#if it needs to not be surface level means like it needs to be the very very basics of media comprehension that you should be doing naturally

[crxzytogether]

Lol I wanna address this even tho nobody asked because I’m mad. Like ship whoever you want as yk this person said but leave it out of our tag-💀 my problems more with the fact that they tagged byler for this post than what they said but yk since they tagged us might as well respond.

Firstly, “ideas planted by your community”? Huh? Girl what- you mean our evidence? You mean our analysis and perceptions and ability to interpret what we’re watching beyond surface level? And honestly after season 4 even surface level melodramas not looking too good- Secondly, what harsh truths were brought up? The lies? Your perception of montauk? which idk sounds a lot like mike and wills relationship to me but to each their own… “they’ve been together since pretty much day one”, “they have a deep connection”, “four seasons of character development”?? Do I even need to explain? Who’s been together since day one? Right mike and will, in the beginning of episode 1 before any of the upside down shit even happens we’re shown that their relationship is different from their relationship with the other party members. A fact that’s proven time and time again throughout season 1 where we see how much more Mike is affected by Will’s disappearance(not tryna negate everybody else’s feelings or reactions but it’s clear that we’re supposed to notice Mike cares slightly more or in a different way). As for the deep connections? Season 2 shed scene ring a bell, the first one of Mike’s monologue that’s an attempt to help someone he cares about that actually works and is completely honest, deep connection boom. And that connections emphasized again in s4 with Will being able to encourage Mike and make him feel better and we already know why it’s special on Will’s side and their whole plot-line that season. Next, “four seasons of character development” im sorry what?, season 1 and season 3 maybe are the only seasons I’d consider they had that meanwhile season 4 I’d say they had character regression because tell me how Mike goes from being able to comfort El about her feeling like she’s a monster but then does a 180 not only unable to comfort her but also make her feel worse-(I’m talking about she didn’t look fine in case you didn’t catch that). Back to s1/s3, s1 where they were friends for the most part is the healthiest their relationship has ever been the entire show- like😭😭it literally just goes downhill from there. Season 2/season 3 their codependency I’m- and season 4 El feeling like she has to lie to Mike about her life and Mike unable to comfort her and also hiding his own interests from her. Like sure the bullying thing I get why she’d hide that maybe not really but El lies about so many things😭😭 she feels like she has to lie to keep up the relationship. THAT 👏 IS 👏 NOT 👏 HEALTHY 👏. Like maybe after they’ve both grown separately I’d consider it but as of now? No sir. Also let me remind you how El confronted Angela and asked her to help El keep up the pretence- SHE STILL DIDN’T FEEL SAFE OR COMFORTABLE ENOUGH TELL MIKE THE TRUTH. That’s not healthy for either of them. My byler agenda aside I still don’t think Mike and El should be together. Lastly, “the fact that Mileven IS endgame”, again I’m sorry what? Have you watched season 5? Have you read the scripts or been on set or talked to anybody working on st5 or work on st5 yourself? No? So then how is that a fact- it’s a prediction, an assumption but it’s not a fact. If after season 5 comes out and it did end up becoming true then you could use that phrase but as of now when you have no idea how season 5 is gonna go you can’t call that a fact. Also rip how are you so confident when Mike and Will are literally attached at the hip so far from what we have seen besides the rooftop convo and if that is enough to convince you then yikes- bc we’ve got like 10 of those to convince us so good luck watching season 5 and have a good day ig

[oswildin]

Debated making this, but oh well, here we are…

I rewatched the Loki series.

Going to add here quickly that I have been a fan of Loki since 2012/2013, and I personally relate to his character for a multitude of reasons.

Now, I enjoy the series, but I wish they made it more character focused than they had. I do feel like they prioritised story in terms of making it fit the next phase over exploring and expanding on Loki’s character to some degree (a lot of it was surface level).

For example, I would’ve loved to have seen:

Exploring Loki’s Jotun heritage, even if it was a variant of him in the void that embraced it, dropped his aesir form, a conversation between Loki and his Jotun variant as they explain why they chose to embrace it, giving a different view to maybe how our Loki sees himself/the Jotuns. If ‘What If’ could have a frost giant Loki variant, why couldn’t the show?

Expanding upon what happened to Loki during that year after his fall from the Bifrost. The reason for this is self explanatory really, it would add more lore/depth to his experiences/actions during the Avengers. Maybe address the trauma he has from it.

Loki fighting with his so-called ‘desire’ for a throne more. By this I mean, I felt he flipped pretty quickly from his plan to overthrow the time keepers to just following along with Sylvie - which is fine, but I kinda thought there would be more push back from him. I get it was a life or death situation and Loki’s whole thing is ‘survival’, but it would’ve added to their dynamic and the fact the writers clearly wanted to push how Sylvie was different to other Loki’s.

