#and that is just the stuff that has been shown

[ploppythespaceship]

Please Watch My Adventures with Superman

This show is just so delightful and manages to capture the essence of Superman in a way a lot of adaptations just don't quite get. If you've ever been curious about Superman, if you've ever felt Superman is too boring for you, or you just enjoy a fun superhero story, I highly recommend checking this series out.

The first season has ten episodes, and the second season has just aired its third episode. In the US, it's available on Adult Swim and Max.

What It's About

If you aren't familiar with Superman, he's an alien -- the last survivor of planet Krypton, sent to Earth as an infant where he was found and raised as Clark Kent. Being an alien, he has extraordinary powers which he uses to lead a double life as a hero. This show focuses on a core trio of Clark, his girlfriend Lois, and their friend Jimmy, all of whom work at the Daily Planet newspaper.

Clark Kent / Superman

One of the main reasons this show works is it understands that Clark is Clark, first and foremost, and Superman is his disguise. Clark is a big friendly nerd. He's a huge sweetheart who cares so deeply about the people around him and the planet that adopted him.

This version of Clark is starting out very young (early 20s), so a lot of this story is about him just figuring things out. He's gradually learning the truth about his origins, the extent of his powers, and how best to be a hero -- all while grappling with the fact that he isn't human and his people of origin may in fact be a massive threat to Earth.

Clark is voiced by Jack Quaid, which you might not expect to work well, but he honestly nails it.

Lois Lane

Lois is loud. She's ambitious. She's intelligent and quick-witted. She doesn't take no for an answer. She has jumped off a building to prove her point -- twice. She is an unstoppable force of nature, and this show refuses to dumb any of those traits down.

But above all, she's kind. She wants to use everything she can do to help people. Her relationship with Clark is also everything you could ever want from a Clois dynamic.

This version of Lois is Korean-American, and voiced by Alice Lee, who does a phenomenal job.

Jimmy Olsen

Jimmy is Clark's best friend and roommate. This version portrays him as a supernatural/paranormal vlogger, running a web series called Flamebird. He's easily excitable, very passionate, as well as one of the most dedicated friends you could ask for.

Following in the footsteps of several previous iterations of the character, this version of Jimmy is African-America. He's voiced by Ishmael Sahid, who's just perfect in the part.

Why It's Great

The characters are all fun and interesting in their own right, while also having a great dynamic with each other -- as duos and as a full trio. And because the characters are shown as being very young and just starting out, they're very relatable. Additionally, every character feels very true to the spirit of their comics counterpart, despite taking a lot of liberties with the specifics.

There's a great cast of villains so far -- Livewire, Task Force X, Mxyzptlk, Parasite, Silver Banshee, and plenty of others that I don't want to spoil. They've also been teasing some really interesting stuff for the Kryptonians, which is noticeably different from any previous adaptations I'm familiar with.

The show is very anime-inspired, giving it a distinct flavor from other Superman adaptations. The creators are clearly having a ton of fun with it. Classic Superman villain Mxyzptlk, who's typically shown as an imp, now looks like he just walked out of a Dragon Ball episode, in an episode called "Kiss Kiss Fall In Portal."

It's also the same animation studio as The Legend of Korra and Voltron: Legendary Defender, who do excellent work. The character designs are unique while still fitting the characters perfectly. I particular love Clark and Superman's designs -- they've struck a balance between making sure he's big and muscular while also retaining a certain softness to his appearance. The fight scenes are fluid and dynamic. It all just works.

[suffersinfandom]

Heyo, @nidmightcookies! This is my response to your reply on Atticus' post over here -- I didn't want to take away from the message of that post or the additions from other POC.

Sidenote: I'm extremely white and have no credentials that make me qualified to talk about race (I'm just a person who reads and tries to listen), and my takes are probably going to show that. That's another reason I didn't want to clutter up the original post with my reply.

In response to this

“Why is it racist to depict Ed as uncontrollably violent?  Because he's not actually depicted that way in the show.”

you talk about Ed baiting the crew to murder him and committing other violent acts. The original point is stating that Ed is not depicted as uncontrollably violent in the show, not claiming that he perpetrated no violence full stop. Yes, Ed does violence. No, he is not uncontrollably violent.

