been watching mashle and oh my god, the eugenics???? the way lance's parents were so ready to give up their daughter??? no second thought???? just "why did this child have to be born to us?"???? um everyone talking in mash's face about how non-magic people are inherently worthless???? the triple line dude fucking making dolls out of people and somehow no one??? is??? checking him???? and then when questioned immediately jumping into "well humans are little more than mindless beasts and i will become a creator deity and reshape the world in my liking!"????? the, um, corruption in the government??? the way this story is so clearly "h*rry p*tter if it was actually funny"??? the slytherin coded characters are blood purists???? they took out hufflepuff??? one of the magia lupus' mage's powerset was just big shuriken???? another one is rip off kisame???? lance is a siscon and the first thing mash says is "that doesn't make it better"???? lemon is genuinely so fuckin funny??? dot is incel-coded but like in a funny way??? dot says that lance is playing life on "easy mode" cause lance has a good face??? dot likes tea??? dot has good manners??? everybody only has one spell they can use??? finn ames is like if you transported is regular human into this stupid ass world??? i think the old man and the cop have explored each others bodies.
859 notes
·
View notes
IMPORTANT QUESTION
My friends and I have started calling you the irl version of Lilia and we wished to know if you can cook because we are worried for the home if you cannot
(This is a light hearted joke)
I can (more or less) follow a recipe, which gives me the advantage! >:D ...although it is true then when left to my own devices I default to "dump in a bunch of random spices and see what happens". I...I just really like cayenne and turmeric okay --
other than that (and all the other many things that are different about us) Lilia and I are, y'know, basically identical.
1K notes
·
View notes
behold: my second least favorite string of words in the entirety of Tears of the Kingdom.
(it's a little less transparent why this time so I'll explain my thoughts under the cut)
So why do I not like this?
In so many words: because if you remove it, the scene still works, but you lose the moral certainty of what is going on.
This single sentence does so much legwork for the entire game (the kind I dislike), to the point where I'm about 60% sure it's the product of a rework that realized how ambiguous Rauru's position was as the Good Rightful King and needed to nervously reassure the players that Ganondorf Is and Always Was the Invader, Actually.
(no matter that it leaves the gerudos in this awkward in-between state of both invaders and victims, while never dwelling in the specifics of their history and their own agency in the entire thing; brushed off as a sin they have to expiate through loyalty to the winners of that particular strife, but without explicitely blaming them either to avoid the implications of what that would have looked like)
If you remove it, not only do you lose a pretty clunky line that detracts from Ganondorf's intimidating presence (who is he even speaking to? who needs to hear this right now?) that honestly speaks for itself when it comes to his experience with warfare, but also you lose any tension and any mystery regarding why he is attacking in the first place.
You also... kind of rob Ganondorf's motivations of their meaning. "Hyrule will bow down before me" leads to asking... why? What does he want? What does he see in those lands? And what little we get with Rauru and then Link during the final fight begs more questions; why do you prefer hardship to peace? Why do you value strength? What leads you to want to rule a land devoid of survivors, become a king without a kingdom? I don't think we ever get satisfactory answers. If you remove this sentence, on the other hand... Subtextually, it becomes pretty clear that his motivations is that he felt threatened by Rauru's power, which is ripe with subtext and questions about whether this is a legitimate reaction, whether his "no survivor" stance is due to a feeling of betrayal when his own people turned against him post the Demon King shenanigans... I'm not saying it would fix the entire game's writing, far from it, but it would already do *so much more*.
(genuinely, I think he could have stayed completely silent during the Molduga Assault, speaking only in the Show of Fealty before going completely nuts after Sonia's murder, and it would have worked MUCH better in terms of characterization but anyway anyway
EDIT: ALSO!!! that way he wouldn't speak hylian to fellow gerudos, which is weird inherently)
Without this line, the core of the tension between the gerudos and Hyrule comes front in his conversation with Rauru; it allows the cause of his hostility to be Rauru's invitations, that he would have taken as a threat, and would have still made him warlike and domineering without making him cartoonishly flat, because, once again, Rauru is not acting in a particularly more legitimate way when Zelda arrives in Ancient Hyrule; and it would have been... fair to point that out. And make for better characterization for Rauru, and Sonia, and Mineru, and everybody. But the priority was for Hyrule to be pictured as unquestionably holy; always legitimate, always truthful, always beautiful, always just.
Also, and this is more of a nitpick but: why would Ganondorf want Hyrule, specifically, to bow down before him also? Was he at war with the rest of the disparate tribes before, and just carried on his ambitions to the very very newly-founded kingdom as they allied under a new banner? (though it seems to be implies the lands were crawling under monsters in a generic sense, and not Ganondorf's attacks in particular) Why would he even consider Hyrule a legitimate entity worth taking over then, if it is so new, born from the will of a powerful rival, founded by what is basically a stranger to these lands? Why would he covet something so young instead of destroying it and just calling the lands Gerudo Lands II or Grooseland or something?
I don't think any of that was even accounted for, because, beyond everything else: to me, this sentence is so clearly and painfully crammed in here to shield Hyrule from any potential blame and immediately characterize Ganondorf as Bad without having to remove any of the causes that could lead one to side-eye Rauru's little pet project as equally questionable.
Beyond the clumsiness, it is cowardly --and, I think, a little damning.
140 notes
·
View notes
I really wish I could understand what the hell is wrong with Andrew
like with Ashley it's so easy for me to see a traumatized girl whose parents didn't love her enough who lands pretty high end on a sociopathy scale and therefore has got an awful time trying to fit in into the groups around her
those around her can tell there's something off about her and wind up leaving her alone making her see herself as forced to manipulate and abuse her brother into staying with her to the point of creating a codependent emotionally incestuous relationship
but like its not just her
theres something wrong with andrew too and i cant figure out what it is like he isn't just stuck into the caretaker role with Ashley beyond purposefully choosing her to keep taking care of her
like he kills people too hes alright with screwing anybody else over if it means staying with her
like what's wrong with him he definitely doesnt seem to be the same as Ashley because he did have a girlfriend and apparently some friends before they got locked away into their apartment
and before Ashley harassed them into abandoning him
so does he just see himself as intrinsically linked to her like his whole identity has become just being able to take care of her
is it self loathing as well that he's different from the rest and he needs her to be there to be able to keep blaming her for his own misdeeds
Does he just love her so he doesnt want to let go of her and is willing to stand through everything for his love
and i guess they are trauma bonded together as well as only having each other maybe he is also afraid he wotn make it on his own without ashley by his side without some motive to live
is he that haunted by his own actions that he literally cannot bare to live if he doesnt have somebody else to take the burden for him so he cannot let go of the only person who helps him with that
Ashley also said its because shes the only person he can be real with that he cant bare to lose her but beyond the 'you cant sleep withouth me' claim andrew didnt dispute her
god i dont get that guy at all i love him so much
151 notes
·
View notes
i dont think the comic version's end of nimona is negative specifically because the villain she happens to attach herself to is a villain by label only. blackheart is pretty much the kindest and most noble character in the book, if she happened to associate with anyone else, she probably would have been different, her killing everyone in the beginning wasnt exactly fake and i think she couldve easily been influenced to actually be worse if it was an actual villain, lol.
but a big thing in the comic is that no matter how many times nimona is evasive, lies, threatens him, gets aggressive, whatever, blackheart still forgives her and unconditionally supports her and thats what helps her in the end. him keeping this attitude
and her being able to reflect on all his actions, even if he did end up hurting her in the end, is what helps her go on a new path thats not focused on fearing the possibility of being hurt because shes different
63 notes
·
View notes