#kind of does the actor a discredit

[coolspacequips]

Gotta say I'm so glad the strngr things fandom got a new white boy to ship w Steve, it's made seeing it all over the dash this year a much less nausea inducing experience lol

[opencommunion]

"When a book titled Terrorism: A Very Short Introduction, written by the British professor and historian Charles Townshend, was found by police near the pro-Palestine student encampment at Columbia University, it was held up by New York Police Department (NYPD) Deputy Commissioner Kaz Daughtry as evidence of some kind of foreign, radicalising influence on student activism. Apparently, for Daughtry, reading a book on terrorism is evidence of radicalisation. Knowing about terrorism makes you at risk of committing terrorism. Finding a book near a student encampment confirms that pro-Palestine solidarity is linked to terrorism.

What Daughtry was arguably trying to do was darken Palestine activism on college campuses across the United States with the association of terrorism. But doing so did not require much ideological work. After all, Daughtry had the media establishment on his side, an industry that had been furiously working well before October 7 to ensure that Palestinian resistance was entrenched in the public imaginary as a 'conflict' between so-called moderates and extremists and to set Palestinian violence as 'terrorism' in opposition to Israeli violence as 'self-defence.' ... Aside from all the eye-rolling, Daughtry’s book-staging act generated at least one very important reflection: we need to add a demand that is currently missing from the movement’s demands to universities to disclose and divest from financial ties to Israel. It is the demand that universities across the West dismantle the academic disciplines and systems of knowledge that produce, transmit, and sustain the very conditions that make genocide possible in the first place.

It is worth stating that terrorism is much more than actual political violence. For those paying attention, terrorism is a system for representing violence. It demarcates what counts and does not count as legitimate violence. In this knowledge system, the death-dealing of militaries, intelligence agencies, and private security forces acting at the behest of state actors is legitimate. And the violence of non-state actors resisting sovereign power, imperial projects, and state violence, is not. ... Attempting to discredit the pro-Palestine student movement, what Daughtry’s ludicrous book act also reminds us is that terror talk racialises. Terrorism has long been used to describe violence that is pathological in nature instead of political. It is the violence of 'psyches gone awry' and 'psychological disturbance.' Reframing political violence as pathological violence, terror talk implies that those who commit what is called terrorism do so out of some innate and ingrained penchant for irrational violence. In so doing, terror talk creates a racial category: the category of people who have not progressed into the age of the rule of law – and indeed cannot – due to reasons that emerge at the intersection of biology and culture.

As a Black man in a position of power, Daughtry should be ashamed of trafficking racial discourses that expose racialised populations, like his own, to state violence. For, indeed, with the irrational and uncivilised as its object, terror talk creates an edge to a rules-based order. That is, it establishes the limits of the universal application of the rights enshrined in international humanitarian law — the right to sovereignty, the right to security, and the right to life. In other words, terror talk suspends the juridical order for those deemed outside of the political and the rule of law — the so-called terrorists, future terrorists (children), terrorist sympathisers (the population), and terrorist reproducers (mothers). Suspending the guarantee of international political protection, terror talk makes killable life. We see this in Gaza. Terror talk has made it legitimate to bomb, maim, dice to pieces, snipe, displace, detain, and torture Palestinian life. Terror talk exposes Palestinian life to death and premature death.

The Western university is a key producer and disseminator of terror knowledge and therefore is entangled in the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people in ways that move beyond its financial investments in Israeli companies. Terror knowledge has been given the veneer of scientific and academic respectability under the umbrella term of 'terrorism studies.' With 90 percent of its research taking place after the 9/11 attacks, terrorism studies mushroomed into an area study since the war on terror. ... Offering embedded expertise to powerful institutions such as the police, military, intelligence agencies, arms manufacturing, and media industries, the overlooked role of the Western university in the 'military-industrial-academic complex' is that it creates and sustains the very conditions that enable genocide to happen. ... We thus call on the student movement to add another plank to their demands: the dismantling of terrorism discourses."

[angelxd-3303]

What is your thoughts on mario and luigi's family in the movie?

Hajdmfnismakfksmdjfnc

*ahem*

Yes, I absolutely loved them. I have literally so many thoughts about them, I hope you don't mind a few paragraphs!

First of all, their MOM??? I would die for her. I would kill for her. Either way, what bliss...

She was so sweet and supportive, and not just with the Bros. We see her helping what I assume is her Dad(?) eat, because he can't do so on his own, and she just strikes me as the type of person who gives all they can for their family. She goes out of her way to encourage her boys, either with the plumbing business or otherwise.

As for the Dad, some interpreted him as kind of cold. And yeah, I guess, but he actually reminds me a lot of my mom. He clearly loves his boys, he was upset that they left a steady job because he didn't want them to fail. So yeah, he uses a bit of tough love on them (especially Mario), but that's not to say that he doesn't care. It doesn't discredit how Mario feels and interprets things, but I appreciated them making the Dad such an accurate example of parental miscommunication. In other words, I loved him as well.

Uncle Tony (Who I believe is the one with the afro?) strikes me as the Fun Uncle. He can get a bit exuberant, but he seems fun. Not much to say about the guy, just that I could vibe with him, but only for a short while. I feel like after too long his presence would get overwhelming.

Then we have Uncle Arthur. I'm assuming he's the one sitting across from Mario, along with his wife and their child. (I read in one place that the kid with the hat was a boy, and in another place that they were a girl, so I'm just gonna use they/them until I get confirmation. If anyone knows for sure, please tell me!)