What Ed does is purposeful, not uncontrollable. He doesn’t push Lucius off the ship after he gives up all hope because he’s a violent guy who just does stuff like that, and the mutiny situation in S2E2… as allthinky said in a response, “that’s Ed at the end of his rope,” not him being uncontrollably violent. He’d been working towards suicide ever since he started baiting Low. As a backup plan, he’s been working the crew hard, disregarding their well-being, and being an overall awful boss in an attempt to incite a mutiny. 

Yes, he was “a serious, immediate threat to his crew” by the time he was out of other ideas to make someone take him out. Ed commits acts of violence -- I don’t think I’ve seen anyone claim he doesn’t -- but he always does so with some amount of reason (not necessarily good reasons) and control. 

“Upon reflection, my biggest issue may be with the people who argue that Ed's never been shown to be violent, or that any time he has resorted to violence, he's absolved of blame by the fact that someone was mean to him first. Which... I don't think I've seen you make either of those arguments at any point in the past.”

I’m really glad that you mentioned that OP hadn’t made either of those arguments (that you know of), that was genuinely very cool. As for the rest of it, I don’t believe I’ve seen anyone say that Ed is “never shown to be violent” or that he can always be “absolved of the blame” unless you want to remove all of the nuance from common talking points. 

He is never shown to be more violent than the average pirate and, due to his deep-seated trauma relating to his own capacity for violence, he’s actually on the less violent end of the pirate spectrum. He can’t be absolved of all blame for his actions because he’s a grown man who makes his own choices (and saying otherwise robs him of his agency). What I’ve seen said is that Ed’s actions are informed by things like trauma, abuse, and racism. His actions make sense. They’re not spontaneous violence committed because Ed flies into rages and homicidal spirals out of the blue.

“Not saying we shouldn't consider it [that is, are we “assigning more weight to Ed's violent actions than those of other characters or assuming he's worse than he actually is”], but I mean. If a white character on the show had cut off his employee's toes and fed them to him, shot him in the leg, ordered his death, held a gun on his other subordinates, marooned some/tossed one overboard, threatened to drown the ones that remained... because he was pushed into it, with the same combination of abusive childhood/hostile work environment... would he be equally deserving of that consideration? Would it be an overreaction to call him dangerous?”

Probably, but if everything was the same except Ed Is White Now, his baggage and his relationship with Izzy wouldn’t be exactly the same. Ed's race isn’t inconsequential. We can't really remove race from the story and end up with the same character, y'know?

Also: I do think it’s inappropriate to turn this question back on POC. I don’t think that POC are obligated to reconsider biases against a white character.

“Izzy is crew”

Ed’s relationship to Izzy is not comparable to his relationship with the crew. The crew have done nothing wrong and haven’t behaved antagonistically towards Ed. Izzy and Ed have a complicated, toxic, and difficult relationship (regardless of where you stand on whether or not Izzy’s abusive), therefore any harm caused to Izzy has to be considered differently than harm caused to the rest of the crew.

“Even if we say that he doesn't count, Ed still pushed Lucius off the ship.”

Yes, Ed did do that, but I think that Atticus is talking about Ed’s S2 actions in that point, not what happened in S1. Most (I think all?) meta I’ve read does consider Ed pushing Lucius off the ship an act of violence that Lucius himself did nothing to provoke. 

This might be controversial, but I’d put Ed pushing Lucius overboard on par with, like, a particularly unjust firing in a workplace that isn’t a pirate vessel. When we watch OFMD, we have to adjust our physical violence meters to account for the fact that we’re dealing with an environment that’s full of physical violence.

“Also, emotional abuse directed at the rest of the crew is still abuse”

I don't consider Ed emotionally abusive. He works the crew hard. He’s a terrible boss who doesn’t give his employees vacation days or paid time off and then throws them a sad pizza party. That sucks, it’s not okay, and his final death spiral in S2E2 is terrible and he never should have involved the crew in that. 

Abuse is a pattern of behavior that’s meant to control people. Not all harm is abuse. When I say that Ed isn't abusive, I'm not saying that he didn't hurt people.

“So... I was raised by a physically and psychologically abusive parent. I get that Ed's been hurt, is still hurting, and why. The "why" doesn't matter for the question of "did he or didn't he", though. It may or may not be his fault, he may or may not have done it because he felt unsafe. The point is, his actions did hurt people.”

Same, friend, and I'm sorry you went through that. (That’s actually one of the reasons I’ve always been wary of Izzy. What he says and does in S1 is too familiar to me, sometimes to a point where I can’t watch certain scenes.) I don’t think anyone’s saying that Ed isn’t hurting anyone, or that all of his actions can be attributed to abuse. If that’s not what you’re getting at here, apologies for misunderstanding.

