#do i think realistically they would have much conflict? maybe? yes? no?

[johnny-jhonny]

i want johnny to join the activity club SOOOO bad because i Need to see that conflict him and isaac would have. lad (irish) vs lad (scottish) violence

[cursedvida]

It's really crazy to me to see the hate Mae gets, like I was reading some reviews and I can understand not liking a character but as soon as they start with the name calling their opinion is invalid to me because they have no reason to be calling her a bitch, among other things, like it just reeks of mysogyny, (it's like they just want an excuse to call women names) and seeing it coming from other girls makes it worse like..

"Oh the girl was such a bitch why did she do that 🙄" ..is it really that hard to think for a moment about the circumstances in which mae was raised?? Do they need it spell it out for them?? Like, c'mon guys do you really think that the people trapped in a bunker for generations have anything nice to teach/say about the apes?? Wes Ball please give us Mae's backstory in the sequel!! Your audience needs it bc they are out there calling Mae the real villain and saying Proximus was right 💀 (when he was literally everything Caesar hated in an ape)

Look, I'm usually a polite person when expressing my opinions, but I'm fed up with the hate towards Mae, basically because the arguments people give seem incredibly basic to me, typical of people with little to no understanding. Sometimes I doubt if these people have watched the same movie as me or maybe they have some sort of cognitive dissonance, but seriously, I find them ridiculous. Either that, or they are basically the typical comments from misogynistic guys or women with internalized misogyny who can't stand morally gray and questionable female characters.

And well, having said that, I'm going to present my doctoral thesis on this topic:

One of the things I've seen the most is people saying that Mae is evil, the true villain, or an ungrateful traitor to Noa. This argument seems quite incomprehensible to me because, even though we don't have much data about her, I believe there's something very important that explains why she acts as she does: the Proximus apes killed the people in her group, including her mother. I mean: her damn mother. If we add to that the UNDERSTANDING (I mean, you have to be very short-minded not to assume something so obvious) that she has been raised in an environment where they've probably told her all her life that the apes are the reason for all the evils of humanity and the main reason why humans live in shitty conditions, I think anyone with half a brain has enough information to understand why she does what she does.

Yes, Noa is a good guy, but he's not helping her. Noa and Mae have a common goal and decide to ally themselves momentarily to achieve that goal, which is to reach Proximus. As much as they've formed a bond throughout the story, it's not yet strong enough for Mae to set aside what she has worked for so hard. Mae not only bears the weight of humanity on her shoulders but also emotionally carries the idea that she, as the sole survivor of her group, must complete the mission at all costs. Are those who criticize her telling me that if they truly thought that with certain actions they could not only save their species but also honor their loved ones who have been killed infront their eyes, they wouldn't do them? And that they wouldn't do them for someone they've just met, no matter how much they like them? That's just not realistic, it makes no sense. We would all do the same as Mae in her situation. I mean, I have no doubts.

Another thing I love is when they say she's the "true villain" as if it weren't clear enough that she feels bad every time since she forms a bond with Raka and Noa when she does something that she knows may harm them. She feels pain for Raka's death and clearly, you can also see the conflict and remorse when she detonates the bomb. It's not something she enjoys doing, but she HAS to do it. In the final scene, even though she's carrying a gun, you can also clearly see her in conflict with herself. Clearly, she doesn't want to kill him. Clearly, she has nothing against Noa, and this is evident when she finally accepts the necklace and they even shake hands. You can't tell me that's the attitude of a villain, narratively it's not presented as such, and seeing it that way is to have understood nothing.

Mae is a complex character whose life is based on survival, she's no different from the characters we're used to loving and idolizing in other post-apocalyptic series, the difference here for me is that she's human and humans have to be bad by default and also that she's a woman. Because female characters always have to be the support, the romantic interest, or the unconditional friends of heroic male characters, and Mae is none of that. Mae is a character with her own story and ambitions that go beyond Noa's plot. Mae has her own plot, and it seems that's something that bothers people a lot.

I'm sorry, but the hate towards Mae seems very similar to the one people had for Sansa Stark in Game of Thrones, which basically stemmed from people being misogynistic and hating complex and imperfect female characters, combined with how much they hate seeing protagonist characters with such human and real characteristics that they can't bear the idea of seeing themselves reflected in them.

But hey, for Sansa Stark, I would have killed, and now for Mae too. Mae haters basically DNI

[a-twistedheartslonging]

Same anon that initially raised the question about monster boy reproduction. Guess I’m back to torture you with more logistics questions. Specifically for the monster boys that you canonized oviposition for.

First, is their ability to create eggs based on their mating seasons? That could make for interesting behavior in-season as they would then have to find ways to deal with the unfertilized eggs. I imagine it would be uncomfortable and/or painful otherwise.

Second, how exactly would be eggs be fertilized? Irl, it would be the male fertilizing the egg, but that can’t happen here or the egg may as well be a form of asexual reproduction. Which would conflict with the ability to have half-humans.

Oh, this is the opposite of torture, it's so much fun to think of stuff and add new things. World-building can be complicated but very fun.

Yes, the ability to create eggs is indeed based on mating seasons, and having to deal with them, especially on your own is an unpleasant experience.

....and yeah, realistically the eggs wouldn't be able to properly fertilize, the guys shouldn't even be having the eggs in the first place, but this is just one of the areas where I ignore fact and science and just go with nonsensical kinks that make no sense because its hot.

I do headcanon that some of the guys can reproduce asexually, but for the ones that can't it's just...egg up that human.

At first, I figured it could just be: he eggs you up, then you Incubate the eggs for a while, and something something magically fertilized, and then the now bigger eggs are pushed out.

But then again it could make sense that simply the sperm is enough to get you pregnant, and you just have kids the usual mammal way, and putting the egg in you just feels really good and makes the passing of the egg less unpleasant for him.

Perhaps those egg-laying beasts produce eggs regardless of sex because of some weird evolution trait that is just normal in Twisted Wonderland but not our world cuz magic reasons and unless someone nuts in them, they just lay duds.

...huh actually this ask is making me come up with better ideas and reasons for stuff happening. I am very pleased by this.

I wonder if it would be seen as weird to use your own duds for cooking. Maybe not since there are plenty of animals that have reasons for eating their own eggs.