First of all, can we talk about how he and Luigi look just alike? Like-

Look at him!! He looks so much like Luigi! We didn't hear much from Arthur, but he does seem to be a bit of a wise guy. Something about the way his wife smacked him after the "worst actors" comment makes me think he's a bit of a smartass, lol!

Speaking of his wife, I love her, but let's play a game called "guess which one married into the family", lol. Poor girl sticks out at that dinner table so much 😂

She is very pretty tho, and I wish we'd seen more of her. Same for their kid, they seem chill.

All in all, they seem like a loving family. Yeah, they pick on each other, but what family doesn't? It's obvious that they love one another so much, and I imagine stepping into their home would feel like walking into a warm hug. They just give me a very cozy feeling, and I honestly would have watched a movie just about them!

[shannankle]

The Sign Episode 7 Thoughts

Showing abs is apparently necessary for good art (taking notes)

Okay but are they talking about having him paint him, make love, or kill him and make him a part of the art (they keep showing the art tools like torture tools)

That love scene was really beautiful, love the way it makes the art very visceral. The way it's framed reminds me a bit of Hannibal and the way bodies there are framed as art.

Ah so we are intentionally blurring the lines here between love making, art, and potential murder--cause the scene of him washing off the paint is pulled straight from a crime thriller. I like the contrast between the red paint and the blue lighting.

Interesting bathroom, the shot is really pretty, but logistically how do you shower without getting everything wet. The mirror is really interesting though. Practically it's a good way to make sure he gets all the paint off. But it also highlights how alone he is here, with only his own reflection to keep him company.

Yai why are you trying to stop Tharn from saving someone?

These guys are so bad at working, meanwhile Yai is telling Tharn not to get distracted from the job they're already all not doing

Oh I like the way the actor plays Mr. Montree. A lot of actors would overplay the sinister aspect to make sure the audience really gets it, but instead of any tension in his voice or body language, he comes across quite genuine and warm in his responses. We can still pick up the tension if we observe the captain and read between the lines of what he's saying. Nice!

Tharn, darling, maybe don't tip the guy off! I'm glad Yai told him that was stupid

Ah hello again Nat's abs!

Interesting that most of the guests are in black, white, or beige, but Mr. Montree is in blue and Phaya's grandma is in red. Of course those are the colors used in the painting and earlier with Art. It makes sense that Mr. Montree would stand out, but I'm curious why Phaya's grandma in particular. Will she become more important? Is she related to Mr. Montree in some way?

I'd love to know more about the artists and art they used for this episode. There's some really gorgeous pieces

Oh no a broken statue I'm getting Shadow flashbacks

Wait why would they detain Art? It was clearly an accident

Dr. Chachacha stepping up to say Art is his patient, what is this Hannibal? Dr. Chalecter over here! It's got to be an influence right? Cause I was getting similar vibes in the opening scenes too

I wonder if hysteria as a term has the same connotations as it does in Western psychiatry. Like is it still a term that's used medically? Or is it clearly outdated? If it's the later, why doesn't that raise any eyebrows? Either way it fits with his sinister role in the story and the way he riles Phaya up to cause problems and make it seem like Phaya is dangerous or hysterical. Say Art is hysterical and off his meds and you can discredit him. How much of that is Dr. Chalecter using some sort of power on people is hard to say.

Huh, even after that back and forth, I'm not quite sure what the show's perspective is here on mental illness. They aren't necessarily pushing back on the idea that it can make you dangerous, even if there's some nuance added. Though Dr. Chalecter did get in a funny burn telling Phaya: you're not mentally ill, your personality just sucks.

Okay I get that Phaya is acting like an idiot because he's scared, but my patience is a little thin. It's just not a dynamic I enjoy. I'm kind of hoping it really is Dr. Chalecter's doing.

Oooof Dr. Chalecter is over here distinguishing "normal" people vs mentally ill people. Rich and ableist! Despite the copganda the show is at least giving us evil psychiatrists.

No don't bring the charismatic psychiatrist into your police investigation! It's like the captain hasn't even seen Hannibal!

Did Kao's body get put into the art and that's why they can't find him?

Okay I guess I'm glad it wasn't portrayed as him killing out of madness or mental illness, that's a relief.

Tharn's visions are getting super convenient and helpful now. I like the touch of focusing on the clock in the flashback

Imagine being the poor cab driver. You pick up a guy with a bleeding neck and instead of going to the hospital he asks you to drop him somewhere sketchy

Why would you sit in the car to get evidence? Wouldn't that disrupt things?

These two have no chill, why are they bickering in front of everyone's salad. Also not sure why we needed a montage of the meeting.

Kitty Kitty Kitty Kitty!!!

Oh Phaya's little meow to deflect, adorable!

Huh the grandma's comments about not understanding people's motivations and everyone losing their minds are troubling. Feels in line with what the episode seems to be bringing up around mental illness. Even with Tharn's response, I'm not really sure what the show is trying to say about the topic. Kind of similar to last week's take on justice.

Kitty makes the perfect transition shot!

Interesting how the final scenes between Phaya and Tharn here mirror Art and Kao but with very different endings. Both begin in spaces where Art and Phaya make and display their art. Tharn and Kao are invited into these intimate spaces. But the couple's follow opposite trajectories--one betraying that intimacy (Kao) and the other (Thar) deciding to take a leap of faith and trust in it.

Art and Kao make love in a scene that may have just been a fantasy, but, real or not, the scene has a dream-like aesthetic that is edging into nightmare. We then learn they fought and separated.

In contrast, Phaya and Tharn talk, resonate with each other emotionally and come together. They then make love. Like, Art and Kao's love scene, there's a fantastic quality, but this one stays out of nightmare territory.

