#it’s okay to Have Differing Opinions On Media

[v8mpvrse]

the only reason the leafs “choke” is bc the amount of pressure that is put on them by the media and their so called “fans” actually makes them stress out wayyy before playoffs! wdym u BOOED U R team when they lost tonight???? instead of cheering them on? letting them know it’s okay? ur human? and this is a GAME?? talking shit about mitch as if he doesn’t make a HUGE difference in and out that locker from??? and talking about how now the guys are overreacting and being childish??? the pressure and stress they are under is bc of YOU?!? shitting on willy as if he isn’t dealing with MIGRAINES (if u think it’s a joke let’s remember nolan patrick.) getting mad at auston as if he hasn’t been DEALING with an illness for U UNGRATEFUL FUCKING “FANS”?!? i get in hockey there’s gonna be brain dead takes and opinions but jfc. have some fucking empathy and SUPPORT ur guys.

[volitioncheck]

nvm this is still on my brain. kim does not like to watch harry suffer… to say that kim takes satisfaction in harry’s pain is a huge misconstruing of his character.

the “getting thrashed like a schoolboy” line comes from a board game, lol. it’s a tease, not a cruelty. there’s never any line that implies that Kim enjoys seeing Harry taking actual morale damage.

he can be amused if you fail a check, but the check is always relatively inconsequential, and again, Harry isn’t taking damage in these.

Failing to pry the trash bin open:

Failing to shatter Ruby’s lorry window:

(also in both of these examples he only responds smugly if you choose for Harry to stubbornly dig in his heels. if Harry gets huffy, Kim teases. If Harry backs down right away Kim won’t rub it in, which feels significant to me! it reminds me of that recent post goin around about Kim meeting your energy!)

and here’s some reactions to failed checks where he does take damage.

Failing the jump to get your cloak:

Failing to break down Plaisance’s door:

he’s not laughing if Harry’s taking damage because he’s not a dick lol.

aaaaand here’s some other instances of morale/health damage and kim’s reactions.

alternate dialogue for failing the harbor jump:

after the call with precinct 41:

seeing bullet holes in the wall:

most significant examples to argue this point for me come when harry has done something to jeopardize the RCM’s image. which kim goes on and on about the importance of maintaining— and yet even here, he still extends worry and assurance.

telling Billie about her husband and handling it badly:

hardie authority check failure cock carousel:

aaaaand the car. this line is one of the most mask-off kim moments we get in the game in my opinion, honestly.

tying this back to the schoolboy line— that line doesn’t show up if you have a negative reputation with Kim. if you have <1 rep, it gets replaced with him calling it “about four hours of our lives that we'll never get back,” lol.

it’s affectionate ribbing!! twisting it into anything else is bizarre 2 me lmao!

anyways. kim is a foil to every other cop we meet in the game specifically because he doesn’t view harry as a punching bag or a lost cause. gottlieb does nothing but sling jabs and glib jokes about harry’s health. torson+mclaine and the others laugh at harry’s panic attack over the radio. in response to harry’s suicide-by-car attempt(!!!!) jean yells about RCM budget. all kim’s lines in response to harry’s check failures and health-damage are consistent, explicit textual contrast against the callousness of the rest of the RCM. twisting kim’s character here requires a bad faith interpretation of the whole game.

[cctinsleybaxter]

200+ movies on my list and you guys are really going to make me hate-watch saltburn

[quesadillayuri]

anons crazy 4 this one im not sorry. like truly calling it a ZERO out of TEN arc. u must be crazy im not sorry

[nyxofdemons]

okay okay. now that ive got the complaining out of my system i do need to say. i recognize that expecting this show to be brilliant all the time is unfair and it IS important to recognize that its really fundamentally a small dark comedy spin off show. in fact i think one of the main reasons this show GETS so much hate is because the long wait between episodes builds up high expectations and fans want it to be amazing and groundbreaking the whole time (ive actually briefly mentioned this before. there's a whole essay in my drafts abt this rn)

all of that said. i WAS deeply disappointed by the episode unhappy campers, but i also recognize this is an episodic situational comedy show, and i'm not gonna hold it against the show or anything. this is very rambly i just. i think its very good and useful to be able to recognize that this show really can be hit or miss and you can be disappointed with it without having to devolve into critic and anti territory (i previously said i still thought it was a good episode, just not for me, but i have since changed my mind. i do think it was a bad episode actually. there were... crumbs? of it? that i thought were really good? but barely and even at this episode's best, NONE of it feels on par with the rest of the show. but again, expecting this show's best to be the STANDARD is not fair.)

i really don't know where i'm going with this i just want to point this out i guess bc i have never REALLY complained about this show before and i don't wanna come across as pessimistic or anti. but i don't think this was a good episode at all and that's alright

[dragon-giggles]

Ok but why are so many of the Muppets so hilariously ticklish?