[eddiegettingshot]

Seriously there are a lot of bad buck-centric takes/tropes on here but the one that chris thinks eddie will push buck away is the absolute worst to me like 1. Chris loves buck but eddie is his dad and he wants eddie to be happy and eddie has never actively pushed anyone out of chris’s life nor has chris expressed worry eddie would do so. He actively keeps his shitty parents in his life and is trying to fix his relationship with them so chris can have a relationship with them as well. and 2. Chris and buck’s relationship is actually quite separate from eddie in canon like the only signification chris/buck development that I can think of that eddie was present for was maybe 3x12 ? And 4x14 I suppose. But if (strong if here) chris were ever worried about buck leaving if something bad happened with eddie it is something that would and should be explored via a buck/chris conflict and not a eddie/chris conflict. Because it is a sentiment that is tied to buck and chris in 4x08, not anything that has happened between eddie and chris. (And also if buck ever “left” it wouldnt even be because eddie did something I think. It would be because buck perceived himself as in the wrong and would be giving eddie and chris space) Also 3. chris is like soo much older than he was in s4 now, and is also written as older/more mature in canon and it would be nice if fanon/headcanons could keep up

yes literally all of this and. well honestly i’m not even saying that it’s not a realistic response i guess? like it’s not out of the realm of possibility. but by no means do i believe it’s the most likely AND it has very quickly become THE singular conflict that anyone can conceive of. half the time it doesn’t even come across as being written based on chris’s character but on what people themselves think about eddie’s relationships (and my BIGGEST pet peeve is when people act like he’s been regularly externalizing his issues with shannon when that is quite literally the opposite of what he does!!!!!!). it’s just so unenjoyable like probably my least favorite thing to read about at the moment. and it’s EVERYWHERE. so.

[yugiohz]

i do agree with you, and i’m still delusionally hoping shigaraki still has something left to help that conclusion even though it’s not looking likely, but do you not think these endings are more “realistic”? like obviously it’s a superhero world and we are already stretching reality in every way possible but do you think it would’ve been too “and they all lived happily ever after and everything was okay yayy” if all the villains just turned out good? (in the most basic way to say that lmfao). i’m not saying that i fully think this because i do agree with you, that this ending is giving bad writing. i think hori had the guts to set up this beautifully complex world with flaws and wrongs and made some amazing villains and anti-heros with valid mindsets and then didn’t have the guts or maybe the artistic ability to fix it all.

so yeah my only “reprieving” thought i guess is the idea of like… i guess that’s real life? like the wronged people are wronged to the end, and bad people are forgiven, and life is unfair. but idk i just think hori is a coward too lol. i will say i’m at least surprised that he had natsu actually cut contact, maybe the best handled part of it all imo (or maybe it just hits home for me lol)

sorry for dumping all this i guess i just have a lot of thoughts too you don’t have to post this dhdhdhd

re: realism: yes i think everyone suffering from irreversible consequences is realistic and that's sth i expected. As i said in my previous ask, I never expected or wanted dabi to magically survive and heal from this by any means, but I think there are better ways to handle a character like him because the narrative frame of bnha allows for that.

re: happily ever after: I don't think that giving one of the biggest victims in a story some sort of good ending is necessarily a corny, wish-fulfillment type of bad writing, especially when the protagonist postulates that the other big villain is worth saving. I also find it fascinating that bakugo can survive an open-heart surgery on the battlefield & that deku's arms get disintegrated and grow back while that level of suspension of disbelief doesn't seem to apply to the villains. bnha has always been kind of corny, so I don't think it would have been weird for shoto to be able to somewhat save his brother when that has been his goal within that dynamic all along. So far, neither deku nor shoto could save their foil, so what's up with that??

happily ever after: while it has always been obvious that bnha is not a radical, anti-establishment story, to me, deku's conflict with grand torino & the vestige has allways been representative the "everyone deserves to be saved, everyone deserved to have their hero who's gonna save them". why set up characters as foils within the context of a hero story with saving as one of its core themes when 2 of these 3 villains won't get saved in the end? why do deku and shoto fail at such a point in the story? "saving" is a very tangible thing in the case of bnha, I think ep. 1 basically sums up the overall narrative paradigm of the good guy indiscriminately saving someone out of a bad situation, so to me, it just feels like there is a glaring narrative incongruence in this final arc & epilogue

re: i guess that's just real life: i think that premise is a bit misplaced here because bnha is not a story that is meant to reflect our reality, like ofc it's all a big allegory that tackles a lot of real issues, but it also is a genre-typical hero comics that is borderline fantastical, so i wouldn't say "that's real life" is a valid premise, like the established diegesis & themes of bnha would have allowed for sb like shigaraki or dabi to be granted a kinder conclusions

i'm not forcing anyone to agree with me and i'm not saying that i dislike this closure because i don't want anyone to die, i just think horikoshi's choices for the villains of his story are rooted in pragmatic reasons; shigaraki & dabi die so he won't have to think too much about how to handle the abjects of society, so he won't have to consolidate that with his decision to cling to the establishment

like i don't think it's too much to expect a victim of abuse to survive in a story that's about a boy who constantly risks his life to save random people, esp victims of grooming & abuse like i don't think it would be corny for dabi to end up in a better state, esp when we've seen deku grow his arms back and bakugo dying and coming back to live and

[jasontoddenthusiastt]

BFTC isn’t really a case of terrible characterization for Jason so much as it was a terrible case of victim blaming. Like yeah, some of the things Jason did were a bit extreme compared to his “better” appearances, but that’s nothing new and pretty much true of many stories that aren’t utrh or lost days. The bad parts are are also definitely exaggerated by fans.

The story isn’t centered on Jason. Of course every other character’s description of Jason would be knee-jerk dismissive and misunderstanding, since (again) the intention was to make Jason out to be the cartoony bad guy villain. But if you look past the layers of grime they added, the bare bones of his characterization are not entirely incorrect. It’s a biased story in which their intended criticisms of Jason’s morals often fell short, so to compensate they deliberately cranked up his motivations to be more extreme and unrealistic (but one which, nonetheless got Jason’s overall thoughts and goals relatively consistent with stories that portrayed him accurately).

Yes, him shooting Damian was out of character, but granted we’re all in agreement that it was a true case of “bad writing decision”, I don’t think it’s hard to look past. The only other bit people probably complain about (which felt iffy at worst) was him being “a bit enthusiastic” at times in trying to convince Dick to become another lethal Batman (you can just as easily say Jason wouldn’t have been personally invested enough to have acted in the way he did). I don’t care though because he was probably doing it for shits and giggles, and it was funny watching him push their buttons on his spare time while being excellent at his job. Same old ‘none of them deny that he’s effective, they just can’t get behind the killing’ conflict.