The mirrors are particularly notable. We end with mirror's capturing Phaya and Tharn together, intimate. While we began with Art in his bathroom, the mirrors highlighting how alone he is.

A final thought: It has been 4 weeks since Sand has graced our screens, now we must wait at least a week more and that is a true crime!

[buddieisgoingcanon2024]

I read through the quotes from last night's TCA interview and like another anon mentioned in their ask, I wasn't happy with the comment TM made about RG either. Like what the fuck was that?

RG has worked hard to be a great actor and he can and has done more television shows and movies than just 9-1-1. He was an experienced model, he's an exceptional dancer and he's also fucking drop dead gorgeous so what in the actual hell kind of comment was that? It was demeaning and the tone of it made it seem like the only reason RG is on 9-1-1 is because he's gorgeous. All of the men on the show look good but RG is strikingly handsome and it doesn't matter what clothes he wears, if his hair is long or short or if he wears a full beard (like he did in the hiatus) or if he's cleanly shaved, he's beautiful. That shouldn't be the only reason he's there.

For anyone who isn't offended by it, imagine how you would feel if you're working a job and you have all the necessary credentials, college degrees and the work experience to do it but your manager says, "I told you I'm keeping you around because you're too pretty to lose"; in front of a room full of people no less. Wouldn't you be upset? If not, then you should be because that's some demeaning and dismissive bullshit. No one should want all of their accomplishments and achievements discredited with a single comment about how good they look.

TM should really check himself for that fucked up comment and stop treating RG and the character of Eddie like a pretty face. The man can act his ass off and no on can do facial expressions the way he does them. He can have an entire conversation with his eyes alone.

For sure anon. You are not wrong on anything you’ve said here. Ryan/Eddie deserves better.

Hoping he does this season. At least he better be.

[popculturebuffet]

Lion King II: Simba's Pride Review (Birthday Review for WeirdKev27)

Hello all you happy people and it's time once again for that annual tradition where I celebrate Kev, my client turned friend and client who comissions much of the reviews you see on this blog, exactly how he likes.. by talking about lions for a while. And after covering the rather abismal interquel 1/2 last year, we're finally onto the sequel this year, Simba's Pride.

Simba's Pride is my first time covering one of Disney's various DTV sequels. And while many a kid can recalled having to suffer through these things , I honestly don't have a ton of experince with them. I saw about 6 as a kid: the aladdin sequels, extremley goofy movie, this one, pocahantas and hunchback. I saw them advertised sure but I was more a toy story kid. I watched and was scarred by that one way more than most other disney films outside of say Aladdin, which I remember watching all the time .That and the aristocats. MOstly for that bitching opening

So i'ts not a suprise the only ones I really remembered were the aladdin sequels.. and extremley goofy movie, which is likely responsible for me loving goofy so much. Yes over the orignal , I just headbanged to the aristocats what makes you think I just magically turned into this one day?

That said.. I was curious to revisit this one when the time came as Lion King II has one of the better reputations among the disney sequels, feeling both SLIGHLTY more necessary. It's well liked to the point that when lion king sequel series LIon Guard happened, Lion King 2 was kept fully canon, to the point season 3 goes out of it's way to explain why the new crop of chracters from lion guard are absent during this film.

So the question is does this film hold up... or is it simply good by comparison to Mulan II: Everyone Woke up On the Wrong Side of the Bed This Morning? Find out with me under the cut.

We're Doin a Sequel: I almost didn't have much of a production section this time, but thankfully wikipedia provides.. in this case an old LA Times article from when the movie was in pre-release. It's not DEEP into production but it least it gives me some insight into how the sausage was made on this one.

The first was this pretty damming line from Buena Vista Home Entertainment's president, which sums up the DTV boom in a nutshell

“We look at the feature animation business as a way to set up the original story,” said Michael Johnson, president of Buena Vista Home Entertainment Worldwide. “Their energies are absorbed completely in new productions. So we have set up a division through the television animation group to do the sequels. . . . That’s not to say this isn’t good enough to go theatrical.”

This.. may be one of the grossest things i've seen disney do. It's not homophobia gross, it's not "making a feature film next to a concentration camp" gross, but it's still horrible to make a division just to make cheap sequels you don't consider anything but money , not only discrediting the work done by the animators on these films, but also admitting your making a shoddy product just to get money from parents who trust your brand. Am I saying this is the first or last time any company, disney included, pulled this kind of shit? No. Not even close. Even GOOD movies have done greasy shit to their animators, see the shoddy conditions on across the spider-verse. But this is still a special kind of wrong and set up a whole industry of wrong in these cheap half assed sequels. If antyhing could remind me WHY we need the writers and actors strikes, this is a big flashing symbol as to why as execs haven't really changed how they treat animation, just the tactics for being shitty to it.

That being said as always it didn't stop the team from trying hard, as Sharon Morill, then vp of DisneyTVA which also ran these things, was determined to break the stigma. It sadly didn't happen, but I can't fault her for trying. And Lion King II did try. It had a four year development cycle, which for animation seems pretty normal, but for one of these films is twice the length. They also changed up some things along the way but we'll get more into that with the film itself. The film released to mostly good reviews, with no one liking it more than the first but still finding it a fine sequel. So what'd I think of it? Let's explore that shall we? A Good Idea at The Time The core of Lion King II isn't terrible. it has some cracks just from the foundation but it's a solid idea for a sequel: We focus now on Kiara, Simba's daughter, played by the star of one of my faviorite franchises and a huge get for the time, Scream star Neve Campbell, who was just coming off scream 2 when this film came out no less. She does a great job once we get to the present with what she has, suprising no one. This honestly wasn't a bad move: unlike most disney sequels the setup for one is there in the finale with Kiara's cornoation, which is where this film picks up before going into her life as a cub, then spending most of the film on her as a young adult. Not only that the film does have the clever idea to play off Simba's trauma: he's overprotective of his daughter and Nala can see it.. and it wears on her more and more with time, with her finding pride rock confining and being annoyed he constantly sends her gay grandpas to go spy on her. You can see both sides: To kiara the pridelands have become a cage her dad's keeping her in but you get that simba still has lingering trauma from both Mufasa's death and his own buffet of near death experinces. Simba is wrong to smother her like this, but you can at least see why he's like this.

