#Weird idea poorly executed blah blah blah

[connectionterminated13]

the art I did recently of Cassie coming across what remained of Michael.... Thinking of turning that into an AU

That's like the only safe room in the underground pizza plex. I'm pretty sure Cassie has to sleep there so the mimic doesn't come to get Her... Like she has to sleep in the room with the dead body and the pile of wires. Sometimes she talks to the body, There's nothing else to do when she isn't hunting for snacks or evading the mimic. It never moves never talks because it's a corpse.

But sometimes she sees things in that room. A boy in a old Freddy's mask the kind her father kept in the glass case in the basement watching her. Sometimes I'll just walk into the room from seemingly nowhere and sit with her by the fire saying nothing. Sometimes he brings things with him food, blankets, Roxy merchandise. He never eats anything never says anything he just there. Cassie accepts him as part of the day today as she tries to figure out a way to escape the underground

[tortoisesforhire]

The MCU Meta no one asked for

Part 1 (yes this is going to be a multi-part meta I am that petty) 

So I’m very salty about how the Marvel movies have gone, for a variety of reasons and as they continue to churn out hot shit that I have to see on my dash every fucking day I decided to write a thing on it. Because fuck Disney and fuck Marvel for ruining something that I have loved my whole life. Now I considered several methods of how to approach this, where to even start unsifting the mega ton crap pile that is the MCU (no I will not apologize it is CRAP and I absolutely WILL explain why.) And I’ve decided chronological order is the best way to go. And the most classic, so here we go. 

Everything Marvel Got Wrong In Order From The Beginning

So before I get those whiney crybabies who spit at me ‘Everything Exists in Its Own Universe it’s the Multiverse’ blah blah blah, I’m not gonna be talking about differences from the comics too much. Only in the sense of story structure and narrative. Because more than I am a Massive Marvel Comics Nerd I am also a writer and things like plot and story fucking matter okay. So don’t @ me with your bullshit ‘kay. 

Narratively Ironman, the first movie, is more or less perfect. There are a few elements that really matter in a superhero movie and Jon Favreau really hit the nail on the head with Tony Stark and this had a lot to do with RDJ’s performance and passion for the role. A Superhero Movie needs, essentially, three things; Theme, Character and Adversary. Pretty basic yeah? Kind of. Superheroes and Superhero comics are about hope and conquering the odds and success against insurmountable failure. Tony Stark’s story is a story of redemption, and the belief that you can change for the better. Favreau really made us feel Tony’s fury at what he and his company had been made into. His righteous desire to be better, to clean up the mess that Obie and his father and his own foolish negligence had created. The theme was righteous redemption and they sold it to us wholesale and it worked very well. 

The Character of Tony Stark, I don’t think would have worked as well as it did without the involvement of RDJ. He really knocked that one out of the park. He conveyed perfectly the juxtaposition of Tony’s arrogance and his self loathing. We as the audience understood his front of cocky genius was to cover his loneliness, his scars and his insecurities instilled by Howard. He was broken, yes, but redeemable and hopeful and essentially good which is really what mattered and we loved him for it. 

Obadiah Stane, Anton Vanko and Aldrich Killian are probably the weakest parts of the Ironman narrative. And this issue stems from the larger issue with the Ironman movies which is it’s very clear that they didn’t know what they were getting into with this superhero business. They had no idea it was going to blow up as big as it did and a lot of what happened later was improve. Shoddy improve, I might add. Widow’s entrance in the second movie is overhand and poorly executed, Scarlet’s performance leaves absolutely everything to be desired (shut up I’ll get there) but the real issue I find with these films and the Ironman arc is the incongruity in the second and third film with tying in Howard and SHIELD. In both Comic and MCU cannon Howard is a founding member of SHIELD. And in both Comic and MCU cannon Howard is unrepentantly, indisputably abusive towards Tony to an insane degree. So the weird video where we’re meant to believe that Howard was merely a distant but loving father is discordant with the rest of the narrative and doesn’t fit the Tony we know at all. It certainly doesn’t fit with a man who would choose Obadiah Stane as his business partner. There’s also the matter of Peggy and the fact that Tony doesn’t seem to know her which also...doesn’t make a lot of sense. From all we’ve seen Howard and Peggy were friends. She was also very close with Edwin Jarvis who essentially raised Tony. But we’re meant to believe that she never met or had a relationship with Howards son? Why? Did they have a falling out? These questions are never answered to a satisfying degree. But sure we can just sweep these under the rug of a good action storyline. 

