*sees copper lamps and trapdoors on Minecraft Live*
"OMG I bet GTWScar will be excited about this"
*opens Twitter*
597 notes
·
View notes
Something I find funny is how some people hyper focus too much on the new Scrooge and how attractive he is... As if attractive people can't be bad and horrid, and how it's 100x easier to dunk on someone when they're ugly and grotesque (this change already adds a different spin/conversation to the massive pile of other adaptations that are essentially the same). Like if you watch the movie, it doesn't change the fact that Scrooge is STILL an outright asshole of a human being (like the dude threatens to call the cops on some old ladies and performers on top of everything else). You'd have to be absolutely dense or purposely obtuse to just gloss over all that (the movie from what I've been told goes even further in making Scrooge meaner in some aspects as well). I see people just throw around the word "woobify" when the movie doesn't pull any punches in making Scrooge an absolute piece of work (insulting poor children at the start of the movie) and also making him face and realise that a lot of his misery that's been done as result of his actions in the past, are STILL his own actions. Him being a silver fox doesn't change ANY of this. They never make a reference to his appearance other than Past noting how attractive his younger self was and her saying "what happened to you?" as a commentary on how ugly and horrid he's become AS A PERSON, which I find to be a great moment. This being just ONE adaptation that decided to take this approach amongst a countless myriad of more "accurate" adaptations (which is funny because its still practically the same beats, Scrooge is just designed attractively) isn't going to somehow erase all that and frankly isn't the end of the world.
Also I find it hilarious when people say they're woobifying scrooge... when isn't the whole point of his redemption story THAT?? That ultimately his character is woobified in the end in lieu of becoming a good guy?? But no... People just assume they're going to absolve him or somehow misplace him being the villain in the first place JUST BECAUSE HE'S ATTRACTIVE LMAO. Like WOAH how could we possibly forget that the main character of a super famous story that has a surname used as a reference point for being a miserable human being? WOAH, he's handsome?? OH NEVER MIND, MY BAD. I CANT FUNCTION ANYMORE OH NOOOOOO!! HELP ME! I'VE FALLEN AND I CAN'T GET UP FROM HOW HANDSOME HE IS OH NOOOO!! Might as well just say "I want bad man to be ugly and stinky looking so I can keep track of how I should feel about said character throughout the narrative because I'm so focused on tying morality with physical attractiveness".
177 notes
·
View notes
what does it mean to average 2:1 or 2:2? I don’t think we do that in America
okay so the uni grading system here is done based on percentages. the pass mark is 40%, which americans ALWAYS hit me with 'only 40???? easy!!!' so id like to clarify the content/exams are very difficult and the marking is very mean and generally it's really frustrating when people respond this way, like why tf would we have such a low pass grade otherwise it's a dumb assumption to make but anyway. you do about 6 modules a semester (on average, some courses have more/less), and each module will give you a final grade, and then the average of all your modules from both semesters will give you your final year grade. they're all marked by the same system, which is:
grade of less than 40% = fail
grade of 40%-50% = third class honours (called a third)
grade of 50%-60% = lower second class honours (a 2:2, literally said aloud as 'i got a two-two in my exam')
grade of 60%-70% = upper second class honours (a 2:1, said as 'i got a two-one'). this is what im PRAYING for.
grade of 70%+ = first class honours (just called a first). this is the highest you can get, so even if you get 90% you'll have the same grade as someone who got 72%. this is also what i mean by the exam system being really tough here, bc most people are just grateful to get a first.
9 notes
·
View notes
I very much get the whole ‘the point of found family is not needing family to exist inside traditional structures and it’s sooo annoying when people always put it into traditional family roles’ complaint but at the same time it’s not the authors at fault for that. (I mean also, sometimes found family irl /does/ fall into those. Sometimes you get a surrogate sibling or father or kid. But also) Authors specifically wouldn’t have to do this so much in their stories if people wouldn’t automatically interpret every close meaningful relationship as inherently romantic and sexual. Like you can’t complain an author keeps going ‘this person is like a brother to me’ or ‘like a mother’ until family-zoning hard as hell isn’t literally the only way to try and convince at least some portion of the audience that the characters have a canonically most important to them relationship that doesn’t actually involve wanting to fuck each other.
24 notes
·
View notes
everybunny line up for their mornie hug!! ૮꒰ ྀི〃´꒳`〃꒱ა in each squeeze is a whole bunch of gentle energy & love from the universe & ofc me!! <33 have the v best thurs in the whole world!!
4 notes
·
View notes
my uncle brought me a massive weeb library today and it was simultaneously astounding how much was there (5 terabytes.) and yet incredibly disappointing occasionally (hit or miss as to whether extremely well known titles would be there?? no inuyasha? or trigun?? revolutionary girl utena but only the movie??)
5 notes
·
View notes