresponsible drivel. You fell for the Kremlin's propaganda like how a snake eats an egg! You swallowed it whole without question!

-"Russia and Ukraine have always been inseparable. I miss the brotherly union."

This is nostalgia for an era when the Ukrainian nation state was denied the right to exist.

This is part of the narrative that Ukraine cannot exist without Russia.

Putin has stated this narrative too, saying Ukraine is inseparable from Russian history and culture.

-"An order was given, we went in."

Seriously, where have we heard that line before, I wonder...

The director suggests the Russian soldiers are just tools in a larger political game.

This is part of the narrative that it's Putin's war and his alone. Ordinary Russians are innocent and should not be punished. Ordinary Russians committed war crimes willingly. They've been rewarded with money, medals, and awards. Ordinary Russians invaded Ukraine. To shift the blame to a higher command is to absolve them of their crimes.

The supposed "oppositionists" to Putin that were exchanged recently even parroted how ordinary Russians shouldn't be punished and how sanctions should be lifted.

-"If I'm fighting in a fight, I always need to know that i'm right." ; "I came today so that my kids don't go tomorrow"

This is the narrative that Russia was right all along to invade Ukraine in order to fight NATO's expansion and encroachment on its sphere of influence.

Furthermore, the narrative ignores the reason why countries that have experienced Russian imperialism and aggression want to join NATO in the first place. Sovereign nations should be able to decide what to do with their futures. NATO isn't encroaching on anything.

There's a scene where Russian soldiers are talking to their families on the phone, thus promoting Russians are fighting for their families and children while ignoring the fact they are the aggressors who came to Ukraine to kill Ukrainians and Ukrainian children and seize their territory.

-"Whataboutism" from the classic Russian propaganda playbook.

Russia amplifies supposed neutral voices that are "asking questions" such as the director, but might not necessarily want clear cut and defined answers.

This derails clear cut moral cases to distract and confuse people from the actual problem of Russia being the aggressor and invading. This is done to promote inaction and indecision to the problem.

"I saw no war-crimes" is an attempt to excuse and white-wash war crimes. To cast doubt on culpability.

-The director stated she saw no war-crimes committed.

The director doesn't examine the idea that any war-crimes may have been screened from being put in the film

The director doesn't examine that they have occurred in other places at other times.

No mention about victims, witnesses, or survivors.

-Aggressive Victimhood

Humanizing the aggressor diminishes the will to assist in fighting back against the aggressor.

"Russians at War" is a manipulation of public perceptions of the war made by professional propagandists.

This is done to perpetuate Russian violence and aggression towards Ukraine.

-According to people that have seen the film, there is:

No discussion on how the war started, or who started it.

Denial of documented war crimes committed in Bucha

Russian soldiers express they are tired of the war, but no discussion of Russia starting it or how to end it.

No sympathy for Ukrainians that a Russian soldier attacked and whose land he invaded.

A Russian soldier promoted narratives about a coup and armed rebellion in Kyiv being carried out by the US in 2014.

The narrative that Russians never want war, they never attack, and they only end wars.

Ukrainians are called fascists and nazis, which is a core justification for Russia starting the war.

The Russian military makes a statement, "Holiday is victory." This goes unchallenged and with no commentary. This of course means for Ukrainians a Russian victory is subjugation and annihilation.

A dead civilian is shown in occupied Donetsk but without context. The Russians use Donetsk's residential areas as a shield to shell the Ukrainian army and they hide behind locals. Thus, locals get killed from the return fire, which fuels more propaganda of "Ukrainians killing their own people."

A Russian occupier says this land is historically Russian.

Obviously, there's more. A great breakdown video about the film is here. It's 27 minutes long, but hits everything about the film and Russian propaganda. Much of it is also listed above, but there is plenty I didn't mention in this post.

---

But let's get back to Marsha's article.

The feature film All Quiet on the Western Front, which also humanized the “wrong” side of the First World War with its devastating portrayal of a young German soldier’s experiences, won four Academy Awards last year, including best international feature film. Russians at War, which dispels the myth that there is any glory involved in war whatsoever, deserves similar recognition. It certainly deserves a chance to be seen.

Is Marsha seriously comparing "All Quiet on the Western Front" to "Russians at War"? These films and situations are not similar at all.

