#members are poor

[hyakunana]

POV: Even with advantage and buffs, your local folk hero just rolled 1 in Intimidation

[ra-vale]

Zhang Chengling is a lucky one to survive his shifu’s lessons

[theoriginalsapphic]

If Mike had the same focus on his mental health as part of his character arc in season 4 like Max did, he wouldn’t be as a disliked character by the general audience as he currently is.

I’m being serious.

Their behaviors throughout season 4 are similar enough to draw parallels between them.

They both treat Lucas like crap in less than ideal terms.

They both get their declining academic performance pointed out by another character.

They are both hiding things from people, and being open and honest about it could help them but they won’t do it.

They both mistreat and push away someone they love.

They both lack self-preservation, which leads them to have suicidal tendencies and put their lives at risk.

The show even makes a point of putting Mike next to Max in two of the symptoms mentioned in the Vecna’s curse.

The only difference is that Max’s character has a huge focus this season, and most of it is centers on her deteriorating mental state. On the other hand, the only time Mike gets a chance to explicitly and verbally acknowledge that he is struggling with something, he admonishes himself for caring about something so irrelevant considering the ongoing situation, and the scene shifts to be about Will and his disguised confession through the painting.

.

.

.

So, with all being said... what could this possibly mean for Mike in season 5? Well, Ms. Kelly said it best:

[feelingtheaster99]

I know Beardsley already alluded to thing but it was really sad and powerful when Kristen tells Cassandra that she knows “chaotic is not cute.” And then Cassandra straight up tells her, “I can’t rely on you.”

And Kristen and the entire audience have to agree. It’s really humbling for me as an audience member but I’m guessing also for Kristen in that moment

[diabolichare]

Familar Stranger

DP x DC au with a dash of dimensional travel where Danny, due to his ghostly nature, looks slightly different depending on how others perceive him. 

Warning: OP has no knowledge of space other than Google and is also a non-native English speaker; proceed with caution.

Same startup kits; Danny becomes the successor to the Infinity Realm (he's a baby by both ghost and human standards, so there's a temporary council for now). Anyway, he still has some power over the ghosts, so he asks them to lessen the amount of fighting to focus on schoolwork and "princely education." 

Now here's where my brainrot begins.

The Lazarus Pits, necromantic rituals, or portals of any kind that have "death" or "soul" in them tend to be connected to the Ghost Zone. However, the zone has its own defensive mechanism, so unless someone *Fentons* actively makes a gateway or has "experienced" death, it's nearly impossible to come upon the zone. A certain furry bridage in Gotham has unknowingly ticked all the checkboxes.

During a misson, one of the bats got caught in a magic situation and got transported to the Infinity Realms. They wandered around, dogding ghosts, slowly getting insane from all these damn corridors and living paintings, before they stumbled upon a seemingly random door (CW is involved; he's having a great time testing the poor bat).

Opening the door leads them to the universe. They closed the door, then opened it again. Yep, that's an entire universe complete with its own planetary systems and, oh, so pretty stars growing and dying in a blink of an eye. Another check around shows them that this is the only door so far in the endlessly long hallway. They look down (if there's even a down, for there's only infinity) and take an experimental step. The Milky Way lit up under their feet, with stars gathering around to form a twisting path to nowhere. 

For the next couple of hours, days, or minutes, they made their way through the galaxies. Just when they were about to spiral into a midlife crisis, they heard... humming? 

Did they finally lose it? They asked themselves before noticing a glowing figure sitting on an asteroid nearby.

"Hello?"

The figure flinched, and life paused. The blackhole by their left stopped spinning, the stars weren't twinkling, and the figure turned their head. Now it's their blood that runs cold.

"You're not supposed to be here."

Lazarus-colored orbs stared back at them with a familiar face but an unfamiliar voice. Damian tilted his head, looking at them in confusion (there's something wrong, wrong, wrong-). They blinked because, what the hell, seeing something other than a scowl on the boy's face is WeirdTM. Suddenly, that's a teenaged Jason staring at them, much closer than he(?) was before.

At this point, they realized— eyes moving over the entire regalia and the glowing crown that just appeared—they're probably in deep sh*t.

