#i've seen bits and scenes from it!

[asukachii]

Jujutsu Kaisen 2 ED 1 | AKARI

[mastersoftheair]

"Masters of the Air details. Part 6-Bombsight and bombing.

"[...] I was brought in to Masters of the Air to teach actors how to look like they knew what they were doing, and the bombardier work would certainly be important to the series.

"[...] The Norden bombsight was being developed in the 1920’s by Carl Lucas Norden, a Swiss engineer, who worked for the US Navy. He developed this sight (eventually the Mark 15 series for the Navy and the M series for the Army) and the autopilot system that goes along with it. The autopilot was needed as it could fly the aircraft more precisely on the bomb run than the pilot could. Just don’t tell the pilot this!

"The Mk 15 Norden sight was a beautiful hand-built and fit device with an analog computer that would calculate the point in space at which to drop the bombs. The Bombardier would input information to the sight in the form of altitude, air speed and the ballistics of the bomb. On the bomb run he would pick up the target with the crosshairs in the optics and engage a motor drive that would keep the crosshairs synchronized on the target during the approach. On the run he would also make fine adjustments to be sure the crosshair stayed on the target for range and drift. When the sighting angle reached the predetermined dropping angle the sight sent an electrical signal to the intervalometer that would drop the selected bombs at the specified interval.

"The mission order would define what bombs were to be used and what the nose and tail fuses were to be used and their delay settings, if any. The order would also specify the aiming point and the interval to be set in to the intervalometer. This would space the bombs across the ground as desired. Maybe you wanted the bombs dropped quickly, right next to each other, to try and put a hole in the roof of the hardened sub pens. Or maybe you wanted to walk them down a long runway. The intervalometer would be set for your ground speed and how many feet apart you wanted the bombs to hit on the ground.

"If you wanted to drop a string of bombs all down a line, like a runway or a front line, then you would want the center bomb of the stick to hit in the middle so you would adjust the trail plate on the bombsight the right amount to drop the first bomb early and have the center bomb right in the middle. This center bomb spot would be the mean point of impact or MPI.

"When I arrived on set at MoTA they had several nose sections with varying amounts of the bombardier’s equipment and controls. They had one real Norden sight head called the hero sight in the hero fuselage. The hero label was attached to the best props where special or close up filming with lead actors might take place.

"The stabilizer is the lower half of the bombsight and contains the yaw gyro for the autopilot. The bombsight head sits on the stabilizer and pivots to keep pointed at the target.

"The hero sight was sitting on a prop stabilizer, and it needed more accessories and work to look as good as the real sight head. I asked if they had a better stabilizer around and they thought so, but where it was seemed to be uncertain. It was eventually located and cleaned up for mounting in the hero nose. It was still missing some items namely the directional panel and an Automatic Bombing Computer or ABC. The ABC was used on the bomb run so they could perform evasive maneuvers and not have to do the run and drift calculations again. I was told that a Norden Bombsight expert in the UK said that they didn’t use the ABC early in the war, if at all. I had to differ with that opinion as it was most certainly used throughout the early war and almost all the way through. Its use dropped off later in the war if anything.

"The ABC is quite visible on top of the stabilizer so I thought the hero sight should have the ABC not only for authenticity but for eye candy too. I asked my daughter, Sydney, to send out the directional panel and ABC set from our museum’s bombsight back home in California.

"[...] Like with the pilots and their own preference for hand positions on the throttles, the bombardiers were given the options of the two different hand configurations bombardiers often used to adjust the sight on the run. The more uncomfortable two-handed method or the single hand. Which eye to use while looking through the eyepiece was also their own decision as this would have been a preference item as well.

"We also taught them how to look over the sight to pick up the target then transition down to the eye piece and to uncage and adjust the gyro for leveling the optics in case this might be of interest to the directors. We went over the control sequence for the bomb bay doors, bomb select and intervalometer adjustments and the bomb run itself.

"[...] The standard procedure for the bomb run was developed early on by the 8th AF which was to navigate to a point where the bomb run would begin. This was called the Initial Point or IP. From the IP it was either a straight line into the target, or evasive maneuvers along this line to the target.

"At the IP, the bombardier would open the bomb bay doors. This would change the drag and the airspeed accordingly. It was up to the pilot to adjust power to maintaining a specific airspeed and altitude which was critical to accurate bombing. The pilot would also re-trim the aircraft so it would fly hands off at which point he would engage the servos of the autopilot and turn control of the aircraft over to the bombardier. The Bombardier would fly the aircraft through the bombsight and its connection to the autopilot.