I won't speak for the rest of the world, but on "my side of the pond", we are so far removed from World War I, the only time we think about it is in a history lesson, a textbook, or a movie. We can look back on it with hindsight and safely explore different aspects of the war without sparking outrage and traumatizing anyone. Most if not all of the discontent I saw that came from "All Quiet on the Western Front" was due to historical inaccuracy, how the weapons were portrayed to be used in certain situations, and how scenes with the trenches and barbed wire were set up. There is emotional distance.

Let's not forget, the original book is a piece of fiction based on the collective experiences of WWI soldiers and the author. The characters are fiction.

This is reality with real people suffering from Russia's aggression. it is absolutely ludicrous to compare "All Quiet on the Western Front" to "Russians at War". Ordinary Russians are committing horrendous, inhumane, and evil crimes, so much so that it is hard for the human mind to comprehend the scale, quality, and magnitude of it all.

I don't need Russian soldiers to be humanized, because we have already seen what humans can do both in history and the here and now. There is a great capacity to do immense good and to do incredible harm. Instead of protesting the war and the government, Russians have chosen to support the war. Ordinary Russians have joined the war for money or to have their prison sentences cleared. Ordinary Russians have willingly posted their crimes on Telegram with pride. Ordinary Russians have tortured and killed Ukrainians, subjugated them in occupying lands, kidnapped and trafficked Ukrainian children, and so many other atrocities. It is a choice they made, and they should not be absolved of it.

Of course, Russians is much more sensitive. It is a documentary to begin with, but also because this catastrophe is happening right now. It is bringing agony to Ukrainians at this very moment. Nobody should have to experience what Ukrainians are suffering through at the hands of Russia.

You ignorant little shit, you literally wrote "the anger around this film is unjustified" in the beginning. You dismissed the anger people feel about this film and you have the audacity to only now knowledge the pain Ukrainians feel? Your words. "Propaganda? Please." Fuck off.

Russian fighters – some drafted, some indoctrinated, some there to keep their families fed back home or a friend company at the front, some there because they don’t know why – are also victims of this war. As one notes in the film, they are at war with themselves. “Slavs against Slavs.”

Oh, look, Marsha! Another piece of Russian propaganda that you have confirmed is in the film! Now, it can be explained for those that don't know (which includes you apparently! :D).

Russia has co-opted the term "Slav" to mean Russian and only Russian. They do this to deny the existence of other Slavic ethnicities, such as Ukrainians, and subjugate them. This further fuels the narrative that Ukraine cannot exist without Russia, that Ukraine is inseparable from Russian history and culture, that Ukrainians and Russians are one and the same and that Ukrainians don't exist. Hope that helps. :)

And a talented filmmaker, without an official posting or even a press pass, followed them almost all the way to the front so that we could know about it. And be outraged. Not at the film; at the war. Censoring art is never a good idea. But keeping this film under wraps is denying the public of more than the experience of seeing an excellent movie. It is restricting access to a vital message: an unforgiving indictment of war. Peace.

The Russian army has restricted soldiers from being able to use phones. There is no way in hell the director could waltz in with sophisticated camera equipment, sit with a bunch of Russian soldiers for MONTHS, and film whatever she wanted without the FSB and GRU knowing. Canadian organizations that funded this fell for the lies. TIFF fell for the lies. And you, Marsha, fell for the lies.

So, you want to be outraged at war? Fine. Of course, war is horrific. But make sure you damn well know who the aggressor is in this war. It is Russia and Russia only. There is no both sides-ing this.

It takes millions of people to support a genocide and millions more to commit it. It is not Putin's war but Russia's war.

No matter what, this propaganda film is a win-win for the Kremlin. It's a win if it is shown, using the West's cultural centers, festivals, and institutions to spread its narrative, and a win if it is not shown to further fuel its propaganda.

But I think Kate Tsurkan from the Kyiv Independent said it best.

"It is our responsibility to categorically reject any attempts to excuse or rehabilitate the Russian war crimes being committed in Ukraine, and to ensure that the suffering of Russia’s victims is neither forgotten nor minimized — it’s the very least we can do for the tens of thousands of Ukrainians whose lives they stole and destroyed."

This isn't the first time Russia has pushed its propaganda pieces through cultural festivals, nor will it be the last.

Know who the enemy is.

Remember who they are.