Looking past the fact that Jason still had a valid point, the “he’s the bad guy” plot falls apart for other obvious reasons, which happen in the 3rd issue. It’s kind of hard to focus on how much of a bitch Jason’s being when the other characters are written in an infinitely more problematic way (which ends up happening in most “hate Jason” stories). Not only did they heavily imply Jason is a victim of SA, but the way Dick/the batfamily treats Jason about this is … horrible. Arguing that this was a case of character assassination for Bruce and Dick would be more realistic than using this story to claim Jason is a Bad Person™.

Even though Bruce does have a bad track record with his perspective on victims of SA.

Hey. Maybe listen to the living person begging you to turn it off.

Geez. I wonder why he never felt safe enough to confide in Bruce or any of the rest of them. Implying that enduring what he did made him “broken beyond repair”, that he needs to be “fixed”, and saying verbatim, “you are my greatest failure”, not “I failed you greatly”. Then deciding on behalf of Jason that a bunch of people who weren’t involved in what happened to him should all know about this so they can decide what should be done. And everyone agrees with this garbage. Unbelievable.

Aka, any sort of healing he may have tried to accomplish was ruined by you lot. When exactly am I supposed to see that Jason was evil all along.

The story collapses in on itself in the third issue because where Dick is supposed to be at his prime within the arc, he just sort of rambles about how Jason was a shitty victim and then awkwardly shifts to talking about personal growth and coming to accept his own heroic destiny.

I do resent this, but not because “Jason sucks here”. Jason’s “bad portrayal” pales in comparison to the problematic mindsets given to the other characters (namely Dick) which were framed as good-natured intentions and “tough love”. As for people who describe this as “vilifying Jason to prop up Dick” … I don’t really know what to make of that.

[suitsusboth]

Hi! I saw on your twitter that you have another idea for season 2 au (post gazebo). What is it about? 👀

hello! yes, i do. i’m trying to get it order bc i just know how s2 pissed me off s3 is probably also going to piss me off and i’ll want to write something. from my annoyance with s2 love came back to me was born, but that was a fix-it before the dreaded wedding. i think it’s be fun to see how things play out after ep six but without kate falling off the horse and that’s why the sharmas “forgive” her.

i wanted to start in a place of true conflict for kate— she has undeniable feelings for this man, and him for her, but it just feels like it could never be. never should be if she wants to heal her relationship with mary and edwina. but then she realised, after the mist of the gazebo scene falls away, she was forgotten about. and it’s sort of a breaking point for her.

i want it to be a deep dive on the sharma family and their dynamics/history and why they are the way they are. it’s not my intention to villainise mary/edwina at all, but i want to explore the unhealthy dynamic they have going and then find a way to come out on the other side of it. i also want kate to realise she can have good things, want her own dreams, let herself love and be loved. that sometimes she does need to put herself first.

and some good old Anthony apologising. because that’s what kate should have gotten 🙃

my intention is to make it a two part series, so the conflict and healing between the three woman would take some months (aka, end of s2 and then carry into what would be s3. i highly doubt i am going to follow much of what the show does in s3 and it would be a kanthony focused perspective, obviously). i just feel like that’s realistic? healing and forgiving can take time.

i won’t lie i was inspired by the recent ts album release and the stages of grief for the first intended part: denial, bargaining, anger, depression and acceptance. i just think they fit very well with the concept i’m imagining.

i don’t know if it would be everyone’s cup of tea, especially as we’re moving into Kanthony happy era. but it’s been in the back of my mind for a while so maybe i will write it 🤷🏼‍♀️

[7central]

I just love the different ways that aloto approaches queerness and parenthood.

Toni recognizes Max’s queerness and fears it, but mostly she fears her daughter being hurt in the way that she’s undoubtedly seen happen to Bertie.  The core of their conflict being that she wants to provide for Max, since she’s a pillar in her community and she provides for everyone, at the salon, ushering at church, being motherly towards people like Clance who need it.  She does like Max as well as love her, but she can’t see Max living a future with the way she is, so she wants her to change all the same.  It’s such a realistic conflict with so much urgency in the time (and now too).  Edgar is much more accepting of Max’s reality because he didn’t experience losing Bertie the way that Toni did, and his family has been settled in Rockford for much longer, so he’s farther removed from the immediate need to establish himself in the community the way that Toni has.  Toni, on the other hand, knows how hard it is for Black women, and she knows how much more dangerous it is for people who are gender non-conforming and queer.  On the flip side of the coin, there’s Bertie and Gracie, who are pillars in their own community, who bring Max in and encourage her to learn of the world beyond Toni’s sphere.  All of them love Max, but none of them can tell her who she is.

For Lupe, motherhood is a complicated obligation.  We see her sending money home, so there’s someone she’s providing for, but we never find out who exactly that is to her.  From what she tells Esti, her family intervened and took her daughter from her because they thought she would be a bad influence in some way.  Bad influence in that she was a young, single mother?  That she was queer?  Something else entirely?  It’s not clear.  But whatever it was, Lupe recognizes, and regrets to an extent, that she has benefitted from being relieved of the responsibility of motherhood.  So when she’s forced back into a caretaker position, expected to meet all of Esti’s needs because she is the only one who can communicate with her, she resists.  It’s cruel, yes, to contribute more directly in Esti’s exclusion, while the others do it carelessly, out of ignorance and lack of effort.  But it’s an understandable response to the unfair expectations placed on her, especially given that she’s harshly scrutinized by her teammates and subjected to casual racism on a daily basis.  That’s not even getting into the ways that Esti reminds her of her daughter, and of the youth that she herself was denied, having a child at that age.  It’s all been denied to her, because, in letting go of her daughter, she lost all claim to those feelings.  In deciding to go find Esti, deciding to open up to her about it, she gets just a little bit of that back.  Her motherhood is inextricable to who she is, and so is her queerness, and so is baseball.  She’s never been allowed to have all three.  And opening up about it doesn’t fix that, but it’s something.  Esti’s forgiveness is something that Lupe rarely receives, but constantly gives.  And forgiveness is something we constantly deny mothers who give up their children.

Carson’s sister immediately mentions the absence of their mother on the phone and half-accuses her of leaving Charlie.  It’s not until later that we find out that Carson’s mother left when she was young, probably forcing her sister into that motherly role.  Carson clearly misses her mom, maybe idealizes her more than you’d expect from a kid who was abandoned.  I don’t know if Carson ever realizes it fully, but I think she takes comfort in knowing that, even if her sister and husband are disappointed about her running off to play pro ball, putting off having children for it, her mother would probably be proud of her decision.  Charlie’s accusation that “whatever made your mother leave is in you,” is heavy with the implication that her mother was queer.  That it was selfish to choose that over her family.  And it was.  But Carson decides to do it, too, because the newfound sense of self she has is more than any of the stability or love that her husband could give her.  In a way, it’s just the same as Greta confiding that she’d like to have children but could never put herself through commitment to a man.  I think a part of Carson knew that about her mother all along, which is why she shows such an unexpected amount of grace about being left behind.

