#alex was arguing with. but.

[kiexen]

re: these gays, did you prefer the book over the movie/vice versa or if you didn't have a real preference, what were some differences you noticed or appreciated or disliked

the movie was good but the book was BETTER.

i'm gonna say this is a whole lot of spoilers for red white and royal blue for anyone else who sees this, because i know you won't watch or read it. so it doesn't matter. anyway. and also i guess i'm putting this under a readmore. feels like a lot of words about nothing.

justice for june i cannot believe they cut her out ENTIRELY. [june is alex's older sister. she just straight up does not exist in the movie which is a travesty i love her so much] there is So much missed characterization. and a whole large plot point that is missed because of other cut characters and a lot of it i know can be chalked up to for timing and pacing but :/ there was also a few really minor changes that didn't really make sense to me to have needed to be changed? idk. they changed henry's royal side of his last name, and that just did not make sense to me as to why. in the book, the reigning monarch is a queen; in the movie, a king. why? [makes i don't know sound] also on the topic of siblings, i'm almost completely certain the book told me henry was the youngest and his sister was older. in the movie, his sister is the youngest and her characterization just. does not feel the same. everything about her was cut out. all of it.

there were a few other minor changes that i liked, and some that i liked, but i am glad we have both versions? if that makes sense? there's this scene like, ¾ths of the way through where henry takes alex to the v&a and talks about how his dad [movie, it was both parents in the book but yk. his mum doesn't exist in the movie, either. also a travesty.] took him to that museum a lot before he died and now henry sneaks in a lot. he was going on about how he used to fantasise about bringing the man he loves there and slow dancing amongst the statues. in the book, henry then puts music on and invites alex to dance. in the movie, henry doesn't even get to finish his sentence about it being a "daft prepubescent fantasy" before alex pulls his phone out behind him and puts music on while he's still talking, before dancing with him. and idk i just. really like the idea of alex being the one to initiate it more than it having been hen. [also, in the book, henry played "your song" of elton john's. in the movie, alex plays "can't help falling in love" and both just make me so. mmmmm.] a little later when alex is preparing to leave back to america, hen gives alex his signet ring [which, info dump within an info dump time, if you don't know, signet rings are the like. flat ones that usually have a family crest on it. it's an identifier.] in the book, alex slides it onto the chain he always wears, which also holds the key to his family home, he started wearing it when they moved into the white house. which yk. the symbolism of having both his homes together. very tasty. in the movie, however, after hen gives him his ring, alex gives henry the key necklace and is later seen wearing the ring on his hand instead. which, i believe, is a little bit of a call back to a movie only line way earlier [the book directly contradicts this quote, actually.] where alex is explaining the key and henry says he's never actually owned a key before. so now he does. i love both of these versions of this interaction so very much

there were a couple of scenes or lines that were movie only that i did enjoy, but most of my favourites were either in the book, or both. most of my issues with the movie stem from what is normal content loss in adaptations

[alfavromeo]

q: if you could eat anything for the rest of your life what would it be

alex: well scientifically breast milk would be the best but prob something thai, something spicy

logan: burger

via: team torque ep 11

[actual-changeling]

i LOVE crazy meta posts and wild speculations, i write unhinged interpretations myself, and fandom is first and foremost about having fun.

but i am very, very tired of seeing serious theories that constantly call the final fifteen fake/a conspiracy/a magic trick/etc. retconning that scene would take away the ENTIRE emotional weight and the importance it has for both their character archs.

[ilottthepilot]

very strange how many people want to die on the hill that this is not alex's home race, simply because of the flag on his racing license... one would think dual nationality is a very simple concept for an adult to grasp

[aroaceleovaldez]

I was reading a post about CoTG and I realized: Rick has seemingly started to write every character pairing with the exact same dynamic, and he's not good at writing that dynamic and it doesn't make sense for 90% of the characters he writes it for.

