#it’s never been accurate that’s literally like one of the main problems with it and a reason why am consider it a bad show/adaptation

[lady-green-sleeves]

It’s actually hilarious how freaked out people are over the whole Daemon dreamfucking his mom thing😂

Like don’t get me wrong I agree the writers are cowards and should have made him dreamfuck his brother instead but oh well we can’t win them all (or majority of them with this show)

I personally think it was funny and it’s even funnier the targ stans who have sm other incest ships and are grossed out by this and think it was too far

People who are fans of the incest show when the incest show has incest that’s not the specific flavor of incest that they wanted:

[beanarie]

⭐️ for the temperature of becoming something (or any of your post-s8 fics) I'd love to hear about your approach to writing the 118 and how they ought to have treated buck, and how you balance nuanced characterization with what the show gave us! Really enjoying that story btw.

oh gosh i love this question. fair warning this will be long on words and possibly short on sense!

so temperature is the first fic where i tried to contend with the essential abandonment of buck by his family. for each character, i put them on a couple of different spectrums to figure out how to repair the relationship.

proximity is one spectrum. hen is the character with the most distance from buck. one on one, all things being equal, she maybe gets along a tiny bit better with him than chim does (where is my chim & buck daydrinking scene, timathon?), but the maddie connection shoves chim in the other direction. eddie is the closest to buck. even after he moved to texas, he and buck talked regularly about life shit (at least eddie's life shit, tho i guess buck telling him about everyone forgetting hen's birthday counts in the buck column).

not sure if i've had to say the plural of spectrum before. spectrums looks silly but spectra feels wrong, too. pretentious. anyway the next spectrum regards level of trauma/ability to recognize what was going on with buck. chim is on the high trauma end, as the one bobby sacrificed himself for, and as a guy with a heavily pregnant wife that might descend into a depressive episode as soon as the baby is born. hen is again the closest to the other side. she was sad, but she had her head on straight. and then there's eddie fighting for his life to steal chim's spot. do not get me wrong it makes sense to be upset under those circumstances! bobby's death triggered some shit. it did. but to make out like his struggle was worse than any of the others? bro literally made it all about him while accusing buck of doing that. fucking wild.

so between closeness, level of spiraling, and a couple of other things, i sussed out how responsible they each were for buck being left out in the cold. i didn't read eddie's "no one knows how to handle you" as accurate. hen and chim never had to "handle" buck on their own before. i think they would naturally assume eddie had him, so hen could concentrate on athena and i guess her kids (tim? bueller? remember bobby's stepkids??) and chim could wallow/be there for his wife & kid. still not very toretto style family of them, given buck's relationship with bobby, but eddie's the only one who knew exactly how little support buck was actually getting.

for maddie and chim, i kept the explicit amends to a minimum, instead focusing on them showing a commitment to doing better. because they do love buck; they've just been stuck on a rollercoaster the last six months and hadn't been able to take a breath long enough to see what's going on. also this is a divergent au where the transfer request never happened, so buck announcing he was going on leave was their first real sign of a problem. for hen, because she was in a better position to see buck wasn't okay, i went a little further, having her identify the issue and sincerely apologize for it.

for edmundo, my guy needed actual consequences because his main character syndrome is absolutely devastating for everyone around him. i wanted chris to be mad because he had just returned to la and one of his favorite people bounced due to his dad's mouth. i wanted buck to recognize how awful that one-sided fight was, and to go fully no contact for a while to force a reset including some actual growth for the two of them.

[justarandomsixfan]

More Epic opinions (Fanfic edition x)

I don't like most Astyanax survives Au's. At all.

(Strap in for this one, It's a fuckin novel) This isn't to say I don't like the concept. There's a small handful of fanfics that I think are able to pull it off (A GREAT example of one is Follow the light by Caregulus! (It's a French language work but can easily be translated) Suis la lumière - Chapter 1 - caregulus - EPIC - Jorge Rivera-Herrans (Albums) [Archive of Our Own (This also features one of my favorite Au's, Trojan Polites)

Anywho, I'm getting off track x I find myself disliking these type's of fanfics for a multituide of reasons, but I always circle back to the main three.

Plot holes galore

Andromache of Troy anyone??!!

Muddled characterization Let's go through these in order, shall we x?

Problem one:

With Astyanax now alive, we have.....quite a fair few plotholes that need to be addressed. I could go on for days, but for this post, I'm only gonna highlight one.

The Crew of GREEK soldiers would never in any universe accept the Trojan heir on their ship. Ever.

Forget making it onto the ship, Astyanax wouldn't make it out of Troy. Keep in mind, there are other kings fighting this war. A war that has been fought for the last decade. These people are going to loathe any Trojan, no matter their age, height, whatever. Odysseus will have to somehow smuggle that child through a burning city with victorious Greeks at every corner without being stopped once?? No chance. Also, let's not forget. There was a crowd forming for this pancake ceremony. The guy just dips back into the room with that lil bundle of future vengeance?? Hell nah.

I can absolutely say for sure that Astyanax would not be leaving Troy alive, not only because of this, but also because of one very specific character. Neoptolemus. If there was one leader who was not letting a single Trojan see the light of day again it was this kid. Not only is he the son of the best Warrior in the entire army, he's also quite frankly a psychopath. Going be EPIC lore, this dude has already killed at least 3 other guys AND the Trojan king. This guy is ruthless when it comes to Trojans. In most versions of the Odyssey, it's actually him who's the one to man the pancake ceremony and yeet the infant.

And if, by some unattained miracle, this baby makes it onto a ship, he still would not logistically survive without divine intervention. There are 600 Greeks on this Ship, and with the exception of maybe Polites?? They'll have no qualms with killing the heir of the city they've just torched and sacked. (And so concludes my first point)

Problem Two/Three:

My next two points link to each over in a sense, but context is needed for them to fully make sense. So, let's establish two things before we dive into a deeper analysis (rant)

(Point A) Troy had innocents. That's just a fact. There were innocent children, and most certainly innocent women. This isn't a problem with just these types of Au's, It's one I see quite a bit with Epic fanfics. They tend to gloss over the grittier details of the Trojan horse plan, especially with some of the more.....unforgivable actions. (See: Cassandra of Troy and Ajax the cleaning product) I wouldn't say this is an issue with Epic itself, more so an issue with people taking it at face value. Jorge himself has said multiple times that Epic is not an accurate telling of events, and this is reflected in the album. (Also see: Zero mention of Hecuba at all)

Now, Let's look at Andromache herself. At this point in time, she has lost everything. Husband, Home, any sense of dignity and pride, and is about to lose her Son. Quite literally The last thing she has left. This is meant to be a tragedy.

Looking at it from a non-Epic lens actually, Odysseus is one of the people to decide her fate, and if we're really stretching lengths out, could still play a part in that (It's never confirmed nor denied🧐)

(Point B: My issue) Most (As in 99.99%) of these fics completely ignore Andromache's existence. As in, she doesn't get a single mention. Some even take the admittedly worse route and have her involved, yet say "there was nothing he could do". Dude. You've just defied the KING of the damn Gods. Where is this sudden vulnerability coming from??