It’s just so intense to see these different ways that queerness intersects with and complicates parenthood, especially in this time period, when the expectation of women to become mothers was even more prevalent than it is now.  The strangeness of having so many men off at war is enough to shift the perception just slightly enough for something like the League to exist, but it’s all about to snap back like a rubber band during the baby boom to come.

[beevean]

While I like Steven Universe and all of it's misgivings (even though I feel some parts of it could be written a bit more realistically, like Kevin and Steven's weird animosity angle), I always felt that the Movie adding Spinel was kind of a lazy and thoughtless decision just to make Pink Diamond more cruddy than she really is. I get that as part of the regime that considered castes wouldn't treat their lower halves with such kindess as they would the parts they belonged to, but it just seemed rather out of character for Pink to discard Spinel and make her stay in her garden for so damn long, if we were to assume Pink actually did shatter her Pearl accidentally. If there was more instances of Pink Diamond being that volatile in the show and not a lot of heresay (The Crystal Gems talking about Pink like she's an spoilt brat, for example), I'd probably would buy it more. As it stands, there's too little information thanks to the nature of the show, and it really just feels like after the revelation of Pink and Rose Quartz being one and the same, they forgot to give more humanizing qualities to Rose, especially sinc she's such a trigger for Steven in Future.

Spinel, to me, only exists to make Pink Diamond more cruel than she actually is, and I don't actually like Spinel because of that.

I agree with you in part. I don't think Spinel exists only to make Pink look more cruel, but I think the show started villainizing her a little too much in general, culminating in Future.

The idea is sound on paper. Present a character as a paragon of unreachable goodness, to the point that Steven feels like everyone expects him to measure up to his dead mom, and then start showing the cracks in her shining armor: she looked down on the same humans she swore to protect, she bubbled Bismuth, she shattered Pink Diamond and is the reason Homeworld hates everything to do with Earth, she was Pink Diamond and lied to all of the CGs and forced Pearl to keep her secret. We see her at her best, and slowly we go backwards to see at her worst. The idea is that we're supposed to put together the events in reverse order and appreciate her character development... but in practice, it means that Steven just starts to resent Rose and have an attitude of "yes mom sucks, must be a day ending in Y"

Future is what irked me the most. The last time Rose is plot relevant, we discover that she literally traumatized Pink Pearl through a temper tantrum. The last time we see Rose, it's her painting stuffed inside Lion's mane, out of sight and out of mind. The last time we hear her name, Steven is angrily comparing Greg to her. Everyone has moved on from her, but not in a healthy way, but in an almost... cancelled way? The narrative put too much focus on her bad actions, and seemingly forgot that Pink did a massive work on herself to do the closest thing a Gem can to grow up.

Spinel is just one of those examples. As an antagonist, she works, she's out of her mind with emotional pain, Pink and not Rose hurt her (so Steven can't just tell her the truth, like she did with Jasper and the Diamonds), and her inner conflict is abandonment issues, which how in the hell is Steven supposed to solve? He doesn't, the Diamonds do. But... yeah. Since Rose isn't around to defend herself, a recurring theme in SU, we never learn why she never came back for Spinel. Maybe because the portals were broken! But the narrative just leaves us with "Pink was a jerk and abandoned her friend because she was annoying" (or because she was meant to replace Pink Pearl in a shallow, insulting way, but still).

This is a big flaw of trying to paint the complexities of a dead character. We have to rely on hearsay, different opinions, and so does the titular character. Steven decided that Rose was a liar, and that's where the show stopped. It sucks, because Rose is my favorite character in the show and back in the day I swear that she was more hated than the Diamonds :<

[lausol]

My thoughts about this drama: “what a valiant roar, what a bland goodbye”

I loved the first episodes, how complex their dynamic was and how well Soohyun and Jiwon brought them to life with their micro expressions. The way the pacing felt realistic, since a lot of things have passed between them. For me the drama took a bad turn when they lost focus of the main characters and expanded so much on the Queen’s drama. Especially the villains, they had so much screen time and were not really nuanced. Or the aunt, like yes, she was a nice character, but ???? why would they think I wanted so much screen time with her and that bland guy? At first it was cute, but when they gave them so much screen time the last episodes it turned out really annoying for me.

I feel like the car crash was unnecessary and something the writer included because she felt like the audience had not forgiven Hyun Woo enough for the way he acted at the beginning of the drama. That we needed to see him have this big gesture and go rescue her as proof of his love, but it was unnecessary and redundant by this point. We’ve already seen how much he loves her ever since the reality of losing her was on the table and he realized it (when she gets lost on his hometown and she admits it and he hugs her and cries).

In episode 1 and 2 we see how distant and resentful they’ve grown of each other, how they’ve built walls between each other (like when she says he is acting out of character by siding with her and taking her hand) but the moment she is honest and vulnerable (probably it’s been years since that) it dawns on him that she is sick and loosing herself. And it breaks him, because it turns real, that maybe she won’t be saved, that they’ve lost years of companionship they took for granted and both of them could’ve done something to fix things (their talk outside of the supermarket). Him recognizing he forgot that love (while she didn’t) and that scene in episode 6 in Germany was top notch, and staying by her side with Queen’s take over and also recognizing his own mistakes (like how Haein tells him she never wanted to be alone, and both understand she is talking about their baby; or him saying that he wishes he would’ve asked her about her day back then instead of acting as strangers) for me was enough. Him egging her on to have a reaction out of her, bringing her family to his hometown, being vulnerable with her and recognizing his faults, listening to her and caring, were reasons enough to forgive him.

I was also not a fan of her losing her memory. I think they chose way too many conflicts and they overlapped and we didn’t have enough scenes of them being happy without the threat of her disease. I would’ve either picked the Queen’s take over or her amnesia, both was too much. Especially when the pacing by the end was so bad and they chose to keep her amnesia instead of her remembering. We didn’t have scenes of “them” but of HyunWoo and a HaeIn that didn’t feel like HaeIn at times and did not know their past. Like, yes, their past wasn’t perfect, but it was what gave their relationship depth.  And then they chose to skip her falling in love with him or any life milestones between them!!! Like them finding out about her being pregnant again and this time supporting each other and facing the uncertainty together. Their child’s first birthday! We got like a few seconds of them on the steps and then were clubbed with old HyunWoo facing her death and meeting each other again as “souls”. I think it would’ve been a little less shocking if we’d had at least more scenes of them spending their life together before that scene. Especially after most of the drama they made us bawl our eyes out.