This time though there's ANOTHER lead, Kovu, played by disney legend and goof Jason Marsden, which sets a trend: While Cambell is a big flashy name most of the cast are either returning form the first one or are vetran voice actors or tv stars. Nothing wrong with this as the cast with one glaring exception we'll get to all does a fantastic job. The only one not to return is Rowan Atkinson, whose replaced by Fraiser Vetran Edward Hibbert and who does.. fine. He's not as good as rowan, but he's not bad and Zazu isn't in the film enough for it to be a real issue.

Kovu is one of the outcasts, a group of lions who were banished from the pridelands for supporting scar wholeheartdly. I'm a bit torn on the outsiders as the concept: I like the idea Scar had actual supporters, that Simba, given how much scar had done to him, overreacted and banished them all instead of trying to work with them, giving them legit reasons beyond WE EVIL to hate Simba and want him dead. That said.. their also a MASSIVE retcon that makes zero sense in the context of the original film. What lionesses we saw hated Scar and resented him, the pridelands were dying so it's hard to see why anyone would support him, even a small pack , EXCEPT simply being evil, and NONE OF THEM did anything about scar being eaten by the hyenas nor against the rest of the lions, nor tried to start a war when Simba exiled them. The Hyenas are also conspciously absent as , despite Cheech Marin being tapped to return, they were apparently written out.

There's also a massive elephant in the room: See if you look at Kovu you notice he kinda LOOKS like Scar and his mom, the leader of the outcasts and one of the best parts of the film Zira, played by Suzanna Planchette to vllanous resentful perfection, acts more like a vengeful widow. Surely i'm just reading too much into this and Disney didn't SERIOUSLLY consider making a film about incest right?

Yes. I wish to Mufasa up above I was kidding. Granted this info is midly suspect as neither tv tropes nor wikipedia have a link for it.. but givne Kovu looks like scar, how Zira acts about her former leader and lover, and how it seems very weird Scar wouldn't just sire an heir outright and just pick some random baby, i'm feeling it's true and it's laughable they got as far as they did before someone said "Wait isn't this incest' Which yes, yes it is. It makes the romance between the two feel weird as even with the film trying to act like Kovu isn't scar's son just his heir... it still very much comes off like Kovu IS scar's son and no one brings it up becuase lions apparently give a much of a shit about incest as the writers of this flim did.

Zira and Kovu are fascinating though: Zir ais as clever as scar, has a swagger to her and seems just at all times like a snarling engine of vengance. Her husband is dead.. and so his murderer shall burn. She's not deeply complex, but she is incredibly fun to watch and sometimes tha'ts all you need. Kovu meanwhile has a LOT of fascinating layers: he shows up hostile to kira as a cub and it's clear with how the outsiders function that he's been raised as a weapon his whole life: only to fight an dsurvivie with what scraps they have out there. And his transition to adulthood is shattering: Kiara is just herself but older, simply less willing to take her dad's shit after a lifetime of it. Kovu by contrast goes from a fairly sweet innocent kid.. to a revenge engine modled by his mom to infiltrate the lions and kill simba. Marsden gives a truly awesome performance, with just what Kovu has become being clear.. but also that beneath that what he could get from Simba's side of things.. could be better.

The problem is that while the setup is really good, the first third of the film having the two as kids and setting up the situation, and it's enough that I just ignore the massive leaps needed for the outsiders to exist or the fact their basically the hyenas but as lions, the rest of the film... does almost nothing with it. Instead of diving into these two characters and especially Kovu's very complciated crisis of concious.. they just do things in the most most cliche and tired way possible: Kovu finds his new life almost instantly better and plans to tell Kiara asap but can't, his clan gets tired and attacks, Simba blames Kovu and tries to clamp down harder and kiara leaves, theyg o back to stop a war. it's basically west side story or romeo and juliet but speedran so all the actual conflict and emotoin is gone. Kovu dosen't even kill anyone, the death is on Simba for Kovu's brother.

Oh and since we have to talk about him at some point let's talk about Kovu's brother. His brother is Nuka, a shabby lion who thinks he should be heir but proves every second why he shoudln't and why his mom didn't choose him, basically being comedy relief. They then try to give him a tragic death scene which would work.. if it were not for one clear error. one horrible mistake that ruins the character. They cast Andy Dick to play him