“His boss that he was trying to control was brown.  Was that a factor in his power play though, or was it because Taika wound up being cast as Blackbeard? Any other (white) actor in the role, would Izzy be as bad for trying to control him? Would the scripts have gone a different way?”

Here’s the thing. In the show we have, Blackbeard is played by a Maori/Jewish man, and this fundamentally alters the character. There are things in the show -- whole episodes, if you want to look at S1E5 and the fancy party guests who treat Ed like exotic entertainment and not a peer -- that wouldn’t be the same if Ed was white. 

And yeah, Ed being brown changes the dynamic between Ed and Izzy. It would still be bad if a white guy was trying to control another white guy, but it wouldn’t be bad on the same level. Same goes if they were both brown. A white man trying to control the behavior of an indigenous man is worse.

“Izzy got permanently disfigured, crippled, and dead, while Ed came out largely unscathed in a physical sense, due to Muppet logic. Not to say one is more deserving than the other, but for a bunch of fans, there's probably a sense of Izzy getting the short end of the stick, to consider.”

That’s fine if some people feel like Izzy got the short end of the stick. It’s fine that some people feel like Izzy’s arc was kinder to him than it should have been. It’s okay to feel whatever! We connect emotionally to different characters and that biases our opinions and meta. That’s not a crime. We just need to be aware of our biases and why they exist.

The thing with OFMD is that Ed is a main character with more background and a story that, at every turn, asks you to sympathize with him. We’re given a look into Ed’s psyche. We understand at least some of his trauma and hurt and why he acts the way he does. Izzy has virtually no backstory and we’re never offered a glimpse into his mind; we don’t know why he’s like that. You can totally like a secondary character (or even an antagonist!) with no real canonical background or mental groundwork. It’s fun to ask why characters do what they do when canon doesn’t offer us any answers, and who doesn’t love a mystery box? 

But with OFMD, it can raise eyebrows when people say their main concern is the suffering of a white man who behaves antagonistically towards a brown man, especially when that brown character is a well-developed lead who also suffers (and suffers at the hands of aforementioned white character). It’s not inherently racist for someone to care more about Izzy than Ed, but it’s also not unreasonable to ask that someone to think about the possibility that subconscious racism could be factoring into their point of view.

“I don't think it's fair discussion to have a rule saying ‘even though you didn't directly call out the brown man, your argument is still racist’... even if it's true in many cases, it effectively means that no criticism of the character can ever be considered valid. If someone wants to argue ‘removing your employee's toes and feeding them to him is abusive behavior’, they can't, because of the unspoken skin colors involved? I don't know what the solution to this is.”

No one is saying that all criticism of a character of color is racist or invalid. As allthinky said in response, we’re saying that “those critiques have to be based on real evidence, and placed in a careful context, so that their actions can be understood as human, and not just the brutality of some brute.”

Criticize, but criticize with evidence and with awareness of the context of the criticized behavior. 

With the Izzy example, you have to consider the context of their relationship and Izzy’s actions throughout S1. Izzy isn’t just an employee: he’s a trusted second-in-command who has been insulting, controlling, and disloyal; he endangered not just Stede but also Ed and the rest of the crew; he told Ed that he was better off dead than acting as he was, and that Izzy's loyalty belongs to the violent worksona that Ed wants to shed. Is Ed being abusive when he’s reacting in response to abuse from his abuser? 

“[T]he show has layers (like an onion). Sometimes the meaning is not entirely surface-level, and everyone has a different level of comprehension. Sometimes obvious things to us aren't obvious to other fans/vice-versa. There's a whole 'nother discussion of media literacy to be had.”

I think that Atticus said it best here: “This is not a subtle show. That's not to say it's a simple one [...]. It's amazingly layered and emotional responses by characters are often extremely complex. However, when the show is trying to tell you something, it's not subtle and it never tries to hide it.”

There are a lot of things in OFMD that are subjective and open to interpretation, and those things are fun to discuss even when we have different takes. There are also a lot of things that are very clear. When people try to subvert the messages and ideas that OFMD is conveying loudly and openly, other fans get suspicious and wonder if the folks doing the subverting have an agenda, a bias, or just misunderstand what the show is saying.

I hope that reply was sufficient!