One of the worst things they chose to do was that the reason they both grew distant and started to resent the other was not addressed with the depth and care that it should’ve been. They both hurt each other. HyunWoo felt that his feelings were not taken into consideration by HaeIn and that she did not care as much as him (shown by his surprise by the date being her passcode) and that he was not given space to grief. Like he grew up in a family in which they talk things together and support each other, that’s the way he is able to bear sadness, and HaeIn closing off emotionally and being on the defensive made him feel isolated. Meanwhile, HaeIn has already suffered the loss of a family member and she was blamed and resented by her mother for it, so it makes sense that because of that experience and the guilt and trauma of the miscarriage she was going through she thought HyunWoo would do the same, especially after seeing that he moved his things out of their bedroom. He did it because he felt hurt by her breaking down the nursery and not giving him space to grief, but it was how she was taught to grief: walk around it, pretend it did not happen and don’t talk about it (like how her father was going to turn the page of the family album when there was a photo of her older brother). I feel like the way they started to approach it was on track: HyunWoo seeing the birthdate being her passcode, HaeIn admitting she never wanted to be alone and HyunWoo understanding she is talking about the miscarriage and realizing he misinterpreted her back then and the look of regret when he apologizes and hugs her. But I think they should’ve talked about it sooner (like when they’re in his apartment) instead of the gloss over they did on the final episode when she still does not remember a lot of what they went through.

The drama started out great but I feel like the screenwriters didn’t understand the characters enough and thought we needed big action scenes to be impressed and hooked. Instead, it would’ve been better if it stayed as more of a character study on how for love to be kept alive it needs to be nourished, it needs work and communication and respect between each other.  Jiwon and Soohyun are amazing actors and have the range to bring those scenes to life, so it’s a shame that the writers chose to sideline them. Tbh, Soohyun and Jiwon were the reason I kept watching, especially by the end, I can say that the last two episodes are some of the worst episodes of the drama.

I love HyunWoo and HaeIn, and it’s been a while since I’ve been so hooked with a drama and the actors had the ability to make me care so deeply about their characters.

“Love doesn’t just sit there, like a stone, it has to be made, like bread; remade all the time, made new”  by Ursula K. LeGuin  reminds me of their relationship.

[pygmi-says-hi]

writing tips - fictional religion

I'm gonna be honest, writing a religion is probably one of the hardest things you could do as a fiction writer. Religion is such a prevalent topic and so multifaceted. It's fascinating, but hard as hell.

This probably needs to be two parts because of how much information is out there (I'll link some sites below!).

What purpose does it serve?

Why are you creating the religion? Is the main conflict about theological differences? Is it just atmospheric?

Depending on your answer to those questions, it'll change the level of depth required for the development.

If it's a minor addition, don't worry too much about researching all the ins and outs. If it's the main conflict and/or occupation (priest, cleric, etc) of your character and book, you need to put in the effort.

Pantheons

Probably the most common in fantasy, pantheon religions are polytheistic, meaning 'multiple deities.' Pantheons are also commonly misrepresented.

For a pantheon to work, it needs to have balance. Gods are usually associated with common natural, physical, and emotional occurrences. And there are two sides to every coin. If there is a god of death, there must also be a god of life. Every reaction has an equal and opposite reaction.

Underdeveloped pantheons have uber-specific deities, like the god of fireballs (stay with me) but no god/dess of harvest? Huh.

Pantheons are not excuses to add a religious element to a character's powers. Realistically, a civilization would have no reason to worship a Fireball god. It doesn't help or support their society.

Religion serves its people. If it doesn't have a benefit to them, why is it there?

Societies often structure their methods of worship around the way they structure the civilization. Think of it like a relationship (bear with me).

If you like making pottery, you're going to give the person you care about little pieces of pottery to show your appreciation. You're not gonna randomly start making side tables and give them an ottoman. If you live long distance, you'll arrange your dates so it's an equal commute towards the both of you, not fifty miles away from anywhere convenient.

The methods of worship need to make sense.

Can I use religion to give my character powers?

Sometimes.

Religion as a basis for character powers or development is interesting, but you need to do some creative thinking for it to read well.

Suppose you want your character to have fireball powers (we'll just stick with the analogy). Rather than having them worship a fireball god to receive these powers, maybe there is a god of fire. They worship the god of fire dutifully, and in turn the deity bends fire to the cleric's will. Then the cleric can choose to make fireballs.

Why do I need to be so careful about religion? It's fiction, right?

Yes, of course it is! And honestly, as long as the rules your religion subscribes to are consistent and make sense regarding the rules of your fantasy world, anything goes. Problems only arise when the religion is underdeveloped and lacks the explanation needed for the audience to appreciate it.

Major tip before you start writing a religion (specifically religious wars). If you are creating a religion based off of a real ethnicity (West African, Japanese, Indian, Latino, Jewish, Scandinavian, etc) PLEASE GOD HOLY MOTHER OF EVERYTHING do your research. What could seem like an innocuous representation could contain a harmful stereotype. "but silas, why do I have to do all that? won't people understand it's just fiction?"

no.

You are deciding to undertake a very precise responsibility of creating mythology based on a real cultural group. that means you need to be respectful. You're using their background, be nice with it.

xox i love you guys!

sites:

Writing Fantasy Religion

Pantheon Religions

[powerpuffobsession]

All this Charlie and Lucifer conflict feels so fake and thrown in for drama points. Because it's hard for me to sympathize when watching two characters who barely have any hardship in their lives, imitate having to go through hardship. That's why I kinda rolled my eyes at "More than anything" part of the episode. No tears whatsoever

The whole daddy issues problem doesn't even make sense from a realistical stand point. You both are non aging, powerful (although Charlie refuses to use her powers, but they are clearly there) beings who barely have any problems in your lives. You were even spared from the exterminations, even though Heavens could have easily disposed of a fallen angel and his off spring a long time ago! (and Charlie just had to abuse that generosity) Everything is just dandy, lots of viewers of Hazbin hotel would kill for a life like that. Sinners who get killed can f*ck themselves. They are criminals, after all

Lucifer, I understand being upset the first few years after your wife left. But seven years? Wouldn't that get old? When you are a powerful being who has an already grown up daughter who doesn't need to rely on you, unlimited resources and his own kingdom (that he got for screwing up humanity, mind you)? Overkill much. Just find yourself a new love or go fix your damn hell ring and maybe ensure that rapists actually go to the boiling pot instead of owning a glamorous business to thrive on