Yeah even putting aside his harassment , general creepiness and the fact John Lovitz had FRESHLY punched him in the face for making a crack about Phil Hartman post death (AFTER also enabling Hartman's wife's drug addiction), WHY would , even for the price of a nickle, you cast ANDY DICK for a dramatic death. Even before we knew he was somehow even worse, Andy Dick's whole existance was to be a punching bag. you hire him to annoy your audience and your characters. You CAN have a comedy characters death mean something and be truly gutting, take 24's death in venture bros or even among disney hooty getting turned into a puppet during owl house. But you have to make us care about that character on some level beyond being a joke no one takes seriously first. With Nuka.. he's just a dick who envied his brother and stupidly challenged Simba to a fight. And even as much of a dick as Simba is in this film, more on that in a moment, Simba STILL tried to just bat Nuka away. Simba, despite being ambushed, despite his hatred of the outsiders, despite everything you'd expect.. WENT EASY ON HIM. He didn't want to kill anyone. He only started getting serious when Nuka, somehow, proved to be an actual opponent and didn't even kill him on purpose. The idea of Simba being forced to that is good, but it just dosen't work when the character is nothing and had no personality other than "Pralines and Dick". Fuck em. And most good ideas end up like Kovu or Pralines and Andy Dick. Kiara is mostly wasted, mostly just wanting to bone her cousin and having a fairly sterotpicla disney princess arc, Rafiki is just there to push the main couple together, and Simba .. simba gets done kinda wrong. While the idea of him turning to his worst impulses over trauma is good, the film has so much going on instead he just comes off as a massive prick whose prejduiced, judges Kovu because he , in the context of the film HAPPENS to look like his arch enemy and isn't related to him, and treats his daughter like shit. Brodrick tries but there isn't enough depth given to Simba or anyone for this flim to work. The film just feels half assed...

It dosen't help despite not really giving the story time to breathe.. it also spends a LARGGGGEEE MEATY CHUNK of the storytelling on musical numbers. There's about as many as the original.. but I can barely recall them, with all just feeling like half hearted rehashes of the originals And unlike the original films songs which were all vital to the plot in some way (Circle of Life set the tone and theme of the film, I Just Cant' Wait To Be King fully sets up Simba's character for the first act and has him ditching Zazu, Be Prepared fleshes out Scar and sets up his big plan to kill Mufasa while also revealing at it's start that Scar was working with the Hyenas and by it's end reveals the Hyenas as a real threat, Hakuna Matata handles the time skip and sets up Simba for the third act, and Can You Feel the Love Tonight? has Simba and Nala begin their romance, which is key in getting him to go home. ). In contrast while these numbers COULD commuincate key stuff, they all go on so long they just pad out a film that REALLY didn't need padding, it needed a liver and some kidneys to help it function better.

The one thing the film does really well.. is the animation. Seriously while you can tell this isnj't a theatrical budget.. you can also tell the animators stretched every dime they had to make this LOOK theatrical grade. While some shots i've seen, or some sequels i've seen outright look like they were made cheaply, Lion King II looks damn good and worthy of the original. Despite all the challenges it'd bring the characters still look expressive, colorful with just that hint of real animal movements that made the original's animation so damn good. It may not look as good as the original but for what they had to work with it looks as close as they could possibly get and that's DAMN impressive.

So yeah overall this film isn't great. I wanted to like it I did: It sounded good.. but the final product , even acknowlding the struggles they likely had, is so padded and full of wasted potetial it just makes me sad. It's still probably one of the better Disney Sequels as it both had a reson to exist, good ideas and the animation is again fucking beautiful. But it sadly isn't as much as it could've been. Hopefully when I get to Lion Guard at some point, we'll see what a lion king followup truly could've been. For now.. we can only watch this and see someone almost but not quite make it. Maybe if disney wasn't treating these like disposable money factories this could've actually worked.

[niallschesthair]

No no I knew you weren’t talking bad about him! I was just baffled that people were talking shit when he legitimately said nothing bad about Taylor or their previous relationship…

he was very kind and very eloquent and succinct and i think this is the best response possible (and it once again discredits all those tabloid articles people thought came from him 🙄) but people will always be mad when someone they perceive has wronged taylor doesn't bend over backwards apologising and sanctifying her putting all the blame on them thus he continues to be a villain for answering the way he did (it's a catch-22, nothing he does will ever be the right thing in their eyes)

i was honestly more interested in the bit where he talks about how he's more interested in continue being a character actor even if it's only in supporting roles instead of empty leads that don't fulfill him artistically rather than the breakup questions

[wonders110]

does Drake bell support Dan? what about josh? what was the thing about Jenette's novel?

Drake merely said in the documentary that Dan was the only one from the people who had worked there that even offered him any kind of a sympathetic ear, he also said he wasn't going to take away from anyone elses experiences or discredit them. Drake also read Jenette's book so I believe he did get to see a different perspective on how Dan treated the girl actors.

Josh's wording re: jenette's book was clumsy and he was just upset that he had recorded a podcast episode with her and then had to scrap it because she recanted her approval of it, he made a shitty joke about it but I don't think he's ever come out and say anything positive about Dan.

[unproduciblesmackdown]

shoutout to the serendipity of it all like this unlikely ass show dropping in this unprecedented nonbinary character b/c a co-creator organically heard about how Nonbinary People Real and was like gee wouldn't that be interesting. an actor getting hold of the character breakdown who could go "hey wait a second. I'M nonbinary people." going "wouldn't it be interesting too if there was an autistic character" but even more inadvertently b/c they don't even know. seeing deh & maybe it helped that ben platt happened to be out that performance & offering a one-off bit part to an actor you can write a role around after casting, because then went "god damn i guess we keep writing him [ugh, those annoying loser nerds we all hate, am i right?] material so he can keep up the magic." that the autistic guy just has to happen to latch on to the nonbinary person throughout the whole series, and then do it again for the other person whose nonbinarity is a secret like his autistacity. the role of taylor being so powerful that they'd escape the scope of the series in 5 episodes if it wasn't holding them back by the scruff of the neck to prevent that. same regarding winston not even getting a funny little arc in his own right because if someone doesn't tell him to shut up every few seconds, the illusions would start to break down, like taylor's mere presence does re: gender. that the closest taylor got to escaping the curse of the series and reaching full potential was thanks to winston breaking rules and being serious enough about anything to give them honest criticism to their face. that only one character's worn a tmc tee shirt once, twice, as statements, It's Winston. that winston's kind of too powerful to even potentially get a dynamic with taylor as is warranted, like how taylor can't ever Not have one or two bullshit central characters getting in their way on purpose: too much could be accomplished, too much would have to change to accommodate this

