#does this make sense at all?

[snipsnipsnippy]

I have another secret children theory.

So we are introduced to these lovely force sensitive twins, right? Super cute twink and a darling ball of rage. And Luke and Leia look fairly cohesive as brother and sister.

But you go into the prequels and take a look at their parents. And listen, I love Hayden. He’s gorgeous. He’s got the gorgeous blue eyes to give to his son and these super beautiful luscious natural curls (don’t tell me it was a wig, I will cry real tears). And the funny thing to me is.. I guess they got jealous? And had to give curls to Padmé?? Despite the fact that she has no idea how to care for them… which is neither here nor there. But for the sake of this theory, both Padmé and Anakin have curly hair, right? Like both fairly defined curls. We see Padmé with full ringlets and Anakin with more wavy curls, but both defined curls.

But what about the twins? Luke? Straight hair. Leia? Also straight hair.

And the thing about curls (mind your business, science tumblr) is they’re a dominant trait. And not like brown eyes are dominant where there’s two allele types, B or b, and both Bb and BB make brown. It’s kind of a spectrum where like nothing makes straight hair and c and cc make curly and curlier hair, right?Like, it’s possible but very unlikely that two curly haired parents make straight haired children, not just once but especially TWICE. They would need a straight haired parent to make this mathematically possible.

And who do we know like that?

All I’m saying is that Anakin wasn’t exactly wrong to think that Obi-Wan was sleeping with his wife. Because it’s entirely possible if not more likely that Obi-Wan Kenobi fathered the twins.

[dr3adfulpenny]

how do you think ben feels about the cheating thing now? do you think he understands why devi did it?

I actually think he understands perfectly, and that makes it hurt so much more.

Something that I've always found interesting in 2x02 is that, yes, Devi follows Paxton but before that she turns to Ben specifically and says "I just...like you both so much." in a kind of panicked, frantic, yet familiar voice.

the way she says it it's Iike she's trying to explain to Ben, who knows her--- and let's be honest, at this point this is something we can't say for paxton---what's going on and that she does care about him and she's realizing how badly she's fucked up. and she expects him to understand (in my opinion this is something to do with why she followed paxton but that's a different answer).

they were rivals, yes, but at this point they're also good friends who have known each other for almost a decade. ben knows that devi is still healing from this horrible trauma, he knows that she can be snarky and impulsive and reckless. he knows that she struggles with confidence and that being with paxton would be a huge boost to her ego.

but despite all that he still trusted her. trusted that their relationship was real and meant something and that that would be enough to make everything okay. and he's forced to realize (or at least begin to realize) that devi has her own stuff going on and she cannot be that person for him right now, no matter how much they love care about each other.

and at the same time, he realizes that devi knows him and knows how much this would hurt him and did it anyways. he wants to just trust her so badly but he cant

tldr; ben and devi get each other on another level and that makes the cheating 100x worse

[wizards-and-t]

something something crimson peak something something sunlit garden something something trying to return to the past by any means necessary even if it kills you even if those sunlit days were not truly as rosy as your memory would have you believe something something this is how it's always been this is how it always will be something something my world is falling apart at the seams and i am terrified there is nothing outside it, i will hold onto whatever scraps i can something something "we've been dead for years lucille" "we're all in our coffins" "the ghosts are a metaphor for the past"

[bluemoonbabes]

Idk if I’ve talked about this yet, but I think the clones in Ep 2 might be reflections of the characters that interview them.

Bryan is given the clone of Eric that’s obsessed with work. Throughout the series, we learn that Bryan is closed off and duty centered (to me it seems like a coping mechanism for Asalah). The Eric is also much more aggressive and confrontational. He isn’t as docile as the other clones and seems to be the least willing to answer questions. Bryan isn’t inherently aggressive, but he’s the protector. Reactive, defensive, confrontational, whatever he has to do to carry out his role as the protector. As such, both he and the clone get no where in their interview because they’re meeting each other with what seems to a similar mindset, and because there’s no deeper connection, the clone dies. Bryan, because of his reserved disposition, is emotionally disconnected from others. His heart has withered.

Finola is given the most emotional of the Eric clones, and that’s something she’s able to latch on to (her quote from Ep 1 “when I give a piece of myself I get so much more back”). Eric is grieving just like she is. And there’s mentions of him needing to fix things (his relationship with his gf, Finola’s relationship with her sister?). When Eric goes into cardiac arrest (I think that’s what happened?) Finola is there to calm him down. She’s emotionally adept, and with that Eric clone also more emotional and open, they connect. Eric lives, and she’s able to actually interview him where it’s revealed that this clone is centered on love, as Finola seems to be (at least in part, considering her joint storylines with Dee Dee, George, and Bryan, and how she’s deeply connected to all three of them).

[supermo0]

Something that I’ve noticed is that I’m a queer cis man and my following list appears heavily skewed towards trans folks and/or lesbians

There’s nothing wrong with this, I just sometimes get struck by how I feel like I’m in the wrong bar sometimes, lmao

[ahoyimlosingmymind]

best depiction of the batfam will always be "You grew up to be the person who would have saved you" but it applies to them each respectively and that's why none of them can see eye to eye and also get up their own asses about things and go to such great lengths to defend their personal brand of justice. Because they can never stop trying to save themselves from their own history.