"The main bombardier actor, Elliot Warren, portrayed James R. Douglass. Elliot was a quick learn and did a great job. He was a pleasure to work with and I really enjoyed his scenes.

"[...]Props made several Norden sights. Rubber ones and some with more detail. One was set up with squibs to detonate when the sight was shot by the actor with his 45 cal M1911 pistol. They were wired and the squibs went off with the sound of the pistol. It looked pretty good on camera.

"It was AAF policy to try and destroy the bombsight so it would not fall in to enemy hands. Some of the manuals actually discuss what should be done to destroy it. I would hope that the large gyro in the sight head was not spinning at its normal 25,000 RPM when the bullet hit the 2-pound rotor, as I would imagine that it would come apart and potentially send shrapnel back at the guy holding the gun!

"The lighting folks would control the instruments and lights throughout the fuselages, like the bomb bay door open light on the bombardier’s panel. We put in a lag between the bomb door handle operation and the door open light coming on. Not an accurate lag as we obviously will not be filming for the actual 20 seconds or so needed to open the electric bomb bay doors. It was a delight to work with the lighting crew and they did magical work especially with the custom made instrumentation.

"[...] Here is a full-on rant about the Norden so you might want to skip out!

"Keep in mind that this is my own opinion. An American who is discussing the Norden sight. Your mileage may vary.

"Recently there has been, what I call a ‘revisionist historians’ view of the Norden Bombsight. In short, this modern interpretation, pretty much lead by Malcolm Gladwell’s TED Talk on YouTube and his book Bomber Mafia, calls in to question the usefulness of the Norden. Basically, saying it was not effective and some of his followers have even been using the term ‘useless’ recently.

"Just keep a few thoughts of this rant in mind.

"The bomb sighting systems we had going into WWII were based on technology left over from WWI. They were simple sights with wires to sight down. They were meant for aircraft speeds and altitudes from WWI. Now skip ahead to the new bombers flying two to three times as fast and at altitudes up to 30,000 feet instead of 3000 feet.

"An all-new system was needed to solve this new complex bombing problem. Sperry was working on it and Norden, who had left employment at Sperry, started his own effort.

"The Sperry and Norden sights were the leaders of synchronous sights going in to WWII. They both were good sights which were constantly being improved. They had each also developed a highly advanced autopilot that the bombardier used to fly the aircraft on the bomb run.

"These were visual sights, so it was necessary to see the target in order to be effective. Not so easy in Europe all year long. Radar and other methods were coming online to help with all weather bombing but there were many limitations in play.

"Results would certainly vary from target to target, and it was a brand new technology made up of gyros to keep the optics level, a mechanical computer to make the calculations, motors to drive the optics. Lots of parts needed to be able to work at 200 degrees F to 50 below, not to mention the complex autopilot system.

"So, my main question is: If this new technology was so bad then what exactly was it that brought the German war effort to its knees?

"The RAF was going after cities and targets at night and the AAF was trying to hit specific strategic targets like submarine production, aircraft and weapons plants, fuel and machine parts to make the weapons work. The very things the Germans needed to wage war.

"What brought this production essentially to a halt?

"I submit that it was the bombing campaign.

"If it was the bombing campaign, then it was likely the Norden and Sperry sights that made it possible. Mostly the Norden as it was chosen as the primary system and the Sperry S-1 sight was discontinued.

"The invasion of fortress Europe was certainly needed to push the Germans all the way back to Berlin, but I would also submit that these efforts were made easier by the results of the bombing campaign.

"There were certainly mistakes and errors all throughout this campaign as there was a massive learning curve in doing something that had never been accomplished on such a scale before. How to amass hundreds to a thousand plus bombers to rally together to attack a target effectively and then get home. The attrition was unbelievably steep in the early years as so beautifully depicted in Master’s.

"Just how do you get back in that bomber the next day and face near certain death once again like they did. Again, as seen in Master’s. Just a few of the wonderful aspects of this series and the history behind it.

"Having a PR campaign about the weapon that would help win the war, like Harold T. Barth created for Norden, was not such a bad thing. If it rallied the troops and home front to keep up morale, then I think it was a good thing. Just open any wartime magazine and look at the full page ads all throughout. Each ad promoting the companies contribution to winning the war effort. BF Goodrich with their new Rivnut or Seeger Refrigerator building bomb racks and feed chutes for the 50's. It was a nationwide industrial and personal team effort to wage this war against the Axis. Norden was one of them.

