#documentary /j if that is desired however...

[hostilecityshowdown]

I'd love love love to hear more about your version of Kevin Nash from that one Heartbreak Hotel fic 🙏

shaking diesel in my teeth and dragging him under the cut

chapter one • additional notes • credit for the AU, lore and character development, original fics, and accompanying material in the series: @cyberslam

this guy. while my little pocket dimension within mango's heartbreak hotel AU is his main 'verse, almost every other time i write diesel, i'm just writing HHAU diese in yet another AU. you can actually thank slater for this one!! they love him so much and are so inspiring for me, and if i could i'd churn out fics based on our conversations and their OCs and headcanons like a machine. slater i am holding ur hand.

in terms of the patented* Diesel Writing Process, his muse is headstrong, stubbourn, and self-centered, and most of the work i do when writing involves convincing him to share the spotlight. my offshoot of mango's universe would be all flowery prose, cerebral horror, and... diesel, suffering largely alone on centre stage, if i couldn't coerce this big lug to cooperate. some aspects of that are still preserved, but i've been able to avoid writing all my chapters in this world as solitary experiences; silent hill one and two deeply impacted me as a tiny xentex, and i always want to write that slow, surreal, murky trudge through dreams and summoned memories laid atop the burnt-out husk of reality that the SH2 hotel section, especially, captures.

*patent pending

diesel loves being the star of his own show, but so does the heartbreak kid - shawn's a begrudgingly necessary fulcrum for diesel, once he decides he has to be. my diesel muse genuinely suffers from OCD, and projecting his compulsions onto other people is an unhealthy coping mechanism of his. shawn likes the attention and benefits enough to encourage and enable this in his own ways, until he's able to take over performing compulsive rituals for diesel, becoming a mandated aspect of the rituals themselves. i wrote an example of this in diesel's testosterone injection, and shawn's absence will leave an impact on diesel's compulsive thoughts and behaviours in the ongoing narrative. shawn likes when people are dependent on him (to his preferred degree, not for anything... substantial. he just likes feeling special.) sure, but the heartbreak kid and, inherently, the hotel, need that dependency.

diesel also collects matchbooks from hotels, motels, rest stops, tourism welcome areas, reservation smoke shops and other native-operated establishments, and casinos, which he started as vinnie vegas. dallas collects poker chips, and kim collects ashtrays, cigarette boxes, and dice. studd much more passively collects coasters and glass bottles (especially tiny ones) but competes with kim for dice. and scotty flamingo, the most notable member of the diamond mine (duh /j)... he likes to swipe cosmetics, towels, notepads - anything free! and sometimes even things that aren't free. he doesn't collect but outright hoards various forms of tickets, too, but that predates the stable. i was going to include a huge section on these habits, quirks, and compulsions, but... in the end, most of that was cut. it detracted from the atmosphere too much, and it started to spoil plans i have, which you can see the beginning hints of in that heartbreak hotel branded ashtray in my most recent chapter contribution.

diesel's muse solidified for me very quickly and easily, and i barely even need to keep notes on him. big wolf keeps track of himself and comes to me with whatever i need when i need it, or chases me down and demands i devolve into a crazed, sweating, dizzied madman, writing twelve thousand+ words in a single sitting with no breaks. always something with this guy. in a diesel/undertaker fic that will eventually see the light of day, i write in his beloved ford bronco. it has a wolf howling sticker on the trunk, an Idle No More bumper sticker, genuine leather upholstery, leather conditioner and a rolodex (with hundreds of names, numbers, and addresses of people who died of AIDS and their loved ones, roadside memorials for 2SLGBTQIA+ people and missing and murdered indigenous women, and various gay clubs, bars, bathhouses, safehouses, shops, farms, and other gay establishments - including many that are defunct even by diesel's modern time) in the glove box, endless atlases for different states and provinces he swaps out as needed (most of these go with him to his truck cabs as needed), and a dedicated, custom case for depeche mode CDs and cassettes. i hope that gives a better overview of the guy he is than i could ever provide in mere words alone /j

[alikharaghanian]

4. DEPICTION Photography and the Corruption of Reality

Perhaps in the past, photography, according to Nicolay Chernyshevsky’s theory, was seen as a reproduction of reality. However, today, with the advancement of cameras and photographers’ deeper understanding of art and their ability to create captivating and artistic scenes, photography seems to align more with Wallace Stevens’ theory, where reality in photography is more like a corruption of reality.

When photography first emerged, it presented itself as a remediation—a medium that could surpass painting in clearly reconstructing portraits and landscapes. However, with the advent of photo editing software and the power of AI generative tools, significant ambiguities now arise when viewing photographs. Questions such as, “Are these images real or simply products of editing?” are becoming more frequent.

It appears that photographs are no longer entirely reliable as documentary evidence. A striking example of this was the 2023 Sony Photography Competition, where Boris Eldagsen revealed after winning that his image had been created using artificial intelligence.

With certain settings in photography, it is possible to capture a scene with a camera and yet detach it from its sense of reality. For instance, the duration of the camera’s shutter being open can result in capturing moments of a moving object or scene that the human eye cannot perceive in reality due to the high speed of the event. Conversely, when the shutter remains open longer, moving objects can appear elongated. These scenes are real and unedited, yet in terms of form and appearance, they deviate from reality.

Additionally, the aperture’s opening and closing also affect the depth of field in the photo. Naturally, our eyes do not have such depth of field and cannot blur the background to this extent. Aperture adjustments can also assist in capturing photos in low-light environments. In this case, a wider aperture tends to stay closer to reality compared to the camera’s shutter settings. The photo collage technique is one of the most transformative methods in blurring the boundaries between reality and surrealism in photographic art. In the past, collages were created by assembling and combining printed real photographs, which still maintained a connection to reality. However, with the advancement of photo editing software today, collages have evolved into creations that are far removed from reality, providing an excellent platform for creativity and showcasing imaginative ideas. In my opinion, photography is gradually returning to its original essence, which is capturing real moments—like a family birthday party, the first romantic kiss, a photo of a childhood neighborhood, or a wedding celebration. With the advancement of special effects, 3D modeling, realistic rendering, and the ability to create any scene we desire, artistic photography is becoming less significant and giving way to new media for creating artistic works. I pursued photography professionally, but I always avoided taking real photos. First, I turned to abstract photography, and then with creating collages, I was able to create things that aligned more with my tastes and interests. In this blog, I will share a few examples of my collages and discuss them.

First of all, the foundation of all these collages is my own urban photography, which represents the most realistic aspects of society and architecture in the heart of a metropolis. By combining my photos with other personas, I have challenged the meaning and definition of the scene. At first glance, it might seem that the collages create a surreal and unrealistic scene, but these collages actually challenge the deeper layers of societal reality—poverty, overcrowding, cultural and historical oppression, and the escape from hard life.

References

• Mitchell, W.J.T. (1994) The Reconfigured Eye: Visual Truth in the Post-Photographic Era. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. •Baudrillard, J. (1994) Simulacra and Simulation. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. • Edmonds, E. A. (2020) ‘A journey from abstract film to concrete interaction’, Digital Creativity, 31(3), pp. 147–155. doi:10.1080/14626268.2020.1781195.

[net-code-com]

Netflix secret codes for documentary fans

Hey readers! Netflix, the world's leading streaming platform, offers a vast library of films and TV shows catering to diverse tastes and interests. Among its extensive content, documentary enthusiasts can discover a wealth of thought-provoking and informative films. However, with the vast amount of content available, finding the perfect documentary can be a daunting task.

Fortunately, Netflix has a hidden gem in the form of Netflix secret codes, which allow users to access specialized categories, making it easier for documentary fans to explore their favorite genre.

In this article, we will delve into the world of Netflix secret codes for documentary fans and guide you on how to unlock the treasure trove of captivating documentaries.

What are Netflix Secret Codes?

Netflix secret codes are a series of numbers that correspond to specific genres or sub-genres within the platform's vast content library. These codes enable users to access hidden categories not prominently displayed on the main interface. By using these codes in conjunction with Netflix's URL, users can unearth a plethora of films and TV shows that cater to their particular interests, in this case, documentaries.

How to Use Netflix Secret Codes?

Step 1: Open Netflix on your web browser and log in to your account.

Step 2: To access Netflix's hidden categories, you'll need to modify the URL. The basic URL structure.

Step 3: Replace "XXXXX" with the desired secret code from the list below, based on your documentary preferences.

Netflix Secret Codes for Documentary Fans

a. Social & Cultural Documentaries - 3675 Discover thought-provoking documentaries that explore the diversity of human societies, cultures, and traditions.

b. Historical Documentaries - 5349 Unearth the past with captivating documentaries that shed light on historical events, figures, and significant moments in time.

c. Political Documentaries - 7018 For those intrigued by the intricacies of politics and governance, this code opens the door to compelling political documentaries.

d. Science & Nature Documentaries - 2595 Explore the wonders of the natural world and delve into scientific discoveries with this code.

e. Biographical Documentaries - 3652 Get to know the lives of extraordinary individuals with in-depth biographical documentaries.

f. Music & Concert Documentaries - 90361 Music enthusiasts will appreciate this code, which offers a variety of documentaries about musicians, concerts, and the music industry.

g. Environmental Documentaries - 5507 Raise awareness about environmental issues and sustainability through impactful environmental documentaries.

h. Travel & Adventure Documentaries - 1159 Embark on thrilling journeys and explore awe-inspiring destinations with travel and adventure documentaries.

i. Food & Travel TV - 72436 Discover mouthwatering food documentaries and culinary travel shows from around the world.

j. True Crime Documentaries - 9875 Satisfy your fascination with true crime stories and investigations with gripping true crime documentaries.

Unlocking the World of Documentaries

Netflix's secret codes open a world of possibilities for documentary enthusiasts, allowing them to tailor their viewing experience according to their interests. Whether you're passionate about social issues, history, nature, or music, these codes enable you to dive deep into the content you love.

Note of Caution

It's important to note that Netflix's library and the availability of content can vary depending on your region and the current licensing agreements. Additionally, Netflix occasionally updates its codes or makes changes to its interface, so some codes may become outdated or inactive over time.

Conclusion

For documentary fans, Netflix's secret codes offer a treasure map to a vast collection of captivating and informative films. By using these codes, viewers can navigate the streaming platform with ease and indulge in their passion for thought-provoking storytelling. Unlock the potential of these hidden codes and embark on an enriching documentary-watching journey on Netflix. Happy exploring!

[queenshelby]

Oppenheimer (Part Two)

Pairing: Cillian Murphy x Reader

Warning: Smut, Fluff

Words: 4,015

Please engage and comment if you like it as this is what keeps the stories going

Ten days later…

Cillian’s hand caressed your breast and he began to cover your neck and shoulders with kisses, always returning to your lips as he worked his way deeper and deeper into your body. You moaned, one arm around his neck, the other clutching at his back as he began to gently make love to you, deep gentle movements of passion and desire, a kind of connection that made you feel like you were everything.

Moving in unison, your bodies quickie and Cillian pushed himself up onto his forearms so that he could look into your eyes as he made love to you. Everything was perfect, everything was special and you held his face in your hands as you gazed intently at each other. Then you pulled him down for another kiss.

Your fires burned slowly, sparking but not spreading too quickly... passion mounted as your moans became deeper, bodies twining.

Cillian pressed himself against you, his groin moving and grinding against your body. You cried out with release, your fingers clutching at him, and as he felt your body tense through an orgasm beneath him, he allowed himself to let go and thrust into you, wanting to hold you and take you as you climaxed. With a gasp, he held you tightly, pressing your groins together as he came, filling you as you writhed together in mutual ecstasy.

Breathing slowed, limbs relaxed, and your blinked away a tear brought on by the intensity of your union until, suddenly, you heard a loud and somewhat annoying scream.

‘There is a fucking spider in the shower. Get up’ your sister began to shout and, just like that, you were ripped from your dream which was a dream you couldn’t quite understand.

Why, on earth, would you be dreaming about Cillian in this way? He was almost twice your age and an actor in your father’s new movie. What on earth was wrong with you? But then you remembered the previous night and realised what had happened after you had just a little too much to drink. You almost kissed! Almost!

But was it just last night, when matters escalated, that you started to think about him in a way that you shouldn’t have? Or did you think about him in this way all along?

Flashback…

It was the first day of prep when Cillian invited you over to his unit for the purpose of getting a good rundown of the scientific works of the man who he was portraying. And, it was that same evening that you sat down on his lounge for four hours straight, explaining quantum physics to this man you barely knew.

He wasn’t even scientifically minded and you wondered whether you would be wasting your time with teaching him about this topic. To your surprise however, he seemed interested in what you had to say and you truly had never met any other actor before who was so deeply invested in their role. He had read books and watched documentaries about Robert J Oppenheimer. He was prepared and you were impressed by his enthusiasm.

But physics wasn’t something Cillian understood easily and when you began to use pieces of pizzas to explain how atoms work, things became rather amusing.

You had a lot fun with Cillian that evening and, evidentially, so did he when he invited you over for another lesson in quantum physics the evening following the next.

According to Cillian, going through the “work” this way was more productive and you tended to agree, although your father questioned your approach and wondered why you had, so suddenly, become eager to teach Cillian the ins and outs of Oppenheimer’s research.

‘It is impossible to explain this stuff to someone when you get interrupted constantly and, clearly, Cillian has other scenes to prepare for as well during the day. He seems to be super invested in this and I am happy to help him out because I know that I am not actually wasting my time’ you said, defending your decision to take up these little crash courses after hours when you returned back home rather late that evening.

‘I told you he was good. He get’s right into his roles’ your father praised him before thanking you for putting in the extra mile.

***

The following evening, which was also the evening before your physics second crash course with Cillian, some of the lead actors of the movie were invited to your house for dinner. This was something your father had always done as he liked to keep the core of his cast engaged and work as a group together.

The dinner was meant to be an opportunity for them to get to know each other personally before filming some of the more intense and intimate scenes.

Your sisters always enjoyed these kinds of dinners and one of your younger sisters clearly had her eye on Jack which you thought was somewhat amusing since he had been hitting on you constantly.

But you were more interested in Cillian that evening as him and Emily were talking about the last movie they had filmed together.

‘This movie scared the shit out of me and, until now, I had no idea that this was you who played Emmett’ you said to Cillian. You were surprised and remembered the movie well as it gave you nightmares.

‘He looks almost twenty years younger without the beard, doesn’t he?’ Emily joked but Cillian simply rolled his eyes as, clearly, he was just a little self-conscious.  

‘Honestly, I just never pay much attention. George Clooney could walk past me in the subway and I would not be able to recognise him’ you explained shyly while sipping on your wine and using your fork to move the peas to the side of the plate.

‘Nice safe. Very polite’ Emily laughed and even Cillian had to chuckle.