It's that very specific dynamic of one half of the pair who is almost aggressive to the other party - "teasing" them constantly/insulting them, affectionately punching/judo flipping/maiming/etc, seemingly almost always exasperated with the other - and said other party usually just accepts this treatment or blanketly views it fondly, and may generally be framed as more incompetent than their partner and a little bit of a doormat (particularly relating to being insulted/teased/etc by their partner).

We start seeing this dynamic in HoO with Percy and Annabeth, as a sort of semi-inconsistent twist on their rivals-to-friends-to-lovers dynamic from the first series. Then the dynamic pattern develops further with Leo and Calypso. Then Magnus and Alex. Then Nico and Will, particularly in TSATS. And now in CoTG, it's Percy and Annabeth again but even more in this direction.

I know people have talked about Nico and Will's relationship over the series rapidly being shoehorned into Percabeth Two™, and it's extremely apparent in TSATS that Rick's doing it on purpose (including directly quoting Percabeth scenes but minorly tweaking them to be Solangelo). But recognizing it as an overarching trend in Rick's later books honestly reminds me a lot of how Rick started trying to apply the "Percy Formula" so-to-speak to nearly every protagonist in HoO (and then try to replicate similar character archetypes with Magnus and Apollo's narrations - moreso Magnus in being jaded and sarcastic, very much trying to be first series Percy. He only sounds unique because Rick failed at making him Percy 2. Apollo is more akin to later-series Percy characterization of being goofy and incompetent. Apollo [and Zeus] even got retconned to give Apollo a more similar backstory to Percy's). Rick seems to have decided that he thinks the audience wants this specific dynamic but 10 times over, except he's not good at writing it the first time because it's a bastardization of the time he did a different thing okay.

And Rick also seems aware of that too! Because he retconned Calypso and Leo at the end of TOA, probably because he realized how absolutely awful it was reading when they were written with that dynamic of Calypso just functionally hating Leo and constantly being aggressive towards him! The only time Rick's actually made the dynamic even semi-successful was with Magnus and Alex, because it actually fits within their characters, their dynamics with each other, and their environment. Alex beheading Magnus on the regular works out fine because there are no repercussions to that in Valhalla, Magnus will be fine, so it does genuinely come off as humorous. And Alex has been effectively established to be abrasive at times but have her genuine feelings shine through regularly, and that meshes well with Magnus' jaded-and-aloof-but-quietly-very-empathetic character. And Magnus has been established to, yes, not be great at combat, particularly compared to Alex. They are the only time that flavor of dynamic in that form was effective and cohesive.

Percabeth is no longer rivals-to-friends-to-lovers badasses on equal levels with shaky pasts who finally found some form of permanence with one another. Now it's super smart doting and affectionately aggressive girlfriend and her silly goofy 50%-of-the-time incompetent boyfriend who she judo flips/pushes off cliffs/etc - but affectionately~! Solangelo is trying to riff off of the early series "Poseidon & Athena are enemies" dynamic that Percabeth had but with Apollo & Hades being "opposites" but learning to accept each other, except it ends up with Will just coming off as a huge asshole and Nico being retconned to a complete doormat about it - when prior to that those characterizations would be completely contrary to their established characters (even just from TOA!). Calypso in HoO gets retconned from her PJO characterization to being snooty and aggressive, and Leo's false persona gets merged into his just normal personality except he just also becomes a doormat but more goofy than Nico with occasional haha-dark/depression-humor! Which Nico also got. Which was also a bastardized Percy trait that got redistributed.

It's exhausting. Rick write more than one relationship dynamic you can do it I promise

[manichewitz]

honestly louis should've known armand was secretly a manipulative evil maniac when he found out he was the artistic director of a niche theatre company

[norgeant]

This is our norgeant content for the week gang 👊😔

The McLaren and Williams hang out

[k3ithsk0gane]

Henry may be blonde but he is NOT the golden retriever boyfriend. If anything he’s more black cat coded, but I also wouldn’t label him fully as the black cat boyfriend. Alex is 100% the golden retriever boyfriend.