And I don't just mean the Sesame Street guys, even though Elmo's like the only one who got noticed for it lol, I mean ALL the Muppets

Kermit like freaks out when he's tickled and it's so funny to me for some reason. Why Elmo is the only one noticed for being ticklish, and having a whole doll made after him and stuff, is beyond my understanding lmao

[musical-chick-13]

Oh not me avoiding a wildly popular piece of media that I’d probably actually like out of sheer spite.

[inheritskill]

im so mad about this im talking about it on two platforms. if i see another tik tok comment section talking about how everyone hates everything about g3 im seriously gonna lose it. im gonna rip you into string cheese.

[infriga]

Just a small request to anyone who follows me or checks out my blog, please don't insult something I enjoy in the tags if you're going to reblog something about it from me that isn't already a critique.

[phlyaros]

im gonna be real anon I don't care about label shit ship discourse I care about if real people are getting hurt and ONE reblog from someone being jokingly aggressive on the subject isn't enough to convince me that people are getting hurt when there's more evidence to the contrary. you've put me in a shitty situation here and I don't want to engage with it. please just ask people what they actually think next time before you go throwing your assumptions at other people.

[bylertruther]

i only follow 40 blogs of which maybe <30 are actually active (this is a generous count) and sometimes i think to myself hm.. maybe i should branch out... find some other brothers in byler out there to bless my dash.. and then precisely .00002 seconds after i do that i end up seeing takes so bad it gives me immediate -75 hp damage and a poisoned effect that knocks off an additional -2% every ten seconds and makes my vision turn increasingly red at the edges as it goes in and out and that perilous journey always ends with me blocking 89743984739 people so that i never have to witness anything so heinous ever again. and then. and then a week passes and i do this all over again for whatever reason </3

[maudlin-scribbler]

Part of the process of me becoming a better more well-adjusted person is actually internilising that friends do not have to always agree with eachoter when it comes to things like opinions on a movie or story or whatever. In the past whenever a friend would tell me their opinion on something like a show we watched and it would differ from mine, i simply just lied and said that I thought the same thing, but I need to stop doing that, and I am trying.

[emeryleewho]

I used to work for a trade book reviewer where I got paid to review people's books, and one of the rules of that review company is one that I think is just super useful to media analysis as a whole, and that is, we were told never to critique media for what it didn't do but only for what it did.

So, for instance, I couldn't say "this book didn't give its characters strong agency or goals". I instead had to say, "the characters in this book acted in ways that often felt misaligned with their characterization as if they were being pulled by the plot."

I think this is really important because a lot of "critiques" people give, if subverted to address what the book does instead of what it doesn't do, actually read pretty nonsensical. For instance, "none of the characters were unique" becomes "all of the characters read like other characters that exist in other media", which like... okay? That's not really a critique. It's just how fiction works. Or "none of the characters were likeable" becomes "all of the characters, at some point or another, did things that I found disagreeable or annoying" which is literally how every book works?

It also keeps you from holding a book to a standard it never sought to meet. "The world building in this book simply wasn't complex enough" becomes "The world building in this book was very simple", which, yes, good, that can actually be a good thing. Many books aspire to this. It's not actually a negative critique. Or "The stakes weren't very high and the climax didn't really offer any major plot twists or turns" becomes "The stakes were low and and the ending was quite predictable", which, if this is a cute romcom is exactly what I'm looking for.

Not to mention, I think this really helps to deconstruct a lot of the biases we carry into fiction. Characters not having strong agency isn't inherently bad. Characters who react to their surroundings can make a good story, so saying "the characters didn't have enough agency" is kind of weak, but when you flip it to say "the characters acted misaligned from their characterization" we can now see that the *real* problem here isn't that they lacked agency but that this lack of agency is inconsistent with the type of character that they are. a character this strong-willed *should* have more agency even if a weak-willed character might not.

So it's just a really simple way of framing the way I critique books that I think has really helped to show the difference between "this book is bad" and "this book didn't meet my personal preferences", but also, as someone talking about books, I think it helps give other people a clearer idea of what the book actually looks like so they can decide for themselves if it's worth their time.