and of course shoutout to us for serendipitously organically finding the wonder of the world that is All Winston & Taylor Scenes in Season 3 and becoming the niche fans who are so wrong about the show that we're righter than it can handle (and not to jokingly discredit the soph nothingunrealistic taylor scholarship & appreciation which involves a ton of correctness about canon even without being here for an s1 elements) (anyways autistic winston is also correct. the "wrongness" is a joke. didn't want us here, then you shouldn't have partly accidentally hosted the bitchingest characters who just so happen to need the idiosyncrasies of billions to be so elevated without any tamping down or required context of being outliers)

[incandesang]

i think sam talks like a big fan of book!lestat and most of his takes come from there. I don't think he specifically supports Lestat's actions in the show (he said ep.5 was DA) but he has to defend his blorbo without discrediting the show's writers.

oh yeah for sure lmao. i definitely get that vibe from him, and i have said to a friend of mine in our discord that it feels like there is a disconnect between the way that sam sees lestat and how rolin and the showrunners do. sam's first exposure to vc was the queen of the damned movie, and then the books, so his view on lestat as a character is probably predominantly defined by those things. there's no denying sam is a bit of a superfan, and that he's probably living some sort of childhood fantasy rn. he just kind of looks like. an asshole for constantly trying to defend lestat while these episodes are airing where he is being The Worst Person Ever. like sam buddy tone it down PLEASE.

we all wanna defend our childhood faves. I've said before but my favourite problematic blonds are literally john constantine (who is just. awful) and (616) warren worthington iii (who is technically a spree-killer among other awful things) and i would personally die on the hill that john is redeemable and that warren isn't as bad as he really is just because i have soft spots for them. in recent comics warren literally killed a whole town and I'll still defend him. but like. my defence of some asshole from a comic book doesn't have the same reach as a topical actor defending his character,, who is, every week, being a destructive menace to everyone around him. i understand this being the hill he wants to die on ig but to defend an abuser when you have as much influence as he does is just kind of irresponsible.

there have been hints in interviews that sam and jacob maybe don't see eye to eye with the showrunners on some of the decisions in the show (the fight being something they were obviously uncomfortable talking about + said they didn't like filming + they mentioned how they got into a disagreement on set about 'what the story was' in that scene before quickly backtracking lol) but idk I'm not sam and i don't have any idea what contracts him and jacob have signed and what they are and aren't allowed to say. this aside, i think that all this is genuinely making him look bad? like to say that lestat does everything out of love, and three weeks later for a scene to air where he beats his lover nearly to death, another where he mocks his daughter for her sexual assault, and ANOTHER where he horrifically mistreats antionette,,, it looks bad. it does open up discussions surrounding what exactly love looks like to a character like amc!lestat, but those discussions will more likely than not lead to darker places that just make him look even worse lmao. i am open to having and seeing those discussions bc i think it's fascinating but they will not end with him looking any better i'll say that.

him talking about book!lestat is ultimately probably what he is doing, and i think that there is at least some belief on his part that book!lestat will be a character he will get to play but it currently isn't and he needs to, respectfully, stop talking himself into a hole like this LMAO

[opinated-user]

A while back I made a vent post discussing the harm I think hypercritical media analysis youtubers can have on their audiences, particularly young ones. It wasn't a very well worded post, but L*ly was mentioned and she actually reblogged my post, telling me to watch simpler media that's hard to nitpick, and then talking about how she's financially incentivized to make content that's angry/inflammatory, and how she tries to enjoy lighthearted things in her free time.

That response left me with some mixed feelings, but ultimately nothing to write home over. However, in the tags of the reply she wrote this:

This was an incredibly condescending reply imo. She immediately jumps to the conclusion that my dislike of her is something 'bad actors' have pushed on me, not a dislike that I forged myself, discrediting my dislike of her. In my vent I wrote that i resented youtubers like her for encouraging vitriolic attitudes in her audiences, and that's cuz I was in her audience. The majority of her content, as well as what she's famous for, is how cathartically angry she can be. People watch her content so they can watch her rip different media apart, and here she is calling me an addict for applying the hypercritical attitude she uses to attract her audience in my own free time because she was among the youtubers I watched as a child.

Obviously, this kind of harm is by far not the worst that Lily has done, but it's telling that even in the relatively small amount of harm she's caused me, she distorted the situation by jumping to conclusions about the kind of person I am, the kind of media I consume, reinforces the idea that there bad actors out there spreading narratives around her, and fails to recognize that her vitriolic attitudes can have a harmful effect on her audience.

Following up on my last ask, I've seen the results of the narrative she tells her audience that the people who criticize her are bad-faith actors. I received a reply on my vent post to the effect of "this mf has never seen a L*ly video in their lives, have they" and then that person blocked me. If that person hadn't immediately blocked me, I would have replied to them and told them that I had actually watched one of her videos a few days ago. That exact kind of reaction is the vitriolic attitudes instilled in an audience that I was criticizing in my own vent post.