[willgrahamscock]

I don’t think hannibal lecter is a bad person, perhaps you just don’t understand him but I do.

[icebluecyanide]

Alex going behind Scorpia's back to get the Invisible Sword file. Alex Rider, S03E05: Revenge

[yrsonpurpose]

CHARLES LECLERC & ALEX ALBON Sprint Shootout // US GP 2023

[sandersgrey]

AUs where either Geralt or Jaskier fake their own deaths after the mountain are good but what about an AU where Jaskier doubles down and fakes Geralt's.

Nilfgaard cant hunt you if it doesnt think youre alive!!

[ftmsimonriley]

i really do think gaz and ghost have a "my boyfriend's boyfriend" type relationship. like they don't have a lot in common, don't talk much or hang out by themselves that often, but they have a mutual respect based on the fact that price trusts them. ghost was already there when gaz started being price's protégé, and ghost trusts price's judgement sometimes even more than his own. their relationship strengthens when soap gets introduced, because he's definitely gaz's bestfriend and partner in crime, and someone (read: ghost) has to keep them out of trouble and so he gives them more reasons to encounter each other.

gaz eventually learns that when everything's too much, he can't sleep, and his mind won't leave him alone, ghost has an uncanny ability to find the calmest and furthest spots to chill in that become more predictable the more he seeks him out. there's eventually more than enough times that he nods off while sitting somewhere with ghost, only to wake up back in his bed.

[actual-changeling]

And once more with feeling: Why there is no magic trick or gun to either of their heads in the final fifteen.

Before you immediately run to my comments or hit reblog, please read the entire thing. If you're still mad, either read it again or sit with it, do not make it my problem. Genuine questions and discussions are always welcome, comments that make it clear you did not understand a word I said aren't.

Okay? Okay.

With that, welcome back to Alex's unhinged meta corner, and today we are going to compare their first and last argument in the bookshop—they are, fundamentally, the same. It both sets the scene for their relationship this season and works as immaculate foreshadowing of how they part.

I compared the scripts, which you can find here. It's incredible that OP put all that work into creating these because otherwise I would have gone insane doing it myself.

Now, the setting: they have a problem.

In ep1 it is Gabriel, in ep6 it is technically still Gabriel, or rather his now empty position in heaven. They solved one problem and now they're forced to deal with another one he also caused; meanwhile he's drinking space margaritas.

Crowley, stuck in his trauma-induced hypervigilance and paranoia, suggest putting as much distance between them and the problem as possible. I think it is interesting that in ep1 he wants to get Gabriel away from them, while at the end of the season he is ready to get them away from the problem.

So far, I have never seen anyone mention that change! And it's important! The entire season, it is hammered into our heads how much they love being on earth. It is THEIR bookshop and THEIR car and THEIR life.

Crowley wants to protect that home, and Gabriel is a threat to it, a threat to both of them, their life, the bookshop—everything. He does not want to leave, he wants his peace and angel in one place.

Yet by allowing Gabriel to stay, Aziraphale destroyed the sense of comfort and safety Crowley slowly developed over the last few decades. Heaven nipping down every now and then to check in with Aziraphale is very different from him sheltering the Supreme Archangel who is running from 'something terrible' without even asking if he's alright with that.

Aziraphale calls it their bookshop, but he fundamentally still sees it as his space to govern and Crowley as a guest.

After another horrible week and having his previously safe space violated several different times and beings, Crowley is back to where he was before—without a home. That fragile existence broke apart, so he is standing in the heap of shards and telling Aziraphale 'I don't feel safe here anymore, let's leave'.

He lost his safe space, but he still has his safe person, his best and only friend, the person he loves. I doubt he cares where exactly they go as long as they're together and it's safe.

Returning to heaven—it is the one place Crowley cannot follow him to. It's literally the worst option, he can't go back, he won't go back. So he invokes the bookshop again, if you don't want to stay for me, stay for the bookshop, your books, your corner of existence that I thought we had carved out for ourselves.