Also, With Astyanax now alive, yet Andromache still in the exact same position, this....complicates things. A lot more than you might think. With her son alive, you might think this would make matters better. Wrong. If anything it makes things worse (not in the way you'd think). Looking at it from quite frankly any other prospective, Odysseus has kidnapped a child. A child whose mother is right at hand and about to be taken as a glorified sex slave to her husband's killers Son. A fate which Odysseus, who could quite frankly do anything at this point in time, does nothing to prevent. Not a single thing.

To summarize: Epic lore: Baby is yeeted, Glorified sex slave Fic lore: Baby un-yeeted, still glorified sex slave, not has to live with the immense fear and paranoia of her son being in the hands of the man who constructed the quite bluntly sadistic idea which destroyed her home, and given an abundance more suffering than she initially already had and did not in any way deserve.

Now, I can link this to my 3rd point.

This one is a lot shorter than my previous two, yet still holds weight in my eyes. Keeping Astyanax alive sets Odysseus's character back. A lot. I stand firmly on the headcannon that Odysseus is a monster prior to the first song even beginning (see above re: Innocent trojans) and his ruthlessness and selfishness only becomes clearer as the albums continue, until finally every facade is shattered in the Underworld saga.

In I'm just a man, this is meant to be the 1st time we see this ruthlessness. The idea that this guy will do anything, anything for his family. Even going as far as to hurt an entire city or children just to return to one. This guy is meant to be ruthless, just more hidden.

Small unrelated side rant: Why is Odysseus so hung up over this one child?? He's already masterminded hundreds on thousands of children's suffering (even if we go by epic lore, their father's are new residents of the underworld), but it's this one child that triggers morality?? Like, welcome to the consequences of your actions??

Anywho, back on track. I feel like with now alive, there is a major setback. We don't have this ruthless, cold-blooded war criminal anymore, instead we have a sappy, compassionate randomer who wants to raise the boy who could one day destroy the two things he holds most dear?? Make it make sense!!!

So, In conclusion. I cannot stand most of these fics for the life of me. This isn't bashing against any specific writer of Jorge himself, this has just been building up in my mind for a wee bit too long and i needed an outlet x

As usual, fell free to leave ur own thoughts in reblogs, notes etc!

[northstar-galactic-command]

Shipkillers, Part One

Shady marketing materials will sometimes claim a weapon from a particularly license is “ship scale” or “naval grade”. Some pilots will also claim that the custom, overpowered monstrosity they’ve attached to their Mech is a “ship-class” gun. But what does that mean, anyway?

On a purely technical level, it means absolutely nothing. All of these terms are fluff and marketing buzzwords. There is no formal or official definition of what is and isn’t a naval weapon. At the most literal level, if someone bolted a GMS Type-I Pistol to the side of a freighter then any Frame equipped with a Type-I Pistol is technically armed with a “ship gun”.

A more realistic definition for so-called “naval weapons” is that they are dedicated ship-to-ship weapons that have been scaled down for use on a Mech, Mech weapons that have been scaled up into a ship-to-ship weapon, or Mech weapons that operate using the same principles as a popular ship-to-ship weapon.

In a hilarious twist the Pinaka missile launcher is a simultaneous example of both the first and second definitions*, while Harrison Armory’s Tachyon Lance is a pretty straightforward example of the third.

All that being said, claiming a chassis weapon is a “naval gun” because it has a loose naval counterpart is like claiming something is an artillery mech because it’s equipped with an IPS-N. hand cannon. The hand cannon uses explosive propellant to launch a high-caliber projectile just like the GMS Type-III howitzer and HA siege cannon, and even has “cannon” in its name! That still doesn’t make it an artillery cannon.

There is one major exception to this, and it’s the main reason we even have to have this discussion. So let’s talk about the elephant in the room: the Apocalypse Rail.

First, we need to clear up some misconceptions. The Apocalypse Rail does not use the same technology as the long and short-spool guns found on warships. It was never put on a ship, and it was never meant to be put on a ship. Not in its current form, at least.

The Apocalypse Rail was originally a scale test of an entirely new type of spool weapon that Harrison Armory hoped would eventually replace existing spinal spoon guns. It was released to the general public as a form of crowd-sourced field testing, to give HA engineers live data they could use to help work out the kinks before attempting to put it on a ship.

Getting it to the point it could actually be deployed to a real battlefield was the tricky part. It was too big, too volatile, and required too much power to include as a standalone weapon. So instead they built the Apocalypse Rail around the only Chassis big enough to handle it: the new (at the time) Barbossa frame. Or the Barbossa was built around the Apocalypse Rail, depending on who you ask.

Unfortunately for those desiring taxonomic precision, this came with a PR problem. The Barbossa was built under the explicit orders of John Creighton Harrison II. It was supposed to, and this is a direct quote, “stand as the unstoppable image of Harrison I”. There was no way HA was going to let words “miniature”, “small”, or “light” be affiliated with the signature superweapon of the biggest frame they’d ever released, a frame that was supposed to be an idol to their beloved founder. So instead of an accurate classification like “small-scale gravitational spool gun” or “miniature exponential gravitic catapult”, the weapon was marketed as a “ship-class spool weapon”.

…which is where the problems start.

There’s no shortage of people who like to perform statistical analyses of Mechs and their equipment, and there’s no end of data for them to comb through: official specs, field tests, action reports, simulations accurate down to the last spec of dust, videos of weird stunts someone pulled in the Long Rim, and so much more. The official reports done by corporations or nationstates almost never see the light of day, but plenty of others are willing to take a more public stab at it. Some of these are extremely methodical and well researched, some are hot garbage, and virtually all of them have at least some bias (intentional or otherwise).

The Omninet is flooded with articles, videos, and think pieces on each and every major Frame, most arguing why the Frame is either the best thing ever or utter trash. While it has its supporters, the Barbarossa rarely comes out well in these sorts of amateur reviews. A common complaint (aside from its ridiculous size) is that the terrifying Apocalypse Rail is overhyped. It's easy to find a weapon that can be modified to hit just hard as the Apocalypse Rail does against an unarmored or lightly armored target, without the Rail's many drawbacks. For example, according to most reports a full burst from a stock Leviathan Heavy Assault Cannon has higher average damage than an Apocalypse Rail, and a mech with a Leviathan doesn't need to sit still while their gun charges.

This causes some misunderstandings. Pilots look at the numbers for their over-caliber artillery cannon or super-charged turbolaser and see that it's averaging as much or more damage as the legendary "ship-class spool weapon". If the Apocalypse Rail is a ship-scale weapon and their gun hits just as hard, they must be carrying naval ordinance too!