Exploring Sylvie’s backstory more. It really did feel like it was an afterthought, which is a shame. I suppose they left it ambiguous for certain reasons, but I think they should’ve had more flashback scenes of what Sylvie could remember. I think it would’ve helped people understand and relate to her more. (I do love her though).

Actually showed Loki’s gender fluidity & shapeshifting ability more. Again, self explanatory really & important to his character, plus the whole implied only ‘woman variant’ thing with Sylvie should’ve not been a thing, like at all.

They should’ve given Loki more time to process everything. This show really should’ve had 8 episodes each season, I get that’s not the writers fault, likely Disney/marvel’s doing. Perhaps then the shift in his character wouldn’t have felt so jarring, especially considering he’s 2012 Loki. I do agree they wrote him as if he was Ragnarok!Loki, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing, but it just felt jarring considering the last we saw of this Loki was Avengers. But then I could also argue that maybe he thought ‘what’s the point of it’ because the TVA know everything about him, but I digress.

Used Sylvie more in S2. It did feel like they didn’t quite know what to do with her, her and Loki clearly just needed to sit and discuss the citadel fight, but the closest thing we got is in EP3 where Sylvie says ‘this is all rather familiar, isn’t it?’, referencing their different/opposing opinions on the TVA/He Who Remains. And also maybe the pie room scene, but it’s very vague/not directly addressed.

Explored the fact that Mobius is not a good guy more. Because, he isn’t. And that’s okay. To me, the whole point of the show is based on Loki’s quote of ‘no one good is ever truly good, and no one bad is ever truly bad’, and whilst they do reference Mobius’ own morally grey actions/traits, they don’t particularly make it clear and most just see him as this ‘happy go lucky old man who likes pie and loves Loki variants’. In fact, I actually really liked the scene where Sylvie confronts him - which is a very unpopular opinion to have it seems, lol.

Delved into the psychology of Loki further than surface level/what we already know about him. Yes, we know he’s the God of Mischief. Yes, we know he isn’t evil. Yes, we know he is redeemable. Yes, we know he’s cunning, manipulative and selfish. We get that he projects this ‘illusion’ of himself, but it was only really mentioned in S1 EP1, maybe slightly EP2, before it’s never really mentioned again. I suppose S2 does this to a degree with the bar scene and EP5 of S1 in the time cell with Sif - also I think they tried to take the narcissist angle from the pov that it’s because of his low self-esteem as to why he needs validation and it’s a defence mechanism, but they didn’t particularly make that clear and made it seem like he just thinks highly of himself.

I know it seems like I have a lot of issues with the show, and I do, but I still enjoyed it. It’s okay to be critical of a piece of media and still enjoy it.

I do prefer S2 to S1, mostly because I prefer the direction they took it in and whilst I, of course, wanted better for Loki, I can’t deny S2 EP6 is a stunning finale. I sobbed so hard during the ending and still feel the grief that I actually lost someone I knew personally. But I also have hope that this means Loki is now a main player in the next phase (am I delusional? Maybe).

I enjoyed the dynamics, the back and forth/chemistry, the story was interesting, the set & costume design, the acting, the directing/colour grading, the music (Natalie Holt, you are genius), the emotions, the fun, the characters…

So this is not a hate post by any means, I will once again state, I enjoyed the show. But, I do have issues with it, and that’s okay too.

Please, dni if you’re just going to be argumentative or confrontational. I also don’t want to hear that just because I enjoyed the show that I’m ‘not a real fan’ lmao. I’m sorry, but I’ve been a Loki stan for over a decade, and I will not have someone tell me I’m not a real fan because of a piece of fictional media. Also, please do not mention anything regarding ships on this post, I do not care for it because it always ends up in arguments and I am a multishipper so I don’t tend to fight for any side. Thank you! :) /gen

[lovemyromance]

Idk how I can say this without sounding condescending but

SJM IS NOT A COMPLEX WRITER. Her storylines and character development and all her plot points are great, no doubt, but they are predictable!

There is simply no need to out here digging through TOG for clues on the next ACOTAR couple. There's no need to go digging through ACOTAR even to predict the next couple. You don't have to do any analysis of words and metaphors and foreshadowing.

It is all laid out at the surface level. There is no deeper analysis necessary. Like whatsoever. Nothing SJM has ever churned out has managed to surprise me, except the Elucien mating bond (it just seemed RANDOM) and the ACOTAR crossover in HOSAB.

It's not that hard to understand. This is not your classic english lit class where you had to analyze the effect of iambic pentameter or what the green light at the end of the dock means.

It is obvious that Elain & Azriel are next. It shouldn't require you to read all of SJMs books to come to that conclusion. It shouldn't require you to analyze the shit out of random objects mentioned once in the text to come to that conclusion.

SJM said it was obvious. Because it always has been.