[jarflies]

i thnik the issue is less about specific genres and more about the lack of sincerety in media and movies now adays, an interest is the meta-self commentary rather than sincerly telling a story cliche as it may be. obviously its not all of the movies or horror movies that come out, but i do think the proliferation of meta commentary in the form of movies, cheapens any actual discussion that could be held.

[bamsara]

I think that one thing people fail to understand is that unsolicited literary criticism coming from an online stranger who is reading with no knowledge of what the authors intended goal is, is not going to be received the same as say: the authors beta reader or friends who know what the authors intended goal and has the sufficient knowledge and input to help the author reach that desired outcome.

"But I'm only trying to be helpful" How do I know you have the knowledge and literary skill for you to be able to actaully do that when we don't know each other and you are essentially a stranger to me? Are you applying this criticism based out of personal biased experience and desire to see the story or characterization be driven in another direction or tweaked, or do you know the author's intentions for the character? If the story is incomplete, are you basing your criticism of a character on the incomplete narration with only partial information available of them or are you building up a report until the story's completion? Did the author provide you with the information needed to make a fully informed criticism?

Have you discussed with the author what their plans are or are you assuming them based off the narration, especially if the narration is proven or implied to be unreliable or missing key points of the plot? Are you unbiased enough to help them reach their desired outcome for the characters and story regardless of your personal feelings towards the characters/antagonists and setting? Can you handle being told your specific input isn't wanted because you're a reader and/or have no written anything relating to their genre or topic? Do you understand and respect that the author's personal experiences might influence their writing and make it different than how you would have done it personally? Do you understand if an author only wants input from a specific demographic relating to their story?

If it's for fanfiction or other hobby media, are you holding a free hobby to a professional standard? Are you trying to give criticism because you feel like the author has produced 'subpar job performance' of their fic? Are you viewing their work as a personal intimate outlet or something that must conform with mass media? Are you applying rules and guidelines when the fic is shared for simple sharing sake? Is your criticism worded appropriately and focused on the parts where the author has requested input on rather than a general dismissal and or disapproval?

Have you put yourself in a place where you assumed you have the input needed for the story to evolve better, or have you asked what the author needs and what they're having trouble with? Can you handle having your criticism rejected if the author decides their story doesn't need the change and not take it as a personal offense against your character? Are you crossing that boundary because you think you are doing the author a favor? Are you trying to be helpful, or do you just want to be?

I think sometimes when people hear authors go 'please don't give me unsolicited writing advice or criticism' they automatically chalk it up to 'this author doesn't want ANY constructive feedback on their stuff at all' and not "i already have trusted individuals who will help me with my writing goals and- hey i don't know you like that, please stop acting so overly familiar with me'

[pumpkin-magpie]

That feeling when a hallway is a little too long and wide and a staircase is a little too big and you’re tempted to just

[slfcare]

when you keep yourself small all the time (swallowing the words you want to say, seeing everybody else as though they’re automatically above you, downplaying your feelings and achievements), the entire world will constantly be looming over you. that’s not the way to live your life. you’re supposed to be experiencing it, not be subjected to it. (this is your sign to take up more space)

[puppyeared]

learned something about myself lately

[muppetebbtide]

I think often about the heavy irony of John laughing at Wake's name and mocking BOE's naming systems. BOE are trying to preserve lost Earth culture, but clueless of context, their fragmented merging of high and low culture comes across as silly to John (and us. But it's a noble attempt to preserve everything, even the stuff that wouldn't necessarily seem 'worth' saving. But what does John rename his friends? Pyrrha and Cassiopeia and Ulysses and Augustine. He also names almost everything after Earth culture, but it's literary/religious/historical 'high' culture. BOE is scrabbling to save everything possible, but John has the privilege of context and memory, and so he picks and chooses what's 'worthy' of being used or shared. Low culture is reserved for his little jokes with himself— though honestly, a lot of his references to earth culture full stop seem to be inside jokes at the expense of others. I doubt Cassiopeia knew she was named after the infamously vain ancient queen, for example. John also quotes things at people without explaining what he means, like when he quotes Shakespeare and Hans Christian Andersen at Harrow; he's not really sharing it, he's mostly using it to isolate the other person in the conversation, or make himself seem unknowable and superior. It's honestly very telling that when given the choice John will name most things biblically or classically. It does partially feel like he's desperately scraping to preserve something of his childhood and the home he destroyed (especially with the renaming of Gideon to the Māori translation Kiriona, but... well, he literally renamed her and made her into a walking corpse teenage soldier so :/), but when you look at how he deploys earth culture on the whole, it usually becomes weird and imperialistic and weaponised. He's not really preserving lost art, he's selectively using it for his own agenda, and he's often using the two biggest things that were ever co-opted by conservatives and imperialists, the classical world and biblical convention.