What most people forget is that the Apocalypse Rail wasn't designed to shoot at Frames, or aircraft, or tanks. It's honestly wasted against them, like trying to kill ants with a sledgehammer. The Rail was designed to be used against hundred-meter long slabs of armor that can't dodge or take cover. It's an anti-ship, anti-fortification weapon, and that's where it shows its true power.

An IPS-N portable bunker can shrug off hits from siege cannons, Pinaka missile barrages, and fully-charged solidcore lasers. It’s four times as thick as the GMS Pattern-A Jericho deployable cover, designed to tank sustained barrages from super-heavy ordinance.

An Apocalypse Rail can destroy a portable bunker in a single shot.

Even if you somehow doubled the bunker's thickness and put it under two overlapping Aegis shield generators, a fully-charged Apocalypse Rail will still vaporize the bunker in a single hit. It’s that powerful. So why does it suck?

To put it bluntly, the Apocalypse Rail can barely hit the broadside of a barn. It has a deviation measured in meters. This shouldn't come as a surprise: it's a highly volatile weapon system built directly into an infamously clumsy Frame that must be totally stationary while charging and firing. Everything from gravity to humidity to atmospheric pressure to density of air particulates can impact the weapon's accuracy, and that's not even getting into the fact that enemies usually won't sit perfectly still so they can be shot. Unless the Rail is shooting at a large building, a direct hit is almost impossible. So instead of aiming at their target, most pilots will aim at something near their target.

Infantry, Frames, vehicles, and similar units don’t take damage from an Apocalypse Rail’s projectile: they get damaged by the shockwave from the projectile impacting nearby. This keeps misses from unintentionally rearranging landmarks several dozen kilometers away, and a fully charged Rail is so powerful that even a near miss can severely damage most units. It doesn't always work, however, which is how you get those amusing images of people standing in the molten crater of an Apocalypse Rail impact, totally unharmed despite everything around them having been vaporized.

Against large orbital targets, which move in predictable ways and don’t have as much terrestrial nonsense to complicate the shot, the Apocalypse Rail is devastating. In an orbital defense role, its range and damage exceed almost any other chassis-based weapon system on the market. Thus, while it isn't purpose-built for the job, the Apocalypse Rail is still the closest thing most pilots ever get to putting “true” naval ordinance on a Mech.

But dedicated Frame-mounted anti-ship weapons do exist. They’re known as “Shipkillers”.

To be continued…

*: The Pinaka was based on a ship-to-ship missile system, which was sized down for use on a mechanized Chassis. The original naval weapon was phased out, but the Pinaka performed so well as part of the Monarch license that SSC scaled it back up and rereleased it as part of their LIMITD line of naval weapons.

[afrsconp]

Small correction to the last MQ post about The Villain's Feast: I rewatched the ep and Brad does take one small sip of a drink. But that's it. Definitely a lot less than what we see David doing.

But then I also started thinking about the logistics of the party.

If Rachel's denouement speech was accurate, it means that Jo manipulated multiple people into shelling out a ton of cash for the party. But the theme of the party was so specific - 1940s murder mystery in a spooky mansion on a private island - that I think Brad must have helped her orchestrate it. Not that I think Jo isn't capable of being an evil queen, but that kind of manipulation requires a level of subtlety that I don't think Jo (or Dana) are capable of at the moment (but I'm sure they can get there eventually).

Also, Brad must have known the real plan all along, because not only did he not look even a little bit surprised when Dana proposed, but Dana also had to get the couch shipped to his house. So if Brad knew the real plan, then that part of Rachel's speech was wrong - Brad didn't pay Jo like Ian, Poppy, and David did, because he was in on it from the start. And if that's the case, then they would've made a TON of cash. I mean yeah, some of it would've been used for transport to and from the island, for the costumes, and for food and booze, but there would still be a lot left over since they wouldn't have to pay to rent the house.

Brad might've kept it as rent anyway, but I think it's more likely he either split it with Jo and Dana, or gave it all to Jo since she's the one who planned the party. And we've seen before that even though making money is one of Brad's main goals in life, he also wants people to get paid what they deserve. Like how he used the profits Rachel made to pay the staff bonuses during Christmas, or wanting Dana to get paid for the revenue her game was bringing in.

Which is all a very long winded way of saying that Brad must have done all this solely for Dana and Rachel to get their perfect engagement. Sure, he might've claimed that it was a convenient way to get David to burn his house down for tax purposes, but come on. It's a weak excuse. There are any number of easier and less expensive ways to stage that. And we've seen him do something extreme to help someone before: when he went to jail so Jo wouldn't have to. (No matter what Brad or anyone else claims, I'll never buy that he did it just for 'street cred'. And I'm pretty sure Jo knows that, too.)

So. Twice now Brad's gone above and beyond to help someone he cares about, and both times were after Zack turned up, made him beg, and called him soft. And now Anna's turned up too, and Brad straight up admitted that he's not the same person he used to be. I 100% believe he's still ruthless enough to take down anyone in his way, but he doesn't do it solely for his own benefit anymore, which I think is what he used to do when he and Anna were together before. And even though it still benefits him some way too, Brad now does it for other people - first MQ, when Zack made him beg; then Jo when he went to jail; and now Dana and her game.

I'm sure he's going to have to go up against Anna in some way, and I'm not sure if he'll win. But I can't see the point of this story arc if Brad doesn't learn that either a) caring about something other than yourself is not a weakness and can maybe even be a strength, and/or b) he doesn't want or need to go back to being the person he used to be in order to build/retain power.

And just on Brad/Anna: their interactions were interesting because even though they have no problem with having sex and sitting around naked together, there's nothing intimate between them at all. Their directness (you look fat; you look old) and their literal nakedness are just another layer of obfuscation, because they don't allow themselves to be really naked with each other. They'll call out each other's insecurities but it doesn't sting because they don't dig any deeper. It's like a tacit agreement to let each other keep their masks on even as they draw attention to the fact that they know the masks exist. I'm not sure they know what's underneath the masks - Anna didn't know who Kate was, after all - but Anna at least must have some inkling, because she knew enough to realize that Brad was leaving himself exposed.

And to bring this back to the murder mystery party: aside from when Zack showed up, I think the only time we've ever seen Brad with no masks on at all is when he was watching Rachel and Dana get engaged. And he was smiling - like for real, genuinely smiling. And even though he didn't really understand what was happening during the Zack thing, it doesn't change the fact that the only person who saw Brad both those times was David.

[rainrein]

FL OST asks: 2,3,5,10 for Marlowe?

eeee my girl!!! 2) An Embassy Waltz: Marlowe actually struck up a "relationship" with the Struggling Artist back in Veilgarden, mostly because it was her month or so in the Neath and she was recovering from a rather... er, *tumultous* relationship back up on the surface that she ran away from. She enjoyed his paintings but didn't think of him other than a passing amusement before she got to other people.