[beanghostprincess]

It still amazes me the number of people who see the juxtaposition between Nami and Usopp during Wano and their fight against Ulti as "Nami's devotion to Luffy is unmatched, unlike Usopp's" when she isn't able to say he won't be the king of the pirates but Usopp is telling her to lie.

I think most people don't have in mind, either, that Usopp isn't the one being directly asked. He is looking out for Nami and begging her to lie to keep her alive because he is scared to death they might lose her for something as insignificant as lying. For him, lying is a form of survival and it is not that big of a deal because he trusts Luffy enough to tell Nami to lie about her feelings. It is something that will only stay between them because he knows it is better to lie than to die and Luffy would want it that way too.

And that doesn't mean he isn't loyal to Luffy or his dream. He is just looking out for Nami's safety. And as I said-- He isn't being asked directly, either. It is easier to tell others to lie about something of the sort than to do it yourself, and if the roles were reversed I personally think he'd have the most awful of times with it too.

Nami refuses to say Luffy won't become the king of the pirates because for her, even if lying has gotten her out of messes, she puts her trust and loyalty in Luffy before her own instincts of survival because lying is what got her to push them away when they first met and this is the one thing she can't lie about because it would hurt more than death.

Then again, I think she would do the same exact thing Usopp did if she wasn't being the one asked. It is the whole point of the scene, actually. They both know the most rational thing is to lie so the one witnessing the scene will always be cold-headed about it, but the one having to lie is the one suffering the bitter realization of how lying about this and saying it out loud is way harder than it seems from an outsider's perspective.

So I am tired of seeing people criticizing Usopp for his decision during the fight against Ulti as if it were that easy for him to see Nami being about to get killed if she doesn't lie. Sorry for the guy to actually want to protect the people he loves instead of letting her be reckless and basically kill herself freely for telling a truth even Luffy would tell her to lie about if it meant living.

[koetjingwarrd]

You're my baby, say it to me...

[jojo-schmo]

Does Meta Knight know what happend to Dedede in TDX?

TDX is what the cool kids call "Triple Deluxe," right? lol

In the Roleswap, they both know the facts about the events in Dream Land... Meta Knight knows what happened to Dedede during the whole Dreamstalk incident, and Dedede knows what happened to Meta during the Haltmann invasion, for example.

But I don't think they'd get outwardly vulnerable enough to really open up to each other about how all of that made them feel.

....Not at this early point in the story, anyway. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

To be fair, they don't really share their inner thoughts and feelings with anyone. Prideful King and Stubborn Knight... They've both got their own images to uphold, even to each other! They bottle up their feelings in hopes they go away on their own! That ain't healthy!!

But they do have the ability to let down their walls a little, somewhere deep deep inside them. It would just take something very stressful to get either of them to open up....

[kuruk]

oh my god I know like it sounds weird to say this when it's just avatar but the original show has aang go back to the southern air temple to show katara and sokka his home only to find evidence of the genocide of his people and the loss of his loved ones and it's quiet until you see his grief and his rage but you just see the aftermath a hundred years later and the netflix adaptation makes it feel like they wanted it to be a cool action movie with an epic scene showing the fighting and running of the airbenders like that side by side with aang running away and it's like ??? okay it's "darker" congratulations I can see that's what the goal is based on the differences in firebending and early on screen deaths go and focus on every bit of violence for the audience's lazy sadistic pleasure instead of any of the characters personal narratives especially the women that can all be taken right out + the discovery of different places all over the world in the earth kingdom and outside of it. put everything in omashu so they don't get to meet people and see the diversity of the world and each town and SEE what life is like for them under war and have these experiences with all these people build up to something bigger at the end

[britneyshakespeare]

i'm very interested what ppl find to be the harder shakespeare plays and which they found to be easier. bc i was googling out of curiosity and i found a sparknotes article (link if you're curious) that ranked ten of the most commonly-read plays on difficulty and it put king lear kinda down low whereas it put julius caesar pretty high because of the politics/complicated conflicts. that kind of baffled me because julius caesar was the first tragedy i read outside of the classroom and i found it very approachable; it's one i often recommend to people trying to get into shakespeare because the plot is already familiar to most ppl and you can just enjoy the poetry and how shakespeare chooses to characterize these figures. on the other hand i read king lear a few years later in my shakespeare journey, and to be honest i still kind of have a hard time with lear. maybe i just don't connect with it on some level; i'm not sure. it's not a very tightly-organized play where the action is as centered as in the other tragedies like hamlet or macbeth. that's certainly a me thing and maybe that'll change with age. but i'm always a little surprised when i find someone's experience with the plays so much different than mine.

anyway if you're reading this feel free to reblog and tag or comment which shakespeare plays you found yourself falling into most naturally and which worlds you felt like you had to force yourself into. i'm interested in what ppl feel on this subject

