#this film was made for me in particular

[aclue-aclue]

"Yeah, today is the day"

Blue's Big City Adventure one year anniversary

Music Gifsets: Brand New Day [01/09]

[saucy-mesothelioma]

[padfootswhiskers]

but what behaviours made dumbledore realise nagini is a horcrux is the question…

[cicaklah]

Ya girl watched saltburn and will never be the same again.

[kaftan]

the worst crime of suspiria 2018 is they didn’t even have the evil lady witches try to pull some weird lesbian shit with their younger vulnerable lady dancers

[eyebrowpunk]

non-comprehensive list of animals capable of spite

human beings - self-explanatory.

chimpanzees - also quite apparent. genuinely believe it's only a matter of time before a researcher in the African jungle spots a wild chimp wearing what looks suspiciously like a necklace decorated with ears bitten off of other chimps (and by god do you hope that they are only chimp ears)

lions - "if I go 2 more days without eating then maybe I'll consider chasing a zebra, but if I see another predator in my territory I'm hunting him down, turning him inside out, and wearing him like a jacket while he yet breathes."

orca - I read an article a few weeks ago on the topic of the multiple observations of humpback whales intervening in orca hunts, and one of them described an instance where, after they unsuccessfully tried to sabotage a seal hunt, the orca matriarch reportedly took the seal carcass and flaunted it in front of the whales as if to taunt them, which if that is an accurate reading of the situation, is also hilariously petty.

[widowshill]

"for most of my life, i've wanted a place where i've belonged. a place where I could feel at home again. feel loved again. and i've found that place, here at collinwood." this is actually what it's all about babey

[prettyboysdontlookatexplosions]

In his testimony, Depp copped to some bad stuff, but this too was a play for sympathy, of a piece with the charm and courtliness he was at pains to display. That he came off as a guy unable to control his temper or his appetites was seen, by many of the most vocal social media users, to enhance his credibility, while Heard’s every tear or gesture was taken to undermine hers. The audience was primed to accept him as flawed, vulnerable, human, and to view her as monstrous.

Because he’s a man. Celebrity and masculinity confer mutually reinforcing advantages. Famous men — athletes, actors, musicians, politicians — get to be that way partly because they represent what other men aspire to be. Defending their prerogatives is a way of protecting, and asserting, our own. We want them to be bad boys, to break the rules and get away with it. Their seigneurial right to sexual gratification is something the rest of us might resent, envy or disapprove of, but we rarely challenge it. These guys are cool. They do what they want, including to women. Anyone who objects is guilty of wokeness, or gender treason, or actual malice.

[...]

The rage of men whose grievances are inchoate and inexhaustible found expression in a 58-year-old movie star’s humiliation of his 36-year-old former wife. I have to wonder: Are men OK? That’s a sincere question. Does the blend of self-pity, vanity, petulance and bombast that Depp displayed on the stand represent how we want to see ourselves or our sons? That’s a rhetorical question. The answer is yes.

Not all men, though. Right? Now that the trial is over, we’ll find new things to be ambiguous about, new venues where indeterminacy can serve as an alibi for the same old cruelty, and for its newer iterations. Johnny Depp is being embraced as a hero in some quarters, but his victory extends even to those who will allow themselves to feel troubled by the outcome of the trial and then move on. Some of us may wince a little when we watch “Pirates of the Caribbean” or “Donnie Brasco,” but we’ll probably still watch. They’re pretty good movies, and it’s not as if they can be expunged from the collective memory. That hasn’t happened to Louis C.K., or Woody Allen, or Michael Jackson, or Mel Gibson, or even Bill Cosby. Some of them have gone to court, some have faced public censure and disgrace, but they all remain woven into the fabric of the culture, and their behavior is too. We may not entirely forget, but we mostly forgive.

Let’s at least be clear about what that means. It means that we value the comfort and self-regard of men, especially famous ones, more than we value the safety and dignity of women, even famous ones.

[batfamfucker]

Tell the truth comic fans challenge. When's the last time you read a comic and how many have you actually read?

P.S. This isn't me being gatekeepy btw I'm being genuine because I'm gonna be honest I've probably only actually read about five series and every thing else I've gotten from movies/series, online, or fanon. I know all the important events. Have I actually read them? No because my ADHD just wouldn't. And I can't be assed having to read important events if it's in a shit run by a bad writer.

[teafiend]

I sometimes wonder how long they took to make sure the actors were spaced just right from each other, because that distance always felt very deliberate. “Just a bit more left or right”? LOL Or were the actors already in tuned to the necessary adjustments by that time?

Only TG ever made me ponder about the production/shooting process. A complete ignoramus otherwise. They also made me wonder about things not fit for public consumption (and wished I never wondered about). 😬

TG as a production might have broken lots of labour laws during its time, but at least they made a show which remained indelible and impactful for us fans. Thank you, PD, writers, cast and crew. Forever grateful. Happy 5th airing anniversary!