‘Don’t worry. I am not even offended. I know that I am getting old’ he joked before watching what you were doing.

‘So, you don’t like chilli and you don’t like peas, huh?’ he observed and you shook your head.

‘And you don’t eat meat’ you observed in turn as his plate had only some of the vegetarian dishes on it and, when he confirmed that he was vegetarian, you asked him about it.

With that, you spent a great time talking about your food choices and other things, ignoring the people around you which certainly didn’t go unnoticed.

You had so much to talk about and making conversation with Cillian seemed so easy and natural for you. You had similar interests. You both enjoyed literature, music, travel and you were both into running. He was funny, polite, intelligent and somewhat weird, making a tone of jokes no one else really understood but you.

But, he was also the first person to leave that evening, using his age as an excuse which was always something that made Emily laugh and tease him about.

‘Yeah, you go home old man’ she joked and just as Cillian was about to say goodbye, you were quick to blurt out something you probably shouldn’t have.

‘Still going for a run in the morning?’ you asked, which was something you had talked about earlier during dinner.

‘I was planning to. Do you want to come?’ he asked politely before extending his invitation to the others as well who, luckily for you, declined the offer. A 5 o’clock start was too early for most of them but you agreed to meet him at the state park at this time nonetheless.

‘Alright, see you then’ Cillian then said before stepping out of the house and, just after he got into the waiting taxi, Florence pulled you aside.

‘You don’t have your eye on Mr Murphy by any chance, or do you?’ she teased after having had one too many glasses of wine.

‘What? Me? No!’ you quickly gasped.

‘Sure? Because you are all flirty with him’ she told you quietly so that no one else could hear her.

‘I am sure. We just get along well. Despite, he’s an actor and in his forties, so absolutely not an option for me’ you pointed out, earning you a chuckle from her.

‘He’s in his forties and your point is?’ she giggled before starting to whisper into your ear. ‘Men in their forties know what they want and they know what they are doing. It’s so much better, trust me. I know what I am talking about’ she teased before changing the topic and you left it at that.

***

The following morning you went for a run with Cillian as planned and that same evening, you gave him yet another crash course in quantum physics.

This time, you had Chinese take away and you were introduced to something called ‘tofu’ after you had told him to simply order a few non spicy vegetarian dishes for you to share. Of course, you knew what tofu was but you certainly never tasted it before.

‘It tastes interesting I guess’ you said after you took a bite, causing Cillian to laugh.

‘You don’t have to eat it if you don’t like it’ Cillian chuckled, knowing that you were pretending to enjoy it and, with that, you put your food aside and looked at him with apologetic eyes.

‘It’s the texture. It’s kind of strange’ you admitted.

‘You don’t need to explain. It’s fine Y/N. I will order you something else next time’ he told you with a hint of amusement.  

‘Next time? Do you think you need another session on quantum physics after tonight?’ you asked.

‘Possibly. It seems rather tricky, wouldn’t you agree?’ Cillian asked.

‘Well, I suppose it is complicated. Do you want to show me what you’ve got so far?’ you asked him, putting some paper and a pen in front of him.

‘Do you want me to do the whole scene?’ he then asked, wondering what you were asking him to do.

‘Yes, show me…convince me that you are Robert J Oppenheimer’ you said as you got comfortable on the lounge and watched.

With that, Cillian began to rehearse his scene and you were forcing him to draw up one diagram after another until, finally, he nailed it.

It looked real and he sounded like he knew what he was talking about even though some of the words he had to use were unfamiliar to him.

He was an amazing actor and you were nothing but impressed when you saw what he could do throughout the course of an hour. Clearly, this was why your father had casted him for the lead role.

‘So, now that you had the chance to ask me a million scientific questions, I have a question you’ you told him as he was opening a bottle of wine.

Nailing these diagrams was certainly a reason for celebration and you agreed to stay for just one glass.

‘Alright, go ahead then. Let’s hope I can answer it’ Cillian chuckled before pouring two glasses of red wine for you both.

‘How do you just pretend to be someone else? I mean, your whole demure just changed when you did that scene and your Irish accent was completely gone’ you asked curiously, causing Cillian to laugh.

‘That’s a difficult question actually. I suppose it’s just practice’ he told you before telling you what he liked about his job and why he chose to become an actor.

‘That’s very interesting. So, what about nude scenes or sex scenes? I know there are a few in this movie. How do you just pretend to do this kind of stuff?’ you asked curiously, earning you another chuckle.

‘Well, you do actually have to kiss and touch another person in front of the camera and that can be really awkward in the beginning. But, you get used to this aspect of your work as you progress in your career. It doesn’t mean anything physically or mentally’ he told you and, as you drank some more wine, the number of questions you had for him quickly increased.

‘Fair enough’ you said, looking into your half empty glass, hoping that he wouldn’t notice that you were an absolute lightweight when it came to alcohol.

‘What does your wife think about the sex scenes though? Does she get upset?’ you then asked bluntly, causing Cillian’s eyes to widen.

‘I divorced her last year so I really don’t care what she thinks anymore’ Cillian admitted and you immediately apologies. Clearly, you had no idea.

‘Oh my god, I am so sorry. I didn’t know. I can get a bit direct after a little bit of wine’ you apologised.

‘Don’t worry. It’s fine’ Cillian reassured you.

‘Do you have kids?’ you asked after a moment of silence.

‘Yes, two boys. They are sixteen and eighteen’ he told you and your chin dropped when you realised that he had children the same ages as your youngest sisters.

‘I know, I am getting old’ Cillian joked as you failed to say anything else and you quickly shook your head.

‘No, you are not. Tell me about them. What are they like? How often do you see them?’ you wanted to know and, with that, you talked about your respective lives for at least two hours while you finished the entire bottle of wine without even realising.

Eventually, at around midnight, you took a taxi back home and were grateful that your parents and siblings were in bed already.

Whilst you were old enough to make your own choices, having stayed at Cillian’s apartment for over six hours was a bit difficult to explain. You had lost track off time and you didn’t want your parents or siblings to get the wrong idea and neither did Cillian.

***

Following that evening, you caught up for runs and saw each other on set, but you missed having your scientific education sessions and banter after work now that he was sufficiently prepared for his scenes.

You enjoyed spending time with Cillian and you were somewhat surprised by the fact that you missed this kind of interaction you had with him during the evenings at his apartment.

It wasn’t until the last day of preparations that you suggested another, final session, knowing that two of his first scenes were to be filmed in a scientific facility in Santa Fe.

You had taken him through that facility with the rest of the crew during the last couple of days but managed to arrange access to the facility again to rehearse the opening scenes on day nine, which was a day you were both meant to have off.

Rehearsing the scenes on site was what your father wanted but he was also unavailable that day as he had to fly to LA for a quick visit at the studio before filming would commence.

‘I am no movie director but I can make sure he knows how to use the equipment without blowing up the building’ you joked, knowing very well that the equipment had been deactivated for the shoot.

‘Take Lucas with you and do it. Thanks Y/N’ your father told you before calling Cillian and informing him of same.

***

On the evening of day nine after the facility had closed for the day, you were able to access it for the rehearsal but, when Cillian and you arrived at the building there was no sight of the assistant director Lucas.

‘Do you know what’s going on?’ Cillian asked and you raised your shoulders and shook your head.

‘I am not sure to be honest’ you began to say before scrolling through your emails and calling your father.

Your father was quick to pick up the phone and informed you that Lucas had to go into isolation, awaiting his results on a COVID test.

According to your father, he had sent you and email but, quite obviously, he had sent it to one of your sisters again instead.

‘Apparently, Lucas isn’t coming’ you told Cillian after you got off the phone with your father and, when you explained to Cillian what had happened, he chuckled.

‘Well, it was only a matter of time for someone to catch this fucking thing I suppose’ Cillian said before suggesting that you get on with it anyway and so you did.

You showed him around the facility again before you went to the experiment room which is where you took a seat and watched on as he pretended to use the equipment while saying his lines.

‘Actually, wrong button Cill’ you told him as he was reaching for the machine.

‘You said the second button to the right’ he pointed out, cocking his eyebrow.

‘No, it is the second to the left’ you told him.

‘Are you sure? Because that one is red and freaks me out a little’ he joked.

‘Yeah. I am sure Cillian and, since the device has been disabled, nothing will happen if you press it. I promise’ you chuckled.

‘Well, if this building blows up it’s your fault’ Cillian said and, just as he did, you walked towards him with the view to give him some reassurance.

With a big chuckle, you pressed the button, wanting to show him that nothing would happen if he had pressed it but then, all of a sudden, he tipped to the side while holding onto one of your arms.

‘Did you feel that? Something isn’t right’ he told you with a stern look on his face.

‘What are you talking about?’ you asked with a little concern.

‘The ground shifted. I could feel it…and I can see some lights flashing outside, can’t you see that?’ he said with a dead serious look on his face and you slowly began to panic.

You were certain that the equipment was turned off, or wasn’t it? There was literally no reason for the ground to move even if the plant and equipment had been left on, but Cillian seemed so certain about the movement and the lights he had seen outside which was what caused you to worry.

With great concern you ran towards the switchboard and, just as you reached it, you heard a giggle behind you which is when you realised that Cillian had played a trick on you.

‘Oh my god, you are such an ass’ you said angrily just as you were about to disable the safety function inside the equipment room. Notably, you had a permit to be in there and operate it. You made sure it was turned off and locked when you arrived pursuant to safety protocols. Yet, his acting was so convincing that he scared the hell out of you.

‘I am sorry, I didn’t mean to…’ Cillian began to say, thinking that he had genuinely upset you but then you began to laugh.

‘You had me there, didn’t you?’ you laughed.

‘I did and you are such an easy target too’ he teased you, earning him a nudge before you suggested that he got back to the rehearsals.

The rehearsals took no longer than an hour as he had his scenes down packed. You once again were fascinated by his acting skills and it was after you were done and you locked up that Cillian invited you for dinner.

‘Do you want to grab a bite to eat on the way back into town? There is that restaurant near the highway I’ve heard a lot about from Emily and her husband’ he told you and your eyes lit up.

‘Do you think they do takeaway? I am just thinking that it might look a bit odd if we are out on our, together…’ you began to stammer, causing Cillian to laugh.

‘I see what you are getting at and I am sure they do. We could go back to my place and watch that documentary you told me about while we eat?’ he asked and you agreed.

***

You liked spending time with Cillian and, whilst you had to maintain a relationship now that you were tasked to work closely with him on his role, you probably liked him a bit more than you should have.

His presence excited you in unusual ways and when he inadvertently touched you on occasion, your heart would skip a beat.

Even though he was over twenty years older than you, you were somewhat attracted to him and you knew that you shouldn’t have been.

You also wondered if he felt the same way. Was this attraction mutual or was he just being polite since you were the daughter of the movie’s director.

You were unsure and, even throughout dinner and following one too many glasses of wine, you couldn’t quite gauge the situation.

What were you even thinking about anyway? After two glasses of wine, this wasn’t so clear to you anymore.

All knew by now was that Cillian’s true, raw and clean nature attracted you in the most unusual way. You hadn’t quite felt such an attraction before, especially not after such short period of time.

There was an instant connection and he wasn't pretentious. He was just himself. No fake emotions. No fake displays. Just the way he naturally was, without hiding behind any curtains. He was unlike anyone you had ever met.

God, he was also so incredibly handsome and you began to notice it more and more as you starred at him, sitting right next you on the lounge.

He had collarbones that had the perfect contour. A jawline that was sharp, but still jagged enough to be real. A voice that could sway dozens of people and eyes that were absolutely mesmerising.

That's what you wanted. You craved for him. His natural body scents. His warmth. And his true, raw self. A shot of oxytocin, dopamine and endorphins was the perfect cocktail that you wished to savour.

‘Are you alright?’ Cillian eventually asked and you snapped out of your daydream which, ironically, happened to be about him.

‘Yes, uhm…I am fine’ you said shyly, causing him to cock an eyebrow and then it happened.

Cillian turned towards you and gently tucked a strand of hair behind your ear, eliciting a small gasp from you.

You were already having goosebumps, and could sense the heat in the air. His hand was there, right on your cheek and he drew closer towards you until, suddenly, he spoke up and pulled away.

‘You got sunburned’ he then told you before quickly withdrawing his hand and all you could do was nod. You thought he was about to kiss you and were somewhat disappointed that he didn’t.

‘Yes’ you said, biting your lips even more nervously now.

‘You should probably put some sunscreen on your cheeks and nose next time’ he then chuckled and you nodded before touching your nose, feeling it burn.

‘Don’t touch it. You will make it worse’ Cillian chuckled, moving your hand away gently with his hand and feeling his touch was remarkable and even somewhat sensual.

‘Well, your cheeks are slightly red too, so…’ you began to say, causing Cillian’s laugh to fade.

‘It’s probably the wine’ he explained before clearing his throat.

You were staring at him and this had become rather awkward. Did he feel the same way, you wondered?

Without the opportunity to find out, Cillian jumped up quickly and got himself a glass of water and you knew that it was time to go home.

‘I should probably go. I see you tomorrow?’ you asked and he nodded before seeing you to the door and wishing you a good night.

What you wanted to do was to kiss him, right then and there, but the small voice inside of your head prevented you from ceasing the opportunity.

It was too awkward and it was wrong. Yet, you couldn’t get him out of your mind. You were so close, but never quite got there. Did he want you too?