She actually didn't get into any prominent romantic arrangements while doing the Persuasive MYN, which was an accident on my part but yknow I think it fits. She was friends with the Cloistered Diatomist, and even though she found his lab slides pretty boring she was enthralled by how passionate he was about learning. Her 100% actual friendship was with the Fashion Flies-- she had a *great* time being catty and annoying about fashion with all of them, and I'd like to think every time she gets sent to the Tomb Colonies she comes back to Court and is like PLEASE.... get me another outfit that doesn't have bandages in it. 3) Labyrinth of Tigers: Okay, so I actually haven't entered the Labyrinth because I got distracted grinding Watchful (boos) but I'll talk about some of the pets she has in her inventory. Marlowe has both the Malevolent Monkey and the Dazed Raven, and her Rattus Faber is considered a pet because Why Not. She likes her Dazed Raven (the least annoying out of all of her pets) but also because Marlowe actually never really had a pet until she came to the Neath! She actually had the Grubby Kitten for a while until she sadly gave it to the Duchess because she was too busy to take care of it. Now that's she's (almost) a POSI and has her own townhouse she'd probably get more pets/kittens. 5) Peligin and Pearl: Hehe. Her signature garment is a black, accurately-shaped heart necklace that she literally wears all of the time, even when she is sleeping. If it were an item, it would give you +6 Shadowy, +2 Persuasive, but increases both Nightmare and Scandal (especially scandal.) The necklace's name would be called "The Heart of a Love-Struck Woman," with the descriptor saying, "The necklace is actually a locket, with two images placed on the inside. One of a family, with a little girl sitting in between her mother and father, and the other of a woman, holding hands with a young man." If the locket was ever stolen, Marlowe would *absolutely* chase down whoever took it. Out of character, Marlowe seems to get scandal whenever she breathes and has been sent to the Tomb Colonies more times than I can count, so having a necklace that specifically increases her scandal is just natural to how she is. Carnival at Midnight: Marlowe, one hundred percent, is projecting whenever she writes a novel/poem/play where the main character has a problem with their pride. For someone who basically came from nothing, Marlowe is *ridiculously* arrogant. She has the world's biggest chip on her shoulder and will happily tell anyone she meets that she is the smartest, most attractive, and amazingly talented woman in the Neath. This also isn't covering up an insecurity-- she is *very* proud, but some would say that it's a lot of pride with no substance behind her. She's also a Hedonist, but in comparison to her pride it falls slightly behind as she's more likely to go and do something if someone insults her talents than to go simply hunting for pleasure. These traits don't exactly irritate her, but the "all face, no substance" comment *does.* I wrote a lot about girlie... she is so <3

[harleycao]

So, uh.. This happened

And so... Here's the rest? Also, while I'm of a fan of both Batman and Green Arrow, I an in no way an expert and am almost definitely going to get stuff wrong!

Side note: I'm coming from after having written more of this post and just want y'all know that I'm kinda jumping all over the place with what I'm saying. So... Be ready for my chaotic adhd rambling, lmao.

But my overall message, is right. Or, well... You know what I mean.

Before I start the main rabt, though, i want to go into some background about my... Viewing history,i guess you'd call it.

Arrow was actually my introduction to the wider world of DC, because prior to watching Flash (i started watching Flash first and then found out about the otheers and started Arrow so I could watch the arrow-verse properly. Prior to that, the only dc stuff I cared about was Harley Quinn. I'd started with marvel after a friend at the time introduced me to the mcu. In 2015/2016, that same friend introduced me to Harley Quinn when the original Suicide Squad was coming out. (they were a little older than me, BTW and looking back, I'm pretty sure they read comics).

But I didn't even care much about Batman then. The arrowverse got me interested in the rest of dc and later, when Titans came out, i loved Jason Todd and found that there was only 2 other movies (and 0 shows) that had him and one of them is the one where he dies and isn't really in the movie much.... And that's why I started really reading comics. I still only dabble, but I do read them. Also, i want to note that prior to the titabs thing, I'd watched Constantine and upon finding out (after finishing it) that it had been cancelled and the cliff hanger was never going to be resolved, i read some hellblazer. But no other comics, at the time.

And eventually, I started reading some green Arrow and... That leads me to the next bit.

The Oliver Queen in the comocs (and everything else, except arrow) would literally hate the Oliver in arrow.

Please understand, I'm not hating people for liking arrow.

I just hate that people think that is what green arrow is always like. My problem is a lack of information and a lack of more accurate portrayals.

Because there is no Thea Queen in the comics and her whole dying/resurrection thing?

THAT'S JUST JASON TODD!!

Roy is... Honestly, he's not the same personality-wise and in the comics, he's a red head. Beyond that, I can't think of much to say, though I know there probably is stuff.

Ph, yeah! That brings me to something else.

Black Canary..... Oof. They really did her wrong.

Also detective lance? Jim Gordon.

Oliver in the comics is pretty hardcore left-wing, though whether he's socialist, communist, etc is kinda up for debate.

Oliver and Bruce! They.. They don't hate each other or anything.. But Oliver is FAMOUS for fighting with the other Leaguers over politics

Bruce Wayne is a literal billionaire.

They don't hate each other but they don't really like each other.

Anyway, i just remembered Felicity ends up in a wheelchair because she's apparently Barbara Gordon.

(Note the heavy sarcasm there).

Alright, I'm done with this post.

Hopefully, I can come up with a better, understandable, and more concise post tomorrow when I'm not tired. (It's almost 11:30 pm right now).

For now, I'm going to just post this.

( @ladyphlogiston - totally forgot to tag you last night i plan to rewrite this at some point).

[splongebobby]

character 5!

(see original post for info.)

this round the charecter i got was Claire and the peculiarity i got was #4 aka Millard's!

i don't know what made this so hard but holy shit this took me 4 TRIES. 3 HOURS. for this small child. just rode the struggle bus and kept missing my stop. i blame her. /hj.

what i did design wise:

invisibility: probably the most obvious and main point of her. let me explain a bit:

it is said that Millard started to disappear once he reached puberty, and (im pretty sure?) he started disappearing at his feet, making his way up. i full heartedly believe that the peculiarity you receive will be different depending on who has said peculiarity. there are multiple ways it starts, multiple ways it can be used, different skill sets each ability has depending on who has it, etc. so, for invisibility, i believe that this could strike someone at any point in time, starting at any place, or multiple. you could be like Millard, who began around 11-13 and started with his feet, you could be 26 and suddenly your hands and nose start to disappear, or you could be how i made Claire in this case. i made it where Claire not only started to disappear around a young age (id say 4ish, if she is 5ish-6ish here), but she started disappearing from the "tips" of her body; her feet, hands, and top of her head. the invisibility spread up to her waist, to slightly past her elbows, and halfway through her face. if she had not joined a loop, she would have fully disappeared once all 3 (or 5 if you want to separate both legs and both arms) points met in the middle of her chest. almost like it spread to her heart. which is almost a little sad.