"Barth said that the sight could hit a pickle barrel from 20,000 feet. When the press asked if this was true Norden replied ‘sure if you tell me which pickle you want me to hit’. Some folks nowadays are taking this literally and complaining that it really couldn’t hit a specific pickle. No kidding. Say it isn’t so. Those bastards!

"To Mr. Gladwell and his followers, I'll ask again: What was it, in your mind, that allowed all of those bombs to take out the German AND the Japanese war efforts? If it wasn’t Sperry’s S-1 and Norden’s M series bombsights, then just exactly what was it?

"Rant over. Flak vest, with crotch protector, and helmet, on."

[boyfridged]

the brilliance of jay's progression in countdown is that it gives you a promise of positive character development, and then it breaks it. and it does so intentionally, in the most diverting way, to emphasize jason's inability to escape the cycle.

or, another post breaking down the series, where i repeat myself a lot but also make a clearer argument.

there are three notable events that happen at the beginning: the subtle showcase of jay's internal conflict considering his approach toward killing (the very first encounter with duela and the monitor), jay reaching out to donna in crisis ("i guess I just wanted to be around someone else who might know how it feels…"), and finally – his helmet shattering. these scenes tell you: jason's direction as a character is changing, and it seems, for the better. he's about to abandon his trauma-based (no matter how ironic, it does remain tied to his trauma) identity, he is connecting with people, and he seems to be on a brink of understanding that his moral standing does not provide easy answers or solutions either.

and for the most part of the series, we see that narrative unfolding (even if a bit non-linear, still innocently convincing way). it is, in many ways, supported by bringing up features of his characterisation from the 80s. jason remains, of course, still unpleasant in ways typical for this era of writing, and is conflicted and disagreeable, which makes sense for his utrh/post-utrh personality. however, there are also details that bring us back to his original robin run and his cameos on ntt – we see him being responsible (e.g. #43 – suggesting to bring in other superheroes in crisis, even though he clearly is not keen on the idea of working with them), determined (#16: “isn’t that your super-power, stupid boy? too stupid to ever give up?” “maybe it is”), sensitive (half of the whole storyline, really), caring for gotham (gotham by gaslight) and people-oriented (as early as #51).

the issue that particularly signals that jason is an inherently good person and externalizes his internal conflicts regarding classic heroic vigilantism vs his cynical approach is #30, where we meet batman of earth-15 –  alt jason, whom our jason attempts to punch in the face.

and on topic of batman – jason is always gravitating towards batman. in gotham by gaslight jay looks delighted to see (the foreign) bruce and suggests checking with the local bat. then, earth-51 arc arrives.

earth-51 arc (#16 - #13) is a culmination of a promise of catharsis for jason. we have already seen him as batman, as a confirmation that a different life for him is possible. and here he has a chance to come to terms with his past and overcome it. he meets a version of bruce who has done exactly what he wanted him to do in utrh: killed the joker and the rest of the rogue gallery. what is most important – he is disappointed with this version of his father. we realise that jason, deep down, has an intimate and intuitive understanding of what batman stands for; and that he shares most of his values. this is a truth that you can't ignore especially since jay is the one to inspire this hollow, cynical version of batman to go out and fight in a seemingly lost battle.

and then batman dies. right in front of him.

this is a central moment of the narrative, for many reasons, most strikingly:

the symmetry:, a premise known from the lost days, becomes literal. this "the father had lost a son, and now the son had lost the father" is a cruel parallel to a death in the family and bruce's grief. jason's death created a gap between them that jay has been desperately trying to close, with no avail – because in bruce's mind, jason remains dead. now that jason is grieving bruce, the connection closes on both sides, and there's no way for either of them to reconcile the mourning with the reality of the other being truly alive. in this sense, the arc solidifies that jason can never come home.

no good deed goes unpunished. as i have mentioned before, so far jason is established as someone good at heart, but confused; and the reader intuitively assumes that his better, honest side will win. yet, the moment jason gives in to hope, it victimises and retraumatizes him. this event, again, brings to mind his own death, when he tried his best to save sheila and ended up paying the highest price for it. so, narrative-wise, jason is always punished for his kindness.

perhaps because of the nonchalant act that jason pulls off, many readers seem to miss that everything that happens after that arc is an upshot that follows logically from it.

jason's immediate determination to leave – and later a short period of indecision that ends up with his dramatic exit, pushing his team away, makes perfect sense when you consider what intense trauma he has just gone through. admittedly, i'm not a fan of the notion that he would give up at all (i think he's always ready to give up on himself, but not on the world), but then on the other hand, if there's anything that would cause it, narrative-wise, witnessing batman dying does sound like a good incentive for that. (it also has to be pointed out that jason seems to be confident that the rest of the team can go into the final battle without him anyway; it's not like he would go back to his earth not even knowing if said earth will exist tomorrow).