Tag List:

@fastfan

@kpopgirlbtssvt

@cdej6

@kathrinemelissa

@landlockedmermaid77

@crazymar15

@m3th-kate (cannot tag)

@damedomino  

@lauren-raines-x

@miss-bunny19

@halleisheree (cannot tag)

@skinny-bitch-juice

@odorinana

@cloudofdisney

@lexiwoods (cannot tag)

@weepingstudentfishhorse

@allexiiisss

@geminiwolves

@letsstarsfalling

@ysmmsy

@chlorrox

@tommyshelbypb

@chocolatehalo

@music-lover911

@desperate-and-broken

@mysticaldeanvoidhorse

@peaky-cillian

@lelestrangerandunusualdeetz

@december16-1991

@captivatedbycillianmurphy

@romanogersendgame

@randomfangirl2718

@dorothea-hwldr (cannot tag)

@missymurphy1985

@peakyscillian

@lilymurphy03

@deefigs

@theflamecrystal

@livinginfantaxy

@rosey1981

@elenvampire21 (cannot tag)

@hanster1998

@mariapaiva13 (cannot tag)

@fairypitou

@zozeebo

@kasaikawa

@littleweirdoalien

@sad-huffle-nerd

@theflamecrystal

@peakymalfoyscullymulder (cannot tag)

@0ghostwriter0

@stylescanbeatmyback

@1-800-peakyblinders

@datewithgianni

@momoneymolife

@mcntsee

@janelongxox

@basiclassy

@being-worthy

@chaotic-bean-of-smolness

@margoo0

@vhscillian

@crazymar15

@im-constantly-fangirling

@namelesslosers

@littlewhiterose

@ttzamara

@cilleveryone

@peaky-cillian

@severewobblerlightdragon

@dolllol2405

@pkab

@babaohhhriley

@littleweirdoalien

@alreadybroken-ts

@masteroperator

@stevie75

@shabzy96

@rainbow12346

@obsessedwithfandomsx

@geeksareunique

@laysalespoir

@paigem00

@lkarls

@suneshinebelledaisy (cannot tag)

@vamp-army

@luckystarme

@myjumper

@gxorg

@eline-1806

@goldenharrysworld

@cristinagronk16

@stylesofloki

@faatxma

@slut-for-matt-murdock

@tpwkstiles

@myjumper

@cloudofdisney

@look-at-the-soul

@smellyzcat

@kittycatcait219 (cannot tag)

@xandria1710

@layazul

@theliterarybeldam

@masteroperator

@monaredd

@alons-y-odinson

@cleverzonkwombatsludge

[nouraalali]

The Progress of LGBT representation in American

Before the events of Before Stonewall that took place in 1969, members of the gay, lesbian and transgender community endured constant attacks and harassment from police raids. At the time, members of the LGBTQ did not know that their sexuality had political implications or that there would ever be a new way of life other than in hiding in shame and wishing the police did not attack them. However, since there was little to no media coverage at the time because the LGBTQ community was not yet identified and categorized, the media did not spend their time, technology, and space covering their events in footage or writings in newspapers or magazines. During the early 1960s, even the word lesbian hardly surfaced in mainstream conversations. Gayism, on the other hand, was considered slang, and the term homosexual had not been coined at the time. The first known use of the term homosexual was in Charles Gilbert Chaddock’s 1892 translation of Richard von Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis, a study of sexual practices. During the 1960s, there was old-fashioned homophobia that revolved around homosexuality, and this would explain why there was little to no media coverage of such topics by the media despite the LGBTQ community's continued harassment by members of the police force. The grassroots riots by the drag queens, butch lesbians, male sex workers, and androgynous youths were deemed so insignificant that neither the Life magazine nor the Time magazine dared to cover them. Even the three main TV stations at the time bothered to send camera operators to record the riots.

In 1969 at a dingy, Mafia-owned bar in Greenwich Village, the LGBTQ community reached a breaking point due to their continued harassment by the police. Unlike previous raids, on this day, they refused to be herded into a police van for their umpteenth arrests. This was the beginning of a six-day route that started in Stonewall Inn to Christopher Street and the neighboring areas.

With such an outbreak, the media could no longer turn a blind eye to the LGBTQ community. The media coverage started helping the public visibility of same-sex sexuality. By airing and publishing interviews and protests of famous LGBTQ members, the public started to accept same-sex orientation as part of their societal sexual preference, and names like gay and lesbian were not as frowned upon as before. The media made it easier for the LGBTQ community by increasing same-sex orientation's visibility and perceived legitimacy. At the time, the idea of being LGBTQ had begun to gradually weaken the predominance of the heteronormative discourse and the formation of homonormative lessons. This means that the media was at the forefront of portraying how gay and lesbian individuals should appear and behave.

Identity Politics and Impact of Grassroots Organization in Redefining the Status of LGBTQ

The post-Stonewall gay liberation movements restored radical energies seeking to align politics with radical social change in American society. Legendary activists such as Barbara Gittings from Philadelphia and Franck Kameny from Washington DC understood that there needed to be a radical change that was big enough to overturn the laws that kept embers of the LGBTQ stuck in their second-class status. After the uproar of the Stonewall resistance, it became a symbol that would inspire solidarity among many homosexuals’ groups worldwide. While historians agree that the Stonewall riots were not the first to initiate the gay rights movement, they agree that it did serve as a catalyst for a new era of political activism, especially those campaigning for equal rights for members of the LGBTQ.

Historians recognize older groups such as the Mattachine society founder in California and flourished in the 1950s. Lilli Vincenz and Frank Kameny, two members of the Mattachine Society of Washington, participated in the discussions, planning, and protection of the first Ride along with activists in New York. Additionally, the Mattachine were enlisted as stalwart Cold Warriors, and they used these anti-communist credentials to push for citizenship rights. However, since the riots, new groups appear such as the Gay Activists Alliance (GAA) and the Gay Liberation Front (GLF). These groups launched numerous public demonstrations whose main goal was protesting the lack of civil rights for members of the LGBTQ. Although the lesbian community was not as affected as the gay community, they shared the desire to have a secure place in the world community at large. Unchallenged by the fear of violence, they ganged up with the gay community to voice their desires for equal treatment under the law and their unwillingness to be considered second-class citizens. These alliances, in many cases, resulted in such tactics as the disruption of public meetings and public confrontation with political officials to force them to recognize members of the gay community. Unlike before, when gay protests were frowned upon by both the media and the public, members of the gay community demanded respect and acceptance after the Stonewall uprising. Many gay and lesbian communities’ members demanded equal treatment in employment, public policy, and housing. Through continued radical activism, a new motion was set in place, one that discourages discrimination against members of the LGBTQ by government policies. I

t was not until December 1973 that the vote to remove homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual was cast, and the motion passed. Historians consider this one of the most significant early achievements of the post-Stonewall LGBTQ movement, especially since the new law undercut all forms of discrimination against members of the LGBTQ. The nondiscriminatory trend was also forced to educate society on the significance and contributions of the gay community. In response to their activism, any jurisdictions in the United States enforced laws banning any form of discrimination against homosexuals. They also increased the number of employment and agreed to offer "domestic partner" benefits similar to life insurance, health care, and in some cases, pension benefits to heterosexual married couples.

AIDS Crisis in Redefining the status of LGBTQ

In the United States, AIDS was particularly prevalent in the urban gay community, especially during its first discovery phase. For this reason, the public developed a somewhat negative perception of lesbians and gay individuals. Although there were not publicly prosecuted, bt members of the lesbians and gay community were singled out and discriminated against, particularly because they were blamed for the transmission of HIV. Gay and lesbian couples were losing their loved ones to this new disease that only seemed to affect the gay and lesbian community; it drove a shockwave of fear of death from contracting the disease in the community. As a result, there was an increased stigma, violation of human rights, discrimination, and physical violence against members of the LGBTQ. Most of the LGBTQ members at the time adopted "social homophobia." They unknowingly contracted and lived with the virus for fear of societal discrimination whenever they thought of testing or healthcare treatment. One research reports that due to this "social homophobia," members of LGBTQ exhibited adverse mental issues such as depression and anxiety, and many were driven into substance abuse and addiction.

For this reason, gays and lesbians were at the forefront of advocacy for research into the disease and the provision of better support for its victims. One such group recognized for this effort was the Gay Men's Health Crisis located in New York City. AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP), founded by Larry Kramer, was another group that actively campaigned to promote political action against the disease through his writing in local chapters in cities such as Washington D.C, Los Angels, Paris, San Francisco, and New York.

Many members of ACT UP were sick with the virus themselves, and they engaged in civil disobedience in protest for increased research on HIV/AIDS in the attempt to find a cure for the virus. Activists such as Kramer made good use of the media when they established AIDS organizations. These organization's central role was to increase media exposure on the risks that members of the LGBTQ were facing as well as encouraging them to come out in huge numbers to fight for their rights. Through such organization and media coverage, it forced the government and private drug companies to pursue research that led to the discovery of ARVs as a treatment for HIV/AIDS and saved the lives of not only the gay community but infected heterosexuals as well.

References

Butler, I. (n.d.). This remarkable history of the fight against AIDS is a guide to the battle yet to come. Slate Magazine. https://slate.com/culture/2016/12/david-frances-how-to-survive-a-plague-reviewed.html

Corry, J. (1985, June 27). Film: Documentary on homosexuals (Published 1985). The New York Times - Breaking News, US News, World News and Videos. https://www.nytimes.com/1985/06/27/movies/film-documentary-on-homosexuals.html

Heiko Motschenbacher, H. (2019, November 18). Language use before and after Stonewall: A corpus-based study of gay men’s pre-Stonewall narratives - Heiko Motschenbacher, 2020. SAGE Journals. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1461445619887541

History. (2018, June 1). How the Stonewall Riots Sparked a Movement | History. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9wdMJmuBlA

Holden, S. (2013, February 20). They wouldn’t take no for an answer in the battle against AIDS (Published 2012). The New York Times - Breaking News, US News, World News and Videos. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/movies/how-to-survive-a-plague-aids-documentary-by-david-france.html

John-Manuel, A. (2019, June 14). Film: "Before Stonewall" Explores LGBTQ pain and resilience. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/stonewall-strong/201906/film-stonewall-explores-lgbtq-pain-and-resilience

Lecklider, A. S. (2021, June 10). The push for LGBTQ equality began long before Stonewall. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/06/10/push-lgbtq-equality-began-long-before-stonewall/

Weiss, A. (2019, June 30). Creating the first visual history of queer life before Stonewall. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2019/06/before-stonewall-documentary-archives-history-invisible/592675/

Winik, M. (2016, November 28). David France’s eyewitness account of AIDS activism. Newsday. https://www.newsday.com/entertainment/books/how-to-survive-a-plague-review-david-france-s-exhaustive-history-of-aids-activism-1.12667430

[camrynjade12]

Lauren Greenfield

Girl Culture, Lauren Greenfield

Generational Wealth, Lauren Greenfield

Lauren Greenfield is a phenomenal photographer who is well known for her exhibitions. She was born on June 28th, 1966 in Boston, however she grew up in Los Angeles. In 1987, she graduated from Harvard with a Bachelor’s of Arts degree in visual and environmental studies. After graduating, she worked as a photojournalist based in Los Angeles and London, publishing multiple works in famous magazines, such as National Geographic, Vanity Fair, and the New York Times Magazine. Over time, she has received many awards for her work. She was awarded ICP’s Young Photographer Infinity Award, along with the National Geographic Society Documentary Grant, and a National Foundation for Advancement in the Arts Award as well. Her work has been featured in many museums around the world, such as the Art Institute of Chicago, Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), the J. Paul Getty Museum, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA), Smithsonian, the International Center of Photography, the Center for Creative Photography, and the Museum of Fine Arts in Houston, Texas. She is mostly known for her THIN, Fast Forward, Girl Culture, and Generational Wealth projects. Out of all of her projects, Girl Culture and Generational Wealth stand out to me the most.

Lauren Greenfield’s photography exhibition named Girl Culture is a collection of photos that show how some girls in today’s day and age primarily use their body as a huge form of identity expression. The photos have an array of girls who differ in age, weight, skin color, and many other things, however they all have the same idea that their body is a large part of their individuality. Each photograph explores the relationship between girls' lives and emotional development in the material world and popular culture. In my opinion, Lauren Greenfield couldn’t have done a better job with this project. As you look through the photos, the point in which she is trying to get across is very evident. You see photos of girls looking at themselves in mirrors trying to figure out how to make themselves look better, or little girls playing dress up with makeup to make themselves feel grown up, or a large group of women in bikinis showing off their bodies. I understand what it feels like to compare what you look like to others, almost wishing you looked like something completely different. As a female, it hits you right exactly where I imagine Lauren Greenfield wanted it to.

In another one of her other projects, Generational Wealth, it visualizes today’s generation and its obsession with wealth. It documents how we as people value materialism, celebrity culture, and or social status all around the world. Lauren Greenfield spent years photographing for this exhibition while travelling to many parts of the globe, to show how we all are alike when it comes to such. She travelled to places such as Los Angeles, Bel-Air, Monaco, Moscow, Dubai, China, and many more. The idea of the project itself isn’t about being rich, but instead, it’s about the desire to be rich and have the luxuries that most do not, which I think at some point all of us can relate to at some point in our lives. I believe this exhibition in particular was a great thing to present to society because it kind of gets you to step back and realize our thoughts or even behaviors when it comes to this subject.

Between Lauren Greenfield’s Girl Culture and Generational Wealth, the two have a lot of things in common because they both have a lot to do with peoples’ opinion of themselves socially and materialistically. Besides story wise, they are similar because the subject in both exhibitions for most of the photos are females. I believe she chose to do this because in society I think that these kinds of things, such as wealth, status, or looks, mean more to girls than they would to men. Therefore, the subject matter for these projects were pretty spot on in my opinion. The way she photographs makes her seem like a fly on the wall. None of her photos are staged to where she told her subject to pose or look a certain way, they’re more documentary than they are narrative, which I think proves her points even more because they are truthful in what they show.

Works Cited :

International Center of Photography. “Lauren Greenfield.” ICP.org, ICP, https://www.icp.org/browse/archive/constituents/lauren-greenfield?all/all/all/all/0

Institute Artist. “Girl Culture.” InstituteArtist.com, Institute Artist, https://www.instituteartist.com/filter/lauren-greenfield-exhibition/exhibition-Girl-Culture-Lauren-Greenfield

Lauren Greenfield. “Generational Wealth.” Generational-Wealth.com, https://www.generation-wealth.com/

[tosikoarts]

SFW Alphabet | L Lawliet

L is here too, wow. You can check tosikowrites tag for more. Warning: there’s a lot, again. 

A = Affection (How affectionate are they? How do they show affection?)

   Here is the thing: сhildren receiving inadequate affection may manifest stunted physical growth despite receiving adequate nutrition, so you can imagine what it can do to the emotional growth and perception of other people. Watari tried to cultivate kindness, mercy, love equally in his wards but it is impossible considering how many orphans reside in Wammy’s house. Little L was more interested in the world’s famous inventions, books, riddles than in other children, and now you have to face the consequences.

  He has to start from scratch. In the beginning L sticks to mimicking affection given to him. You bought him a box of chocolate, he will buy you a box of eclairs. You ruffled his hair, he will play with yours, twisting it on finger. You hugged him and he will hug you whenever feels convenient. At some point he will find new ways of showing his love.

  Understanding that he can do other things too gave him insight. He can try this, and that, and ask you if you liked it or not, wow. L’s curiosity will take over: different types of kisses, various cuddle positions, playful fights, nights out, nights in – he wants to do it all.

  Well, not everything is so rosy. During work, he forgets what he has learned and goes back to his old self. Sadly, this won’t change no matter what.

B = Best friend (What would they be like as a best friend? How would the friendship start?)

 Where to begin? How do you even get this man to be your friend? You don’t. He chooses you and then suddenly, - boom! – you’re best friends forever, it is established fact. But before it happens, he will study you like an ant under a magnifying glass.

There is not a lot of places where he can find a person with an IQ close to his. High chance L will look for a friend among the best FBI agents or fellow detectives.