easy stuff, right? i knew i wanted her to be not fully invisible because that's boring and at first, i was going to do the same thing Millard had going for him, making her legs and half of her arms gone but the rest in tact. but, i do believe what i said about peculiarities being different for each person, and i figured this was a better way to go about it.

bracelets: she wears them to feel pretty and so people know where (about) her hands are.

bow: also same reason as the bracelets, except is to people can see the entirety of her head.

hair: tried to keep the big curls she's described as having, but it's tough to make half of a curl.

dress: a somewhat poofy dress, more accurate to the 1930's 1940's style.

shoes: can you tell i don't draw shoes.

inspo pics:

how she is personality wise:

despite not literally being able to be seen, she is always seen. she often draws a lot of attention to herself. it's a force of habit, and a bit of a longing from her. she has caused rukus on purpose before in desperation to be paid attention to, can you blame her? other than that however, she is a joy. she seemingly lights up every room she's in, being just a big sweetheart. she has a bit of a babbling problem, and has gotten some of her other loopmates in trouble for talking about something she shouldn't have, but it's never been on purpose. this is something everyone knows well, and can never stay mad at her for. overall, she doesn't let her peculiarity change who she is as a person; she's bubbly, full of youthful life, and wants every one of her friends to be happy.

~

so. this one is my longest one. not only in terms of how long it actually took me to make this girl, but also in my descriptions. i apologize if it is confusing </3 i tend to over explain.

good news, out of the last 6 charecters i have left, 5 of them are my top 5 favorite charecter (hint: Jacob is not a part of the top 5).

next character coming soon!

[theconstitutionisgayculture]

Why should I strive to accurately reflect your argument when you've refused to do the same with climate change? Ignoring all evidence of humans being capable of affecting their environment and dismissively referring to it as "controlling the weather" which is not close to anyone's argument. The problem isn't me not repeating your argument the problem is you don't like people treating you the same way as you treat others.

Except you guys think that you can literally control the weather if we just tax enough billionaires, regulate enough energy industries, and give up enough freedoms. If the goal is to reduce global carbon emissions, not a single proposed plan to "fight climate change" would do that because they all ignore China and India, which are by far the largest producers of artificial carbon in the world. Even if the west turned off every coal plant and banned carbon production tomorrow, China and India would still be putting out way more carbon than we reduced, to the point where reducing our "carbon footprint" is meaningless. What these plans do accomplish, though, is restricting our freedoms and granting government greater control over the lives of individuals and what's left of the free market. None of the people pushing this climate narrative seem very interested in actually fighting the supposed source of "climate change", so why should I take them seriously?

Humans do affect the environment. I never said otherwise. That's your strawman. My argument is that, if the climate is changing, then human activity is not the main cause. And that's a pretty big if, since your side loves to claim that any weather is evidence of "climate change". One hurricane goes farther north than most hurricanes do? Climate change! Normal amount of hurricanes during hurricane season? Climate change! Indian summer? Climate change! Blizzard in winter? Climate change! Forest fires in a dry, brush covered forest that was started by a human? Climate change! Christ, you people even blame civil wars and riots on climate change. Combine all that with the fact that literally every single climate apocalypse that has ever been predicted, many using the same climate models "scientists" rely on today for their predictions, has never come true, and yeah, I don't believe "the experts" or their manipulated data when they say "No, this time we're totally right you guys. Climate apocalypse is right around the corner!" Climate cultists, because you people do act like a cult, are doing their own supposed cause no favors by acting like hysterical children who keep saying the sky is gonna fall any day now.

I'll make the same deal with you that I've made with other climate weirdos. You live your life like the world is going to end any year now, and I'll live my life like it's not. In 50 years, we can meet up and see which one of us was right and which one of us enjoyed their life more. Maybe on one of the coasts that won't be even remotely close to being underwater.

[tvckerwash]

@joltning I present to thee the elaboration requested:

When broken down to the bare essentials Wash and C.T fulfill the same function within the story, and the differences between them as characters mostly results from how the story was executed when it came to them fulfilling that function. 

For example, everybody (myself included) complains about how C.T exists solely as a plot device in the Freelancer Saga, but nobody complains about how Wash also exists solely as a plot device in Recovery One and Recollection. I mean Reconstruction is literally the ‘omg theres a plot!?!?!?!?” season of RvB, and without Wash there is no story. 

The main reason Wash isn’t perceived in the same way as C.T is due to the level of freedom the writers had when it came to telling the story they wanted to tell. The Blood Gulch Chronicles and Out of Mind set the foundations for Recovery One and Recollection, but it was through Wash that the lore of RvB was reconstructed into a cohesive story. The unexplainable was explained, the unelaborated was elaborated upon, and all the wacky hijinks and random bits and bobs of the previous seasons were tied together in a way that answered the question asked in episode one: Why are all of these idiots stuck in a canyon in the middle of nowhere while being separated into color coded teams that are fighting each other?

C.T however did not have the same level of freedom as Wash, and this is because of pfl’s nature as a prequel combined with the pacing of those seasons. We pretty much already knew everything about her that there was to know, so there was no point in hiding anything or taking it slow because of that, hence the painfully obvious foreshadowing. This approach to the Freelancer Sage, and C.T’s story is what leads to her essentially having the same arc as Wash, just reversed—or more accurately described; mirrored, like Chief and Arbiter in Halo 2.

A majority of the reversal and/or mirroring between them manifests in their personalities, which I actually talk about some here, but some examples of the phenomenon in regards to actual plot points are:

They are both introduced as recovery agents (or rather fake C.T, who was the real C.T at the time, was introduced as a recovery agent). Wash is a single agent recovering human technology from dead Freelancers, and he uses explosives to destroy the rest of the equipment to prevent information leaks. C.T is attempting to recover alien technology from a long dead civilization with the help of other aliens, and he uses explosives to make sure anyone who knows of their operation and presents a problem will be destroyed to prevent information leaks. 

We knew exactly who Wash was, who he worked for, and why he was reassembling the blues. We didn’t know who C.T was, who he worked for, and why he was fighting Tucker in the desert. 

Wash was shot in the back and survived, but failed to subdue the enemy. C.T was shot in the chest and died just as they were going to subdue the enemy.

In regards to the real C.T, some examples include:

The Meta was portrayed as the primary conflict for Wash, but in reality he had always been aiming for the destruction of Freelancer. On the flip side, C.T’s fight to take down Freelancer is portrayed as the main conflict, but in reality, while poorly explained, tracking down the alien artifacts seemed to be her real goal (which is not as insane as it sounds when you remember that Charon Industries was more aligned with the UNSC proper than pfl was). 

Wash never hinted towards his plan of taking out the Meta in Recovery One to South, or his plan for destroying Freelancer to the Reds and Blues until he had the perfect opportunity to strike, and by then he had built enough trust that they were willing to help him out despite his secrecy. If they weren’t, well, he knew what to say to change their minds. C.T however wasn’t exactly subtle with her thoughts and feelings, and she didn’t build any trust with the people around her, so when she finally defected—which didn’t take a genius to see coming—no one was willing to listen to her or take her at her word, and there was nothing she could say or do to change their minds except offering concrete evidence. “I’m starting not to trust you.” vs “I can’t trust you.”