[fictionfixations]

tamashina-mina event (aka the sunset savanna jp event)

so anyway because i cant read jp (the translated vid is in parts so thats why im posting multiple links)

leona brushes it off but

so LISTEN. The chamberlain whatever his name is isn't happy with Leona for not putting his intelligence to help the country

but when he DOES provide an idea (aka actually mining the mineral resources) its shrugged off because they're all for being with nature

so what im understanding is leona is proposing to actually make use of what the land has to, yes, make a profit, but also it could help with all loads of things? like spreading water to be a little more easily obtainable once having the funds to idk throw away money for the good of the people (i mean. they're already rich aren't they? i don't really get it but also the world runs on money. i dont know if there are any benefits to it just sitting there, or if there are cons to digging them out or not but leona seems very passionate about it.)

but so its like this then

where if its not modernized then people will just. not live modernized. and i get that ig, wanting to live with nature (well not really but i mean its all down to preference isnt it? which im not an outdoor person so uh)

maybe it'll make more sense in the EN version (whenever it comes). or maybe i need someone to dumb it down to me like im 5.

but anyway you see my point right?? Leona provides an idea (is very invested in it) that goes to the good of the kingdom (making more profit but its also like they dont have to mine ALL of it he at least just wants them to make use of it at least instead of not even touching it)

and then it gets shot down because. basically. tradition. ???

anyway heres my idea: if someone like Ruggie Bucchi can exist (i mean as in someone born in a poor environment) in the Sunset Savanna, then clearly there can still be something done to keep people healthy and in comfortable situations without compromising idk the beauty of also being able to live with nature at the same time? to help make it a bit more convenient in the process at least? (like there could be a system that brings them water, but it could still be in a well so they can still do that process by hand, there will just be more water so they dont have to worry about idk running out? i dont know how wells work but i imagine they can run out eventually)

and if anyones like 'oh but we wont make a profit' then propose ANOTHER way we can make big income. aka MINING the MINERAL resources so it could be like nothing even changed or that we might be even making more than we usually are (but also probably supervised so they cant take advantage and just i mean get rid of the entirety of it? cause. its.. important right? so some but not all.)

maybe i just dont understand this, maybe im biased towards leona who knows, but i kind of also feel like its dumb to just brush it off. and i mean who knows maybe hes proposed it many times before, maybe hes shown them so many ideas and proofs and proposals related but they mightve been flawed in some way i dont know and thats why they refuse. who knows. it just rubs me the wrong way

its also kind of related to people brushing off leona just as being lazy and stuff like that (also did you know he only failed ONE year? he joined NRC a year late) but leona isnt really doing anything to try to change peoples perceptions of him because 'thats what they think of me, why should i bother?' like people hating on him for being [something something] compared to falena so then just. takes that in and is like 'okay so people think of me this way. if thats how they view me, then whatever.' hes still very competitive and all that stuff but theres also apathy in 'people will think whatever they want of me, why should i even try to change it?' (and hes probably heard all kinds of things at a young age that really stuck with him and shaped who he was. which goes from being really hurt by it to not even caring about peoples opinions anymore. dont get me wrong it can still affect him because the part of him that got hurt by it the first time is still there but yknow)

but so then the chamberlain is like 'why dont you use your smarts for the country'

and leonas just like

THEN SAY SOMETHING TO MAKE HIM NOT SAY SUCH THINGS??? (you knew him as a kid surely you could do something) like. theres. just. such an utter lack of trying to convince him otherwise. and i guess to him it would sound so fake so he might not be convinced at all. but then if you stop trying at all then he'll think that he was right in what he thought people thought of him and wont try to correct anyone. or in fact will correct anyone if they think positively of him.

i mean theres also not wanting to say it in front of other people. but. listen. if youre afraid of what the people think then it will affect the other negatively.

like for example if you try not to do lovey-dovey stuff in public then your lover will naturally feel like youre just trying to hide them away. or that you might feel ashamed.

so if the chamberlain tries to convince him when they're in private but in public he doesnt. then you can see what kind of conclusion leona would come to, right?

its kind of a tough situation because i honestly dont know what youd do in that situation. its just. i feel like they could communicate better. that there could be things to be done and it just frustrates me.

yes he does go on to say that leona is strong

and that he believes in him basically but

it just. doesnt feel like enough. and it could definitely be on leona for also not being willing to listen so hh. and i also get the chamberlain has a lot of responsibility so he cant just be there all the time and everything hfeuishfdi

[quotevarchive]

official quotevarchive quotev death post (three entire days late)

On Friday, May 31st, 2024, Quotev issued an update that removed the activity feed, the chatbox, the ability to post in groups, the recently added “recommended users” feature, the ability to make individual posts private, the “location” feature on profiles, and backgrounds on the homepage, to name a few things.