[tfp-is-my-lifeblood-lol]

Can we talk about how TFP Arcee has a catchphrase, just Ratchet's "I needed that," "yep yep, yep," and "puh-lease!" Shockwave's "Logic" and Knockout's obsession with "luster" and his finish?

Like, am I wrong that Arcee constantly saying "it could be a trap" is a running joke? I feel like no one talks about that, which makes me sad because it's hilarious.

They even acknowledge it (I forget what episode, not gonna lie) when Arcee goes: "I know, I know, broken record, but...it COULD be a trap."

I just freaking love how Arcee thinks literally everything is a trap. And it's so justified, because 99% of the time, she's right.

[thelaurenshippen]

finally taking the time to read through the SAG agreement summary and oof, I hope they have an AI town hall soon because...well, there are things to discuss!

so, in case folks are curious, here are my immediate takeaways from the deal as a SAG actor, a SAG producer, and person who is not any kind of expert but spends a lot of time being skeptical of contracts I sign. this is a summation/commentary, not a holistic breakdown of every point, nor even an in-depth discussion of the points I do talk about. and it is, of course, in no way legal advice or voting advice.

this post is already maybe the longest post I've ever written on tumblr (lol) and I feel like I've barely scratched the surface. to be clear, nothing I'm saying here represents how I'm going to vote, how I think other actors should vote, or my be-all-end-all stance on a particular issue. this is me reading through, flagging what concerns me, and asking myself questions. and I'm here to take your questions too! though of course my expertise is limited.

(what?? something I wrote got annoying long?? in my tumblr? it's more likely, etc. huge write-up after the cut)

the good

self-tape stuff: this is one of the more niche/the thing that the general public will find least interesting, but they've put in a lot of provisions to make sure self-tape auditions have limits (# of pages, no stunts, no nudity, doesn't have to be professionally shot, etc.) which is amazing because these types of auditions have gotten out of control since the pandemic. this feels like a great gain

data transparency: in no world did I think the streamers were ever going to agree to any data sharing with either the wga or sag so even though the data is limited, this still feels huge to me.

folks who sing and dance will be paid for both of those things now, which is great

they've added MLK day and Juneteenth as holidays (about time)

a performer cannot be required to translate their own lines

principal performers are required to be given hair and makeup consultation or reimbursed for obtaining their own services - this seems like a small thing, but it's being put in here pretty much entirely because HMU services have generally been appalling when it comes to textured hair/a variety of skin tones. there's also stuff in here about working to hire more diverse HMU artists

it looks like it's going to be easier/provide a path for folks getting IMDb credits even if they're not credited on screen

miscellany: there's a bunch of gains in wage increases, P&H increases, relocation fees, franchise language etc. that all seem good to me, though my limited knowledge on those subjects prevents me from going in depth on them.

this is not important, but it tickled me, there's a term to replace all instances of "telegraph" in the contract with "email & text" which like...why has it taken us thirty years to do that lol.

the "...hm..."

intimacy coordinators: oof. when I watched the press conference SAG gave, I was fucking thrilled when they said that the new agreement required folks to hire intimacy coordinators for nudity and simulated sex scenes. that was almost reason enough for me to vote for it tbh - not requiring it is the exact reason I voted no on our last contract. however, reading the contract summary now, the exact language is: "Producer must use best efforts to engage an Intimacy Coordinator for scenes involving nudity or simulated sex and will consider in good faith any request by a performer to engage an Intimacy Coordinator for other scenes. Producer shall not retaliate against a performer for requesting an Intimacy Coordinator." this....sucks. "best efforts" and "good faith" are not the same as "required". IMO, an intimacy coordinator is the same thing as having a stunt coordinator or, like, any number of health and safety requirements. OSHA doesn't say you must "in good faith" put your "best effort" to providing fire exits. it's great that performers can request coordinators for any kind of scene, and this is still the strongest language we've ever had in a contract but....c'mon guys.