 Friends who judge people together stay together. He is a person who likes to spill some tea and throw a little shade for entertainment.

  Sarcasm and irony are things that no conversation can go without, so L wants a person who doesn’t get offended right away and can keep up with it.

C = Cuddles (Do they like to cuddle? How would they cuddle?)

   The best way to make L shut up is to cuddle him. No way he will refuse a good cuddle session when in private, but will hesitate if someone else is around.

 He’s 100% touch-starved. All cuddle positions are fine, but if you want to knock him out completely go for face to face cuddle while on his lap. Now he can’t sit in frog-like position (so his IQ has already dropped) and there’s person playing with his hair? Congratulation, L has fallen.

 D = Domestic (Do they want to settle down? How are they at cooking and cleaning?)

D stands for domestic and disaster when it comes to both cooking and cleaning. Even though he would love to settle down and retire from detective work, he has no skills when it comes to the most basic things. His whole life someone else took care for those little unimportant tasks so he could push human mind to its limit, and now it’s too late for relearning. When he tries to cook it never ends up well, you just have to accept this man’s futility and move on.

E = Ending (If they had to break up with their partner, how would they do it?)

There was nothing surprising that he had to break up with you. No other possible ending for such relationship, absurd and strange, and with someone like him. L will choose cruel ghosting because explanation is for losers and emotionally mature people. One day he vanishes from your radar: no more messages, no more calls, nobody knows him because L never met your friends. Conscience continues to nibble him for two weeks or so, he has to continuously fight desire to contact you and he would miserably fail if there was no Kira to occupy all of his free time.

F = Fiance(e) (How do they feel about commitment? How quick would they want to get married?)

Two to three years are enough for him to pop a question. Those months were spent in careful study and relationship viability assessment. Let’s be real, he will put person he likes in tricky situations just to evaluate their reaction. Manipulative? Yes. Cruel? Yes. Weird? Yes. He won’t allow anything extreme though. After all, he learned  a lot about human interactions and developed undoubtedly strong feelings for them. In addition, he will propose during trip to Kyoto, when visiting Kiyomizu-dera  with its famous Love Shrine. Right after “Why would I walk between these   stones if I already found you?”.

G = Gentle (How gentle are they, both physically and emotionally?)

In the beginning his level of gentleness is somewhere between a log and jar of jam. Day by day, week by week L realizes that all of his actions come down to the will to care, love, protect, - and guess what? – these three have to be gentle in order to fit the definition of healthy relationship. He allows himself to grow emotionally. If we talk about physical sphere, he is very cautious from the beginning and tries to fight his natural stiffness so another person can feel his love.

H = Hugs (Do they like hugs? How often do they do it? What are their hugs like?)

It’s another of his weakness. L wasn’t properly hugged as a child and it took a toll on him: when you hug him for first time, he is stiff and awkward. Second time is better, but his hands on your back still feel like a mannequin’s grip.

L grows fond of warmth and comfort pretty fast and he starts to initiate hugs himself. His favorite part of the day is when he tiptoes to you from behind, grabs you in bear hug, and you both fall on the sofa/bed/anything soft enough to leave you without bruises.  

I = I love you (How fast do they say the L-word?)

He suddenly blurted it out after only 3 months of dating. It sounded so innocent, affectionate, sincere, that he shut up for a minute to rethink what just happened. He totally meant what he said, of course, but at the same time, he was not sure it was the right moment, the right tone, even the right choice of words. L will try to explain what he wanted to say in trembling voice but will not say anything coherent because L.exe stopped working.

J = Jealousy (How jealous do they get? What do they do when they’re jealous?)

 Because of how hard it is to let new people in, L becomes very attached to those who have overcome all obstacles and decided to stay in his life. Thus fear of abandonment arises, and so does jealousy.

He is not paranoid about where you are and who you spend your time, but he doesn’t mind  knowing it. You don’t want to use a tracker on your phone? Too bad, maybe, he’s already installed it. For your safety only.

 Easily jealous and will need a lot of reassurance despite immediately becoming distant and silent. It is another way of manipulation because what if you do leave him all alone?

K = Kisses (What are their kisses like? Where do they like to kiss you? Where do they like to be kissed?)

Again, he didn’t have a lot of practice so L’s kisses are sloppy and a little rough. His lips are always chapped because of constant licking and biting during intense thought process, and they feel a little dry on your skin. Because of this (and awkwardness, of course) L will quickly shift kisses into cuddles or hugs. He both prefers to kiss and be kissed on the forehead, since, in his opinion, it is the gentlest expression of love.

L = Little ones (How are they around children?)

The God is dead, house is on fire, Watari maneuvers between flames, trying to save the day. No, seriously, kids love L, he looks like a character from their favorite cartoon, but since he is not the most energetic person, to say the least, they quickly lose interest in him. The best solution for L is to babysit with someone who is more experienced and can guide him through this complicated process. Otherwise, he will make sure all dangerous objects are out of reach and leave children to themselves (if their age allows, of course).

Afraid to have kids of his own. Living in orphanage, he had no real functional family so a thought of parent's duty scares him.

 M = Morning (How are mornings spent with them?)

·   Morning routine depends on L’s messed up sleeping schedule:

If he went to bed last night, it means sleep deprivation finally got to him. Next 12 hours or so he will spend in blanket cocoon, tossing and slightly snuffling. No human power can wake him up, there’s no point in trying.

However if he stayed up all night, you will find out your kitchen turned into delicious sweet buffet. TV is still turned on with weird movie playing, but no sound is coming out of speakers. A tower of empty teacups is about to collapse. L is sitting in the chair, eating two cupcakes at once, lost in thoughts. He will offer you to join him in feast and raise his head a little, exposing his cheek for a kiss. It’s 5 am. Sun is rising and erasing last stars from the sky. Life is good.

N = Night (How are nights spent with them?)

·Nights out are rare, most of the times you stay inside, eating take-out and watching true crime documentaries. He still cannot decide whether they are dumb or interesting, so he keeps watching and changing his opinion with every new episode. After you go to bed, L will lay down next to you. Sometimes he will fall asleep, cuddling you and nuzzling into your neck. Sometimes he will get up and do God knows what.

O = Open (When would they start revealing things about themselves? Do they say everything all at once or wait a while to reveal things slowly?)

Well, he gives you fake name, always lies about his job, and holds back many details about his life… L wants to open up, he really does, but there’s no way he will do it. To every question he has a prepared half-true answer. Everything related to detective work is hidden behind seven seals and will be never presented to you unless you’re from FBI.

P = Patience (How easily angered are they?)

The embodiment of serenity, L never gets angry in classical sense. He may sulk, turn to sarcasm, shower your with stinging comments or, on the contrary, suddenly stop talking, but you’ll never see him red-faced, screaming, swearing right and left. He doesn’t have time to waste energy on such silly thing. It takes a lot to make him mad. After he calms down, L will continue make bitter remarks about thing that pissed him off for weeks.

Q = Quizzes (How much would they remember about you? Do they remember every little detail you mention in passing, or do they kind of forget everything?)

Not that attentive, really. You would expect him to remember a lot but he is always busy chasing exceptional criminals and his brain erases many details, both minor and major. For example, he can easily forget your Birthday and congratulate you both before and after it.

L never fails to remember anniversaries thanks to phone reminders. However, if he doesn’t check his phone that day, he will forget about them as well.

R = Remember (What is their favorite moment in your relationship?)

No matter how trite it may sound, his favorite moment is their first kiss. L clearly remembers his heart beating deafeningly loud and palms sweating like he’s kid who got in big trouble. There is no picture left in his memory, only feelings and crazy thoughts, terribly matted together. After it happened, L couldn’t even make a witty remark. Later that day he sat in front of overflowing cup of tea and slowly realized how little happiness he had felt before.  

S = Security (How protective are they? How would they protect you? How would they like to be protected?)

Since he did everything to protect himself first and then, - just in case, - put a spying app on the phone of his loved, a satisfactory sense of security drowns out all of his possible fears. If anything happens, there’s already a rescue plan waiting to be executed.

T = Try (How much effort would they put into dates, anniversaries, gifts, everyday tasks?)

Let’s say he is trying, he is trying his best every day.

When it comes to presents, L will go for advice to Internet, rarely to Watari, and choose gift as close as possible to your interests. Dates are all on you though, because he feels so strange when he has to plan something for you two. On a subconscious level, he is afraid to ruin everything.

Tries even harder on anniversaries (if he remembers about them) and you either have the best day of your life, when he does whenever you want, or you are all alone wondering what the actual heck. In short, it’s all or nothing situation.

U = Ugly (What would be some bad habits of theirs?)

L is obviously manipulative, you can’t justify him. Some manipulation techniques are so integrated in his thinking and speech that it is impossible to get rid of them. Like if gaslighting was an Olympic sport, he would have all golden, silver, and bronze medals.

It seems like the opposite to the first point, but L also loves to be inappropriate straightforward. You know, moments when you understand what you feel but when another person vocalizes it or comments on it, you absolutely lose your shit? That’s what we talk about.

Quirkiness. I don’t really think this needs explanation. The totality of his strange habits can be a very repulsive sight to an ordinary person.

V = Vanity (How concerned are they with their looks?)

Watari is more concerned about his looks than he is. L never buys his clothes, his wardrobe is minimalist’s dream and consists of few pieces of monotone clothes, three pairs of shoes, and warm jacket for a fall/winter season. He doesn’t like brushing his hair, bites his nails to the blood, but absolutely adores hot bubble bathes. Looks do not matter when all people see is the letter L in Gothic font.

W = Whole (Would they feel incomplete without you?)

Depends on time spent in the relationship:

 It’s stupid to expect L to suffer tremendously if you leave in first two months. When you are here he is a little bit happier, when you are not he is not that concerned. There’s still a high chance you’ll see him as he sees himself and leave, so why would he bother? It’s almost a painful expectation for another person to give up. If it ends, nothing will change, end of story.

Later L starts to catch himself worrying that someone finally climbed over the wall of his alienation, and it doesn’t seem like they are planning to leave any time soon. The closer they get, the scarier it is. If you suddenly cut all ties, he will be heartbroken, his face is emotionless like always but he is still hurt deep inside.

If anything happens a lot later in relationship, like year or two, L’s reaction will be calmer. He is grateful for everything they had and shared with him, for every moment of happiness, so he doesn’t feel like they can leave completely now. They will remain in his memory and his heart and because of it he won’t feel “incomplete”. A little bitter, but not hurt or emotionally torn apart.

If there’s any possibility that his loved one was killed by Kira, L will be furious. He will turn over every stone, use everything he can to avenge them and bring a peace to their memory.

X = Xtra (A random headcanon for them.)

It’s scary how much time L spends in frog-like position with back hunched. Therefore I feel like he will be ecstatic if someone offered him a good back massage to relax those tense muscles.

Overall, he loves random spa days when you two spend time in sauna, hot springs, yoga class etc. This probably would be his present on your first anniversary.

Some children were obsessed with dinosaurs, some were obsessed with superheroes, but L was obsessed with occultism, urban legends, haunted things, unexplained disappearances, and ghosts. His obsession died but its influence didn’t. Why else would he be so scarred and intrigued after hearing about Shinigami?

Y = Yuck (What are some things they wouldn’t like, either in general or in a partner?)

Just like Light, he wouldn’t stand blatant stupidity. Even if there’s something to compensate it, he will grow tired of dumb questions or over-all behavior. Oh, and he will give his comments on it whenever possible too.

Nosiness and bad boundaries. If he keeps some information to himself, it is not because of luck of trust. As a world’s best detective, he has many reasons to dodge personal questions to protect his work from interference and himself from possibility of getting killed.

He doesn’t like loud noises but can put up with it if needed with his collections of different ear plugs.

Z = Zzz (What is a sleep habit of theirs?)

It’s a common knowledge L’s sleeping schedule is non-existent. It has been like it since the day he took his first case and nothing has changed since. Watari keeps an eye on how many hours L stays awake and suggests him to rest from time to time but it rarely helps. Once L got so exhausted he straight up started hallucinating about having an adopted child and it scarred the hell out of him. After this incident he takes Watari’s advice more seriously.

L tried different versions of polyphase sleep at least once. Non of them worked, he ended up even more tired and frustrated, lost feeling in one of his arms, then broke a cup because of it.

Also L can sleep everywhere, no matter how uncomfortable he is. In the chair, leaning on the wall, on the floor – it all works for him unless there’s a loud noise in the room.

[dweemeister]

Kiss of Death (1947)

When 20th Century Fox put together the pieces to launch a production of film noir Kiss of Death, the picture was to be a vehicle for leading man Victor Mature. Mature had impressed Fox’s chief executive, Darryl F. Zanuck, in a supporting performance as Doc Holliday in My Darling Clementine (1946). Zanuck wished to reward the Fox contractee with a starring role, buying the rights to the film’s story with Mature in mind. But no one at Fox expected what would happen next: an actor debuting in his first film role would overshadow Mature. Kiss of Death marks the cinematic debut for Richard Widmark, best-known at the time for his Broadway work in pleasant, romantic comedy roles. For his first movie appearance, Widmark – and I don’t write something like this lightly – provides one of the most terrifying debuts in film history. This is not to downplay the performances (of Mature, Brian Donlevy, or fellow debutant Coleen Gray) or the filmmaking, but Widmark’s performance alone make Kiss of Death – directed by Henry Hathaway, from a screenplay by Ben Hecht and Charles Lederer – an essential film noir.

After a failed jewelry store robbery on Christmas Eve, ex-con Nick Bianco (Victor Mature) is offered leniency from New York City Assistant District Attorney Louis D’Angelo (Brian Donlevy) if Nick can provide the names of his accomplices to the robbery. Against all common sense and in the belief his accomplices will take care of his wife and daughters, Nick refuses. He is handed a twenty-year sentence in Sing Sing. Several months into the sentence, he learns that his wife has committed suicide following a rape by one of his accomplices* and that his daughters have been handed over to an orphanage. Former babysitter Nettie Cavallo (Coleen Gray) divulges this news to Nick, who then indicates his desire to cooperate with the ADA. In an arrangement agreed to by D’Angelo and Nick’s lawyer, Earl Howser (Taylor Holmes), Nick becomes a jailhouse informant and is given the possibility of an earlier parole. While serving as a jailhouse informant, he will encounter Tommy Udo (Widmark) – who, eventually, uses any means at his disposal to keep Nick silent about his plans and partners-in-crime.

The film also stars Mildred Dunnock (appearing briefly in one of the most memorable scenes in any film noir), character actors Howard Smith and Millard Mitchell, and only the second credited film for eventual star Karl Malden.