They also added a reminder in groups and messages that the two features “are being discontinued and will be removed July 1st.”

This update also added a home button and a button that leads directly to a user's library on the menu bar (situated in a somewhat unbalanced position.)

According to reports of several users, the update happened sometime between 1-2 PM, GMT (I am not entirely sure what time is most accurate, and I did not log on until an hour afterwards.)

Thus began the mass panic. Several users blamed themselves for the removal of the feed, including one user (.hideri) who had among other things apparently make a joking bomb threat the day before. Since the administration had not made a statement in the News section (which was temporarily removed when I logged on, at about 3 PM GMT) no one had any idea whose fault it was. With no other apparent options, users began to move to other platforms to discuss the situation, including twitter, tumblr, reddit (r/Quotev), discord, and plurk. Some users sent messages of protest to the administration.

Around 6 PM GMT, the administration posted a statement in the restored News section.

(note that the time on the post is listed in EST on my device)

The last paragraph, detailing how to archive your messages and group topics, was not included in the post until around a day after it was posted.

Users have continued to move to different platforms. Some seem resigned, while others are determined to challenge the administration with a change.org campaign. Several “quotev discord” servers have been created (spawning their own separate dramas.) A controversy on plurk has emerged, discussing whether or not the recently moved quotev users are disrupting the website.

This all leads us to the question: why? The administration's statement is vague and probably not fully true. What is the actual reason? Can they no longer maintain the website? Were they fed up with the constant drama moderation? Quotev has been no stranger to unpopular updates, but none have been as dramatic as this. Website statistics have shown a huge drop in usage. It's not going to get better when everyone finishes moving their stuff and lurking. It remains to be seen if we will ever truly get a good answer. In the meantime, former users mourn, reminisce, bicker, and will ultimately move on. There has been ridicule for the sadness that we are experiencing, over “just a quiz site.” Yeah, maybe it sounds silly to be so sad, but there is really nothing quite like quotev and the community that it contained, for better or for worse.

[nalyra-dreaming]

Hey, I had a sudden wonder while watching this episode: with Louis suggesting what Armand ought to do regarding letting Santiago run the theatre coven... although obviously we have seen such beautiful duality in Armand (I AM SO IN LOVE WITH ASSAD'S ARMAND. He is utter, exquisite perfection! Armand fully realised!) and we've certainly seen Armand being scary and threatening to Claudia... what we haven't seen ourselves (or seen Claudia allude to) is Armand ever telling Claudia she ought to die.

It makes me wonder whether the show will go for Armand's responsibility in Claudia's death to the same degree as in the books?

(This Louis also feels like he doesn't *need* to stay with her, nor she him in the same way...?) or if Claudia's death will be more entirely Santiago's doing? I mean, I guess it is that way in the books and Armand just doesn't stop it because he doesn't want to, so that can still be true.... But it feels like Armand may relinquish some power too on the show?

Still, that would make Louis feel even more responsible too, seeing has he has set Santiago up to give him this power. Of course it could also *seem* feely Santiago and Lestat's doing in version 1 of the trial and we could then get a version 2 of the trial to see more culpability for Armand... but I just had a fleeting wonder is all.... So I thought I'd see your thoughts on it? Thank you!

How good was this episode! I cried twice! With Armand in The Louvre and the final DreamStat scene. (The final Dreamstat scene ever! Arrggghhhh!!! Unless he returns in The Future. Which I don't currently envision.)

It was very, very good, yes.

But also... already quite unsettling, and we have only scratched the really fucked up stuff. -.-

I... I think Armand following Louis' advice there... might be part of the game. I mean, on one hand he wants to. On the other though, the rules and power structures are ingrained in him and have been, for centuries.

That's nothing you just shake off.

I mean, I also think that Santiago will be more shown as the "responsible one" in the trial. But I think we are very much heading for the "I could not prevent it" statement - when he very well could have. And I think that relinquished power or not - but Armand will never fully relinquish power and ultimately Louis will know that. Because he himself also could not relinquish power just like that - and his grip on his business was much, much shorter.

I said it before, but I think Louis will know Armand could have prevented it - but if they go for the surgery? then that might be something only Daniel might know (and, well, we).