it's crucial to notice that following that crisis of faith (faith in fighting for the world) is followed by him raising up for the challenge again, but now... worse and even more confused. in the final confrontation with donna, jason antagonizes the superhero community, and when we see him at the end of the series (#1) his monologue indicates that he believes the capes to be naive. (significantly, he also focuses on bruce and offends the memory of 51 earth-bruce by calling him crazy; an action that can be seen as suppression of his own guilt and invoking, once again, a cruel symmetry considering bruce's engagement in victim-blaming after jason's death). this, once again, is consistent with the "no good deed" reading – jason diminishes superhero values because he has been continuously punished for living by them. (and unlike other superheroes, he doesn't have a support system nor skills in compartmentalization that would help him deal with this trauma) every leap of hope re-traumatised him. hence, it seems to be no surprise that jason decides to abandon the mask, and in the closing scene we see him without it. the promise of the shattered helmet is pushed to an extreme – jason does not get a new alt identity. he denounces the idea of superheroism completely.

and yet, what is ultimately subversive about the ending, is that jay is not truly a civilian and he does not abandon vigilante ways. he does the same thing. we see him without a mask, but he is clearly working a case. he might have rejected the symbolic dimension of the vigilante work, but he still carries the same delusional hope for bettering the world and protecting people that the superhero community does. only now, he is even more isolated and doesn't have any identity to go by (as he is still legally dead).

as such, the ending opens a new question regarding jason's understanding of himself and vigilantism, or rather the lack thereof. is it possible that vigilantism is really at the core of jay's trauma? and why, potentially, is it something that is so destructive for him as a character specifically? (and i have some answers for that, but i'm not going to get into it here, as it's already a very long post)

so, tldr; the genius of countdown is that it establishes jay as sensitive, determined, and fundamentally good (this is what the purpose of seeing him as batman is!), and then it brutally reminds the reader that jason’s tragedy is that on this specific earth, in this specific timeline, his love doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. the story goes on as it did; one way or another, jay is trapped in the cycle of his care ironically creating rifts between him and the others, and bringing him to his own downfall.

[licorishh]

Replayed Modern Warfare 3 2011 on Veteran tonight and goooooooood night. Blood Brothers never gets any easier to watch no matter how many times you've done it and the ending really never misses huh

I apologize for the amount of yapping in the tags I reread it all on mobile and started giggling because it went on for so long but eh. Blessed are those who won't shut the freak up and all that

[tathrin]

📽 action!: rank all six of the films (or three if you're a hater)

Answers for this LotR ask-game.

Ahh okay so at this point I have to confess something terrible: I still have not seen the third Hobbit movie. I'm sorry! I just couldn't do it. The fuckery of it all, especially in the second movie with Mirkwood and Thranduil and Legolas ("a lowly Silvan elf" what the FUCK what the fuck PJ WHAT THE FUCK), was just too much for me. Character-assassination is one thing, and I thought after Denethor I knew what I was going to be getting with Thranduil but NOPE! It was literal world building assassination and I just CANNOT.

Don't get me wrong, Lee Pace did an amazing job and actually seeing Mirkwood was amazing and it was genuinely delightful to see Orlando put those ears on again; but the OuTrAgE that filled my heart at the yeet-ing of what minimal canon we even have for the Mirkwood elves was just intolerable, and while I did mean to go see it, really I did, I just...couldn't actually get the motivation to go before it was out of theatres. I've heard the EE are better (less studio fuckery) so I'll watch them someday! Honest! I just...haven't. yet.

And as to the Lord of the Rings trilogy...man, I don't even know how to do this. In terms of which is the best film, or in terms of which one I enjoy watching most, or in terms of which on hits me in the heart hardest or...? I don't know if I can objectively rank my feelings about these movies even in my own brain because RotK ends with Into the West and I have FeelingsTM about the Undying Lands and Sea Longing okay. So the last scene of RotK at the Grey Havens is a fucking spear through the heart every time and I can't even describe the knot of feelings it engenders, and I think overall TTT may be my favorite but also it has Plot Issues that piss me off even more than the Plot Issues in RotK I think,...yeah, we're going to do this in terms of Film Crafting rather than personal favorites because I'm having too many feelings lmao. So! In order of most-well-done-movie to least:

Fellowship of the Ring

The Two Towers

Return Of The King

The Desolation of Smaug

An Unexpected Journey

[t-u-i-t-c]

Family to the End, Until the Day We Meet Again

[eggmeralda]

kind of wish my way of coping with morbid things wasn't to expose myself to them until I become desensitised lol

[bonestrouslingbones]

suddenly realizing that for the reboot one of the things that i think i Have to hammer in a bit more is the concept of LV as like. just a straight up addiction

[always-andromeda]

I fucking love dudes who watched Nightcrawler and determined that Lou is their sigma male grindset role model. Like bro you completely missed the fact that he's just a strange little guy. He's my babygirl.