residuals: look, I can't speak to these new terms in any concrete way. there are increases, there are bonuses for streaming success, there's a whole thing about a fund regarding those successes that I need explained to me more in depth, but overall, it looks like we made some in-roads here. as someone who employs actors under digital distribution contracts that has no residuals (podcasts), I know how genuinely cumbersome the unholy trifecta of "views-success-profit" can be (as in views do not equal success, success does not equal profit, etc.). I also have no sympathy when the majority of companies dealing with that cumbersome trifecta are massive media conglomerates. anyway, long story short, idk if this is good enough, I'm hoping to attend the next info meeting sag has.

the bad

the new hair/makeup provisions are explicitly for principal actors. while I hope it leads to better, more inclusive HMU services all around I haaaate that this implies supporting or background actors (who oftentimes also have to sit in HMU) don't deserve the consideration. (then again, background actors are usually required to do their own HMU/bring their own costumes, but for productions where that's not the case, the same HMU provisions should apply IMO)

as with every contract, there's language that could be stronger, clarity that needs to exist, and important things missing - but this isn't the final contract and I'm not a lawyer, so I'm gonna leave that stuff to the experts.

but, "lauren", you say, "what about all the AI stuff? where does that go?" well, reader, I was planning on including that in the above but it's the hot-button issue right now and I think it's wickedly complicated, so I wanted to break it down separately, after I had a chance to point out all the good-bad-in-between stuff that's not getting talked about.

a note: in my career, I've learned there's two big things to keep in mind when reading a contract you might sign:

what is the worst case interpretation of this language (thank you to my lawyer, prince among men, for teaching me how to do this in practice (that said, anything I say here is not legal advice, he'd also want me to say that lol))

what are you willing to lose/compromise on/what are the limits of your pragmatism? contracts are not about a company giving you everything you want out of the goodness of their heart - it is always a compromise. pragmatism has to be a part of the equation.

so, with that said, I'm going to play a little devil's advocate here, and a) try to find the good/the pragmatic and b) catastrophize the worst case scenario. but first, it might be handy to look at this SAG infographic for some basic definitions. let's go.

the AI good

a ton of stuff here requires consent. that is not a small thing, and the consent continues even after your death (whether it was a yes or no; though this can be complicated by your estate/your union)

the language does establish that the consent must be a separate signing from the employment contract, even if its in the contract, which is great (but more on that below - timing matters)

actors often do get paid for use of their digital replicas, though it's different based on the use/type of replica.

the actor must be provided with a "reasonably specific description of the intended use". this language is vaguer than I would like, because it allows producers to decide what "reasonably specific" and "intended" means - there's always going to be some vagueness when it comes to this specific thing, but a good start would be for producers to require not blanket consent, but conditional consent for each significant use of digital replicas.

if the replicas are being used in other mediums, that must also be consented to, thank god.

replicas cannot be used in place of background actor counts on a given day - if I'm understanding this correctly, this means a production can't just have a bunch of fake background actors by themselves, they have to engage real people up to a certain number first (which in this new contract is 25 for TV and 85 for movies). we're already filling in background with digital people or copy-pasting of the same crowd over and over and have been doing so since at least the late 90s, so it's good we're continuing to put up boundaries around that.

the AI "...hm..."

it's unclear (to me) when an actor can be asked to consent. IMO, everything is meaningless if the consent is happening as part of regular contract negotiations. these things have to happen when - and only when - the actor has already been engaged in a role and feels empowered to say no

the use of independently created replicas (replicas pulled from existing footage, not created by the actor) being allowed without consent under first amendment reasoning - this is obviously concerning a lot of people bc first amendment arguments are so broad. that said, there's a pragmatism part of me that understands this is already happening/has been happening for a while and used in ways I think are perfectly fine - I was just watching the new episode of For All Mankind (one of the best TV shows right now!) and it's an alternate history, which meant that in the opening scenes of this season they had some bonkers good deep fakes of Al Gore saying stuff he never said. I think that's okay to do in a fiction show that imagines a different US history! "but Lauren", you might be saying, "Al Gore isn't a member of SAG!" are you sure? are you positive? because I'm pretty certain he is - he was in several episodes of 30 Rock, way more people are in SAG than you think (every NPR reporter for instance), and the two worst presidents we've had in the last 50 years (yes, those ones), are both definitely members of SAG (even if one is dead). now, the other side of this is that public figures like politicians are under a different social contract than actors, and if they wanted to sue, they could, unlike the average SAG actor who might have their image abused. this is why this is in the "hm" column - deep fakes and parody/satire/commentary use of replicas is already here and there's always going to be a 1st amendment argument to make, so we need to figure out how best to limit those and protect the most vulnerable.