Before commenting on how the performances heighten what could have been your run-of-the-mill film noir, Norbert Brodine’s (1938’s Merrily We Live, 1949’s Thieves’ Highway) cinematography and J. Watson Webb Jr.’s (1944’s The Lodger, 1952’s With a Song in My Heart) editing are superb. One only has to watch the opening moments of the film to witness the benefits of their collaboration. The failed robbery scene is a textbook example of economical filmmaking. Webb’s cutting neither lingers nor moves away too rapidly for the audience’s comprehension. Brodine’s strategic placements of his camera and use of blocking – of Mature, the supporting actors, extras, and the production design – ratchets up the tension, suggesting without any words how little room for error there is in this operation. Small details such as what level an elevator is on allow the audience to agonize – however much we do not want to see this robbery succeed – over the robbers’ wasted seconds. In Kiss of Death’s tensest scenes, this mercurial combination splices into moments that will shock and unnerve. Kiss of Death is an ideal counterargument to black-and-white film’s uninformed naysayers but, more compellingly, an entry point for film noir novices.

When complemented with Richard Widmark’s performance, Kiss of Death becomes horrifying. Widmark’s face often sports a toothy half-grin that only serves to intimidate. To make matters worse, as Tommy Udo, his staccato snigger accompanies a grin belying a man unhinged, delighting in his sadistic and psychopathic ways. Udo’s disconcerting voice and manner of speech reveals a character as slippery as a soapy eel. The way he tells a cop prodding for information that, “I wouldn’t give you the skin off a grape,” comes laced with dismissal, menace, and even playfulness.

It is difficult to watch the harm Tommy Udo brings to others. But Widmark is so convincing in the role, it is impossible to keep one’s eyes off of him. If you are aware about the basics of the Hays Code, you can easily guess Tommy Udo’s fate. But beyond the scope of the film’s narrative, the character inspired certain men in American colleges and universities to form Tommy Udo clubs or fraternities. These clubs and fraternities codified Udo’s disgusting male chauvinism – as if colleges and universities needed any more such behavior. It is a magnificent about-face from Widmark’s Broadway roles at the time; his actual off-screen persona (by all accounts, Widmark was one of the kindest people in Hollywood and was known to apologize for any hurtful words or behaviors he performed while in character on a film shoot); and many of the upstanding roles he would play later in his career.

Though outshone by Widmark, Mature strikes the balance of being a former hoodlum and caring parent. His physical acting cannot hide his character’s violent past, but – akin to his performance as Doc Holliday the previous year – there is ample room for melancholy and remorse. Mature pairs well with Coleen Gray, whose innocent demeanor recalls her later performances in Red River (1948) and other film noir projects.

Speaking of film noir, most noir is set in an urban environment and filmed on a soundstage. Kiss of Death is no exception to this rule, but a decent portion of the film was shot on-location in New York City and numerous interiors do not feel as if shot on a soundstage. The Bianco family home has a riverfront view in Queens and the interior and exteriors of the Chrysler Building (where the opening heist is filmed), Criminal Courts Building, Sing Sing (Hathaway had Mature and Widmark go through a simulation of convict processing to help them embody the mindset of a prisoner), among other locations. Quotations from the main theme of Alfred Newman’s score to Street Scene (1931) bolsters the authenticity of the film’s New York environment. In terms of backgrounds and production design, there is little sense of artificiality that might have emanated from an all-too-obvious soundstage. Hathaway’s direction posits Kiss of Death as documentary-like without ever quite crossing the lines of fiction and non-fiction. In combination with the performances, these decisions, in aggregate, elevate Kiss of Death from just another film noir. No disrespect intended to the esteemed and prolific screenwriters, Ben Hecht (1932’s Scarface, 1946’s Notorious) and Charles Lederer (1940’s His Girl Friday, 1960’s Ocean’s Eleven), but this was not their most original screenplay – ideologically, structurally, or in terms of character development.

Other reviewers have noted how Tommy Udo might have been influenced by the Joker from the Batman comics. Some go further, claiming that Widmark was a fan of Batman and based Udo’s persona on the Joker and that actor Frank Gorshin based his portrayal of The Riddler in the 1960s Batman television series on Udo. There are no primary sources to confirm any of these claims. If any prior narrative media influenced Widmark’s performance, I cannot confirm any such claims however convincing, on the surface, they might be. The provenance of the influences of and by this performance remains a mystery.

Kiss of Death derives its power almost solely from its performances and nail-biting action. The latter is almost entirely accomplished with slower and/or less motion than one might expect. It is another tribute to the editing’s manipulation of space and time that segments featuring a steady walk, a seemingly ordinary dinner table conversation, or a character sitting alone in darkness watching the movement across the street can leave viewers with wide eyes and goosebumps. Kiss of Death may not stake a claim to being one of the best examples of film noir. Yet through its incredible performances and dramatic ferocity, it will leave impressions that will jangle even the most composed viewers.

My rating: 8/10

^ Based on my personal imdb rating. Half-points are always rounded down. My interpretation of that ratings system can be found in the “Ratings system” page on my blog (as of July 1, 2020, tumblr is not permitting certain posts with links to appear on tag pages, so I cannot provide the URL).

For more of my reviews tagged “My Movie Odyssey”, check out the tag of the same name on my blog.

* Actress Patricia Morrison (1943′s The Song of Bernadette, 1946′s Dressed to Kill... but better known for her stage performances) was cast as Nick Bianco’s wife. She filmed both the rape and suicide scenes, but both were cut in the final print. It is unknown who – Hathaway? Kohlmar? Zanuck? – made this decision. But I imagine that the Production Code Administration, applying the Hays Code which forbade such depictions, might have been instrumental in forcing Fox to drop the scenes.

[soundandcolorsblg]

 It’s one thing to review an album that’s popular but to review one that you have had enough time to sit down and ponder what to say is just as conflicting. You think you’ll know what to say when the time comes to start writing, but then you find yourself overwhelmed with a mixture of emotions. This is what I felt when approaching to write about 4 Your Eyez Only by J.Cole. One of the greatest albums released in my time. Since this album came out in 2016, I was a sophomore in high school when I first heard it. Now this may just be the bias in me but I've never been able to resonate with an entire album emotionally and mentally the way I have with this one. Unlike your conventional rapper, J.Cole always talks about what others are afraid to. He is goated on so many levels and if he can grasp the attention of a 16 year old bookworm growing up in an urban community, then I imagine this album to have impacted many. Cole tackles the fragility of existing as a black man through various songs while expounding on contingencies as one goes through the motions of life.

 Now the album was dropped alongside a documentary that was released on Tidal. In this documentary, the Raleigh native rapper states “you’re never guaranteed to be this high again. And while I’m here, let me use this opportunity to say the realest [sh*t] I’ve ever said.” (https://www.xxlmag.com/today-in-hip-hop-j-cole-drops-4-your-eyez-only-album/?utm_source=tsmclip&utm_medium=referral). Referring to the most pivotal moment in his career, he chose the right time to share his truths and views on the economic disenfranchisement of blacks. In the album-titled song “4 your eyez only,” Cole uses Jazz instrumentals with drums to narrate the story of his deceased friend who is known as “James”  for confidential purposes. As the story unfolds, it is apparent that this song was addressed to the daughter of his friend. Throughout the album, selling drugs is illustrated as the only means to escape poverty. However, poverty wasn’t the only thing worth escaping from on this album. J. Cole raps about people dying on the daily and even goes so far to add the effect of funeral bells on “For whom the bell tolls.” It seems that there are two outcomes for those living in poverty. One being to die to gun violence or never make it out. We know this isn’t 100% true because there are a few exceptions, J.Cole is a prime example of one of them. But for the rest of us who are not as lyrically inclined or don’t exhibit any talents that's desired by Hollywood, that life is a reality. The mixture of Jazz and trap drums is what makes this album so inviting as well as Cole’s poetic lyricism. That man sure does know what he’s doing. 

 Now the majority of this album is focused on this theme but J.Cole also sings about love and fatherhood, which changes his perspective of life, on a few tracks. The parallels of life and finding love to struggling to survive is the conveying message that captured me as a 16 year old. As I navigated through life as a teenager, I found myself making memories with friends, trying to find love, and trying to escape the violence that surrounded me. Hearing about someone dying wasn't a foreign thing but listening to this album made me aware that I wasn’t alone and that others were swimming in the same water. 4 Your Eyez Only, unveils the realities thats tied to growing up in an environment that’s automatically against you. In its essence, this album gives a voice to the voiceless. 

[arcticdementor]

In the David Fincher produced, 2017 Netflix series, Mindhunter, two FBI special agents travel the country interviewing serial killers in the 1970’s. The series, based on the non-fiction book “Mindhunter: Inside the FBI’s Elite Serial Crime Unit” by John Douglas, chronicles the beginnings of advanced criminal profiling techniques developed by the FBI in response to a number of high profile, and gruesome crimes carried out during the era, beginning with the Manson Family murders of 1968. Throughout the show the fictional special agents Holden Ford and Bill Tench meet with frequent resistance from other law enforcement personnel as they attempt to unravel the minds of the serial killers they meet. Everyone from their bosses in the agency to the local police officers they encounter along the way express extreme discomfort at the thought of empathizing or attempting to understand the killers Ford and Tench interrogate. These men are just evil. There’s nothing more to it. Nothing can be learned from them. No insight can be gained. They’re simply, purely evil, and attempting to say anything more on the subject is an affront to the victims, their families, and to human decency and capital-J Justice in general.

Fictionalized though the series may be, in our own time, in the era of mass shootings, one doesn’t have to go far to find similar responses to this uniquely contemporary category of violent crime. Media coverage of the killers oozes sensationalized language that depicts them as dark, evil, twisted, vile, abhorrent, insane. The public, in internet comment forms across social media, offer up their thoughts and prayers, and inevitably, the discussion devolves into a debate on the second amendment and the merits of gun control as politicians and journalists quickly move to steer the national conversation to more politically fruitful areas in order to amass momentum in passing various pieces of long desired legislation targeting gun owners or the NRA. The killers themselves, their personalities, their motivations, their worldviews, the experiences that shape them, every time quickly slip through the cracks of the conversation and are forgotten long before their respective cases are ever brought to trial.

…

Over the course of hundreds of hours beginning in 1959, Ted Kaczynski, the future unabomber, participated in an intense psychological experiment conduced at Harvard by Dr. Henry A Murray. During World War II, Murray had worked for the Office of Strategic Services in developing personality assessment techniques designed to test potential recruits on how well they would endure interrogation and torture by the enemy. At Harvard, Murray went on to further develop his method, transforming it from a diagnostic assessment of mental anti-fragility, into the basis of a radical personality modifying procedure he hoped could be used to forcibly evolve human consciousness in order to prevent the nuclear annihilation he feared was inevitable in light of mankind’s petty national prejudices and self-interest during the period of the Cold War. Kaczynski was among his unwitting test subjects, and though his personal, radical Luddite beliefs would ultimately diverge from the kind of technocratic globalism Murray intended to inculcate in Kaczynski, in a strange way, Murray was also more successful than he could have possibly anticipated.

…

No case provides better evidence of this possibility than that of Adam Lanza, the 2012 Sandy Hook shooter. After years of denied requests, more than 1,000 pages of evidence relating to the Lanza case were finally released to the Hartford Courant in December of 2018. Lanza, who killed himself following the attack, left behind no manifesto. He had even taken the precaution of smashing his devices’ hard drives prior to the shooting. In the end hundreds of pages worth of Lanza’s writings were ultimately recovered by the police, and it’s only from these scattered fragments that his beliefs and opinions emerge. Like Holmes in the weeks and months leading to the Aurora massacre, Lanza was no stranger to psychiatric evaluation. Throughout Lanza’s entire life, from the age of 3, when he was first diagnosed with speech and developmental problems, he knew little else but the offices of therapists and counselors and psychiatrists. A rotating cast of mental health professionals drifted in and out of his life. They all recognized the so-called ‘warning signs’ all too well, but even with a lifetime’s worth of treatment, they completely and utterly failed to prevent his transformation into mass murderer.

…

Lanza goes even further, and characterizes the years of psychiatric treatment he received since childhood explicitly as abusive: “I was molested at least a dozen times by a few different adults when I was a child. It wasn’t my decision at all: I was coerced into it… What do each of the adults have in common? They were doctors, and each of them were sanctioned by my parents to do it. This happens to virtually every child without their input into the matter: Their parents sanction it.”

…

The United States spends more per capita on primary and secondary education than almost any other country. As of 2014 the U.S. is in the top 5, below only Switzerland, Norway and Austria. Despite this however, year after year, a majority of Americans report dissatisfaction with the quality of K-12 education in their country. Alternative education remains a persistent source of controversy within the public consciousness. Private schools, charter schools, school vouchers, homeschooling, all are topics that filter in and out of the national political conversation. Democrats, on the whole, maintain an unyielding support for the compulsory nature of public education in America, while practices like Homeschooling are largely written off as the exclusive province of religious fundamentalists and political separatists. The same goes for the diverting of public resources to charter schools by means of a tax exemption or credit. The argument that has formed over time to circumvent these controversial alternatives boils down to a single word: Socialization.

Public schools not only educate students in facts and skills, the argument goes, but also serve to socialize children by serving as a microcosm of the pluralistic, diverse society in which these students will one day have to live and contribute to. A private, all male school, for instance, will fail to prepare its students for the modern workplace, where they’ll have to cooperate and even take orders from female colleagues or superiors. Likewise, desegregation busing is required to ensure students experience a sufficiently diverse environment. When it comes to a wide variety of controversies in public education, the socialization argument continues to form the backbone of liberal resistance to conservative attacks on the public schooling monopoly.At the same time, as liberals defend the practice and theory of socialization, the scourge of bullying has, on-again off again, served as a cause célèbre among many of the same people. Since 2010, October has become National Bullying Prevention Month, a campaign by the non-profit PACER organization in coordination with companies like CNN and Facebook, among others. Television shows and documentaries have tackled the subject, and celebrities like Ellen regularly champion anti-bullying causes. But what is bullying but the core of Socialization? In a sense the two can almost be considered synonymous. Bullying is, after all, the school of hard knocks which children undergo to learn the complex, unspoken rules of social game playing. Socialization is about instilling conformity, and bullying remains the core experience for many children in learning about all the ways the deviate from the norm. When children are unresponsive to bullying, that’s when things are kicked up to the teachers and administrators and school counselors, and that same unpliability and unresponsiveness is re-conceptualized by well-meaning adults as developmental disorders.