I think they will stay quite close to the books - but for now... it may seem as if they're not.

AND YES - ASSAD is AMAZING!!!!

The perfect Armand, in all his facets - just... amazing.

[puddleslimewrites]

Snippet #12

Inspired by this post.

She wasn't trained for this. Scratch that, she wasn't prepared for this. The blood on her hands was slick and darker than the fake stuff they'd use to practice treating wounds at the agency. She sent the two youngest back to base but she could hear them following behind her as she searched for their target.

"Hang on," she whispered desperately to the child in her arms. "Just hang on. We'll find him. He has to be here somewhere."

And find him she did. Villain looked at the injured child, breaths shallow, chest rising and falling at a rapid pace. He looked at the desperate faces that stood before him. He looked at their leader, jaw set, as she held a comrade no older than herself and asked her enemy for help.

He could use this.

~

"You've got a good head on your shoulders." His voice was deep, tone dry, but there wasn't a hint of fear in any of their faces. When they'd first shown up to fight him a month ago he'd seen determination in their eyes. Now, they only looked tired.

He flicked his eyes to the oldest member of their little group. She looked like she wasn't used to compliments. She ducked her head but Villain could still see the smile. She was fighting to keep her composure.

Villain understood she was the leader of their little band of heroes. He didn't know why she came to him of all people for aid, but he wasn't about to waste this opportunity. He knew full well why he'd been forced into fighting children on a weekly bases. That didn't make him any less livid.

As he sat with them treating a twelve-year-old pint-sized hero, he decided to get some answers.

He turned back to their leader. Villain knew they had to be trained on this - they should know better than to answer questions from anyone but the heroes at the agency. But even so he hardly had to pry to get what he needed.

~

Tag List: @heroes-villains-side-blog @just-a-space-rabbit @ohwrite

Note: The adult heroes did, in fact, shit bricks the day Villain found their base.

[thenotoriousscuttlecliff]

It is funny seeing Chibnall era fans attack the 60th for being too reliant on nostalgia when they were all jumping over 'The Power of the Doctor' a few months ago for all the old characters it brought back.

[luck-of-the-drawings]

OOOH BABY THIS ONE WAS A LONG TIME COMING. NIGHTMARE NIGHTMARE NIGHTMARE!!

YOU THOUGHT IT WAS A DAY LIKE ANY OTHER. A DAY OF ADVENTURE WITH YOUR CLOSEST FRIENDS. OH HOW TIGHTLY YOU HOLD THEM TO YOUR CHEST, AND OH HOW TERRIFYING IT IS TO WATCH THEM GET EVISCERATED BY SOMETHING YOU DONT UNDERSTAND. MAYBE IF YOU JUST LISTENED A BIT MORE, IF YOU LET THE SMART ONE LEAD THE CHARGE, THIS WOULDNT HAVE HAPPENED. ONCE AGAIN YOUR IMPULSIVENESS LEADS TO DISASTER. HEAR ME NOW, YOUNG TIDESTRIDER, YOUR STUPIDITY WILL BRING THE DEMISE OF EVERYTHING YOU WERE BORN AND FORGED TO PROTECT. HOW COULD THE PROPHECY HAVE CHOSEN SOMEONE SO USELESS? I BET YOU WISH YOU CHOSE THE RIGHT LEVER. FAILURE.

[automatonknight]

here's the prick i was talking about^ i have so many thoughts and notes about him but they're mostly incomprehensible so when i organize maybe them i'll post them who knows

[redhoodie1723]

the imaginary carlos and charles beef that some fans are convinced is going on is giving Netflix DTS trying to convince us that charles and sebastian were mortal enemies that prayed on each other’s downfall nightly

[solradguy]

I'm so grateful that the only GG fans that care about the light novels are the ones that can be normal about things because Lightning the Argent goes from the rawest scenes of carnage imaginable to Ky Kiske doing something mildly religious like offering a short, silent, prayer for someone that got mangled to death by WMD dragons, and I just know that, in the wrong hands, those brief religious moments would generate the most annoying goddamn memes you could ever imagine

[shokuto]

Can’t believe Miles and Gwen are about to be the most well developed cbm romance of all time

[puhpandas]

I change how I feel about Gregory and Tony's relationship ten thousand times a day

[ghostorbz]

Spork and Miyuki are so fnnuy to me because you can literally interpret them in anyway. They don't seem to have canon personalities from what I've seen/researched

