There’s something I've been meaning to say but I haven't had the words till now. There is something that deeply upsets me about witnessing stories where villains, who are literal killers, fall in love and somehow become good or act outside of what is expected from them. I love love, love is beautfiul, it is powerful and it can truly change a lot. But to sit, and write a killer suddenly go "actually, this one can stay because I am in love for the first time" is such a weird concept to me. Is this happening because as a sociaty we're trying to convince ourselves that deeply disturbed people can be cured by the power of love? That if they just find the right person, they would stop the masacer? or at least no longer feel the need to kill how they were or at least let their person live? And I am not mad at the love, I do belive anyone can fall deeply in love, but my issue is with how it ends. I want to witness the unthinkable — I want to see is exactly what we expect but hoped won't happen, happening. A gut wrenching truth that stays true to who we have been witnessing, despite the "I can change them" dance. And perhaps people hate this idea because they want to belive that anyone can change if only they meet the right one, or that we can change the monsters in our lives with affection, but trust most likly is that they cannot be changed. And I can understand that to some this is then seen as an illusion. "oh then this was never true love", why can the two not exist? Do we not hurt those we love? Maybe not kill them, but someone elses hurt could feel like a small death to me, and vice versa.
Examples, so that you are not confused as to what I am reffering too;
Killing Eve; I stopped watching when Villanelle was shown shooting Eve. It felt true to her character, even if it hurt. She is a killer, we knew that and so did Eve. Regardless of her love, that was what was always going to happen so why were we given additional seaons of this fanatsy of a declawed Villanelle?
Hannibal; It should have ended with the death of Will, and possibly Hannibal consuming him. Didn't Hannibal say that the consumption of Will would somehow join them in a deeper way?Something so disturbing that only could make sense to a serial killing-cannibal. And I would have watched with wide eyes, and gone to sleep staring at the ceiling.
Interveiw With The Vampire; Louis' death in the hand of a Lestat would have made sense, and despite his dramatics, Lestat would have not committed suicide but instead burried himself in deep regret untill he was too numb to his own feelings that he could return to the world of the living. He would have never forgotten Louis, nor what he did, but he would have moved on beause Lestat is not a good person. He's deeply disturbed and Louis knew this. I don't even aknoclege that beatdown episode because Lestat may be a killer, but he's a drama queen first and formost. Louis' death would have been poetic, beautiful and grusom like a greek tragedy without an audiance.
Bonus - Twilight; I could not end without adding my own favorite, and despite this path never being teased to the audiance the same way the other's were, I would have loved the book simply ending because Edward did as he said he would - drained Bella like a Caprisun on a hot summer day. Because what is love agaisnt animalistic urgase (I understand why it is much hotter that he is simply so retsrained and devoted that he resists her, but I'd pay good money for an AU)
At the end of it all, I think want I want is for sociaty to get over the idea that a good woman, love or any form of kindness can change who some people are. Love can do many things - look at crimes of passion! And to some extend I belive that these villain's love were true, possibly not the way we imagine them - which is less so "I love you too" and more so, "wow, finally someone I can manipulate and obsess over. Someone who I can mold, someone who is alone in the world like me" only to realize that is not true.
So why do we make love into what it isnt? Even when the scene is set for us to be shown the truth, writers and the audiance always make the plot lean towards whatever fits so that we can have that "happy ending".
Honorable mentions;
God should have killed Lucifer, I know the bible and christianity is not technically fiction for all, but the idea that he is forgivin but lets the biggest meanness HE CREATED terrorize everybody is evil. Take him out or let somebody else do it homie.
44 notes
·
View notes
not to be That Guy but
every so often I just search "Separate Ways" on Twitter to see general reactions to it and
overall, people are freaking out over the fact that it's not only better than but also longer than RE3make. there's also a bunch of pissed off fanboys crying about how they have to pay $10 for something that "was free when it came out originally," not realizing that Separate Ways very much was not free when it came out originally; it was $50.00 because you had to rebuy THE ENTIRE GAME on PS2.
and if you didn't have a PS2, you had to buy that, too. so, for some people, Separate Ways was actually hundreds of dollars when it came out originally. jackasses.
and then there's another certain subset of people whose reactions are just causing me to
19 notes
·
View notes
like heres the thing- at surface level, you can really be impressed with rices inclusivity. like in a world where things were not horrible, to have a prominent black vampire in merrick, have an intersex genderfluid character in blackwood farm, billions of bisexuals etc, it all seems really nice. and then you look more into it and find that the way she writes anyone who doesnt fit a very specific mold is written horribly. merrick is treated as a sex object and a temptress as early as.. age 14 or so. she is never given the pov during the entire book that is TITLED AFTER HER because its all from a white guy who's been objectifying her forever. petronia (the character in blackwood) is misgendered often and treated as inhuman often in a very jarring way. her way of "inclusivity" with sexuality often includes very large age gaps between adults and minors treated completely normally and never really unpacking the damage that does to the victims, as well as incestuous relationships that if anything are fetishized to the point where i am positive she had a kink for it. her idea of representation is so incredibly surface level and doesn't really seem to examine many viewpoints outside of her own, nor take any care to handle any topic with any sensitivity. do i need to bring up the gay disabled vampire who is the only disabled vampire ever and is greatly treated with mass amounts of ableism from the woman who supposedly cares about him (if we are to believe rice's narrative that every slave owner just lovesss their slaves and wants the best for them and its GOOD for them to be enslaved). we are supposed to believe an author with this bad of a track record actually cares?
3 notes
·
View notes