alteration: with this language, a project can digitally alter without consent if the script and performance stays "substantially" the same. again, this language is too mealy-mouthed. I don't know that I have a huge problem with a line of dialogue getting replaced with a digital version of that actors voice if, for instance, a word was mispronounced, or wind garbled the sound or whatever - yes, it would eliminate the need for ADR, but if we put some limit on it like..."if there are more than 5 lines in a given episode/movie that require digital alteration in the service of clarity, the actor must be engaged for an ADR session or paid for the digital replacement" then I could see this being workable. I'm also personally okay with things like costumes being digitally altered but, again, we need limitations on that. digital altering cannot replace the art of costuming but, for instance, if a costume needs to be altered to include a hate symbol or something, I think that's fine (example: I have friends who worked at the VFX house for an alternate history TV show that involved a lot of Nazi costuming and set design - a huge part of that VFX house's job was to put swastikas in places, rather than props making nazi flags. I'm okay with that!) but again, these fringe cases do not a compelling arugment make, and this contract language can be interpreted too broadly for my comfort! like everything else in this "hm" category, I need to see the final contract language to decide.

the AI bad

there's a bunch of circumstances in which actors don't get paid for creating their replica/use of it and those circumstances are too broad for my taste.

synthetic performers - this is just awful. no. no, we should not be allowing AI to generate entire actors. just............no. there's some language about the producers having to talk to the union if the synthetic performer is "used in place of a performer who would have been engaged under this Agreement in a human role" but this doesn't apply to non-human characters so....wouldn't that be all roles?? leaving the producers room to be like "this role has to be synthetic, we never would've cast a human!" is bullshit. also, even if we're having AI create a magical talking unicorn whole cloth (which, like, also no, we have artists for this), that unicorn still needs to be voiced by a human person. this whole section is a disaster.

the exceptions to consent for digital alteration are bad-bad. I talked about the potential ADR replacement above and that has a whole host of issues with it that I didn't even get into, but I can see the argument. the rest are very troubling:

there is an exception under "any circumstance when dubbing or use of a double is permitted under the Codified Basic Agreement or Television Agreement" - okay, so does this mean we can replace dubbing artists and stunt performers entirely? this section is about digital alteration, but who's to say alteration couldn't turn an actor broadly miming a fight into an entirely digital, expertly performed fight that usually a stunt double would have done? with AI translation technology, does this mean we're replacing VO artists for dubs entirely? bad!

similarly, "Adjusting lip and/or other facial or body movement and/or the voice of the performer to a foreign language, or for purposes of changes to dialogue or photography necessary for license or sale to a particular market" - Justine Bateman has a great twitter thread on the terrible puppetry potential of this but I want to draw attention to the particular market bit - we all know that selling to china is such a huge part of studios' strategies that they'll remove entire scenes or lines around queer stuff. to me, this clause makes all of that so much easier. I know the argument here is going to be "we can replace swear words and license it for kids!" which.......sure? fine? but, uh, we already have ways to deal with that? and the potential for abuse here is terrifying to me. with all the digital alteration stuff too, there's just so much icky implication for the beauty/body standard to get so much worse.

if a background actor’s digital replica is used in the role of a principal performer, they'll be paid as if they actually performed the days for that role, which, sure, but uhhhh why are we saying it's okay for a digital replica of a background actor to suddenly be a leading role!?!?! I can't think of anything more demoralizing than going to set to act in background (a job I've done! an important job! a fun job a lot of the time! but creatively limited) and then getting a much bigger role (the dream!) and.....not being able to, you know, act that role or be in scenes with other principal actors or do the thing that you've dedicated your life to doing. nightmare stuff.

woof. there's so much more to say but I'm going to leave it there. these are the concerns I'm going to go into SAG's meetings with, and the concerns I'll be considering as I decide how to vote. I know there are things I didn't address and very possibly things I misinterpreted or misrepresented - if you're an actor, I highly recommend a) reading that Justine Bateman thread and b) attending SAG's meetings to ask questions and express your concerns. and I'd love to hear what y'all think! my ask box is open.