In 1975 Autism was diagnosed in children at a rate of 1 in every 5,000. Today that number has soared to nearly 1 in 100. This has ignited a public controversy over the source or cause of what by every definition deserves to be called an public health epidemic. 75% of children diagnosed with Autism today are boys. There’s no need to go searching for a cause. Vaccines aren’t behind the explosion in Autism rates. Teachers and school psychologists are. School psychology today is a booming industry, one which the US Department of Labor identifies as having some of the best employment opportunities across the entire field of psychology. 75% of school psychologists are women, with an average age of 46. It is this same group of people most empowered to conduct psychological monitoring of children across the country, and over the last 30 years, they have come to classify a larger and larger percentage of young boys as having developmental issues, to the point where it’s not clear whether there is anything wrong with these children at all, or if school psychologists have simply written off a wider and wider range of behaviors which they find problematic or incomprehensible as constituting autism.

…

In 2013, a Texas teenager named Justin Carter was locked up for threatening a school shooting. Whether or not the threat was legitimate is another matter entirely. In a bout of online shit talking over League of Legends Carter wrote “Oh yeah, I’m real messed up in the head, I’m going to go shoot up a school full of kids and eat their still, beating hearts…” in response to a quip by a fellow gamer calling him crazy. He quickly rejoined: “lol jk,” likely realizing the fact he could get himself in trouble saying such things. Whether or not it was a good idea for him to make such a comment is immaterial, what matters is the violent, disproportionate response that followed. A Canadian woman, thousands of miles away, reported Carter. He was arrested and locked in jail. Bond was set at half a million dollars, which his family couldn’t afford to pay. He languished in jail, was assaulted by fellow inmates, and then locked up in solitary confinement for his own safety. After 4 months in jail an anonymous donor paid to have Carter released on behalf of his family. The state dragged out the matter for years, delaying the trial as long as possible on tenuous grounds. In the interim Carter was banned from using a computer. It wasn’t until spring of 2018 that a plea agreement was finally reached and Carter was let off with time served.

This is the paranoid system which today we entrust with rescuing at-risk young boys. This is what stands between us and more school shootings. Never mind the fact that as this system has grown, it has only led to a rise in mass shootings. Maybe the real cause of such cases is not guns, or a failure to identify and treat students, maybe the cause is these same students, following a protracted process of isolation and attempted psychological modification, learning to play the part the system has assigned to them, that of the security threat. When schools spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on active shooter drills and security systems, isn’t it just wasted money until someone comes along and gives them an excuse to use it? The complicated apparatus of psychological surveillance and socialization that prevails among schools today is, like the TSA checkpoint at the airport, nothing more than an elaborate piece of (psychological) security theater, and theaters require drama, and more importantly, villains. People like Adam Lanza and James Holmes are certainly killers of the very worst kind, guilty of evil, but on a larger scale, their evil is a only a reflection of our own, of the perverse societal mechanisms we’ve developed to give ourselves piece of mind, regardless of the children that must be fed to the machinery for it to function.

[theziaries]

The Last Dance: A Hip Hop History 🏀

As Michelle Obama wrote in the description for her Becoming Motown playlist on Apple Music, “every story needs a soundtrack.” In The Last Dance, the ten-part visual paean to the Jordan Era Chicago Bulls, that soundtrack comprises the boom and boast of hip hop music. Listed below are a few rap-related moments from the docuseries, including His Airness’s LL Cool J-accompanied court confrontation with the Boston Celtics and The Worm’s playalistic Vegas escapade. 

Episode 1: “Been Around the World” by Puff Daddy (featuring The Notorious B.I.G. & Mase)

Beginning at the 2:19 mark, Puff Daddy’s pompous anthem soars alongside the Bulls’ glory days, when almost every season was crowned with a championship and further entrenchment in the international zeitgeist. “Been Around the World” was thus a wise choice because the song - contextualized by the cultural dominance of hip hop during the 1990s - reflected the NBA team’s universal stardom. As the documentary’s montage shows, they had, indeed, been around the world: everywhere from Arsenio Hall’s couch to the sprawling streets of Barcelona. 

Episode 1: “I Ain’t No Joke” by Eric B. & Rakim  

In 1984, Jordan was a newcomer, occupying a space of anonymity instead of mythology. However, his star began to rise after surmounting the Milwaukee Bucks in his third ever NBA game. Enter the gravelly-voiced Rakim, whose horn-accented classic appears 40 minutes into the film. The emcee’s braggadocio - buttressed by pulsating bass - complements Jordan’s ascendance. With that as accompaniment, the message is clear: Jordan’s athleticism, just like Rakim’s lyricism, was not to be underestimated. Just a few games into his career, Jordan proved that he was a rookie to be reckoned with.

Episode 2: “I’m Bad” by LL Cool J

Securing a spot in the 1986 Eastern Conference, the Bulls met the Larry Bird-led Boston Celtics. Though the superiority of the latter team was indisputable, the fiercely competitive Jordan refused to submit to the decorated squad. His sociopathic desire to devastate his opponents reached its apex in game two, which followed a golfing loss to Celtics shooting guard Danny Ainge. At nearly 42 minutes, LL Cool J’s escalating “aahhh” roars onto the court, where Jordan scores a record 63 points. The Bulls ultimately lose the match-up, but Cool J’s “I’m devastating, I’m so good it’s a shame / ‘Cause I eat rappers like a cannibal, they call me insane” encapsulates the fearsome ferocity that would define the ballplayer’s illustrious career.

Episode 4: “Still Not a Player” by Big Pun (featuring Joe)

After Bulls coach Phil Jackson granted him a 48-hour vacation to Las Vegas, Dennis Rodman summarily exceeded that allotment. Mirroring that immediacy is the instant introduction of Big Pun’s ode to bachelorhood, which begins only four seconds into the episode. Rodman, the crazy-haired wild child of the Bulls dynasty, had briefly relinquished his role as ultimate rebounder to live la vida loca in Sin City. While Pun’s lyrics luxuriate in the background, on screen, The Worm invites vice: dice games, cigar smoke, and hard liquor. The sequence, therefore, is a sybaritic affair between musical and visual indulgence. 

Episode 5: “If I Ruled the World” by Nas (featuring Lauryn Hill)

Within the first 20 minutes of the episode, a dizzying array of rap is featured. Included are the suave rumble of Special Ed and the jazz-filled fancy of A Tribe Called Quest. Of the bunch, the record that best captures the cross-cultural celebrity of Jordan and the NBA entity is the single from Nas’s It Was Written. Entering at the 0:19 mark, “If I Ruled the World” hints at the context of Jordan’s commercialization - his starring in advertisements and bringing fame and fortune to footwear - as well as the global glamour that the Dream Team gifted American sports. Subsequently, in this installment, Jordan - projected into the stratosphere of planetary popular culture because of his otherworldly jump shot - manifests the worldwide reign that Nas and Lauryn Hill fantasize about. 

Episode 8: “Step Into a World (Rapture’s Delight)” by KRS-One

Narrating the Bulls’ historic 72-win season is thunderous production and a snake-charming chorus from KRS-One’s I Got Next track. The song augments the mesmerizing excellence of the 1995-1996 lineup, whose inclusion of Dennis Rodman created the Jordan-Pippen-Rodman triumvirate. As the docuseries reminds viewers of their indomitable effectiveness on the court, KRS-One’s taunt “I'm not sayin' I'm number one, uhh I'm sorry, I lied / I'm number one, two, three, four and five” chimes with a fierce ring. It is a boast that fits the basketball team, whose New York Times Magazine distinction “The Best. Ever. Anywhere.” solidified their entitlement to eternal bragging rights. 

[coldhandswarmh-art]

Rococo and Neoclassicism (24/10/2019)

Today we learnt about the Neoclassical and the Rococo, two wildly different yet cohabiting movements and ideals. Going into this lecture I thought I knew exactly which one I liked best, which one I thought was most worthy, and, for certain, which one was the most frivolous. Following the lecture and the documentary that we watched I definitely cannot be that certain anymore, which I should be used to right now! I am forever walking into lectures and galleries with an idea in my head only for it to be turned completely around and have been leaving with an entirely different perspective, as it should be.

Although it would be improved if I could get rid of preconceived notions, but then, are we experiencing the world properly if we don’t form ideas based on our experiences, as long as we are open to questioning and reevaluating them?

Fragonard, J. (1767) The Swing. London: Wallace Collection

I thought I loved the Neoclassical, with its clean, ordered, harmonious designs, its basis in strong morality and resurgence of philosophy and education. Mainly because I didn’t understand the Rococo and what it stands for, I saw a frilly, fussy, overly saturated, over the top, woman on a swing and assumed that that was everything the Rococo was. The Neoclassical ideals were essentially ‘truth to philosophy and morality’ and the Rococo’s essentials were ‘truth to fantasy and desire’ both born of a response to the dramatic intensity of Baroque art and architecture, the two movements diverged quickly and completely. However only one could survive... and the opulence of the Rococo could not weather the economic realities of everyday life, nor the French Revolution. In the BBC Rococo documentary we watched, the host, Waldemar Januszczak, described the Rococo as the whole bottom of the seabed, encrusted in shells, and stones, and altogether too much, the word combines the french word meaning ‘shell work’ and the Portuguese word ‘barocco’ meaning ‘misshapen pearl’ (which really describes the baroque) and as with all nicknames for artistic movements, began as an insult.

Much Rococo architecture was funded by the Pope especially in Bavaria where the Catholic population was expanding, they were treated to new churches, chapels, and cathedrals, new places of worship, and of pilgrimage. Any miracle was the excuse for a brand new church and a new pilgrimage site - turning nowhere into somewhere. The beginnings of great travel were born for this time, fanned by the publication of great adventure books; Robinson Crusoe, Gulliver’s Travels, Jonathan Swift, Arabian Nights, all influenced the attitudes of the Europeans at the time on travel and whether they wanted to or not. The idea that pleasure was a human right and not a privilege of the few, as inscribed in the American Declaration of Independence. Watteau’s creation of the Fête Galante, a new format of painting which seems to combine all the intoxicating elements of Rococo into one, typically depicting men and women dressed elegantly and extravagantly, gallivanting and flirting around a beautiful parkland, desperately searching for happiness and pleasure, but always with a hidden darkness. As much as the Rococo liked to preach pleasure and joy, it’s artwork understand the realities of life far too personally, it could not hide its base understanding of real interactions.

There is far more depth and substance to the Rococo than I ever thought, and I need to go and research it so much more before I can continue talking about it - hopefully next time I write about the Rococo it will be with more knowledge and understanding.

All I know right now is, that I like the Rococo far more than I believed I could.

Zimmerman, D. (1745-54) Wieskirche. Bavaria: Steingaden

[robwilsonimages]

How can I use critical thinking as a tool for my creative practice?

Rob Wilson

Blog Entry 1

22nd October 2019

 Defining critical thinking is more challenging than is often assumed. It is generally accepted to be a learnt rather than innate skill, and anyone working or studying within academia should possess an understanding of what it is. However, there is no single accepted definition. In fact, Fisher (2001, pp. 2-5) gives four different definitions developed during the 20th century. A useful short definition is provided by Paul and Elder (2006, p. 4), ‘Critical thinking is the art of analyzing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it.’

In an instructive study, Moore (2013) analysed how seventeen academics working at Australian universities defined critical thinking. Whilst all stressed the importance of critical thinking to a university education, their views of critical thinking were diverse. Their responses were placed in a frame of seven different definitions. Two of their definitions are particularly useful for the application of critical thinking within creative photographic practice. These are (pp. 510-518):

1.      Critical thinking as judgement

2.      Critical thinking as a careful and sensitive reading of the text

The application of and focus on these facets of critical thinking to our image making can enable the creative photography practitioner to produce images that are sophisticated and intellectually stimulating.

Critical Thinking as Judgement

When we read a text or, in this case, view a photograph we make a judgement. If we do not make a judgement, then what we are reading or viewing is of little use. As one of Moore’s subjects earthily states (p. 511), ‘I like to say to students – would it profit you to read the entirety of Aristotle’s work, and form no view whether it’s bullshit or not?’.

Judgement is a consistent theme within photography (and, of course, art in general) particularly when viewing the work of others.  Whether this judgement always represents critical thinking is a matter of some debate. For example, William Eggleston’s first solo exhibition at MOMA was famously described in the New York Times as "…Perfect? Perfectly banal, perhaps. Perfectly boring, certainly." (O'Hagan, 2010). Time and more thoughtful judgement have not supported this view; Eggleston is now one of the most revered and admired figures in photography.

However, as a creative practitioner, exercising good critical judgement, rather than just judgement, when reviewing your own work is vital. We must challenge ourselves about its value. Our critical judgement is our quality control. If the work cannot meet our own standards, it is unrealistic to expect them to meet anybody else’s. To again use Moore’s subject’s robust terms, we should consistently ask if our work is ‘bullshit or not’.

We can make that judgement by critically reading our own work.

Critical thinking as a careful and sensitive reading of the text

Whilst Moore’s subjects were discussing academic writing, here our ‘texts’ are photographs, but we can apply the same reasoning to them. The ability to critically read a photography is central to photography theory, and, it can be argued, is what makes photography interesting as an art form. This is not to say that photographs are always readable in this way. Stephen Shore (2015, p. 192) is particularly dismissive of ‘camera club’ photography. He feels that images of this nature have ‘no particular intentionality, no real aesthetic intelligence behind the photograph. It was about making pleasing pictures.’ If we, as creative photography practitioners, want to produce work that is of value, we should be aiming to create work that can be critically read.

In Image of Imperialism, the first essay of Understanding a Photograph (2013), John Berger gives a detailed analysis of an image of the dead Che Guevara. He compares the photograph to Rembrandt’s The Anatomy Lesson of Doctor Nicolaes Tulp and Mantegna’s Lamentation of Christ. His reading of the photograph is educational and insightful.

Freddy Alborta, Che Guevara Dead, 1967

Rembrandt, The Anatomy Lesson of Dr Nicolaes Tulp, 1632

Andreas Mantegna, Lamentation of Christ, 1480

Barthes (1980) goes even further and provides us with a framework for critical reading of images. His studium is what creates a general interest in an image, but it is the punctum, a small feature of the photo – a ‘sting, speck, cut, little hole…’, that ‘pricks’ the viewer and is ‘poignant’. For example, in the photograph below, taken by Nadar, the leading portraitist of his day, Barthes’s punctum is the folded arms of the boy on the left.

Nadar, Savorgnan De Brazza, 1882

 One of the most famous photographs ever taken, Dorothea Lange’s Migrant Mother, has been critically read in multiple ways. This is described in detail in the opening chapter of Photography: A Critical Introduction (Wells & Price, 2015). 

Dorothea Lange, Migrant Mother, 1936

For example, Fisher (1987, in Wells, 2015, pp51-53) makes a feminist analysis of the image and argues that it makes Lange the ‘mother’ of documentary photography. Addtionally, Pultz (1995, p. 93, in Wells, 2015, pp53-54) analyses the image through its pose and analogises the image to a painting. Finally, Beloff (1985, in Wells, 2015,p54) wishes to iconise the image:

‘Such is the power of the camera that we can easily think of photographs as having a kind of independent reality. Dorothea Lange’s Migrant Mother is a picture that has entered Western consciousness. She is not a mere representation.’