Looking at the villains themselves, Ironmonger is a good first villain for Ironman to have. Lots of personal ties, good emotional beats, kind of reminds the viewer of a knock off Lex Luthor. It would have been a stronger choice to use Obie’s son Zeke, the actual Ironmonger and who has a sordid personal history with Tony as an abusive ex. But hey, this is Disney and God forbid we even suggest any of our superheroes could possibly be something other than straight. China might not like us then would they. (pretty sure they don’t like us now but it’s the dollars that count right). Whiplash is a fairly generic Ironman bad guy, Russian eccentric genius with a vendetta against the Starks? Yeah sure. They could have peppered in some more about Howard Stark the Abusive Dad just to avoid confusion but hey, whatever. The Mandarin however is a HUGE Ironman villain and I just...I could have done with some foreshadowing. Some tie ins in the earlier movies leading up to the big bad. It would have fit more. But like I said I understand they were making it up as they went along. 

Getting into SHIELD and the inclusion of Black Widow, I don’t have a lot of issue with her writing in the second movie. Like sure, her being assigned as Tony’s new PA, makes total sense. Very Natasha move. But Scarlet Johansson is a terrible choice for Natasha Romanoff. For a plethora of reasons. What reasons are those? Oh I’m so glad you asked. First off the introduction of Natasha Romanoff in the comics was fucking brilliant because the reader doesn’t know it’s her until she decides to reveal herself. Before that all we knew of the Black Widow was that she was russian and had red hair. She was very nondescript prior to that. So Tony’s new PA had red hair, so what, so did Pepper he has a type. She was bubbly and fun and used to be a model and her and Tony’s affair fit very well with his history at that point. And then BAM she’s actually a russian killer lady. It was so shocking. 

Now that is clearly what Jon Favreau is trying to do there. The way he writes her in, Tony’s interest, Pepper’s exasperation. It should have been perfect except for Scarlet’s performance being so fucking obvious you could see her from space. She’s a terrible spy. Her voice doesn’t change, her face doesn’t change. Her personality remains as blank as before. She’s not subtle. Because Scarlet is not subtle. She’s not a good actress. Just because you can convey emotion does not mean you can portray a character. In every movie she is in she’s just herself in a new outfit and it is very annoying. 

Natasha Romanoff is supposed to be a world class spy. Like raised from the womb spy. Given a modified super soldier serum to increase agility and severely slow the aging process (she’s like 80 something fr). She blends in, everywhere. You don’t notice her until her knife is in your back. She should 100% scare the pants off the viewer in every scene she is in because you never know if she’s being genuine or not. There’s a reason her friendship with Clint is so anomalous and it’s not because people know she used to kill people it’s because people functionally can’t trust her. Scarlet only manages to convey that she’s hot and can kick you in the face. Whoopdie do. Her performance in Ironman 2 annoys me so much because it makes Tony look stupid instead of her look scary. Because only an idiot wouldn’t peg her as the spy the moment she flipped Happy onto the mat. Like come on, you can’t introduce a character as a super genius and then allow him to miss something like that, and then act shocked later when she shows up in a leather catsuit, like obvs Tony gd. 

I won’t get into the inherit sexism displayed in the lack of effort given to Natasha’s character. Her writing was shallow, her casting was bad and her storyline so inconsistent and slap shod it actually hurts me. I won’t get into the in depth character study of Natasha and all the many ways Scarlet fails at being her here. Maybe one day, but not rn. Simply put her inclusion in the Ironman arc left a lot to be desired. 

In part 2 I’ll dive into Thor, Loki and the first avengers movie. I’ll have to leave Cap for part three cause that’s a lot to cut into and it deserves it’s own part. 

[circle-bircle]

YAY, so *deep breath* ill be going from chapter to chapter, if you dont mind:p bc i feel like it's going to get messy, if i try to talk about everything at the same time.

CHAPTER ONE - first of all, THE WAY YOU WRITE Y/N AS A CHARACTER???? im at a loss of words (in a positive manner ofc!!).