Charlie is less guilty than her father, as he did ignore her and failed to teach her basic skills of standing up to herself and ruling a place. If a rich guy fails his kids that way, he's trash, because like, dude you've got resources and time, just use them to do bare minimum for your child. So Charlie's problems with running the hotel make sense (even though if she truly was passionate about helping someone, she would have made an effort to plan it out more properly so that the redemption doesn't happen by accident in a damn war)

That way, Lucifer's complaints about his life make me want to just roll my eyes. Even back in heaven he had one job of not giving the humans the damn fruit, I sincerely doubt that he, as one of the seraphims had no idea of the consequences of that. If he didn't wreck up his siblings' work, he would have still be living in Heaven. And, as I mentioned earlier, he didn't even get punnished properly for the fruit incident - wings still intact, all his powers and the ability to just magic up any goods out of thin air or to defend himself against a freaking angelic exorcist, let alone sinful criminals, is still there. So what's the problem?

Generally, what stops both Lucifer and Charlie from communicating/meeting each other? They never had any sort of fight that would have made their relationship truly sour, and Lucifer is not a heartless calculating abusive father he was believed to be in the pilot era. Charlie is barely loaded with the hotel work, she basically just plays trust games with sinners, and that's all

They like, stay away from each other when they have no reson to and then whine about it. Duh, some irl families who are actually struggling with life and actually have little time and vital strength do communication better than a fking rich magical seraphim and his daughter

And yes i'm jealous of a cartoon fallen angel. In canon biblical lore, Lucifer is actually punished for his actions. But not this Lucifer. You say Adam is spoiled? And least with him there's a possibility that he had to survive on Earth and go through some serious crap before earning his place on Heaven. Lucifer meanwhile can shelter himself in his castle for 7 years wasting time making ducks and be just fine! I even dare say, he fakes his depression because he thinks it's cool or smth. Put the guy on a minimum wage job and other difficulties of a normal human life, and the pussy'll just die

[katherinakaina]

Think what you will of Daniil Dankovsky but his story is NOT a white savior story. Not even a little bit.

And it's peculiar, isn't it? We are so accustomed to white savior narrative, so when we see a character who's in the perfect spot to become one, but doesn't, we read him as hostile. How can you see this struggling population and NOT decide to lead the revolution to save them? Are you a heartless monster?

Racism in Pathologic is not its strongest storyline. But it is fairly realistic. It shows all aspects of discrimination. Starting with slave labor segregation and lynchings and ending with prejudice microaggressions and cultural appropriation (*coughs* Stamatins) simultaneously with cultural genocide. We see how the whole society is shaped by this conflict and there's not a part of it that isn't affected by colonialism. Once again the town on Gorkhon is our world.

And into this centuries worth of history arrives a dude on a completely unrelated mission. And he is appalled by what he sees but what is he going to do? Singlehandedly solve racism? Maybe one day, but here and now he has a bit of a more urgent situation at hand.

In the end Daniil seems to be resenting the town. Not as much as to destroy it just out of pure hate. But he will not go out of his way to save it either. And he thinks (I think he is correct) he has a valid reason why it should be destroyed (still, it shouldn't be).

People sometimes read his hatred for the town as his disdain for the local culture but the culture is racist! Most of the town is segregated white settlement. Most of the people Daniil interacts with are white racists and he hates them.

He doesn't believe in local myths but why would he? He was not raised with them and he does not fetishize them either (*coughs* Vlad the Younger). He does believe in local medicine and his own vaccine is based on Isidor's methodology (that's why Rubin actually creates it, not Daniil). So he is willing to adopt the practices that are useful but now I gather people will say he exploits them (which is a more interesting point, I'm surprised that I've never seen it made before).

So yes, Daniil doesn't abandon everything to save the Steppe culture and liberate the Kin. He believes that the town's foundation is rotten to the core. The plague is a metaphor for fascism and it keeps coming back. We have to start anew. The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house. And Daniil is willing to bulldoze all of it.

You could even say that in some galaxy brain take way he IS a white savior, because he destroys the entire system. But no. The future utopia led by the Kains does not look like a multiracial democracy. It seems like the Kin were pretty much severed from their land and culture even more, if they even survived at all. It is not good. I disagree with the utopian ending.

Daniil is not a character who can do it alone. A white guy will not be able to consider everything when it comes to the perfect future. He can't figure it out. He is not a savior. It is not because he's malicious. But oh boy does he have shortcomings.

Give him a girl friend and a steppe friend. I bet they'll be able to get along.

[arvandus]

Hey, I wanted to ask what do you think of how hori concluded the todo fam arc and dabi’s vague ending? Do you think he’s alive or dead? Hori could’ve showed us at least a grave or a shrine. I just wanted closure :(

So, I'm going to preface this by saying that I have not actually READ the ending to BNHA, and gathered info just from the tumblr community. I checked out of the manga a while ago because it felt like Hori's heart wasn't really in it.

To be honest, compared to the ending the others got, I'm glad that his was left vague enough to be open to interpretation. After all, how many times has he been assumed dead/would die soon, only for him to give the middle finger and keep going?

I feel like Hori's feelings around the Todoroki family and Touya in particular run a little bit deeper than the others, just with looking at how much attention he put into the backstory. I really feel like it's been a combination of mixed messages, swinging back and forth between empathizing with Touya and being an Enji fanboy.

Hori's portrayal of Touya's childhood was VERY sympathetic, and Enji was shown as very monstrous in some of those panels (and in fact, the parallel was done with Shigaraki and Toga's pasts as well). Even his titling of the chapters (e.g., Wrong Way to Put Out A Fire) showed that the responsibility for Touya's downfall fell onto the parents rather than him as a child. I also liked how pathetic he showed Enji was after Touya's reveal, and when his family came to visit him in the hospital. Rei's commentary towards his sniffling was so refreshing, I was cackling and fist-bumping the air. Finally, I really loved that Natsuo never forgives Enji and straight up tells him he doesn't want him in his life.