Update: This is literally just a thought exercise to help you be more intentional with how you critique media. I'm not enforcing this as some divine rule that must be followed any time you have an opinion on fiction, and I'm definitely not saying that you have to structure every single sentence in a review to contain zero negative phrases. I'm just saying that I repurposed a rule we had at that specific reviewer to be a helpful tool to check myself when writing critiques now. If you don't want to use the tool, literally no one (especially not me) can or wants to force you to use it. As with all advice, it is a totally reasonable and normal thing to not have use for every piece of it that exists from random strangers on the internet. Use it to whatever extent it helps you or not at all.

[emotionalsupporthandle]

Do you ever read someone's take on a piece of media that is just so wrong that you're foaming at the mouth, just seething, and want to scream?

[stuckinapril]

23 things I learned in 2023:

Breaking promises to yourself is essentially telling yourself you’re not worthy of commitment or effort.

Listen to people when they tell you who they are.

People put their best foot forward when they first meet you. If they’re already being shitty, it’s likely only going downhill from here.

Self-care isn’t always indulging instant gratification and not doing hard things. I was actually at my most fulfilled when I did hard things DESPITE not feeling like it.

If you’re clinging to other people for fulfillment or validation, you probably don’t like yourself very much.

It’s never the end of the world like we think it is.

If someone wants to walk out of your life, let them. Never be in the business of changing people, even when it comes to changing how they think about you.

Brutally honest communication is everything, but that can also coincide with tactful kindness. Neither is mutually exclusive.

Having a routine makes a massive difference.

Comparison is pointless. No one else has been dealt the same cards you’ve been dealt.

Envy is a waste of time. Instead of being envious of other people, view them as proof of concept.

Self-accountability is important. We are fallible and it’s okay to make mistakes; we just need to own up to them.

Every failure is an opportunity for growth.

Every severed friendship, failed opportunity, lost connection etc etc leaves space for better things to replace it.

We are not tethered to people’s image of us. We are free to change ourselves whenever we please.

It’s not other people’s way, but it’s my way—and that’s all that matters.

Someone denying you love does not erase you.

Piggybacking off the last point—someone not acknowledging the virtues you have doesn’t mean that you don’t have those virtues.

All that really matters are the opinions of the handful of people who truly love you, as well as your opinion of yourself.

Waiting at least 15 minutes before reacting to something. Never trust yourself during the moments when something just hits (learned this the hard way).

Situations are complex and almost never a one size fits all. Asking for advice is okay, but take it with a grain of salt/ultimately follow your own judgment.

Social media isn’t the devil, but scrolling endlessly is. Make an intentional effort to supplant screen time with books and hobbies and friends and tangible, real life things.

We all die one day. None of this is that deep and none of this really matters. Stop taking things so seriously and just enjoy the process 🤍

[old-lorarri]

꒰꒰ ‧₊˚𝐖𝐄𝐋𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐌𝐔𝐋𝐓𝐈𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐒𝐄 ─ 𝐃𝐑𝟑 ˚₊· ꒱꒱

─ summary . . . ❨ these days everyone has there opinions and it just so happens that people have opinions on your relationship...liked you asked ❩  ─ pairing . . . ❨ daniel ricciardo x fem! young! marvel! actress! reader ❩  ─ genre . . . ❨ social media file ❩ ─ author note . . . ❨ short and sweet one ngl I was kinda tapped for ideas with this request lol so I hope you guys like it anyway and enjoy! ❩

❨ taglist | masterlist ❩

danielricciardo

liked by yourinstagram landonorris 67,892,361 others

danielricciardo love my lady

view comments

user am I the only one who thinks it's weird that Y/N is dating someone so much older than her?

user Y/N baby this isn't you 😕

user can't you guys just leave them alone 😭😭😭

user danny wtf are you doing with a child 💀 ⤷ user she is legit a fully grown adult 🙄

user I think they are cute together but I just can't get behind the age difference 🤮

user free adam taylor johnson and Y/N L/N yall ���🏼

user okay but 7 years diffrence ain't that bad if you really think about it 😐

comments have been limited

yourinstagram

liked by danielricciardo lewishamilton 65,279,368 others

yourinstagram hate to break it to you but I have daddy issues and I'm not afraid to show them

comments have been disabled

─ requested by . . .

anon ─ hii!! can i request danny ric x younger! marvel actress! reader? u dont have to if u dont want to,, thank u!!