[dumplingcatho]

ep 4 omgggggg holy shit. arq tech?? lilith?????? GIRL NOOOO????????

[nexus-nebulae]

congratulations to this random youtuber for being the ONLY zelda yter i've seen who's warned about zelda 2's really fucking harsh flashing lights

[mobius-m-mobius]

Ahh! you make the prettiest lokius/loki show gifsets!! Please tell me your secrets oh talented one (aka do you have any tips for the new gifmakers out there?)

Oh my god you're too sweet?? Thanks so so much for the kind words and taking the time to send a message, always means a lot to hear 🥰💖

Haha and as much as I treasure your talented compliment in all honesty to this day I don't actually understand what each layer option in Photoshop does and just make things up along the way which is the best advice I can give! Coloring, cropping, font selection, really everything is extremely specific to your own personal tastes and even my own is a constant work in progress 😊

Overall curves is a solid base for any edit but because my gifs are usually extremely bright and saturated (probably overly so if we're being honest 😂) the adjustments that make the biggest difference there are almost always levels to add strong brightness and contrast (don't like the actual brightness/contrast option for this, who knows why), color balance to achieve the most natural looking tones, and selective color to make shades pop so those are great places to start!

Best of luck if you're getting ready to try gifmaking out and please feel free to ask or message about anything specific you might have questions about in the future 💕

[ookaookaooka]

SIGH am i gonna have to start reading dragon ball z

[demilypyro]

So I've seen a few too many people on twitter talking about The Kiss Scene from the new Scott Pilgrim anime. People saying it's fetishistic and indulgent, people calling it male gazey, etc. And while the kiss itself is certainly a bit exaggerated, I felt like writing a bit about why I disagree, and why context is important, like it always is. But it basically turned into an extended analysis on the metatextual treatment of Roxie Richter. So bear with me. It's a long post.

What really matters about this scene is not the kiss itself, but what precedes it. Not even just the fight scene just before it, but what precedes the whole anime series, really. And that's the Scott Pilgrim comic book, and the live action movie. Because in both, Roxie is a punchline.

She's a joke. Her character starts and ends with "one of the exes is actually a girl, I bet you didn't expect that." Jokes are made about Ramona's latent bisexuality, the movie especially treating it as funny and absurd, and her validity as a romantic interest is entirely written off by Ramona as being "just a phase." There's a fight scene, she's defeated by a man giving her an orgasm which implicitly calls her sexuality into question (come on), and the movie just moves on. It sucks. It really, really sucks.

The comic fares a little better. It never veers into outright homophobia like the movie does, and while the line about Ramona having gone through a phase remains, Roxie actually gets one over on Scott when Ramona briefly gets back with Roxie. But Roxie is still only barely a character. Like all the other evil exes, she's just a stepping stone towards the male protagonist's development. She barely even gets any screentime before she's defeated by Scott's "power of love." But Roxie stands out, since she's the only villain who is queer, or at least had been confirmed queer at that point (hi Todd). In a series that champions multiple gay men in the supporting cast, the single undeniable lesbian in the story is a villain. She's labeled as evil, made fun of, pushed aside in favor of the men, and then discarded. Her screentime was never about her, or her feelings for Ramona. It was about the straight, male protagonist needing to overcome her. And that was Roxie Richter. An unfortunate victim of the 2010s.

Fast forward to current year, and the new anime series is announced. Everybody sits down to watch the new series expecting another retelling of the same story, and.... hang on, that straight male protagonist I mentioned just died in the first episode. And now it's humanizing the villains from the original story. And there's Roxie, introduced alongside the other evil exes in the second episode, and she's being played entirely straight, without a punchline in sight. No jokes are made about her gender, no questions are made of her validity as one of Ramona's romantic interests. The narrative considers her important. In one episode, she already gets more respect than she did in either of the previous iterations of Scott Pilgrim. And this isn't even her focus episode yet... which happens to be the very next one.