[heartvisor]

for every silly shin kr drawing i want to do i try make myself sit back down and do another piece alongside it more directly connected to the work. it (kinda) keeps my priorities straight.

[babygirlyusuf]

tagged by @libraliverpool to post my fav movies (this is in no particular order!) <33

khabie kushi khabie gham // the old guard // sachein // wild child // my neighbour totoro // dilwale dulhania le jayenge // kandukondain kandukondain // captain america: the winter soldier // everything everywhere all at once

tagging: @diabolicjoy @nicolos @nicelytousled @spacegirlsgang @boutiquetraveltravelboutique

[elceeu2morrow]

just my silly thoughts on why i love the latest igtv.

[pynkhues]

Twilight , happiest season, speak , camp x-ray adventure land

Yes! Thank you!

Twilight

never seen | want to see | the worst | bad | whatever | not my thing | good | great | favorite | masterpiece

Mmm, honestly I reject all of these categoriations, because I always enjoy it but I also objectively think it's not very good, haha. It's fun, and as a series I think it's brought a lot of joy to people, but it's never really been one for me? Which is kinda funny given I was definitely the target demographic when it initailly came out and my best friend was obsessed when we were in highschool.

Happiest Season

never seen | want to see | the worst | bad | whatever | not my thing | good | great | favorite | masterpiece

I actually watched this at the cinema when it came out and was surprised by the level of hate it got. Like is it good? No, but I didn't think it was that bad either. It's just a pretty run of the mill mediocre holiday movie, y'know? And the fact that it was gay just drew more critical attention to it than it would've if it was straight.

That said, I will say though that while I know everyone was all about Kristen Stewart's character leaving her fiancee for Aubrey Plaza's character, my controversial take is that the movie should've actually been Mackenzie Davis' character coming home after Kristen Stewart's character has dumped her and finding her ex's ex and having a fun, messy, antagonistic relationship with her that lets her process why the breakup happened before evolving into a sexy will-they-won't-they because I love mess and mutual exes finding each other, okay.

Speak

never seen | want to see | the worst | bad | whatever | not my thing | good | great | favorite | masterpiece

Ooo, I haven't seen this one! It looks interesting though. There are a few actors in it that I quite like. I do tend to be a little wary of movies that explore speech disability these days as it strikes a bit of a personal note, but at the same time I'm also interested to see how it's depicted, so I'll add it to my list!

Camp X-Ray

never seen | want to see | the worst | bad | whatever | not my thing | good | great | favorite | masterpiece

I haven't seen this one either! I'm starting to notice a pattern though, haha. ;-) This one doesn't really appeal to me, although I'm happy to be talked around? I'm just not really interested in films about Guantanamo Bay.

Adventureland

never seen | want to see | the worst | bad | whatever | not my thing | good | great | favorite | masterpiece

It's been a hot minute since I saw it, but I remember really enjoying it at the time!

Ask me about movies!

[uss-edsall]

Ridley Scott, regarding his new Napoleon movie, is being aggressively defensive about its inaccuracies with historians. He's gone on record saying "When I have issues with historians, I ask: ‘Excuse me, mate, were you there? No? Well, shut the fuck up then.’" This is a classic argument of people with no idea how historians do their work, how historical accuracy is determined and evaluated, and - in Ridley Scott's case in particular - how important it is to properly portray historical accuracy in other media.

The reason why Ridley Scott is being so aggressively dismissive of complaints about historical accuracy is due to past beef leading to a problem he likely has.

This is a movie that, by din of being touted as a 'nonfiction' movie about a historical figure, is basing much of its marketing on historical accuracy by default. The trailers show it's not, and reviews by historians say it is riddled with dozens if not hundreds of inaccuracies. Napoleon's portrayal is frankly a surface level depiction and nowhere near the nuance that historians were hoping for.

Scott's defensive about it. He need not be. If he had a historical consultant then he could go "I'm not an expert on the time period, but I have someone who is, ask them about it" and fob them off on his movie's historical consultant. It's a whole Thing. He doesn't have one, however, so he has to defend it personally.

You see, Ridley Scott probably didn't hire a historical consultant for Napoleon. The last time he had one - Kathleen Coleman for Gladiator - she was so upset over the inaccuracies he pushed through and how little her work affected the film, she requested her name be taken off of it.

Why this is important is because so many more people will watch a movie made by Ridley Scott than I or any other person could write. More people will watch Scott's Napoleon in the States than five hundred books about Napoleon combined worldwide.

More people watched Dunkirk than ever read a book about the Evacuation of Dunkirk. The movie Breaker Morant did so much for public perception about the execution of a genuine war criminal people in Australia still on occasion call for a pardon for Morant.

Fundamentally, mass media like movies will always have more impact of a popular perception about somebody, a time period, an event. That's why Ridley Scott making an inaccurate movie and going 'oh, you weren't there, you didn't see it with your own eyes, so how could you know, I don't have to listen to you' is a problem.