This one isn’t a plot point, but I’m going to mention it anyway because I think it’s a nice example of this subtle yet obvious mirroring I’m talking about, and shows what I was trying to replicate in my blurb that spurred me to finally write this analysis:

Counselor: Agent Washington? Agent Washington? Washington: Sorry, what were you saying? Counselor: Were you thinking about Epsilon again, Agent Washington? Washington: No. Counselor: What happened with Epsilon was not your fault, Agent Washington. Washington: I didn't think it was. Counselor: We have safeguards for the unstable emotional patterns of an artificial intelligence. Sometimes these algorithms fail. Washington: Oh. So then it's your fault. Counselor: We prefer to think of it as no one's fault.

Vs:

Washington: It wasn't your fault, Connie. Connie: Easy for you to say. You didn't drop the ball. Washington: The ball got dropped. We were all there, it's everyone's responsibility. Connie: Dammit, why are you doing that? Washington: What am I doing? Connie: Making excuses for me. I'm not making excuses for myself...why are you?

All I've mentioned above is also why C.T’s relationship with the leader and the plot twist that the C.T in the desert wasn’t the real C.T are disliked by so many, as there was nothing to justify the sudden bait and switch like there was at the end of S6. I mean, considering we see both Tex and South use voice mods to sound like men, it reads as though that was supposed to be the case with C.T as well, which makes it feel like it was changed at the last second because everyone saw it coming.

This is an issue because A) There's nothing inherently wrong with being predictable—a good plot twist always has foreshadowing, even if it won’t be registered as foreshadowing until the twist happens in certain cases—and B) The story of the Freelancer Saga as a prequel was confined in a box created by the previous seasons, and all they were doing was connecting the aforementioned events to tie up a few loose ends and properly establish Carolina's driving force in present day S10.

[straightasaaro]

my review of the agggtm live action tv show

hello! I just finished watching the agggtm tv show and I have some thoughts. Here are some warnings before you read below the cut.

I have literally only watched the show and (and read) book once so not every detail will be accurate. If I think I got something wrong, I will make it known.

This is my opinion!!! If you hated or loved the show with all your heart, don’t make that my problem!

I’m not British so I can’t comment on Emma Myers accent.

and finally because they are always some lurking in fandom, racists DNI

spoilers for the rest of the agggtm trilogy below

Alright so to start I think the show, on its own, is good television. It’s got intrigue and the pacing is good and the humor is pretty good at some parts however. I have three main issues with how it deviates from the book.

Show don’t tell.

what many shows have trouble with is telling the audience something instead of showing it. In the books, Pip pretends to be a CNN reporter and e-mails old students of the school about drink spiking. She’s told that it happened to quite a few female students. She hears that Andie sold roofies. She was told by Jesse that Becca got the morning after pill and wouldn’t tell who she slept with. She was told by Andie’s friend (or Becca’s, I do not remember) that Jason was controlling and pit them against each other often.

So pip makes the connection that Becca was raped by Max Hastings and found out that Andie was the one who sold the drugs. Pip is the one who connects the dots that Becca must’ve confronted Andie and it went awry. But in the show Pip is just told outright to protect her drink and that Becca was raped. I think the show did a lot of this, cutting Pip’s slow process of unraveling the murder in exchange for quick answers to immediate questions. It also dials down how clever yet morally questionable Pip is.

Cut cast and scenes

I get that a show with a low budget probably won’t be able to afford as many actors or sets as a high budget show but I’m genuinely shocked how many side characters (or interviews) were cut or down sized in the show. Stanley Forbes is the most obvious one because he plays a much larger role in the second season. Andie’s best friends too-in the book it was specifically mentioned how she could be emotionally manipulative and terrible. It showed how, while everyone thought that Andie was perfect and Sal was the villain, Andie was actually awful. It plays to the trilogies bigger theme of stories never being what they seem from the outside. The show did not show this as well.

Pip x Ravi took front and center

I get that BookTok prioritizes ships and romances and that well liked tropes and hot couples can be a great aisle of advertising. But what the fuck? Everyone on BookTok also talks about how much the romance as a subtle yet powerful thing was so beautiful. I don’t have a good enough memory but I really feel like way too much emphasis was but on their relationship, pushing away Pips love for her friends and family and even Ravi’s family. Was it just me but who else thinks it’s really weird that they cut the scene where Ravi’s parents passionately thank Pip for clearing Sal’s name? It showed how much the family had been freed from being the “shun” “scum” family.

Thank you for reading. Go watch the show if you want. Emma Myers was adorable. Good day ✌🏽

[thinkingfandoms]

An accurate list of the best movies I've ever seen

This list also includes reasons that are all too objective and nonsensical. Avoid asking too many questions. And share what you think in the comments!

Hercules

Hercules is probably my favourite Disney movie. And I also think that's where my interest in Greek mythology started. Hades is my favorite villain from this company and he's such a mood.

The Prince of Egypt

Oh dear you don't know how much I love this movie. I know every song by heart and was lucky enough to sing them with my choir. I'm a big fan of animation and despite how old is this movie, I think it remains one of the best ever produced. I cried more times over this movie than over all the others on this list combined.

Friends & Family

I only discovered this film this year but it quickly became one of my favorites. I have never laughed for so many consecutive minutes at a movie. I approached it because it's unusual to see a gay mob-themed movie, but I immediately fell in love with all the characters and the final scene remains one of the most comic I have ever seen.

Treasure Planet

I have a soft spot for animated films about great adventures and self-discovery. Jim has been my only animated crush for years, and his story has always resonated with something inside of me (maybe the desire for adventure and his recklessness, idk). Plus, of course, "'I'm Still Here" is one of the most beautiful soundtracks ever created.

Howl's Moving Castle

One of the first films I saw by Studio Ghibli and my absolute favourite. The love stories created by this Studio are always wonderful, and this one is no different. Plus I always saw myself in Sophie (especially about the crush on Howl) and, well, there's Calcifer, what more do you want?

Les Choristes

Another thing I love: movies about music. It may be that I've been playing an instrument for years and singing in choirs, but I've always cried watching kids rediscover a new side of themselves through music and songs. And these songs are composition's masterpieces. I still remember them all by heart even though French isn't my native language.

A Christmas Carol

I'm slightly obsessed with this story, with Charles Dickens and with Christmas. I was born on Christmas Eve so you can imagine how close this theme is to my heart. I have seen several versions of this story though, and for some reason, this one remains my favourite. It may be that it's different from other more colourful versions and really shows the darkness behind the original story, idk.

How to Train Your Dragon

I literally grew up with this saga: I was 8 years old at the first film, 12 at the second and 17 at the third. I watched Hiccup grow up with me as a friend and Toothless as a fellow adventurer. I'll forever be grateful to Dreamworks for creating the best-animated saga that cinema has ever seen.