And yet I'll still say "they would not fucking say that" like. you don't know that. Hush

[givehimthemedicine]

can I talk about the 001 tattoo?

so we can agree the 001 is darker, thicker, and WAY bigger on Vecna, right? also it's got a vein running prominently right under it, which doesn't seem to match the anatomy of his wrist in the broom closet tat reveal. (idk if that's an original vein or some kind of vine nonsense tbf)

"oh that shot is dark and spooky and cluttered, maybe they just exaggerated it so you can see it" maybe but.. they can do literally anything with cg - zoom into his skin cells or whatever they gotta do to make sure we see that tattoo without having to make it cartoonishly large.

can I also talk about how Nancy sees the tattooing scene twice, and the tattoos look different?

I know em and/or james (sorry much like henward I forget which of you has said what lmao) have discussed the differences in lighting, etc. in the tattoo scenes and the fact that one is unfinished and so might be 000 instead of 001, but I wanted to touch on the Nancy aspect of it too.

just for clarity, the tattoo scenes go like this:

in 4x7 - "when Papa realized he could not control me, he tried to recreate me" we, and Nancy, see the boy getting tattooed 00(unfinished). this is the last time we see Nancy in 4x7.

4x8 picks up with Nancy watching the tattooing, Brenner wiping off a finished 001, and then turning to her with creepy eyes. she tries to run, pries some boards off the doorway, and arrives back in the tattoo scene again.

so although it's broken across two different episodes, this is all one continuous vision for Nancy (one thing split in two - isn't that fitting for a secret Henward reveal)

it's super weird that after Nancy runs from the tattoo scene, Vecna tells her "Now you've seen where I've been; I would like very much to show you where I am going" and then... sends her back into the tattoo scene?

why say that and then immediately show her more redundant "where he's been"? why not just have her bust through that doorway straight into the apocalypse vision, like Victor in wartime France?

"it's like El arriving in the Rainbow Room over and over" yes. it is! but that was El getting clockwork orange'd with HNL footage and her brain struggling to reject it. whereas this is Vecna. and Vecna, as far as we saw, doesn't usually force his victims into loops like that, right?

Max, Chrissy, Fred ran inside their visions. unsuccessfully, yes, but when they ran, they actually travelled. like, when Max ran in the graveyard, she didn't keep arriving at Billy's grave over and over. Chrissy didn't keep finding her mom in every room. so it's curious to me that the only loops are Nancy and El, both in the lab (or I should say, "in the lab" given that neither of them are actually in the lab). so Vecna deviated from his usual method because he reallllly wanted Nancy to see that tattoo some more.. it's just odd to me, IF those tattooings are truly supposed to be the same event.

why else are WE the audience shown this scene multiple times than because they need to have shown us two events, but made sure we conflated them as one? to assume that that was the same boy getting the same tattoo?

anyway, the actual tattoo:

the 00 in 4x7 seems a lot lighter in comparison to the very dark 001 we see being finished up in 4x8.

people with tattoos: do they start it light and then go over it darker? is that a thing? is the 4x7 a realistic depiction of the 4x8 tattoo in progress? because if not I have more thoughts.

btw if I wanted to get real crazy, I would point out that El's tattoo also seems to vary slightly - it seemed bigger when she was little (maybe that part makes sense. how do tattoos behave on growing children?) but also it keeps sneaking closer to her wrist. look how in s1 it's four tattoo-lengths from the crease of her wrist, and by s4 it's more like two. (does anyone know when MBB got that for real?)

anyway I'll leave you with the thought of: remember those two extremely similar and redundant El-dragged-off-to-solitary scenes they showed us in s1?

[theygender]

The more I think about it the more I really feel like the recently coined term mesosex might fit me and it's been shared by several intersex education/advocacy blogs I follow now so I know there's support for the term but I'm still like. Scared I would be Intruding™ on intersex issues if I started using it. Like I mean. I'm an afab & (afaik) perisex person with a reproductive disorder that's likely caused by a (non-intersex) hormone imbalance which I'm now essentially having to take feminizing HRT to fix, and as a result I'm now growing tits and undergoing female-pattern fat redistribution at the age of 25 after years of having little to no secondary sex characteristics. I've always identified with intersex issues but now that I'm essentially having to undergo HRT to make my body match my asab that connection to intersex issues feels even stronger. And like that's what the term is for. But my anxiety is still like "but what if you're intruding tho" lol 🙃