The anime series goes to great lengths to flesh out the original story's villains and to have Ramona reconcile with them. And I don't think it's a coincidence that Roxie gets to go first. While Matthew Patel gets his development in episode 2, Roxie is the first to directly confront Ramona, now our main protagonist. This is notable too because it's the only time the exes are encountered out of order. Roxie is supposed to be number 4, but she's first in line, and later on you realize that she's the only one who's out of sequence. She's the one who sets the precedent for the villains being redeemed. She's the most important character for Ramona to reconcile with.

What follows is probably the most extensive, elaborate 1 on 1 fight scene in the whole show. Roxie fights like a wounded animal, her motions are desperate and pained. Ramona can only barely fight back against her onslaught. Different set-pieces fly by at breakneck speed as Roxie relentlessly lays her feelings at Ramona's feet through her attacks and her distraught shouts. And unlike the comic or the movie, Ramona acknowledges them, and sincerely apologizes. And the two end up just laying there, exhausted, reminiscing about when they were together.

Only after this, after all of this, does the kiss scene happen. Roxie has been vindicated, she has reconciled with the person who hurt her, the narrative has deemed that her anger is justified and has redeemed her character. And she gets her victory lap by making the nearest other hot girl question her heterosexuality, sharing a sloppy kiss with her as the music triumphantly crescendos.

It's... a little self-congratulatory, honestly. But it's good. It's redemption for a character who had been mistreated for over a decade. And she punctuates the moment by being very, very gay where everyone can see it, no men anywhere in sight. Because this is her moment. And then she leaves the plot, on her own accord this time, while humming the hampster dance. What a legend. How could anything be wrong with this.

[stromblessed]

Mizu, femininity, and fallen sparrows

In my last post about Mizu and Akemi, I feel like I came across as overly critical of Mizu given that Mizu is a woman who - in her own words - has to live as a man in order to go down the path of revenge.

If she is ever discovered to be female by the wrong person, she will not only be unable to complete her quest, but there's a good chance that she'll be arrested or killed.

So it makes complete sense for Mizu to distance herself as much as possible from any behavior that she feels like would make someone question her sex.

I felt so indignant toward Mizu on my first couple watchthroughs for this moment. Why couldn't Mizu bribe the woman and her child's way into the city too? If Mizu is presenting as a man, couldn't she claim to be the woman's escort?

However, this moment makes things pretty clear. Mizu knows all too well the plight of women in her society. She knows it so well that she cannot risk ever finding herself back in their position again. She helps in what little way she can - without drawing attention to herself.

Mizu is not a hero and she is not one to make of herself a martyr - she will not set herself on fire to keep others warm. There's room to argue that Mizu shouldn't prioritize her quest over people's lives, but given the collateral damage Mizu can live with in almost every episode of season 1, Mizu is simply not operating under that kind of morality at this point. ("You don't know what I've done to reach you," Mizu tells Fowler.)

And while I still feel like Mizu has an obvious and established blind spot when it comes to Akemi because of their differences in station, such that Mizu's judgment of Akemi and actions in episode 5 are the result of prejudice rather than the result of Mizu's caution, I also want to establish that Mizu is just as caged as Akemi is, despite her technically having more freedom while living as a man.

Mizu can hide her mixed race identity some of the time, and she can hide her sex almost all of the time, but being able to operate outside of her society's strict rules for women does not mean she cannot see their plight.

It does not mean she doesn't hurt for them.

Back to Mizu and collateral damage, remember that sparrow?

While Mizu is breaking into Boss Hamata's manse, she gets startled by a bird and kills it on reflex. She then cradles it in her hands - much more tenderly than we've seen Mizu treat almost anything up to this point in the season:

She then puts it in its nest, with its unhatched eggs. Almost like she's trying to make the death look natural. Or like an accident.

You see where I'm going with this.

When Mizu kills Kinuyo, Mizu lingers in the moment, holding the body tenderly:

And btw a lot of stuff about this show hit me hard, but this remains the biggest gut punch of them all for me, Mizu holding that poor girl's body close, GOD

When Mizu arranges the "scene of the crime," Kinuyo's body is delicate, birdlike. And Mizu is so shaken afterward that she gets sloppy. She's horrified at this kill to the point that she can't bring herself to take another innocent life - the boy who rats her out.