:::::::i have no idea whether its the fault of all those works of fiction that i had to force myself to read IN ORDER TO consume at least a bit of rare content for certain of my hyperfixations, but whenever I see a signs of ,,no, this character isn't going to start screaming and crying, generally making their situation worse, because of their stupid perception of having good luck on their side blah blah blah making even mOre stupid escape plan and then be mad when it unsurprisingly doesnt work out- like,,, yes, jennifer, you do have the absolute right to cope with such situation like that, but please just cease your noise for at least a second and use your brain!!" i buRST with happiness. i'll go more on about ,,why??" in the next rants, because ill kinda have more to go off from:3

also, the line "You should lie, but this man seems like someone who would trust you and your word until the day he dies",,,,,,circle,,,,,were you kinda fore-shadowing,,,,because now that i re-read it, it feels like what mateus kinda did til the very last chapter,,,,,,

nEXT, i adore the biting/feeding descriptions (as weird as that sounds-). it's just so,,, mateus-like, meaning GREEDY AF, rough, obnoxious and oh-so-abrupt (at least for y/n lol). i liked that a lot. and then,,, the atmosphere change, i felt as if those were the main indication of there being,,, a possibly,,, more-or-less romantic,,, relationship? if it's possible to call it that. ////:::well, mateus somewhat seems to believe, through most of the chapters, that it is a connection of this sort. bUt, the atmosphere changes - the way his expression softens, his tone of voice alternates when speaking to y/n, the small affection tokens (that kind of progress along with the story), the petnames?? spectacular.

last but not least for this chapter's coverage, i'm coming back for a second to y/n as the character - i loVe that she basically admits that she's treated,, more-or-less well in her predicament, the only thing bothering her being the lack of companionship and pure boredom //not a backstory of abuse, depression and dependancy that for reasons unexplained still want to make her come back to her own home, as it usually happens- bc as sad as it can sometimes get, its awfully repetitive, poorly executed and just plainly boring at times//. the line about how the escape could actually be awfully easy, due to mateus seemingly trusting her or just having a good excuse, in case if she was caught was a gReat addition, because,,,, it's really all it takes, doesn't it? the circumstances she found herself in are,,, well,, crazy??? so, it wouldn't hurt - that much - to at least hatch a bit lacking of details, a bit messy, but still better than just straight up spitting in the bastard man's eye and making a run for it RIGHT BEFORE HIM AND HIS SERVANT (i mean, leon DIDNT see us leave, he says to us,,, as we leave,,,but if mateus were there to witness that too,, he wouldnt do so, lets be honest)

(i am sO sorry if its too long aND messy, but i was writing it in the sprout of a moment and right after waking up!! chapter 2 will be a cleaner take,,, i think)

My reply will be under the read more. Because I don’t know how Tumblr cuts it off anymore and. I’m mildly courteous sometimes :P

As I wrote INI, I wanted two things the most:

1. Mateus is hot.

2. Y/N is a mildly normal person. 

I don’t know who is reading on the other side of the screen. I don’t know who doesn’t have a parent, who does, who was homeless and lived in a cardboard box out in the country for his/her life. While I did want it to read like a Wattpad fic (I Fall In Love With The Hot Vampire That Takes Me Captive!?!!!?111?) I also didn’t want Y/N to be absolutely stupid. Generalizing what a normal experience might be seemed to be the smartest thing to do.

While Leon is definitely more ‘human’ due to his circumstances, Mateus only wants loyalty and a ‘bloodbag’ he can keep. I didn’t see Y/N falling in love with either of them as I wrote. As the story progresses with her first escape attempt, I knew I wanted her to be a functioning member of society.

I also didn’t want it to be like, ‘oh Y/N got kicked out of her apartment and now she’s homeless and x, x, x, happened to her OHHH LOOK AT HER!!!1!’ that’s silly (even if it would be accurate to what it would be like if INI was taking place in the real world). I think the isolation would be the worst part of living with them, especially in the beginning - Y/N isn’t nocturnal, she doesn’t want to be there, she’s attempting to be as neutral as possible. But also it’s a reader-insert so what can you do? 

I feel like Mateus would be the nicest during feeding sessions. I mean, HE’S getting what are endorphins and nutrition from your blood. You’re weak from the draining and now you’re all sweet and pliant! He’d really enjoy that, and would especially enjoy confusing you and riling you when you can’t do anything <3 

I feel like I missed things to cover, but oh well? :p

[thesinglesjukebox]

KATY PERRY FT. MIGOS - BON APPETIT [3.53] In which the Jukebox is told it's not getting any dessert until it's finished its Monday singles...