But at the same time, Enji gets to continue on with life more or less without any repercussions, or at least that's the impression I've gotten from the snippets I've gathered on other peoples' posts and the manga screenshots I've come across. Yes he's handicapped and will never be a hero again, but at the same time, it felt like there's a lack of social/societal consquences. Hawks never stops being his fanboy, and Rei stays with him (God knows why)... I dunno. It just left a bad taste in my mouth. I think it's because he never really figured out how to step away from his hero persona long enough to really prioritize his family until it was too late. Enji should have immediately been out there looking for Touya after his big reveal. As a parent, I can tell you for a FACT that if I found out my child wasn't actually dead but was in fact alive and running around out there hurting others, you bet your ASS I'm dropping everything and going after them. Also, Enji should have been the one to face off with Touya in the final conflict, not Shouto. He should have faced him, lost, and then Shouto could have stepped him to have his emotional brotherly conflict with Touya just as it happened in the manga. Enji's behavior was cowardice until the very end, and his apology to Touya at the very end fell very very flat for me.

Maybe Hori is just going for the more realistic portrayal of how complex family dynamics can be, and how forgiveness really depends on the person. I also think that Hori's idea of what counts as a good redemption arc for Enji differs from what I think a good redemption arc for him would be. So in that sense, I just have to accept that Hori has his own take on the entire Todoroki family story and that it differs from my own.

But, I digress... back to Touya. I've always had the feeling that Horikoshi has had a soft spot for Touya especially, and I think this implied ending of Touya not surviving rather than showing it explicitly like he did with the others demonstrates that. So I'd like to think that Touya somehow survives and heals.

Overall, I think the ending of BNHA has fallen a bit flat because there has been so much emphasis on the grey areas between villains and heroes, and I always felt that the students were intended to save them. And that was especially Shouto's goal with his brother. The thought of him failing in that goal and not being able to ever have soba with him feels like such a waste of his character arc as well as Touya's.

So, I'm going to take it as-is. Touya's ending is intentionally ambiguous to allow the fans on both sides of the fence to pick the ending that they want (Hori, you coward). My ending for him is that he heals (although never completely of course) and eventually gets to have soba with his brother. It's not only what Touya deserves, but it's what Shouto deserves too.

[girl4music]

Another thing that Wynonna gets right that Buffy didn’t. I say “right”. What I mean is it’s what I prefer to see. Moral greyness. Without stipulations. Just the simple “I’m a better person than I was before” even when they’re not technically a “person” anymore.

“I do what needs to be done ‘cause I’m a hero. And you know what, yeah, sometimes that makes me a killer.”

“‘Cause I would die to save my sister. Or kill. Anyone. Everyone… I just want to keep my family safe.”

“You can't keep doing this. Killing people and pretending like it doesn't affect you.”

“Right would’ve been shooting that thing and us running for it!”

“He wasn't always a thing, Doc. And if I'm gonna keep killing them and not go crazy, then I need more than revenge!”

“God damn it, Wynonna, they’re bad people!”

“So I’m just supposed to ignore that they’re people at all?”

“You would be dead before you drew.”

“This whole ‘fastest gunslinger in the west,’ that something you proud of? Shooting people who don’t have a chance to fight back?”

“Some people deserve to be shot.”

“Who decides that? ‘Cause the history books say one thing; my family says another. So you tell me, do you deserve a bullet or do I? Maybe, I’ll let fate decide.”

“Whatever side we fight on, the blood we shed to win the war, will damn us all.”

“It’s not a war, Holliday. It’s just a town filled with women who would have us both fight to the death.”

Moral high ground is annoying and preachy. And there’s nothing really to learn from it other than good vs evil. But real people who have experienced both sides know that it’s not that simple or easy. Not at all.

Buffy touches on this a few times. But the problem is they don’t really explore it properly. And they keep to the moral high ground of a hero is always the law. And what that does is it prevents any real moral greyness because the heroes are always the heroes and the villains are always the villains: it’s not how it works.

So in this way - I actually prefer ‘Wynonna Earp’ because they properly explore what should have been explored in ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer’ but never is. They have the conversations - the conflicts - but they don’t have the “am I really a hero for killing them”? And the reason why they don’t is because the canon lore is “demonic possession” rather than demonic corruption. Yet the arcs themselves show otherwise.

Wynonna leans into what is shown in the arcs.

They don’t reinforce the canon lore when the canon lore no longer makes any sense because of the arcs.

With Wynonna I get good AND evil and the fluctuation and the questioning of which side is which…

With Buffy I get “I am the Law and that’s that” when the other characters are challenging the hero on this. But the hero doesn’t learn anything from that conflict.

Because the hero always has to be the hero in the end.

There’s a mountain of war veterans that will say this isn’t realistic. It’s not the way any of that ever works.

So in this way - yes, Wynonna is better than Buffy. And I would even say Wynonna is a better lead protagonist because her flaws are on display and are addressed as flaws rather than just qualities and skills that she has to have to win a supernatural war that she never really gave any true consent to be the collateral damage for. I don’t think anyone realizes that Buffy isn’t a militant. She’s not a trained professional like Riley and Sam are. And she gets a Watcher to “train” her who isn’t either. She pretty much learns to deal all on her own which is inspiring but isn’t realistic. And is - in reality - illegal.

And I don’t know. Maybe there’s some kind of appeal in watching that very nihilistic point of view. But I would have preferred it if this woman got to retire and let everyone else that could and would fight take over. And I would have preferred it if they addressed that maybe not everyone on the side of “evil” had to die ‘cause if you make that damning call then you’re not really on the side of “good” either. You just play god. And I’m not saying Buffy did that but there was no real exploration of whether that is how she’s ending up even when it was revealed that she was part demon. Made from a demon. Whatever. You know what I mean. Belonging to the dark as much as the light.

And so Wynonna did what Buffy was too afraid to do.

And in the end - for me - it just leaves it all empty.

The Chosen One is a difficult concept to work with. But it’s compelling to watch because it’s difficult.

And I just think ‘Wynonna Earp’ did it better in the end. I think it ended the “right” way that it should.

I think it comes down to the differences in the creators/showrunners. Joss Whedon VS Emily Andras. Whedon took the nihilistic approach because he is nihilistic man. Andras took the realistic approach.

So the point I’m making is nihilism is not realistic. And it’s not realistic because there is meaning in the world. It’s just that you have to be brave enough to make that meaning. To determine that reality for yourself without being the arbiter of everyone else’s fate or destiny. Otherwise you just end up being what did that to you. And in all honesty I just think Joss Whedon gave up. You can say that he was always a monster anyway - and obviously cast confessions have testified to this - but I think it’s more likely that he just turned into one because he stopped believing that heroes are corruptible and villains are redeemable eventually - which is the reality of real people. Real human people. And then you have Emily Andras writing the complete opposite to that. Showing the complete opposite of it. That morally grey is the nature of everything that exists. It is only our choices that define who we are. And we step into the role of either hero or villain depending on which it is we choose to do in the moment. It is never inherently the only way to be. And this same philosophy goes for whether human/mortal or not because conscious beings are still real people.