MIZU'S ONE MOMENT OF SOFTNESS AND MERCY, COMING ON THE HEELS OF HER NEEDING TO KILL A GIRL TO SPARE HER THE WORST FATE THAT THIS RIGID SOCIETY HAS TO OFFER WOMEN, AND TO SPARE A BROTHEL FULL OF INNOCENT WOMEN WHO ARE THE CASTOFFS OF SOCIETY, NEARLY RESULTS IN ALL OF THEIR DEATHS

No wonder Mizu is as stoic and cold as she is.

And no wonder Mizu has no patience for Akemi whatsoever right before the terrible reveal and the fight breaks out:

Speaking of Akemi - guess who else is compared to a bird!

The plumage is more colorful, a bit flashier. But a bird is a bird.

And, uh

Yeah.

I like to think that Mizu killing the sparrow is not only foreshadowing for what she must do to Kinuyo, but is also a representation of the choice she makes on Akemi's behalf. She decides to cage the bird because she believes the bird is "better off." Better off caged than... dead.

But because Mizu doesn't know Akemi or her situation, she of course doesn't realize that the bird is fated to die if it is caged and sent back home.

Mizu is clearly not happy, or pleased, or satisfied by allowing Akemi to be dragged back to her father:

But softness and mercy haven't gotten Mizu anywhere good, recently.

There is so much tragedy layered into Mizu's character, and it includes the things she has to witness and the choices she makes - or believes she has to make - involving women, when she herself can skirt around a lot of what her society throws at women. Although, I do believe that it comes at the cost of a part of Mizu's soul.

After all, I'm gonna be haunted for the rest of this show by Mizu's very first prayer in episode 1:

"LET" her die. Because as Ringo points out, she doesn't "know how" to die.

Kind of like another bird in this show:

[ambrosiagourmet]

I've been thinking about Laios' succubus lately. Mulling it over a bit.

Because I've seen these pages brought up a fair bit, but almost entirely in the context of shipping (on all sides, really). And I really want to understand what they are doing for the story beyond that.

When I went back to reread the scene and section, a few things caught my interest: the way Laios responds to both forms of his succubus, the themes of the volume the chapter is found in, and the other events of the chapter itself.

So let's dive into those three things, and what I think they say about the succubus scene's purpose.

Laios is never fully frozen by the succubus

So. If you compare Marcille and Chilchuck's reactions...

to Laios':

-

There is a difference. Sure, the basics may look the same once it turns into Scylla Marcille, but even then, it functions differently.

Chilchuck and Marcille are completely frozen once they catch sight of their succubus. Izutsumi, as well, isn't able to look away, and completely freezes up once her 'mom' starts talking to her. As Chilchuck describes, "just looking at them makes you unable to move."

And yet, Scylla Marcille has to actively convince Laios to comply. He even looks away from her at one point!

Laios accepts this succubus, but he is never actually helpless to it in the same way. Taken in? Convinced? Sure, at least enough to let things happen that he probably should question more than he does. But magically compelled? Not really. Not the same way as everyone else is. So that's interesting. But let's move on for now.

2. Volume 9 is all about drive and desire

I don't often look at chapters within the context of the volume they are included in, but I think there's some really fun things to be found with that perspective in mind.

For one, volume 9 starts with an exploration of what desire brought Laios to the dungeon:

And ends with a question of what desire brought Laios to the dungeon:

It's also very concerned in general with questions of why people do what they do. Why they are in the dungeon, why they are with the people they are with, why they stay, what they fight for.

In addition to Laios, we see it with Marcille...

Izutsumi

Kabru

and Mithrun

Hell, we even get it for the demon!

It's certainly not the only volume concerned with desires and motives, but it is particularly focused on these ideas.

The succubus scene fits quite well into the ongoing question about desires, especially Laios' desires. It is even placed at an interesting spot within the volume. The volume is six chapters long, and the scene takes place at the start of the 4th chapter. It's almost smack-dab in the middle.

With all this in mind, it is interesting that, with both versions of the succubus Marcille, it's not totally clear which parts of her Laios is rejecting.

The first version of Marcille looks human, but Laios attacks when he identifies her as a monster. The second Marcille looks like a monster, but he seems to believe that she is the real (human)(ish) person that he knows. So is he rejecting the monster at first, and then accepting the person? Or is he rejecting humanity and only interested in the monstrous?

Something to consider as we look at the next point...

3. the rest of the chapter is a seduction, too

This is one of those things that might not be apparent on a first reading, but is crystal clear on a revisit. We see the succubus try and charm Laios over 7 pages, and then see the Winged Lion do the same thing for the next 19.

Much like the succubus, it offers the mingling of monsters and humans. Much like the succubus, it offers belonging.