Rachel Bowles: Musing about cunnilingus is the finest thing a person can do, if she's good at it. Narrowed down to just vagina-as-food songs, Perry's extended mixed-metaphor is still easily outclassed, even by Iggy Azalea. As evidenced in this list, cunnilingus anthems have been largely pioneered and perfected by Black women (Janet Jackson, Lil Kim, TLC, etc.) those with the double curse of misogynoir proudly contradicting the patriarchal capitalist message that vaginas are disgusting and only for fucking. A good cunnilingus song makes women high five on dance floors, feel sexy and genuinely empowered. Personally, I prefer obscene instructional songs (Khia, "My Neck, My Back") over those with faux-coquettish metaphor (Christina Aguilera ft. Nicki Minaj, "Woohoo") but in Blow, Beyonce found the perfect balance: sexy imagery with a direct order, delivered with female solidarity in the echoed "Turn that cherry out!" "Got me spread like a buffet" to some generic summer EDM synths just doesn't compare. [3]

Iain Mew: Weird to hear a Katy Perry single where the lyrical issue isn't awkwardly cramming in sexual references, so much as incoherence as a result of failing to properly commit to the obvious cunnilingus angle. The low-key sweetness of the production and her restraint still makes it a better listen than most, and the two note-four note hop-skip in the chorus works even better than it did in Anne-Marie's "Ciao Adios." [6]

Katherine St Asaph: Christ, without Bonnie McKee's involvement Katy Perry really does go right back to One of the Boys leftovers with an Anne-Marie melody. In a just world, such a demonstration of value over replacement songwriter would earn McKee something, like maybe, I don't know, sales. In this one we get midtempo blahs I guess are supposed to signify sexiness, a cursory Migos feature fresh off their Capitol signing, and likely not even a hit to show for it. [2]

Danilo Bortoli: Fabricating hatred has never been easier in 2017. "Bon Appetit" might have received all the negative press it deserves, but that happened for all the wrong reasons. Over time, however, consensus was formed: this is the most soulless Katy has been in years. Nothing works. Migos are out of place here (as a solo version proves). And, of course, the track seems like the result of a pun contest's last place entry (apparently, this is a real and tasteless thing). No joke intended -- but the song itself, that is. [2]

Alfred Soto: "Five-star Michelin," eh? I'll say this about Katy's latest amuse-bouche: it follows through on its conceit. Confirming their A-list status, Migos gets relegated to muttered quavering non-entities. [5]

Scott Mildenhall: You might feel differently, but Katy Perry singing "got me spread like a buffet" just has to be one of the worst musical moments of the year so far. As extended metaphors go, this one is executed very badly. "Table for two... I'm on the menu" -- is she advocating autocannibalism? "Bon Appetit" has the ridiculousness of Perry's worst, most affectedly wacky singles, yet sounds like it's being played with a straight face, and that's quite a weird place to be. The shimmering production is enjoyable, but the words are so egregious that they're hard to ignore. [4]

Cassy Gress: This is arguably the least sexy sex song I've ever heard. Katy Perry is singing through an A/C window unit, the song just rocks back and forth between B♭ minor and B major with no resolution, Migos stops by and contributes virtually nothing, and it's a bit too close to "GOBBLE GOBBLE" for comfort for me. It manages to come off as clinical despite never explicitly referencing sex; I know I'm sort of squeamish about sex talk, but blugh. I'd rather listen to "Touch It." [1]

William John: Katy Perry whispering unsexy, overwrought metaphors over boilerplate house reads poorly as a primer, but remains a more tantalising proposition than faded xeroxes of 80s synthpop with vacant "let's save the world" platitudes. A few extra marks for the intermittent whoops, which nod reverently to Crazy Cousins' classic "Inflation" (at least in my head) and Migos, who may have phoned in their guest spot but deliver it lithely nonetheless. [5]

Katie Gill: Turns out "Chained to the Rhythm" was just a fluke! No, Katy Perry's going to continue to make songs about sex with dumb metaphors stretched to high heaven, warped into near unrecognition. It's an even tackier version of "Birthday", where the best thing is the Migos break and the worst thing is the impossibly tacky dancehall stylings. Possibly the most interesting thing about this song is the cannibalistic implications -- "I'm on the menu"? Really? -- which has the potential to be thought provoking, so of course that means Perry's going to ignore it. [3]