The Three Musketeers

This movie is so random that it's perfect. I watched it again recently (after like 8 years) and realized that maybe my daddy issues come from this movie: Luke Evans, Orlando Bloom and the freaking Mads Mikkelsen together, seriously? I'm not surprised it was one of my favourite movies growing up.

A Monster in Paris

The love I have for this film is enormous. I could never get over the beauty of the songs in it. The characters are so well written and Francœur will always be in my top animated characters. It's too amazing to be real.

Rise of the Guardians

I could talk for hours about this film and have not even touched the tip of the iceberg. I have an insane obsession with all the characters, starting with and especially Jack, my top animated crush for years. It's all so perfect that I don't see how people never nominate it when it comes to top animated movies.

The Hobbit

Again, I have serious problems with films about fantasy adventures. I have always preferred The Hobbit saga to its sequel because the story has always fascinated me more. And the main character especially: for me Bilbo >>>> Frodo. And then there's Thorin and Luke Evans. You know, daddy issues.

Mune: Guardian of the Moon

Another French animated movie, another obsession, another adventure, another animated character in my top. This is an example of how to do good animation. There isn't a colour out of place. The settings are authentic, the characters are original, and the adventure they make gets me every time.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

I'm maybe a Muggle, but I prefer Fantastic Beasts to the Harry Potter saga. That's not to say it's better, mind you, but it reflects me more. We all know how we Hufflepuffs (and Ravenclaws) have no real representation in the HP movies, so to be able to have at least one prequel saga starring a Hufflepuff (in which I also find myself far too much) as the protagonist is wonderful. And I have an unhealthy urge to become a magizoologist.

The Greatest Showman

It's the movie I have watched the most of these. I know every song by heart and every line too. It always manages to be a roller coaster of emotions. And it has Hugh Jackman in it.

The Boy Foretold By The Stars

I'm a big supporter of the Philippine's film company. This is one movie is gentle, funny, and not based on the usual drama between Christianity and LGBT+ people (which is what I thought when reading the plot at first). Moreover, another underrated thing, the Philippines' music company here has thrown in masterpiece after masterpiece of songs, perfect for this movie.

Bros

This is my top comfort film in the last year. It's like watching a Hallmark movie but hotter, much more sincere and gay. Very gay. And the relationship between the two main characters is so cute and sweet. And funny.

Top Gun: Maverick

I love this saga but especially love this particular chapter. I love Maverick and his relationship with Rooster, and all the other characters are so well-written. And don't get me started on the story... I LOVE it. There isn't much else to say except that Cruise is a great actor (and a terrible person).

Glass Onion - Knives Out

I love my silly little gay detective. And I have a little passion for movies and mystery series. I found this saga's chapter more compelling than the first one, and the characters gripped me more. Also I fell in love with the setting. Oh and then there are Daniel Craig and Hugh Grant.

[northwest-cryptid]

I've realized that I'm hesitant to talk about being Lakota around people. Because the older I get the less tolerant I am of people's ignorance towards Natives. I never want to be an asshole, but I've found that people are insanely disrespectful mostly out of a lack of understanding or care.

Typically when that happens if I speak up about it I'm made to be the bad guy in the situation. So these days I do my best to not mention that I'm Lakota, or Native at all unless I feel safe defending myself.

The majority of the time people will attribute problems to things that could be explained easily by simply admitting they were ignorant about Natives. The reason it bothers me is because there is no way they would be that ignorant about any other minority, people just don't care about us like they do other PoC.

I've been called racist for saying that. But I'm sorry it's the truth, when I explain the slurs used against me I'm met with argument. I'm given explanation to defend the use of slurs used against my people. When I explain that something is of Lakota design I'm told actually no it's African, which just isn't true. When I explain that a game literally referenced Native people for their main fodder enemy I'm steamrolled by people explaining how much worse it is that the playable characters aren't as accurate as they should be to the PoC they represent. Like hey I agree that's bad but can we recognize that one of these is the design of fodder enemies and the other is at the very least a playable character who is given importance and respect in the lore and story? I'm not saying you can't have a problem with the bad rep from racist devs but I am saying there's a difference here that isn't being acknowledged.

It says something that people lose their minds about Harry Potter but tell me Genshin is just a game, or when there are so many clips of the streamer who said the N word and was called racist for it and shit but no one cares when they literally said Native slurs. It says something that people will tell me those aren't even slurs, like okay then what are they because they've been used as a slur my whole life by people who were racist against me as a Native.

[worrywrite]

I finished reading Harrow the Ninth. And I'm a little shell shocked. But I do have things to say.

I don't think people really get it. That or I got it all wrong. But I don't think people that bag on these books know what's really wrong with them (and there are things wrong with them, they have weaknesses).

To be clear. I read them happily. As happily as you can read them at least. I like them. They're good books. Their strengths and power do outweigh their flaws. I think I might have even loved them a little.

But I don't think people get what's going on when they read them and don't like them. They're latching on to flaws that they don't understand and can't articulate. They miss the finesse hidden beneath the layer of memes, gore, and trope. And when I say finesse, I mean it.

I'm not huge on 2nd person narrative, it catches in the brain a little and doesn't go down smooth like 1st or 3rd. But it is done so well in Harrow.

And there's more but I'm putting it in spoilers.

Okay, actual spoilers:

I don't think that I could call the narration in HtN 2nd person. I think that's a misleading way to represent the way the book unfolds. If you read the whole book and then tell someone it's in 2nd person present tense, you're wrong. It's 1st person past tense. The difference is that the supposed 2nd person narrator is actually part of the unfolding events and they're literally telling the story as it happened from their perspective, but their perspective is that is a person trapped in the passenger seat for most of it.

And I think it's a disservice to describe it as 2nd person and hard to read because that misses the point entirely and sets an expectation that just isn't true.

Okay, so what are the actual flaws of the books.

Well, first, focal point agency. The main characters, the protagonists, don't do much in the way of guiding the narrative. It is very much a story that happens to them. They are outmatched and outgunned the entire way down and only make it through on technicality or pity. It kind of sucks the wind out of the sails of "we do bones, motherfucker" when "doing bones" does nothing and the only solution to that problem is to follow through on someone else's plans and make the sacrifices that someone far more powerful than you wants you to. Characters generally thrive in positions of narrative agency, even when they make a plan and it sucks they've still done what they were trying to do and their character has led the way for things to follow. It lends to a much stronger story when the main character (from a non-metanarrative standpoint) acts like one.

Secondly, the shear cerebral drudge of the language. You can get a headache from this prose if you don't slow down to a snails pace. I often found myself, especially in HtN, stopping to digest a phrase or passage and look up words to double check if my context was correct--and in the meantime my eyes were moving ahead while my mind slogged behind. The prose is accurate but still convoluted to a degree many people probably don't have the patience for anymore. This may be more of a problem with people than with the book, but it doesn't quite matter unless the book gets read.