(and this is the point where I absolutely must also link this post by fumifooms on the succubus, which has some great ideas on how the scene is informed by Laios' trauma and desire for acceptance!!!)

But, back to the point. The Winged Lion wants to feed on Laios just as much as the succubus did, and it uses similar strategies to try and make that happen. Though this chapter isn't really the turning point for the next Lord of the Dungeon (it is Marcille who will, eventually, become the Lion's next victim), it certainly behaves like it is.

Laios is convinced. The succubus gets its meal. By the end of the volume, the reader begins to understand how concerning his desires are. Together, it is all very good at building up that sense of dread and pending disaster, as we see exactly how and why Laios might just fall into the Lion's open arms and bring about the end of the world.

-

So that's the three things I noticed. But there's still something I want to touch on by looking at the way these observations overlap, and what they reveal, together.

As I said, by the end of the volume, you can feel the tension growing. Just as Kabru and Mithrun do, you look back for an answer to the questions that have been built, chapter by chapter: why is Laios here? Where will his loyalties fall? This chapter, and scene, seem to prove the inevitable truth: he will choose the monster, of course. He will choose the seductive, easy power of the Winged Lion.

But the details of what actually happens tell different story: one in which the Lion is wrong.

First, as a reminder - even in Scylla Marcille mode, the succubus never fully entrances Laios. It convinces him, but it doesn't have him completely under its thrall.

Similarly, in the dream, the Lion does convince Laios to embrace the world he is offering. But even within that dream, Laios continues to ask questions that will be vital to him later. It is because of those questions that Laios comes to a new understanding about Thistle.

And it's this realization that he cites later as part of his reason for refusing the Lion's offer.

He is thinking through things the entire time, just like he continues to question the succubus even after it turns into Scylla Marcille.

Laios also expresses an interesting reason for why he wants to see the future of this world. He's not just invested because it would mean people liking what he likes, or him getting to spend time with monsters. The thought that comes immediately before his acceptance is about what he wants for monsters and people.

I don't think it's a coincidence that this statement - "we're living beings that share the same world, but all we can do is keep killing each other" - can apply to the various humans races just as much as it does to humans and monsters. The thing he is thinking about here isn't just a matter of his personal daydreams. It's an idea that underpins every conflict in the story.

Laios caring about how people as well as monsters in this manner is something that the Lion gets wrong every time. Even at the end, he still frames Laios' desires entirely around hating people and loving monsters.

The Lion has heard him express an opinion about the future of the world! It happened right there in the dream, right in front of him! He just didn't take it seriously, and didn't view it through any lens other than "Laios likes monsters more".

He's convinced that he understands how to get to Laios. Maybe the Lion can't truly see everything, or maybe his vision into everyone's deepest desires has made it hard for him to realize how much choice still matters. That people can, and do, choose which desires to act on, and how to act on them.

Whatever the case, he's wrong about Laios, and the story shows us this over and over again.

After all, look at how the succubus interaction plays out:

A monster uses Marcille to appeal to Laios...

He realizes that something about the situation is wrong, and rejects her.

It changes strategies, and makes new offer: to turn him into a monster.

It also assures him that his friends are, or will be, taken care of.

He accepts. Or rather, allows the monster to have its way with him.

But Laios is not as helpless as he initially appears, and what the Lion thinks is a successful seduction also contains the seed of an idea that will allow Laios to later resist him.

We even get to see Izutsumi playing a similar role in both instances, as the one person fully able to take action in the face to the illusion.

The story lays out what is going happen, and then explicitly tells us that the demon and the succubus are thematically related.

The chapter performs a great sleight of hand here - everything about it seems to indicate that Laios is doomed give in to the option to have his deepest desires realized. But if you look closer, it also contains the evidence that he won't. There's a lot more going on for him.

Yes, he still falls for obvious tricks. He is still extremely into monsters, and he still doesn't feel like he fits in with other people. He may, deep down, crave to surrender to the monstrous - to let it absorb him. But he questions more than he seems to. He considers more than people realize. He cares so much more than anyone gives him credit for.

And I think this is part of why we see the succubus called back to so many times, especially with the wolf head addition to his Monster Form, which he specifically added due to his encounter with the Scylla Marcille.

This all stays with Laios. It doesn't just foreshadow the path of the story, it is fundamental to how and why he walks that path. It's not about him choosing monsters, and it's not about him choosing people. It's about how he considers both, and cares about both.

And it's about the forces that think they already know his answer. Mithrun and Kabru. The Winged Lion. The succubus.

It's about how they are wrong.