'Nothing lasts forever' and 'you're at liberty to go' have the same underlying meaning—you're not welcome in this house anymore, it was your safe place, not anymore. Both times, he's essentially kicking him out.

Aziraphale then switches it up again!

Same manipulation tactic, first making Crowley feel rejected and unwelcome, then trying to pull him back in by promising and showing affection. He's desperate, he's attempting to get Crowley into his "saviour" role because he knows he has a hard time not saving him from whatever trouble he gets him into. Aziraphale knows him so damn well, and he uses that knowledge to get what he wants.

'If you won't, you won't' has the same implication as 'then there's nothing more to say'—I am ending that conversation, you can leave now, he even makes the same face both times.

In ep1, that's that, Crowley takes his emotions and leaves.

The lightning bolt is the kiss. A sudden, heavy discharge of pent-up feelings that has been a long time coming, but in the end he is more desperate, less controlled, at his emotional rock bottom. Everything he thought to be true about their relationship came crashing down around him.

In his mind, Aziraphale chose heaven over him—TWICE! First Gabriel, now Gabriel's position.

'You're on your own with this one' applies to both scenes, I think the reasoning behind that is pretty clear.

Now, some more verbal components and word meanings that I think are worth mentioning.

One of them is Crowley directly pointing out heaven's cruelties when Aziraphale is seemingly unaware of them, thinking of Gabriel/heaven as in in need of his 'help'.

I can take help him -> I can make a difference.

It is, fundamentally, the same argument.

Aziraphale feels like he is the one who needs to play saviour (that Crowley actually hates it but Aziraphale loves it is a post for another time), the one being who can help Gabriel/heaven and fix all the problems.

Crowley correctly points out that they do not care about him and are just as cruel—if not more—as hell, that Gabriel tried to destroy him, that heaven will destroy all of them.

Their responses to that just shoot past each other and it is what Crowley himself tells us. Two different exactlys

Aziraphale's -> I am the only one who can fix this, I feel responsible for this, help me fix this.

Crowley's -> This is dangerous, it can get us killed, we cannot fix this. Come and be safe with me.

'He needs us' becomes 'I need you'.

'I would love you to help me' becomes 'we can be together'.

In episode 1, the argument isn't 'final', as such. Crowley is exhausted, sad, feels rejected, but when he finds out just how much trouble Aziraphale is in, he needs to go back and help him. It's instinct, he couldn't live with himself if he knowingly let him walk into the knife—and yet in episode 6 that is exactly what Aziraphale forces him to do.

It is why Crowley brings up the nightingales, why he kisses him: that primal, love-based desperation. This argument is final, he won't be able to follow him to heaven no matter what, he won't be able to protect him.

He is on his own with this one.

In conclusion, THIS is why the argument that happened in the final fifteen is real, there's no trick, no nothing.

They have had the same argument before, probably over and over again. Same structure but with lower stakes, and eventually they reconciled.

This time the stakes are as high as they possibly can be, which lures their most primal, honest arguments out of them.

Aziraphale wants to fix heaven, wants to help, still believes that they are fundamentally good, that he can make a difference.

Crowley has lived the truth, has been trying to tell him for centuries, and he is exhausted. He wants safety. He wants peace. He wants the two of them in a peaceful, not-fragile corner of existence that no one else gets to break ever again.

Not a single line was 'out of character', this is exactly who they are, with all their layers stripped away and their fears exposed. It's not pretty to watch, it hurts, it makes you ache, and yet they and we know that this is how it has the end—the only way it was ever going to end.

That is what makes it tragic.

However, even after all of that, there is one step left: reconciliation.

Season 3 is going to give it to us, in whatever shape or form. Neil knows what he is doing, and we can trust him to give them the ending they deserve.

[mothellie]

So I have a Life is Strange theory and I know I'm probably not saying anything that hasn't already been said before, but I feel the need to ramble about it because MMMMMMMMMMM. Major spoilers for Life is Strange and Life is Strange: Before the Storm.