Alongside the seriously wrong things she's done to members of her audience, the angry and critical attitudes her content encourages is really unhealthy.

i remember that post of yours and the way LO responded to it absolutely felt so obviously deflecting from any responsability. she didn't even had to respond to your post at all since you were only talking about your own experience as someone who watched her, nor did she need to expose you to the rest of her fans to keep bothering you as well. if a youtuber i was talking about on such terms directly shared my post, i'd think that they're deeply insecure so they needed to "shut me up" whatever way they could. her tag is full of critical people but she decided to share your post because it was an easy response to give and she could use you as an example to build her own narrative where youtuber can never harm their audiences. "was just gonna block this guy but decided instead to call him an addict, insist that people who think youtuber can such a strong effect on them are bad actors and even if people do get harmed in any way it's because they developed an addiction and need to work on themselves, therefore the youtuber has no fault whatsoever nor has any responsability" would have been a more honest response from her. the fact that some of her fans are so deeply convinced that LO can't do no wrong ever and anyone who say she does are "bad faith actors" is worrisome, because that only reinforce for them the notion that the "only" person they can trust is LO and that opens the gates for so much abuse apologia.

[professionallydeadinside]

The princess bride is amazing for multiple reasons. One is that it plays with gender roles. The movie is told through a little boy being read The Princess Bride by his grandfather, and all the actual fantasy stuff happens within the book. It starts with the boy being really against it and saying its girlie but by the end really loves it and wants to hear all about the mushy romantic parts, and he isn’t shamed for it! If anything, his grandfather gives him more shit for being grossed out at love, and is really happy when the boy asks if he’ll read it again to him sometime. The Princess Bride has true, adoring love that conquers all obstacles, though not without struggles. It has genuinely violent villains who don’t hesitate to plot murder, war, torture, and vague almost abuse. It has puppets that are really big rodents, called the ROUS’s, or Rodents Of Unusual Size. It has a revenge plot that doesn’t end with “i am a better person and killing won’t make this better”. It actually ends with the person wanting revenge getting it! He has no moral better-ness and he doesn’t put his rage aside, and he isn’t made a villain for it! It’s made very clear that he’s good and right for getting back at someone who hurt him so badly! It has a character with some form of mental disability (not sure exactly what but he has trouble remembering, and has trouble with complex words and thoughts, though he can still articulate them, just with some struggling) who isn’t really shamed for it! There’s only one character thats mean to him about it, and he dies early! No other character acts like he’s lesser just because he struggles sometimes. In fact, one of them makes a point to accommodate him! He learns what helps the other remember things, what makes him more comfortable, and actively does things he know will help. There’s a scene in the movie that was so funny, Westley (the main man) has to be replaced with a dummy because his actor kept laughing during the takes and ruining them. Someone actually hurt their ribs by trying not to laugh. The main woman, Buttercup’s, feelings aren’t invalidated by any of the characters. The only time they ever kind of are is when there’s been a huge misunderstanding, but once it’s been resolved, none of the actual main characters treat her like garbage or like a stupid girl. She’s actually quite smart, and is able to formulate plans that, while they don’t work a lot, theoretically should. They have logic behind them and would work if the people around her were just a fraction dumber or better people. The main villain also doesn’t get killed in the end! They spare him, and show mercy to him! There’s also actual torture in it, and it shows male jealousy in a bad light, like it should be. When Westley is jealous, it isn’t played as attractive, and Buttercup fights back when he starts to be mean to her. When Humperdinck, the main villain, gets jealous of Westley, we aren’t meant to discredit it. We’re meant to see the cruel lengths that jealousy will drive him and hate him for it. And, as a bonus, between all this amazing storytelling and these mature motifs done in a way anyone of any age, gender, race, anything could understand, there’s still really strong humour. The story doesn’t take itself very seriously until there’s a scene where it has to. It toes that line beautifully. When there’s a reason to be funny, it is, but it knows when to be serious. They don’t crack a joke when Inigo is breaking apart and desperate, they don’t make fun of Buttercup’s despair and anguish and her want to die because she cannot live with her situation. A joke happens there, sure, but it’s meant to feel like a relief to her. Its meant to be like that joke is what will rip her from those thoughts, and it does! It’s showing her that she shouldn’t die because there’s another way out of her situation, she need only wait a moment to see it, but it never makes fun of what she’s feeling or invalidates those emotions. It can crack a joke when there isn’t much on the line, but it gives real scenes real devotion and care, and that makes it a

Okay finally had enough brain to read this and it sounds super interesting I'll watch it when I can wasdfghjhgfd

[icgaminglogs]

Nightwing's Log, Night 9

Looks like we finally got a lead on Clayface. Something's going on down at the docks. Might be worth checking out while we work on our plan of attack at the Masquerade.

What the hell? Did I seriously just walk onto a movie set? Well, I guess he was an actor, once. Guess he still technically is? Not sure he actually gave that up; most theater kids I know say the stains never wash out. At least he's easy to follow.

Nighttime chases through the streets are one thing, but chasing a huge clay blobmonster? Come on, man, couldn't you have picked something a little less 70s B movie to go with? And then into the sewers, which was really kind of predictable...and doing nothing for Jason's newfound suspicion of Gotham tap water too, no doubt. Here we go...

So he is making a movie. To try and discredit Batman. Tell-all exposes are so last year. I get that he's got a grudge, but there's got to be limits. Especially when your skills as a screenwriter are...sub-par at best. Script reads like a Snidely Whiplash cartoon. All that's missing is the mustache twirling.

Does Basil really think I'd lie about Batman's death? If it wasn't for the accusation the disbelief would be almost touching. But I guess that grudge is all he has left, with how hard he's holding onto it. Asshole slipped through the bars before I could stop him, and he's planning something big. Just what we needed.

After that fight, though, I think I'll join Jason and stick to bottled water for a while.