[angorwhosebabyisthis]

watching fandaniel go is wild because he is just [vestibular stims] [vestibular stims] [vestibular stims] [vestibular stims] and yeah man that's a mood

[monards]

sometimes teh hater agenda gets to me. and i need to reason myself away from it

[natashadewinter]

[spacedlexi]

me trying to stay sane when i see some Fandom Shit that makes me mad

[aemiron-main]

these are literally some of the dumbest tags ive ever seen. like. there’s SO much here that’s untrue, including the empathy part. “love couldnt have fixed him as a child” have you considered he didnt need to be fixed??? Did you even watch the show???? Love would have ABSOLUTELY helped him, and he didn’t need to be fixed.

like i shouldnt be surprised that people on here are Siding On The Side Of Child Abuse but… and just like god there’s so many Factual Errors here, shitty and cruel attitude aside. “torturing animals for fun” and the kid in question looks distressed the whole time & a bunch of parallels indicate that he was trying to free the rabbit, but god forbid we look beneath our first surface impressions, right?

and also, the whole “before the lab” thing makes me insane because it acts like everything in his life was fine prior to the lab. meanwhile, he talks about how he was treated as being broken PRIOR to the lab and how his mother despised him PRIOR to the lab and how she wanted to send him away to an abusive predator scientist PRIOR to the lab and that’s just the surface level shit let alone all of the subtext about what his life was like pre-lab.

and not only is it impossible for him to have been trancing victor and killing slice at the same time & theres so much weirdness there, even if he straight up murdered virginia and alice got killed as part of it, it’s not like it happened because He’s Inherently Bad And Evil. I think he was in the right to kill virginia!!!!! Like sorry but wanting to send him away to Brenner????? She had it coming. Alice didn’t, but again, there’s so much weirdness around that AND even if he did kill her, the whole thing could have been prevented if people (Virginia) weren’t trying to send him off to the lab/fix him.

Like it’s insane to me that people will watch Dart’s arc about how creatures from the UD aren’t inherently evil and how Dustin’s love made a huge impact on Dart and yet will also go “oh yep mhm the duffers wrote this Literal Human Child to be Evil and Bad and Broken and he Needs To Be Fixed but hes so broken that not even love can fix him”.

Like. Op is the one with the real lack of empathy here & I sure hope they don’t extend this viewpoint to the abused and autistic kids/people in their life. I don’t feel bad calling the tags dumb because they ARE dumb and literally factually inaccurate and they’re cruel and contributing to the stigma around people who are low empathy (and henry isn’t even low empathy).

[themidnightcircusshow]

@heartofstanding tagged me in this meme months ago and unfortunately it took me this long to get to it because I had a mild crisis over how long it's been since I've read a novel, let alone one that I loved 😅 so this is nine of my favourite novels (not books, because if I included manga/short stories/comics/etc this would be giant)

0The Picture of Dorian Gray -- Oscar Wilde// Pyrrhus-- Mark Merlis//The Scarecrow--Ronald Hugh Morrieson//Unnatural History--Kate Osman//Tunnels of Blood--Darren Shan//The Coffin Dancer--Jeffery Deaver//Hero--Perry Moore//Frankenstein--Mary Shelley//One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest-- Ken Kasey

[mechahero]

@anestofocs asked- We could see people giving Fandom Lambda the Rose Quartz treatment ™️ were all nuance flies out the window the moment Lambda does something that is morally complicated even though being morally complicated is baked into him. People will yell at others at how he's "the real villan" even when he's in the middle of trying to save not just his city but the world. Especially when he has to chow down on human flesh even though he would rather not. Tell me what the “fanon” interpretation of my OC if they were a canon character would be (accepting!)

//I hate how true this is because you guys are absolutely right LMAO.

Because yes, when it comes to morally complicated characters and the actions they take, fandom tends to ignore that? Or flatten it out to "he did this thing, so he's bad!" and treating him like he's a piece of shit even though there's a reason why he did that? And it straight up gets ignored??

And that's always funny to me. And I'm really glad Rose Quartz got brought up because both she and Lambda would be in the same boat? Granted, his character progression isn't shown in reverse and built up to where you see why he chooses to do something like with how Rose Quartz's character was explored but still. The surface level treatment of characters and their actions can be straight up damaging, imo. There's always a reason why they're going to do something and they're not a monster for doing a few shitty things. (Though greater fandom would have you believe otherwise cough cough. And it does depend on how shitty those actions are.)

Also if you ask me, fandom tends to blame the character as opposed to looking at a writer and being like "Hey, where are we going with this?". Or if they do look towards the writers, they would gripe about how the characterization is wrong when it's being developed or played out or something.

Honestly, a lot of it comes down to people not getting why a character might choose to do something morally ambiguous or complicated or simply not wanting to get it.

[snekdood]

bitches really be treating you like a dumb bimbo when you're blonde huh