But just... The delight I felt reading "You never could have guessed that he had seen me." I was giddy. I kid you not. Seeing that flip of narrative context caused some radical joy. Even if some things had been spoiled for me, seeing it play out was a treat. This is the finesse. You can see that Muir had a plan for (I would even call it a twist...) a unique story idea and they carried that plan out with a dedication that must have been very tiring. Because it is very carefully laid out and teased and foreshadowed and then revealed. And then it's revealed again. And again.

I texted a friend that I felt like I was falling down a staircase in slow motion.

[lemonhemlock]

You have a point about Driftmark’s writing, because to this day I’m baffled at people not finding Alicent’s anger valid, I can’t blame that on the writing. What I can blame the writing and the framing for besides the “Aemond stole Vhagar” thing is the “But now they see you as you are” *mic drop* moment, and the scene where Rhaenyra gets her stitches, meanwhile Aemond was literally blinded and that’s barely given any attention and ends with “but I gained a dragon so it’s fair” when it would’ve been fair only if it was Vhagar who took out his eye. Like again, I understand that Aemond was de-escalating the situation, but I do think it was purposefully framed as if that was the truth of it (especially seeing as the stealing comments never get corrected)

you see, when i first saw the scene, i interpreted alicent's speech to rhaenyra as being pretty explicit - "you do whatever the hell you want all the time (i.e. even have children out of wedlock with no consequences), you are so privileged that nothing is off limits for you and you even feel entitled to maiming my son like it's your birthright, you care about no one other than yourself while the rest of us have to play by the rulebook". i would say it's a pretty accurate dressing down of rhaenyra, to which she had a projecting reply - "now they see you as you truly are" - supposedly violent and cruel for demanding luke's eye in return, when a couple of minutes ago, rhaenyra was asking for her little brother to be tortured. not to mention that rhaenyra was actually the socially & legally transgressive one with skeletons in her closet

and i have to say that even emma d'arcy sided with alicent in this scene in interviews and didn't seem to think rhaenyra had the right of it. i think that if team discourse hadn't degenerated so much, people would have been able to VAR replay the scene and accept that rhaenyra should have been carded. but the stan-ification of hotd has left many with worms for brains.

that being said, i think the main issue is NOT clarifying that dragons cannot be stolen - a mistake in an otherwise solid episode. the dialogue should have made clear that aemond was within his rights to shoot his shot at claiming vhagar AND that it was the right decision bc vhagar accepted him (if VHAGAR didn't have a problem with it, why should anyone else? that's how dragons work, they are not pets). it would have been a welcome addition because the public are not 100% familiar with asoiaf dragon lore, so it's basically a piece of exposition that's missing. so if another character is shown on screen claiming it's theft AND they're not ever corrected or challenged in any way, then our brains automatically assume that's the correct assessment bc that's how the medium of storytelling in film works. so if the viewers got that extra information - that aemond was jumped by 4 other kids and maimed basically for shit talking - then they would have been more primed to see through rhaenyra's bullshit.

as for the scene with rhaenyra receiving stitches, perhaps that could have been balanced with one of aemond being comforted by someone, congratulated for gaining a dragon and reassured that what happened to him was not justified. i hesitate to add more, bc i do feel like there's a point where you can make things too explicit and you should trust your audience to piece 2 and 2 together without spoonfeeding them everything. rhaenyra should be allowed to be hypocritical on screen without big red signs pointing at her. the problem is more of an accumulation, not necessarily in this episode, but overall throughout the season. too many of her bullshit statements go unchallenged. once in a while, someone should pop up to contradict her or at least have passers-by give her the side-eye or something. (maybe in season 2? hopefully)

for example, a cool retort after rhaenyra said she was wandering bc she couldn't sleep would have been for someone to say that she and daemon arrived at the same time because they must have both been mourning laena together. thus, you bring back to the forefront of the audience's mind that team black can't be arguing that aemond disrespected laena's memory when daemyra are out there fucking on her grave. is it absolutely necessary? no, i think viewers should have arrived to that conclusion on their own, but apparently a large chunk of them are incapable. at the end of the day, you can't solve everyone's media comprehension problems, you can just try to make good art and hope for the best. however, i would include such a comment at least in later episodes, bc it's too good of an objection to let go

[seriousbrat]

But how ? Snape was the one who started their first fight at 11, and we don’t know what Snape could’ve done to James before SWM. By your logic James could’ve been the bullied one as well and he was just reacting to it and defending himself in a bad way, even Dumbledore calls it a rivalry. Snape was hanging around with soon-to-be Death Eaters, bullied muggleborns by calling them mudbloods, and had a list of spells for his enemies. 🤷‍♀️ he had friends ( Avery, Mulciber, Wilkes ) they were simply not present at the moment.

what do you mean Snape started their first fight? He and Lily were minding their own business when James jumped in and said "Who wants to be in Slytherin? I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"

"We don't know what Snape could've done to James before SWM" actually we do know what happened before SWM: Sirius tried to kill him by sending him down the Whomping Willow. We also know that James attacked Sev simply because Sirius said he was bored. Sev wasn't the instigator- he was, again, minding his own business. When Lily asked James what Sev had ever done to him, he replied "it's more the fact that he exists." How can that even remotely be interpreted as self-defence lol.

We're only shown that ONE scene, and we're shown it for a reason. That's how fiction works. If the reality had been that Snape was secretly the main instigator and that SWM was just reactive violence, that's what we would have been shown. Amazing how many times I have to say this but these aren't real people who actually did things, so when analysing the characters and their dynamics we have to work from what's shown in the text, not baseless speculation about what we would have liked to have been the case. SWM was clearly meant to show that James and Sirius bullied Snape at school. Sirius and Remus don't deny this when Harry confronts them later.

Snape doing other bad things is not mutually exclusive with his having been bullied. It's not even relevant. I think the problem here is you're thinking in terms that are too black and white, as if there can only be one "good" side to every situation and the "good" characters have to be faultless and pure, while the "bad" characters can never be sympathetic or have suffered. That's not how reality works and it's not how well-written fiction should work. Even if Snape had been pure evil and gone on a murder spree it still wouldn't change the objective fact that he was bullied, like it's not relevant to the question at hand.

As for Dumbledore saying it was a rivalry, I wrote recently about how I don't think he was totally wrong to do so. Honestly, I don't think a rivalry is mutually exclusive with a bullying situation either, necessarily. Like I said in that post, I personally feel that Draco bullied Harry, so the comparison is accurate enough even though Harry (and the reader) automatically assume that Harry and James are equivalent in the situation, rather than James's role being much more like Draco's. Obviously Dumbledore did not reveal the full truth of the situation but here's my hot take: Snape literally would not have wanted him to. Also, there's arguably no need to tell a traumatised 11 year old about how his father who was murdered was a dick at school but maybe that's just me.