My theory: Rachel had powers, too.

That's definitely been said before. I know I've seen people talk about it both on here and on other sites. When she kicks over the flaming trashcan, a HUGE gust of wind blows from behind her and turns this relatively small flame into a huge forest fire. The fire goes out when she disappears. I've seen people debate whether this is a power related to the wind, or fire itself, but I personally think that her power encompasses all of nature. Which leads me to the second part of my theory.

Not only does Rachel have powers, ones that are related to nature, but she quite literally is the storm that wipes out Arcadia Bay. And the deer that follows Max around through most of the first game, and the butterfly.

Now PLEASE hear me out on this.

Max Caulfield suddenly gains the ability to control time seemingly out of no where, conveniently right in time to save Chloe Price from being shot to her death in the Blackwell bathroom. She's also been getting premonitions of a catastrophic impending tornado seeming headed straight for Arcadia Bay. And, to top it all off, she sees a doe all around the town that seems to follow her and make direct eye contact with her on several occasions, that only disappears when her and Chloe finally locate Rachel's body. Do you wanna know where Max saw the doe in the junkyard, the very first time she's seen it outside of her foreboding nightmares about the storm? Right next to where Rachel is buried. What's in the bathroom that gives Max a convenient hiding place to witness Chloe's death so she can reverse it? The butterfly.

At each turn Max takes, there is some sort of natural occurrence or creature guiding her path, leading her not only to the clues that solve Rachel's disappearance, but also to saving Chloe's life time and time again. She's then faced with a choice: sacrifice her hometown, or sacrifice her best friend.

Despite being given a choice, it's my firm belief that Rachel wants us to sacrifice the town. The very first thing Max's power is used for is to save Chloe, which she was all but put on a leash and led to by numerous strange occurrences that all seem to link back to Rachel Amber. Rachel wants two things: for her story to be told, and for Chloe to be safe. And she knows the only way to ensure both of those things happen is through Max Caulfield, Chloe's long-term best friend since childhood. She also knows that Chloe and Arcadia Bay do not mix, and cannot coexist. If Chloe lives, Rachel will not let Arcadia Bay stand knowing all the pain this town has caused not only herself, but Chloe. If Chloe is dead, there's nothing for her to protect. And it's all up to Max to decide if Chloe is worth that sacrifice. She's gotten what she wanted for herself, for her story to be revealed. That's why the doe disappears after they find her corpse. The only thing that's left is ensuring nothing can ever hurt Chloe again, not even herself.

Once Arcadia Bay is in ruins and Chloe is safely out of town, the storm stops. Peace has been restored and Rachel can finally rest.

And, finally, my third part of this theory:

Rachel is the reason anyone in the continued Life is Strange series has powers in the first place.

Life is Strange 2 picks up a story that seems completely unconnected from the story of Rachel, Max and Chloe. It follows two completely different characters, Sean and Daniel, in a different state. Life is Strange: True Colors follows Alex Chen, also in another town. This seems like it couldn't possibly tie back to the original story but JUST YOU WAIT, DEAR READER. In LIS2, Sean and Brody quite literally have a heart to heart while overlooking the ruins of Arcadia Bay. In LIS:TC, Alex meets Steph Gingrich, a character who was featured in LIS:BTS and is canonically from Arcadia Bay. No matter how minor the connection is, each Life is Strange game up until this point has somehow referenced or tied back to the story of Rachel Amber, and by proxy the story of Max and Chloe.

Each character who gains powers have something in common, as well. They all have something, or someone, important to protect. The same way Rachel, and Max, protected Chloe. Rachel's influence is still felt throughout the United States, all because she wanted to protect all that was important to her and destroy anything that dared to underestimate her.

The true story of Life is Strange can only be told if you sacrifice Arcadia Bay, and that story didn't start with Max Caulfield. It started with Rachel Amber.

[grubbyraccoonhands]

just when i thought watching top gun maverick 5 times was enough george had to go and reignite the brain rot