[crowley-the-1-true-king-of-hell]

A Vent

I don't care that it didn't happen on screen. I believe Jack who is God himself brought Crowley back. I find comfort in the theory I have that some fanfiction writers have a sort of clairvoyant knowledge of the many different original and alternate universe iterations of a character. They write the character so well that I can't help but believe they are psychically getting information about what that character and what their different iterations are doing without even realizing it

I would have accepted another actor or actress for Crowley though

1. Even if Mark does it better, it is still CROWLEY's dialogue. Still his phrases. Having more Crowley quotes would mean having more content to analyze and more evidence for my theories and headcanons

2. I really really really doubt the idea that only one actor or actress can pull off a character. I mean you would think only Christina Ricci could pull off Wednesday but then the talented Jenna Ortega enters the chat. The theory is that because Wednesday is a teenager now, she isn't going to be exactly the same as her preteen self. Similarly an alternate universe Crowley may have ended up possessing a different vessel, because his original universe vessel was not living in New York. Or maybe he wants a fresh start and thinks a new vessel will give him that

2a. I have an open mind about new actors and actresses playing a character, because you never know how brilliant they will be

2b. Or if you aren't familiar with Wednesday then what about Meg as Nicki Aycox and Rachel Miner? Both of them captured Meg wonderfully. Imagine if they turned down Rachel Miner just because she isn't Nicki Aycox? Imagine if Meg just stayed off screen and we didn't get "Hi I'm Meg I'm a demon" because they thought only Nicki could be Meg?

Honestly the reason Kipling didn't fit is because he states he was pretending to be Crowley tbh. He made it clear that he would rather not act this way. So you can tell he's faking it. You can sense that he is faking long before he even says he is faking, because your intuition tells you. But there are absolutely actors and actresses out there who could capture Crowley perfectly and not be faking it e.g Marnie or lady!Crowley

I'm angry that the show runners humiliated Mark by not only cutting his even when I lose I win line but also turning his character into Lucifer's pet. Look it's not wrong to play a pet role aka Alfie Allen playing Reek in Game of Thrones but there are certain badass, intelligent characters that do NOT suit that kind of treatment. It doesn't fit them. It discredits their intelligence. It discredits their brilliance. It's like they are wearing something that doesn't fit their character

But after their screw up they could still go some ways in making amends by at least giving us lady Crowley. She killed the role and she is believable as Crowley because Crowley has never once been bothered about referring to himself as "a girl" "Daphne" etc

Plus it would have been iconic for a woman looking character to want to be called King rather than Queen. And iconic that just like in a male presenting body he referred to himself femininely just imagine in a female presenting body she refers to herself masculinely? It would be Crowley being nonbinary as he touches on one gender through his appearance i.e his Mark Sheppard vessel but then touches on his other gender through dialogue. "I'm much more of a Daphne" "Can't blame a girl for trying"

But imagine if he touched on his feminine side by being in a Marnie vessel and then touched on his masculine side through dialogue like "King"

[sunglassesmish]

I think in one way I do love Misha but I feel like his all three comment and then tweet was a bit hmmm and kind of made me sort of distance myself from him eg not really paying attention to what he’s saying at cons or following his Instagram intently. That doesn’t mean I’m not excited for s2 of Bridgewater and also I think he’s doing a Second season of Road Food Right?? But I do think it’s important not to put either actors on a Pedal Stall. I certainly do not want to discredit in how he helped me as a teenager through a dark time in my life. and for that he has a spwcial place in my heart

i think that comment has unconsciously affected me as well, as i don’t take everything he says as fact anymore. it’s more to do with the fact that i’ve come to realise his way of answering questions doesn’t really answer the question that’s been asked, he kinda goes off topic and then sometimes ends up saying random things. but that’s mostly when the question isn’t all too serious, because when it is he does give good answers that he obviously tries to think out.

and i still respect him just as much as i did before, maybe even more for the way he handled the situation. but the whole thing doesn’t change all the good things and ways he’s helped millions of people’s lives for the last 20+ years.

[bg3fandomcritical]

Shadowheart & gf anon here. Geez, I wasn't expecting that kind of reaction. I must have worded my previous comment weirdly. I am not hating on Aliona, saying that her being there is awkward, or trying to discredit her contribution to the game (I actually forgot about her mocap scenes and didn't realise she contributed in other ways). I actually like her and follow her on social media as she seems like a genuine person. All those who worked on the game deserve credit and recognition. I just found it a little strange when she joins panels and Jennifer’s booth though I know it comes from support.

Just because some fans of Jennifer are fans of Aliona as well, does not mean that all fans are. Some people may not even know about Aliona's involvement in the game if they are casual fans or only care about the main voice actors. I understand that she is there to support her girlfriend (nothing wrong with that - never said there was).

I have been in fandoms before where fans focus on a random extra/NPC, however I have never seen it move into being a fan of the actor, but there is always something new to discover. I'm sure fans who knew of her would have appreciated having both there, and getting that “two for one” offer. Personally, if I was a new/casual fan that didn’t know her, I would feel obliged to speak to her if she was standing there. 

I feel like the NPCs mentioned like Rolan that getting panels, etc, had a bigger speaking/game part than Aliona's characters did. The actors may not have done the same amount of work that Aliona did behind the scenes, but unfortunately, that wasn't their job. Players will only interact with the characters in front of them so it makes sense that they are getting a bit more attention from the fans. (Regards to booths and stage - I do also find it a little strange that they are now getting con attention, but ultimately, people are happy to see them so it’s none of my concern.) 

Tbh, even if I find it strange, it means that there is more content regarding the game being shared which is what fans really want at the end of the day. My opinion means nothing if you enjoy meeting Aliona and seeing her at panels.

.