To make a judgement about a photograph, the viewer needs to be able to read the picture. That reading can be made in thoughtful, calculated terms as is outlined above, but equally it can be as simple as the viewer saying, ‘I like this picture because…’. As we desire to be sophisticated creative practioners of photography, we should strive to produce images that demand more than only the second type of reading. (It should be noted that there is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying a photograph simply for its aesthetics.) Applying critical thought to your work as a creative practioner of photography is vital. It is a skill that enables us to produce work that distinguishes itself from the prosaic ‘camera club aesthetic’ that Shore is so sceptical and dismissive of.

This article has attempted to show the importance of critical thinking in our creative practice and how its application can enable us to produce sophisticated and readable images. This leads to one more thought-provoking question in terms of how and when we apply our critical thinking skills to our image making: Should our critical thinking skills be applied while we are taking photographs, should those skills only be applied afterwards when editing and reviewing our images, or should there application be constant throughout the whole image making process? The answers are beyond the scope of this article but are perhaps questions that should be considered by all creative photographic practitioners.

  References

Barthes, R. (1980). Camera Lucida. 2010 ed. New York: Hill and Wang.

Beloff, H. (1985). Camera Cultural. Oxford: Blackwell.

Berger, J. (2013). Understanding a Photograph. Kindle ed. London: Penguin.

Fisher, A. (1987). Let Us Now Praise Famous Women. 1st ed. London: Pandora.

Fisher, A. (2001). Critical Thinking: An Introduction. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Moore, T. (2013). Critical thinking: seven definitions in search of a concept. Studies in Higher Education, 38(4), pp. 506-522.

O'Hagan, S. (2010). Was John Szarkowski the most influential person in 20th-century photography?. The Guardian, 20 July, p. online.

Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2006). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools. s.l.:The Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Pultz, J. (1995). The Body and the Lens: Photography 1839 to the Present. New York: Harry N Abrams, Inc.

Shore, S. (2015). Uncommon Places. 2nd ed. New York: Apeture.

Wells, L. & Price, D. (2015). Thinking about Photography. In: L. Wells, ed. Photography: A Critical Introduction. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 9-74.

[paralleljulieverse]

This week marks the anniversary of the birth of Robert Wise, the celebrated Hollywood filmmaker who was born 104 years ago on 10 September 1914 in Winchester, Indiana.  Wise holds a special place in the affections of the Parallel Julieverse as he directed two of Julie Andrews’s finest screen musicals: The Sound of Music (1965) and Star! (1968). What better occasion, therefore, to post a brief pictorial tribute to this supremely talented Star!-Maker…

                             –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Across a long and distinguished career, Robert Wise directed close to forty feature films including such major successes as The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951), Executive Suite (1954), Run Silent, Run Deep (1958), I Want to Live! (1958), The Haunting (1963), West Side Story (1961), The Sound of Music (1965), The Sand Pebbles (1966), The Andromeda Strain (1971) and Star Trek (1979). Running the gamut from melodramas and war films to musicals, ghost films and science fiction, Wise’s output was striking in its diversity and a testament to the ease with which he could work across a very broad cinematic palette. 

The eclecticism of Wise’s oeuvre was, however, a double-edged sword. In professional terms, it served the director extremely well, earning him “wide respect…both at the box office and in the industry” as one of Hollywood’s most versatile and commercially successful genre filmmakers (Busch, ii). But it proved far less advantageous to Wise’s critical reception. Lacking the kind of identifiable stylistic patterns or thematic consistency prized by authorial film critics, Wise’s work has tended to be overlooked, if not actively devalued, in the received canons of ‘star-directors’ (Busch, viii-ix; Leeman, 5-7). Even Wise was aware of the critical disregard with which his work was viewed in certain quarters: 

“I’ve been taken apart sometimes for not having a really consistent style…but that’s exactly what I wanted. I try to address each script in the cinematic fashion I think is right…and since I’ve done such different kinds of stories, there’s no straight stylistic line in my work” (Leeman, 7) .

Modest in temperament and collaborative in work practice, Wise was the antithesis of the egoistic director striving to put a personal imprint all over a project. An old-school practitioner of classical narrative filmmaking, Wise preferred to make the work rather than his personality the focus of attention (Leeman, 5). As Justin Busch (2010) asserts, Wise’s “stylistic eclecticism is not accidental” but a direct expression of his  filmmaking rationale, an “organic connection to the material” where “[w]hat matters is the manner in which the presentation is grounded in the events being presented” (ix).

Not that Wise was a disengaged or back-seat director. Far from it. Rising through the studio ranks in the 30s and 40s, first as a sound and music technician and then film editor, before graduating to full directing honours, Wise possessed a detailed insider’s knowledge of cinematic craft and a rare capacity to actively shepherd a film through the whole industrial cycle from pre- to post-production (Gehring, 3ff; Leeman, 17ff). For all his soft-spoken gentlemanly manner, Wise was intensely passionate about his work and staked a deep intimate investment in each of his films. “Even though I don’t make so-called personal films,” he asserted, “they are personal to me in what they express about matters I feel very strongly about” (Leeman, 5).

So what were the aspects of Star! that appealed strongly and personally to Wise? In a nutshell: Julie Andrews. She was the alpha and omega of the whole project. As trade reports explained at the start of the film’s production:

“So much did Wise and Miss Andrews enjoy working together [on The Sound Music] that they each hoped to find a proper vehicle for the reuniting of their talents. Wise…began combing the field for subjects and discovered that rights to the colorful story of Gertrude Lawrence were available” (Arneel, 7). 

By the director’s own admission he “never had the slightest interest in filming the life and times of Gertrude Lawrence” but was “motivated entirely by a desire to find a vehicle for Julie Andrews…I would never have made the picture if Julie…had declined” (Hale, S7; see also Arneel, 7). 

Together, Wise and Julie worked harder on Star! than anything else either had done before. A “movie of epic proportions,” the production required a herculean commitment from the director-star duo, consuming over two years of Wise’s life and a full twelve months of Julie’s (Kaplan, 12). “This is the most difficult film I’ve ever made,” exclaimed Julie in an on-set interview, “It’s like going into training. I must take care of myself or I’d be dead” (Wilson, 11) It was a sentiment confirmed by Wise who remarked with a mix of admiration and concern, “I believe [Julie’s] role in Star! represents the toughest assignment ever accepted by a screen actress, anywhere, anytime” (Heffernan, 42).

When Star! subsequently crashed at the box office, Wise took the film’s failure to heart:

“I’ve had films that haven’t paid off, but STAR! was my biggest disappointment because I think it’s a better film and more of an achievement than was acknowledged by the mass audience” (Leemann, 195).

He was especially sorry for his leading lady:

“It has always been a mystery to those  of us who made the film why it did so poorly on its original release…I was particularly disappointed for Julie Andrews who gave such a superb performance as Gertrude Lawrence. She worked so very hard on all aspects of the film and never got the recognition she deserved for it” (Wise, personal communication, 3 December 1996).

The hard work wasn’t completely in vain, however, as Star! went on to enjoy a rosier after-life, growing in cultural stature and recognition. Indeed, the film acquired something of “a cult following almost from its inception” with a dedicated base of enthusiastic fans and a growing chorus of critical champions (”Be Glad”, 1). 

Happily, Wise lived to see the latter day reappraisal of Star! In 1993, on the occasion of the film’s 25th anniversary, Wise personally supervised a meticulous restoration of Star! to its original roadshow glory, after which it was given a lavish re-release to select theatres, cable TV and home video markets (Edwards 1993: 4-5). It not only inspired renewed appreciation for this “lost classic” but also helped introduce the film to younger audiences who marvelled at the big screen pizazz and beautifully crafted production values of “this most lavish of musicals” (Edwards 1993: 5). “I am so relieved that it is going to be out there and not forgotten,” said a genuinely delighted Wise at the time, “I think it’s one of the fine[st] musicals that has ever come out of Hollywood” (Edwards 1993). 

So do we, Mr. Wise, so do we!

Postscript:

In a sure sign of the deep and genuine affection Wise enjoyed among those who worked with him, for his birthday in September 1967 the whole cast and crew of Star! threw the director a surprise on-set party. They even sang a birthday song in his honour with special lyrics penned by Saul Chaplin set to the tune of one of the film’s numbers, “’N Everything”:

Who is the man that we admire the most? It’s Robert Wise. And so we’ve gathered here to drink a toast To Robert Wise. This Sunday is his natal date, And that is why we celebrate, We’re glad to know him, And so to show him, We’re giving him his own Stage Eight. And even though our schedule almost daily They revise, They’ll never throw us cause we’re all the way With Robert Wise. Though actors come from near and far, To us he is the star of STAR! And that is why we planned this small surprise To honor Robert Wise!  (Edwards 1993)

Sources:

Arneel, Gene. “How Wise-Andrews Encore Came About.” Film Daily. 6 June 1967: 7.

“Be Glad They Still Make Discs Like This!” Laser Disc Newsletter. No. 133. September 1995: 1

Busch, Justin E. A. Self and Society in the Films of Robert Wise. Jefferson: McFarland and Co, 2010.

Edwards, T. J. “Rare Julie Star!: After 25 Years, A Lost Classic Returns.” American Movie Classics. 6: 7, July 1993: 4-5.

Edwards, T. J. “The Saga of ‘Star!’”. Star! Special Edition LaserDisc. Beverley Hills, CA: Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment, 1993.

Edwards, T. J. Silver Star! (Video Documentary) Robert Wise Productions, 1994.

Gehring, Wes D. Robert Wise: Shadowlands. Indianapolis: Indiana Historical Society Press, 2012.

 Hale, Wanda. “Film Biography of Gertrude Lawrence.” Daily News. 13 October 1968: S7.

Heffernan, Harold. “Julie Andrews Undertakes Toughest Role in ‘Star’”. Philadelphia Daily News. 21 April 1967: 42.

Kaplan, Mike. “Will Julie Hit the Big Jackpot Again?” Press and Sun-Bulletin. 6 May 1967: 12.

Leeman, Sergio. Robert Wise on His Films: From Editing Room to Director’s Chair. Los Angeles: Silman-James Press, 1995.

Wilson, Jane. “Thoroughly Wholesome Julie.” West: The Los Angeles Times Magazine. 15 October 1967: 11-17.

© 2018, Brett Farmer. All Rights Reserved.

[dweemeister]

The Happiest Millionaire (1967)

Younger readers do not know of a time when Walt Disney Studios was never considered a major Hollywood studio. That recognition, to stand alongside the likes of Columbia, Universal, or Warner Bros., did not officially arrive until after The Little Mermaid (1989) and the resulting 1989-2000 Disney Renaissance and Disney’s close ties to Pixar (which it would purchase outright in 2006). In its early years, Disney did not distribute its own films, instead going through United Artists and later RKO. Disputes with the eccentric Howard Hughes – who purchased RKO in 1948 – over the True-Life Adventures documentary series led Disney to (correctly) predict that RKO was a studio in a fatal tailspin, and the RKO-Disney partnership was soon abandoned. Walt and older brother Roy O. Disney co-founded Buena Vista Film Distribution Company (renamed Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures in 2007), but Disney – taking the animation and live-action studios together – lacked the distribution reach of the established Hollywood studios.

As Walt paid less attention to animated features for his anthology television series and the live-action features, an occasional live-action Disney film became part of the American cinematic zeitgeist: 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954); Old Yeller (1957); The Absent-Minded Professor (1961). In a decade heralded (and ridiculed) for its sumptuous musicals, Mary Poppins (1964) was considered the defining film for the studio’s live-action efforts. Of course, an ailing Walt desired to replicate the artistic and financial success of Mary Poppins. Norman Tokar’s The Happiest Millionaire is that follow-up film, adapted from a play based on My Philadelphia Father by Cordelia Drexel Biddle, and doomed to unforgiving comparisons upon release and today. The Happiest Millionaire is an unfocused fever dream of a musical film, surviving – just – because of a handful of Sherman Brothers songs and its unironic charm.

The film begins with Irish immigrant John Lawless (Tommy Steele) arriving in Philadelphia, ready to become the butler of a household headed by millionaire, amateur boxing trainer, Bible School teacher, and alligator enthusiast. Anthony J. Drexel Biddle (Fred MacMurray). Lawless is the on-screen narrator for the film’s duration, noting how he enjoys the Biddles’ eccentricity. He observes or comments on Mr. Biddle’s antics and, more seriously, his eagerness to have the U.S. intervene in World War I. Mrs. Biddle (Greer Garson) and Aunt Mary (Gladys Cooper) pay little heed to Mr. Biddle’s unusual beliefs and behaviors – most likely out of love, not marital/familial capitulation. The Biddle children are older teenagers trained in boxing by their father, and we see little of sons Tony and Livingston (Paul Petersen and Eddie Hodges). Cordy Biddle (Lesley Ann Warren in her film debut) is the best boxer of the Biddle children and, while away to boarding school, falls for Angier “Angie” Buchanan Duke (John Davidson) – what a name!

If it seems difficult to ascertain the narrative focus of The Happiest Millionaire judging by the above paragraph, that is how it feels like to watch the film after the opening song. Though it is ostensibly about Mr. Biddle as the allegedly happiest millionaire, the story transitions between Mr. Biddle, his wife, John Lawless, Cordy and Angie, and Angie’s family without much signaling. These shifts are abrupt, resetting often, and disrupting the flow of the movie. Norman Tokar’s direction and Cotton Warburton’s (1949′s Neptune’s Daughter, Mary Poppins) editing appear scattered, lacking any semblance of cohesiveness, and making The Happiest Millionaire feel like its 172-minute runtime (this is the most complete version of the film; I will go into this more later, but beware of any versions that are shorter and are not presented in the 1.66:1 widescreen format). The adapted screenplay by A.J. Carothers (1963′s Miracle of the White Stallions, 1964′s Emil and the Detectives) just barely connects the competing plotlines to form a comprehensible whole.

Carothers’ screenplay is packed with references to the turn of the twentieth century that probably will be lost on younger viewers, who might be instead charmed by Biddle’s pet alligators and his Bible study masquerading for a boxing school. Too much of the broad humor falls flat, as The Happiest Millionaire is at its comedic best when it elects to be witty rather than relying on slapstick or its bizarre, absurd situational humor. The performances are uncomplicated, but does one ever really expect excellent performances from such a disorganized screenplay?