[inkskinned]

i think one of the reasons glass onion is so fun is that it just... loves the audience back.

so many popular movies and shows these days thrive on a sort of bitter engagement with their fans - where the fans are dismissed as being stupid, annoying, and needlessly angry. we are constantly positioned as being less intelligent as the writers.

so much of "spoiler-free" movie-making relies on writers getting away with one twist in their work, regardless of if that twist was earned. the work doesn't actually have any rewatch value or interesting writing - because they think "good writing" is about "pulling one over" on the audience. they don't focus on making interesting characters or storylines or good endings - they focus on fooling you. glass onion, meanwhile, has faith that the audience has figured the ending out, and that we'll watch anyway, because we love the characters.

so many adaptions of older works... kind of seem to hate the original work. they're done without passion. they're done almost as if checking off a box. so many of them openly mock the audience for enjoying the original, almost directly telling us that we are fools for ever having loved something.

but glass onion. loves the audience. it knows that many of the people watching are mystery-lovers. it is an homage that feels love towards the original works it references. it knows we also love those works; and instead of trying to disparage those works, it allows us to celebrate them.

one of my favorite things about it - and maybe why i found it so satisfying - is that this movie isn't trying to tell you it's the smartest, bestest, most-clever detective story. instead, it asks itself what is satisfying and exciting for the audience? and actually gives us that payoff. it's bright, colorful, and fucking fun.

just... more of this please. i'm very bored of nihilism and grittiness and "shock value" writing. put the love back in. let us love unironically. have your work say i love you too. thank you for sharing this story.

[soybean-official]

To me it's like this

[sluttycinderella]

genuinely think dan just jumped at the first opportunity to make an apology video. this fucking theatre kid WISHES he had a legitimate reason to get up in front of his audience and emotionally manipulate them into forgiving him. he lives for the drama.

[batbabydamian]

A Quick Guide to Damian’s Furry/Feathered/Scaled Companions

LEFT: R:SOB #1 Cover RIGHT: R:SOB #6

GOLIATH THE BAT DRAGON

Introduced in: ROBIN: SON OF BATMAN (2015) #1

DAMIAN'S BABY AND BEASTY BESTIE!! On a mission during the Year of Blood, Damian kills the family of bat dragons guarding his objective. Goliath, despite being the youngest and last of his kind, forgives Damian. Goliath goes on to become one of Damian's most loyal companions, even featuring beside him in Batman Beyond (2016) #10, #11, #43-#47!

LEFT: B&R #13 RIGHT: B&R #4

TITUS THE DOG

Introduced in: BATMAN AND ROBIN (2011) #2

A Great Dane gifted to Damian from Bruce as an effort in fatherhood. Funny enough, Damian finds him a nuisance at first and briefly refers to him as "Dog". Titus is a good boy that follows Damian's every step, even joining Bruce on his mission to resurrect Damian!

LEFT: Batman Inc #1 RIGHT: Batman Inc #7

BAT-COW THE COW

Introduced in: BATMAN INCORPORATED (2012) #1

Bat-Cow, branded with a star signifying which cattle were contaminated, was saved from a slaughterhouse to run some tests (which they do find of a mind control variety). Damian declares himself a vegetarian, and calls her Bat-Cow! She also sorta has a running gag of literally standing in the face of danger to save the day.

LEFT: Batman Inc #6 RIGHT: Batman Inc #7

ALFRED THE CAT

Introduced in: BATMAN INCORPORATED (2012) #6

Considered a "hopeless case" by the animal shelter, Alfred gifts him to Damian. The cat is a bold lil guy, which Damian takes an immediate liking to, and names him Alfred (likely because tuxedo cat = butler lol). After hours of chicken, playtime, and scratches, Damian and Alfred become friends! He makes his first appearance alongside Damian’s first appearance as Batman in BATMAN (1940) #666

LEFT: Batman: Li'l Gotham #2/#1 RIGHT: Batman: Li'l Gotham #23/#12

*JERRY THE TURKEY

Introduced in: BATMAN LI'L GOTHAM (2012) #2 (Digital) #1 (Printed)

The Penguin unleashes an army of turkeys at the Gotham Thanksgiving parade which Damian turns into his own li'l turkey march by playing the trumpet. He ends up bringing one of them back for Thanksgiving dinner (as a friend), and Jerry becomes a fairly regular appearance in the world of Li'l Gotham!

*WIGGLES THE DRAGON

Introduced in: NIGHTWING (2016) #42

A sort of filler issue where Damian has been kidnapped for his blood by the "Crimson Kabuki" in Tokyo, and Dick goes through a series of boss battles to save him. The dragon's blood has been the group's main source of power, so it ends up teaming with the duo, and returns home with them.

Wiggles was originally named by a fan, "Shanootnoot" on Twitter!

*Goliath, Titus, Bat-Cow, and Alfred the cat have been Damian's main canon cast of furry companions, but SUPER-PETS SPECIAL: BITEDENTITY CRISIS (2024) may have just added Jerry and Wiggles!!