[morrigan-sims]

And I forget sometimes I'm just flesh and bone.

As he stands in the ruined bathroom, all Rook can think is, At least now I can breathe.

[elithemiar-blog]

Field Trip + Danny Fenton Bladder Alarm + Mr Lancer's Class Being Cautious + Wayne Enterprise Tour

Danny's grade goes to Gotham for a field trip, at a select number of sites. During the WE tour does Danny need to use the restroom (1st stop for his group).

The rest of the class, who are used to ghost attacks following his departure, become hyper-vigilant and cautious. It's enough to permeate to other people who also feel like they're about to be attacked, like a pack mentality.

Danny returns and everyone calms down.

It doesn't stop there. Each location he does the same thing (his bladder ended up being an alibi that he can use for school, so he has to do the same while in Gotham to keep up the ruse), and still the Gothamites also react but they don't know why.

Eventually, a rouge does attack, while Danny is in the bathroom. Mr Lancer's class is calmer than even the most veteran Gothamite. They're being cautious, but now they have a reason to be so.

Danny returns to the class, which is now a hostage situation, and gets threatened. He does absolutely the opposite of what normal people expect and just stares the rouge down not even bothered by the threat.

Maybe it's normal for Amity Parkers to carry around a basic ecto-gun, so while the main rouge is preoccupied (and pretty darn startled) with Danny, they take down the henchmen.

Then the batfam enter.

(Maybe since the tour they've been looking into these out-of-towners [they caused everyone in their vicinity to have the fight/flight reaction] when they figure out the pattern of Danny using the restroom)

Idea rambling in tags...

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Stop flirting and start fighting

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[lost-external660]

"he's like an abyss;

smiling,

arms wide,

luring you in."

[itscuntingseason]

average ohshc episode:

haruhi: hey kyoya-senpai, i didn't know you liked spongebob that's cool lol

kyoya: like? i do not enjoy this cartoon. it is my understanding that these frivolous media images are created with the intention to fulfil the viewer's temporary needs for entertainment. there is a pact made between the creator and the audience that the product does not have to be 'good' or tasteful. just bright and flashy enough to fill the void. and right now, i am consuming this mindless content as a way to unwind after dealing with tamaki all day. so yes, i'm getting something out of this, but it is not enjoyment.

haruhi: god i fucking hate rich people

[showtoonzfan]

Yes, it’s amazing and heartfelt that this project finally came to life with many talented artists across the area, but I’m just over here laughing at Wick’s reaction to all the damage Rocky caused:

[feuer-bluete]

No, listen this is so important to me.

When we kidnap Kieran he is of course tied to the tree. When he is finally freed he sleeps somewhere close to the horses.

When the gang moves to Clemen's Point, he is more relaxed in camp but still sleeps outside the camp, sitting against a tree, again close to the horses.

When the gang moves to Shady Bell, and Tilly is not rescued yet so Mary Beth is sitting in this spot, Kieran does not sleep at all, and instead he just stands next to Javier's tent staring into the night.

Once Tilly is rescued and all the girls, save Ms Grimshaw sleep inside, Kieran, finally, feels comfortable enough to sleep inside the circle of waggons, among the gang.

[mmmairon]

*sound of shattering glass* diluc will adopt diona

[mishapen-dear]

okay but watching pomme and richas' family growing RACE gets so intense. okay. look.

pomme: baghera, antoine, aypierre, kameto, etoiles, bad, and max (from aypierre) for parents; dapper as sibling; maxpierre twin babies for siblings. she has ten family members in total.

richas: forever, pac, mike, cellbit, felps, roier, and quackity for parents; foolish and vegetta as grandmas; and leo as an aunt. if we count bobby as richas' deceased step-brother, then richarlyson has eleven family members in total.

they both have seven parents in total.

pomme is catching up. richas its time to start whoring your dads out again. dont let her win