Good VS evil isn’t a good story to tell if there’s no point to it that is actually relatable to real people. Everybody loves the metaphorical unpinnings of Buffy. There’s been books and thesis after thesis written on the cleverness of the metaphors used to tell the story. The deeper aspects to the teen supernatural concept. And it is clever. Absolutely. I’m not denying that at all. But I just think it fell flat as far as the final season goes because Whedon and Co just seemed to stop caring. And it’s just sad to say that others have done it better precisely because it ended better because they cared.

Maybe Whedon drove himself to nihilism in the end 😔

[holly-mckenzie]

Hey! What were your thoughts on S3 of Starstruck? It went in a very different direction than I was expecting and as a viewer I feel conflicted - I think it’s brilliantly written and reflective of reality and there’s a lot of beauty in what’s been explored this season, but emotionally I also feel a bit thrown.

hi clara!

Okay. So I have spent the last week thinking about it (I even explained to my counselor how I was a child of divorce now 😂)…. But I still fully haven’t grasped all of my thoughts so this may all sound a bit rambling. Spoilers Ahead!

First and foremost, in my most recent re-watch of Starstruck I kept on thinking about how Jessie loves Kate but… kinda brushes Kate’s friendship as not as important as a romantic one (e.g. - the speech she gives to Joe in S1E5). With this in mind, I do really love that most of the relationship tension and the overall love story of S3 is between Kate and Jessie. Their friendship is so precious to me and I adore it so much. So I do love the way that’s explored in the new season. Kate and Jessie are the real love story of Starstruck.

Other things I LOVED is Sarah and Steve’s relationship. They are honestly so funny, and I adore them so much! I also did like the evolution of Joe's character. Minnie Driver is always amazing as Cath, Shivani is so funny, and I loved Alice Snidden as Amelia (more on that later).

Now unto the important things. I kinda knew that S3 would go this route bc I felt like if it had followed traditional romcom tropes the next step would be marriage. Which I really couldn’t imagine Rose doing.

So when S3 was renewed I had a feeling that it would either go the marriage route, the we are never ever ever getting back together route, or something else completely.

But realistically it would be the breakup. I was hoping that the ending would be kinda unresolved where there was a chance that Jessie and Tom could get back together in the future. But Alas. However, this did not mean I was not in a complete in a state of panic leading up to S3 (if you follow me on Twitter, you know).

Honestly, imo if S3 was doing the we have different partners I FIRMLY believe that Jessie should have been with a woman, and Tom should have been with a woman of colour.

Me at Clem:

The new characters fell SO flat to me. Clem is nice enough and so agreeable, which I think is supposed to act as a foil to Jessie. This is obvs in the way that Clem wants marriage and kids. But I also feel like you see it in the way that Clem isn’t threatened by Jessie, which is a very stark contrast to the way Jessie reacts to Tom’s co-star in season 1, and the fight they have after.

And Liam is just there. No offense to Liam, but none of his scenes really felt like they could compare to the banter and chemistry between Jessie and Tom throughout the seasons. To quote the modern philosopher of our time:

So it was really hard to care about him and the relationships. Also something about his very existence reminded me of this interview Rose did during S1. Though that could be a nothing.

Overall I really didn’t care about these new relationships, bc watching Jessie and Tom in S1-2 is just so electric. The banter, the back and forth. The way they smile at each other, and make each other laugh.

But maybe that’s the whole point, that you could have electric chemistry with someone. But it could also all be meaningless bc that person is not the person for you.

As for Tom, I recently got asked if he was written as an asshole. But I don’t know how to answer that. Was he shit for cheating on his fiancé? Yes. But did I care that he cheated on her with Jessie, no.

I do feel like I’m not a huge fan of the way that Tom was written in this season. Throughout the show he is only shown in relation to Jessie or his work, with the exception of the Christmas episode. But I bc in the new series he isn’t with Jessie we REALLY see how his character is flat.

Now I do realise that it’s bc the show is about Jessie, but it still felt lacking. The fact that Tom doesn’t seem to have friends outside of Jessie’s circle is wild. The fact that he is getting married, and we don’t see his parents or brother is so 💀

Especially since Tom is a full Brown man (that is apparently somewhat religious). And somehow his family isn’t part of any of the wedding prep? That’s so wild and unbelievable (for me as a brown woman). I do realise Vinay is an asshole but I genuinely wish he had made an appearance in S3. It could have been so funny and it would have added some nuance to Tom's character. (We see Dan again, but not Vinay or the rest of Tom's fam? Come on!) I would love to see Vinay’s opinion on Jessie changed and his feelings toward the wedding, kiss, stag, etc.

I do understand Rose and the writers wanted to explore these ideas. And this is something she has clearly been thinking about since Baby Done. I also do think that in the latest series, we explore the anxieties through a queer lens by way of Amelia's speech. It strikes me as fascinating that Alice Snidden is openly bi, and her character is one of the only ones single.

Merryanna Salem, one of the most prolific film critiques of our time, articulated an idea about the queerness of Starstruck, and Queer Relativity in such a nuanced way. I highly recommend you read it. With this in mind, Amelia's speech, and Rose's feelings towards babies, its really not that surprising it ended the way it did.

But at the same time, it really seems like such a shift from the first two series in a way I simply don’t like (or understand). As I previously established Jessie and Tom are SO good together. Their chemistry is unreal, the show is just so bloody cute.

The show sets out to be a romcom, and that is what it does brilliantly in the first two series. Yet in S3, we really see a departure from that genre. It feels more a romantic drama, with comedic elements and I think its REALLY discombobulating. Specifically bc in most romcoms the couple gets together, and in dramas there is more grey area. Because I didn't read S1-2 as anything but a romcom, I didn't even entertain the idea of a break up. So to have it thrown in, in S3 seems so forced somehow.

Especially bc we have seen Tom and Jessie conquer the odds again and again. So to have the writers articulate they just aren't a good fit, and Jessie to say we want different things is strange. Maybe, I was watching Starstruck with blinders on, but it seemed in the previous seasons they were somewhat on the same page. Like even with this idea of Queer Relativity, Tom seems to understand it. He seems content to NOT get married to Jessie in S2 ending and what have you. So to suddenly be presented with a Tom who needs marriage and babies is discombobulating. Again, maybe I watched the show with blinders, but I did not catch the seeds of Tom and Jessie not being compatible, so S3, as you said threw me off.

And on some level I do think it’s kinda a redundant deconstruction of the romcom.

Join me next time where I dissect Starstruck through the lens of Race and Politics (or the lack there of).