Joshua Copperman: Between "lemiteiku" and "the worldsbestcherryPIe", this melodic math was a bit miscalculated. And that's before the chorus, which is possibly the worst Katy Perry melody ever, even counting "This Is How We Do". Unusual for Max Martin, as far as I can tell, the chord progression is limited to B♭m-B the whole way through -- apparently they couldn't even be bothered to use four chords. Migos' verses aren't bad, and I smiled at "appetite for seduction," but those are all the positives I could think of for this half-assed song that makes me wish a portmanteau of somnambulance and cannibalism was possible (somnamibalism?). I assumed that "Bon Appetit" would grow on me over the summer, but as it's currently flopping after just one week of existence, I'll never even get the opportunity to hate-then-enjoy it. [3]

Will Adams: Against my better judgment, I clicked on the Tasty video in which Katy Perry prepares the "world's best cherry pie" (take: this is an impossible task because there's no such thing as a cherry pie that's anything but gross). But my regret soon turned into high enjoyment as I listened to Katy ramble incoherently in some misguided attempt to create a Genius annotation live. As with "Chained to the Rhythm," there's so much effort to legitimize the nonsense pouring out of her mouth: 1. She claims there are "easter eggs" in the lyrics; I think she just means euphemisms. 2. What the hell kind of songs has she heard where "cherry pie" was not sexualized? 3. That she's trying to connect this to the cherry Chapstick in "I Kissed a Girl" shows she still hasn't realized she should probably disown that song. It's all so tiresome; "Birthday" worked because it leaned into the cheesiness, but "Bon Appetit" goes serious with its Cobb salad of food-based innuendo, a concept I've rarely heard executed well. Fold in some perfunctory Migos, overdress with the entire world's supply of reverb, and... oh fuck, now I'm doing it. [4]

Anthony Easton: I adore the gossip about Perry's fighting around her new aesthetic with the label, who apparently is worried about sales. I have no idea if this will revive her fortunes; it's not quite anonymous, but it pushes her against Migos, and Migos wins -- working against each other, doubling down on a cryptic chorus, becoming very close to being a hook singer. It's not sexy, even if it is about sex, and this kind of disembodied paen to the abstract idea of desire complicates Perry's previous perceptions. It's not quite a meal, but it does seem to have that vague whiff of nausea after eating too much candy. [8]

Thomas Inskeep: I guess, seeing that "woke Katy" didn't exactly burn up the charts, her camp/label/some-combo-thereof decided "we better go back to the clumsy sex songs, fast!" Because, you know, nothing's sexier than hearing someone say they're "spread like a buffet." (Pardon me while I throw up a little in my mouth.) I'm sad to hear Migos doing a clear cash-in bridge rap here, because they're so much better than this. Max Martin and Shellback's track isn't bad, but it's sonically awfully slight. Ironic to hear Perry saying "bon appetit," because there's no major pop star whose music I find less appetizing. [1]

Edward Okulicz: Pop stars get hot but they don't stay hot forever, and if this uninteresting ode to Katy Perry's vagina returns her to the top spot, then there is no explanation other than massive amounts of payola and a bunch of Capitol Records interns doing nothing but stream this 24 hours a day. I couldn't last 24 minutes of the title's non-punchline squeezed, against the laws of nature, into this non-chorus. [2]

Jonathan Bradley: I have a Spotify playlist of Katy Perry songs that runs for about 50 minutes. That's not an extensive running time for a ten year long career, but it contains some songs that are very good and some songs that are very stupid and also some songs that are very good and very stupid at the same time. Perry has had five songs off a single album reach the top of the Billboard Hot 100 -- as well as a sixth from a re-issued version. She's been risible and racist and homophobic and "woke" and "inspirational" and fantastic, and even birthed a meme from her Super Bowl performance, but on "Bon Appetit," she's nothing. This is a public-domain club groove and a Migos verse that couldn't deliver the rap group unto dance even as effectively as Calvin Harris did. If, immediately after "Ur So Gay" dropped, someone time-travelled to 2017, could you convince them off the strength of this single that, in the interim decade, Katy Perry had been one of America's biggest pop stars? [4]

[Read, comment and vote on The Singles Jukebox ]