With 3,000 costumes tailored for the extras and principal actors of The Happiest Millionaire (250 were for the principal actors), Bill Thomas (1960′s Spartacus, 1971′s Bedknobs and Broomsticks) crafts gowns and suits for various occasions: casual, formal, sporting, professional. Thomas’ work helps the audience feel like they are embedded within this well-to-do family in the mid-1910s. The art direction by Carroll Clark (1933′s King Kong, Mary Poppins) and John B. Mansbridge (1965′s Those Calloways, 1982′s Tron) is as flamboyantly tacky as could be expected for showing the interior of an eccentric millionaire’s family residence – there is a lot of glass in this film.

Yet from a technical standpoint, this is the Sherman Brothers’ film. Richard M. Sherman and Robert B. Sherman combined to be the most prolific songwriting team in Hollywood – no other duo worked together for as many film musical scores as they did. The Happiest Millionaire is not the best entry from the Shermans in part because of the film’s lackluster screenplay. That is a high bar, however, for the songwriting brothers whose credits also include Mary Poppins, the Winnie the Pooh films from 1966-2000, numerous other Disney animated and live-action films, and extra-Disney productions including The Slipper and the Rose (1976). Immediately after the opening credits and overture, “Fortuosity” (a supposed neologism derived from “fortuitous” and is one of the songs played on rotation at Disney parks’ Main Street) describes John Lawless’ situation and personality in three minutes. The film never approaches that level of efficient musical characterization ever again – not even with the multiple musical quotations of “What’s Wrong With That?”, which is to Fred MacMurray as “The Life I Lead” was to David Tomlinson in Mary Poppins.

The more musically and narratively isolated songs serve their momentary purpose, with little function after they have completed. Some will elicit laughter, like “Watch Your Footwork” and “Bye-Yum Pum Pum”. Others are catchier or more musically interesting than others, such as “I’ll Always Be Irish” and especially John Davidson’s vocals in “Detroit”. Nevertheless, there are too many meandering clunkers (“Valentine Candy” and “It Won’t Be Long ‘Til Christmas”; the latter has hints of late nineteenth century American folk music in its woodwind section that would have been interesting to use in this film), with uninteresting musical phrases extended far past the point where they should resolve to the tonic.

Appearing at the roughly around the one-hour mark for The Happiest Millionaire’s, “Are We Dancing?” does not have the lyrical genius and the poetic personification of Mary Poppins’ “Feed the Birds”, nor has it imprinted itself into the public consciousness to the extent of the Winnie the Pooh theme. Its lyrical imperfections and lack of cultural impact aside, I don’t recall a Sherman Brothers for a Disney film being orchestrated as gorgeously as “Are We Dancing?” (if we want to open it up to their non-Disney careers, then it rivals “He/She Danced with Me” from The Slipper and the Rose). Every section of the orchestra – whether it is the string instruments doubling John Davidson and Lesley Ann Warren’s lyrics or the woodwinds and brass providing a heavenly lift in three-quarter time – is providing some of the lushest harmonies ever heard in a Disney song. Within the film, “Are We Dancing?” – you guessed it – is Cordy and Angie’s first dance, where love begins to a waltz’s pulse. Some, including Cordy before she begins dancing, might consider that old-fashioned. Like she and numerous characters in movie history who have waltzed on-screen, she changes her tune by music’s end.

When The Happiest Millionaire premiered at the Pantages Theatre in Hollywood on an early summer day in 1967, the occasion became less of a movie premiere and more of a testimonial to Walt Disney, who passed away that last December and had seen a rough cut of the film that would be bitterly contested by his successors. The Happiest Millionaire was the final film Disney personally oversaw and, in its most complete form, remains the longest film to be released under the banner of Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures (excluding Hollywood, Lucasfilm, Marvel, Miramax, Pixar, and Touchstone). Following its Hollywood premiere, The Happiest Millionaire was released as a roadshow. The roadshow theatrical release, popular in the 1950s and ‘60s but largely having run its course by the ‘70s, was where a film would first open in a major city before going “on the road” – a film that debuted in Los Angeles or New York City would then premiere in another large city for limited showings (perhaps one or two performances a day for select days during the week). Only after the completion of this roadshow would the film be released across the United States, typically shorn of some scenes that only appeared in the “roadshow release”.  Roadshow films were typically longer, containing an overture, an intermission, an entr’acte, and occasionally closing music. It is the roadshow release version that viewers should seek – the roadshow version is available on DVD (VHS and all formats prior to DVD have shortened theatrical cuts) and, hopefully, will be on Disney’s streaming upcoming service.

By the time The Happiest Millionaire premiered, roadshow releases were on the wane. Studios executives (including Disney, which led him to produce The Happiest Millionaire after the triumph of Mary Poppins), inspired by the financial success of such musicals from the early- and mid-1960s, believed these movie musicals to be their answer to shifting winds in Hollywood. They would, as a post-Walt Walt Disney Studios learned, be mistaken. Any notions that Walt Disney Studios could ever challenge the Hollywood studio stalwarts seemed unlikely. The Happiest Millionaire, for those who temper their expectations and are interested in the final Disney film with any connection to Walt himself, is a flawed effort saved only by a selection of its musical performances and songs found within.

My rating: 6/10

^ Based on my personal imdb rating. My interpretation of that ratings system can be found here.

[aion-rsa]

I Care a Lot: Peter Dinklage is the Scariest Gangster We’ve Seen in Years

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

This article contains I Care a Lot spoilers.

J Blakeson’s I Care a Lot is one of very few films where everyone in it is a villain. In the lead role, Rosamund Pike ushers in a new amoral high mark as conservator con artist Marla Grayson. Peter Dinklage meanwhile mines the standard Hollywood heavy role for an unexpected haul of gangster gravitas. And with his turn as Roman Lunyov, the former black sheep of the Lannister family in Game of Thrones joins the likes of Robert De Niro, Marlon Brando, Wesley Snipes, and Humphrey Bogart as memorable cinema crime bosses.

However, this isn’t Dinklage’s first turn in a mob movie. He got his button in Find Me Guilty (2006). The film was based on the true story of Lucchese crime family soldier Jackie DiNorscio, played by Vin Diesel, and the longest mafia trial in American history. The movie was co-written and directed by Sidney Lumet, who not only helmed such crime classics as Dog Day Afternoon and Q&A, but was one of the original Dead End kids when the proto-gangster social drama was still on Broadway. Dinklage didn’t play a mobster in Find Me Guilty. He played a lawyer.  

Dinklage’s Lunyov Family isn’t strictly going up against law enforcement in I Care a Lot. Rather Pike’s Marla Grayson and her partner in crime (and life), Fran (Eiza González), are court-appointed guardians from hell, and they represent a rival outfit. They are also operating a lucrative racket.

This guardianship gang war could be seen as similar to the scenarios which happened when Italian, Jewish, and Irish mobs moved in on the Harlem and Chicago numbers games in the 1920s and ’30s. Or how Michael Corleone’s first order of business as head of family in The Godfather was to take over the casinos in Las Vegas. Like Don Vito Corleone before her, Marla’s also got judges, such as the sympathetic Judge Lomax (Isiah Whitlock Jr.), in her pocket. Eldercare racketeering dominance is also comparable to the prohibition fights of The St. Valentine’s Day Massacre, and the body count is just as high. The take is just as sweet.

Edward G. Robinson set the standard for cinematic mob rule as “Rico” Bandello in Little Caesar (1931). Dinklage’s Roman Lunyov, by contrast, is more of a Czar. He heads a family in the Russian mafia and purports himself like a descendant of the Romanov dynasty. But he’s got Cossack in him. It’s in his DNA and cascading down his chin like the tail of a cavalry horse.

On Game of Thrones, Dinklage’s Tyrion Lannister was part of an insidious dynasty whose roots intertwined with every twig of the ruling class. The modern Russian mob, on screen and off, can boast even more branches.

Netflix’s World’s Most Wanted dedicated an episode to Semion Mogilevich, the reputed head of the Russian mob (aka Bratva). While Moglievich is allegedly tied to arms dealing, international trading scams, and countless murders, the cops in the documentary series compare him to the Keyser Söze character from The Usual Suspects. He’s a respected, low-key businessman who likes to smoke. He lives in a mansion next to the head of the Communist Party in Russia. His activities aren’t merely state-sanctioned, they are apparently encouraged.

Dinklage’s Roman is all these things, even as his identity is actually more elaborately guarded than Söze’s, and his tastes run toward elitist’s treats.

But then Russian mobsters are always ruthless on screen. These are the guys who killed Denzel Washington’s seemingly indestructible narco cop Alonzo Harris in Training Day (2001). You never prepare for that. When the “Three Wise Men” who always have your back tell you to skip town, you know you’re dealing with folks in a rough trade. On Netflix’s Orange Is the New Black, Galina “Red” Reznikova (Kate Mulgrew) would rather go to jail for keeping bodies on ice than say she was keeping them fresh for the Russian mafia in Queens.

Dinklage’s big bad leans into this mythic image of Russian mobsters, with Roman appearing cut from the same cloth as the New Jersey-based operators who could make even Tony Soprano take pause in The Sopranos. Albeit if Dinklage’s character ever actually visited the tough guys in the Garden State, he would probably need to rethink his man-bun. After all, Tony Soprano couldn’t even get away with shorts.

When James Cagney had fist fights in his early films, he was always matched with a bruiser twice his size because the studios thought no one in the audience would accept him being remotely challenged otherwise. Dinklage also doesn’t display a traditionally imposing physical presence. But he is no lightweight. His own thugs cower at the very thought of a cross word. In the Lunyov family, it’s best to bring a gun to a food fight.

Roman’s personal attorney almost wets his briefs when he screws up. That’s because Roman is as unpredictable as Cagney’s Cody Jarrett, the gang leader in White Heat, Cagney’s most psychopathic role. Dinklage’s introduction as Roman shows him asking how many mules died on the last drug run. He calculates them coldly, as part of business, with the sociopathology of a Chief Executive Officer. But his biggest similarity can be found in oedipal complexities. Like Cody Jarrett, Roman Lunyov loves his mother.

We don’t know much about Jennifer Peterson, the nice old lady played by Dianne Wiest. She’s got money, a nice house, no living relatives, and a doctor who will exaggerate dementia symptoms in court for a stock payoff.  On the surface Peterson seems to be a competent business woman who retired after a successful career. Now under the less than sensitive care at the Berkshire Oaks Senior Living facility, we realize her chosen field was career criminal. After all, any of these sweet old ladies could have had criminally scandalous youths.

When Marla finally asks her ward who she is, all Jennifer has to say is “I’m the worst mistake you’ll ever make.” We learn she has more than one son in the Russian mob. She could be a post-Glasnostic Ma Barker from the Prohibition era. Barker’s fictional approximation in White Heat, Ma Jarrett (Margaret De Wolfe Wycherly) tells her son she can take care of herself. And while Jennifer may have been declared legally unable to do just that in I Care a Lot, she is quite adept at a choke hold, eschewing the standard garrote assassination for her own elbow.

Marla doesn’t romanticize her mother, calling her a psychopath and offering her up as the collateral damage of closing costs. Her single-minded opportunism is more sociopathic than Pike’s Amy Dunne in David Fincher’s adaptation of Gone Girl. She employs a cutthroat logic that’s in the same territories as bad-mannered comedies, but with the ruthlessness of the shark in Jaws.

Roman’s black-on-black dress code ensembles, by contrast, broadcast a desire for stylish power games. Marla is not interested in gangster chic; she prefers classy monochromatic suits so brightly focused they attract moths like flames. Her crew is all business as usual. Dr. Amos (Alicia Witt) is the fixer. She picks the “cherries,” elderly cash cows who can be milked in the retirement home. Sam Rice (Damian Young) is the monster at the center of the center. Everyone’s got a soulless nature except Eiza González’s Fran, who is also the only one to see the wisdom of getting the fuck out of there.

Dinklage is fearsome in one of the scariest screen gangsters in recent years. This guy can dispatch troublesome community angels easier than a creamy éclair pastry–and he loves those treats. He even takes a last loving bite of a chocolate-covered, custard-filled house specialty before he tosses it onto the cold concrete of an underground parking garage.

When he ends negotiations with Marla, his only caveat is to make it look “organic.” Georgia Lyman, who is only credited as “the Assassin,” is I Care a Lot’s Luca Brasi, sharing duties with a few “heavies.” The film’s Fredo is Alexi Ignatyev, played by Nicholas Logan as if he’s always waiting for another shoe to drop. Even Ms. Peterson laughs and calls him an idiot. She laughs a lot, and it’s not just the steady drugs she’s being forcibly and legally dosed with, it’s the glee of power.

Roman’s power lies in his legal team, and the Lunyov family’s Tom Hagen is Dean Ericson (Chris Messina). One thing you have to admit with the Russian mob is they do appreciate innovation and sophistication. Ericson can’t help but be impressed by Marla’s scam. His lowball offer of $150,000 is an insult, but an understandable one. His veiled threats are as subtle as his suits are ostentatious.

Marla doesn’t seem to appreciate the power the Lunyov family wields, but she does appreciate the irony.

“If you can’t convince a woman to do what you want,” she says, appraising the fine print under the mouthpiece’s exploratory offer, “then you call her a bitch and threaten to kill her.” Marla pays it forward by calling the Lunyov matriarch far worse and threatening extreme discomfort, which she promises will last until the day she dies. As restrained as her venom may be, Marla is a proud femme fatale. Though also a stereotypical “ice queen” villainess, and heartless materialist. We’re almost sorry to feel bad for Marla when she is tied to a chair during last minute negotiations.

Director Blakeson, who made the science fiction action movie The 5th Wave and the noir thriller The Disappearance of Alice Creed, sets up I Care a Lot like a horror movie.

“There’s no such thing as good people,” Marla Grayson says at the start of the film. The opening is exquisitely unsettling as Jennifer is guided through a process of enforced institutionalization, followed by her house being emptied, painted, placed on the market, and sold. The plot thickens as keys are traced to a safety deposit box containing millions of dollars’ worth of diamonds, which officially don’t exist. Most gangster films aren’t driven by this kind of mystery, but Roman is a new kind of gangster. Though cheap, dead drug-mules are an unnecessary expense, the Lunyov family want to make a difference in the world.

Blakeson wanted to highlight all-too true stories of elder abuse and the perils of court-appointed conservators which could even bring The #FreeBritney movement calling. But he captures the allure of the anti-hero and the all-American dream of a corner on the market. Roman Lunyov has one final thing in common with Michael Corleone, and many of the traditional gangsters: He wants to earn money legitimately. This is not to be confused with wanting to go legit.

Those of us who root for the “bad guys” will find a wealth of insidious characters, and a very original caper, at the heart of I Care a Lot. Peter Dinklage’s Roman Lunyev may go against type, with his eastern bloc nobility stunted by the limits of black comedy. But as a movie mob boss, he is Street Regal.

I Care a Lot can be streamed on Netflix.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The post I Care a Lot: Peter Dinklage is the Scariest Gangster We’ve Seen in Years appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3sdUjQs