#this movie does a great job telling a very human story

[spacecasehobbit]

The Angry Black Girl and Her Monster is such a good adaptation of Frankenstein and a really well done horror movie, too.

The movie did a really good job leaning on audience knowledge of Frankenstein's monster (that he's not really a monster, just scared and confused and reacting to other peoples' fear and violence) to build tragedy and empathy into Vicaria's 'monster' from the start, without needing to spend a bunch of time on retelling the part of the story that most of the audience would already be familiar with. And I appreciated how that allowed the movie to focus more time on telling Vicaria's story, as her story is the one that diverges in an interesting and new way from the original Frankenstein.

And props to the movie for the subtle hint that Vicaria's last name is Frankenstein during the parent-teacher meeting at her school. Almost missed that detail when I first watched it, which seemed fairly intentional on the writer's part and makes me wonder what other little easter eggs I might be able to catch on a rewatch.

I really enjoyed the way the movie played with the trope of the frightening little girl in a horror movie. The little kid wasn't scary because she was a supernatural entity or possessed or anything. She was just a little girl who wasn't old enough to understand why other people might find certain things scary, which gave her a far more terrifying nonchalance in certain scenes than the movie would have achieved if she'd been actively trying to be frightening.

Before I watched it, I read a few reviews online suggesting that the movie falls flatter in the last act. I didn't find that to be the case at all, though. I thought the twists towards the end were well done, fit with the tone and themes of the rest of the movie, and made for a pretty perfect frightening, tragic, and then very creepy final act.

[bonefall]

Hi Bones!! Thank you for you hard work on this project and for sharing it with us!

I've seen your posts about weird representation of society (regarding the "natural order of things") in xenofiction, especially in lion king, so I wanted to ask:

could you recommend any xenofiction media that has all (or most of the) animal species sapient? Or is the only solution to make just one or two species sapient while the others (especially prey) are plain animals?

Really sorry if you've seen this ask from me before - my account had a weird laggy period when I couldn't send or receive messages and asks, so I don't know if you got the previous one! I just know that now it's fixed so I double all the asks sent haha

Honestly I'm not totally sure! If any 3rd person has some good recommendations for "every being is alive" xenofiction types, feel free to weigh in.

If you want to jump in with me though, I am following the webcomic Africa. It updates every Wednesday. Africa is about a mother Leopard on the verge of a great ecological disaster, the relationship between her children and the animals around her, and the strength of both instinct and choice as the characters face an uncertain future.

Since it's ongoing, I still don't know how it's going to end and can't judge it as a full work! But it's absolutely fascinating and I think the author is doing a fantastic job so far. Bonus points for the way it portrays humans, btw.

No more spoilers though, if you're interested, it's on Webtoons.

(I'm also planning to read Oren's Forge soon. Ask me about it again in a few months over on Bonebabbles and I'll give you my thoughts)

As an aside though, funny you mention it because like... ever since I was a kid I've had a story I want to tell with the premise. It's a scintilla I've kept close to me for well over a decade but haven't done anything official with. So this is actually a theme I've thought about a lot.

It's rare to see it done well though because like... its very premise butts heads with reality. The "natural order" that an animal follows is not something it moralizes. A tiger doesn't have the capacity to think about how fucked up it is to kill to stay alive, the deer doesn't know that if its population isn't controlled it will destroy the forest.

They're animals. They don't HAVE that agency. Your dog does not care about being sterilized. A snake doesn't differentiate between a pinky and an adult mouse except in terms of if it will fit in its mouth. But the minute you put human morality in there... they have the ability to reason, create and agree on the rules of a society, make choices about MORALITY.

If nothing is going to change about their world, you just end up putting human arguments about "natural order" in their mouths and, well... start telling a parable justifying this "natural order."

(Genuine) Does what I'm saying make sense? Animals DON'T rationalize or negotiate. HUMANS do.

So the minute you're approaching a world with that logic, like it or not, you are invoking those "arguments from nature." And you're putting them in a being that is not fully an animal or a human, but an anthropomorphic mix which CAN rationalize but WON'T make an effort to change their world.

(Which is why tbh the best examples i know of are works with a theme of "change.")

OH WAIT I also remember another that's interesting!! Leafy: Hen into the Wild actually has a fascinating take on it. It's not interested in "moralizing" or really being about an animal society. It's a very emotional sort of movie, and it's about joys in adversity, the freedom that choice gives you, how bad things are going to happen and you can never completely prevent them.

INTENSE movie emotionally, the ending will wreck you (especially in the English translation which leaves out a really important theme making it feel abrupt x_x) but it's really good. Check that one out.

OH and also You Are Umasou. That one has more pitfalls imo (it does try to moralize a bit) but it's super unique as a movie. And is about dinosaurs.

[badgerhuan]

SO @maverickcalf UNEARTHED THIS PODCAST/INTERVIEW WITH BILL HADER FROM 12 YEARS AGO AND HE ACTUALLY TALKS ABOUT TROPIC THUNDER AND TOM IN A MORE DETAILED MANNER I'M VIBRATING THIS IS ALL I EVER WANTED!!!!!

JESSE THORN: What was it like to actually interact with him professionally; especially when he’s doing something as ridiculous as his character Les Grossman in that movie?

BILL HADER: He was great. He was really collaborative and was like, oh, do you want to come in on this, or maybe you say this and I say that.

I'VE ALWAYS WONDERED IF THEY EVER TALKED ABOUT IT!!! like the energy and chemistry they had between them, whatever little screen time they shared, always spoke to me like it's an interaction that was discussed about. you wouldn't get that kind of thing if it was just Tom doing his thing and Bill doing his best to keep up. they talked about it!! Tom asked for Bill's input!!!! I WAS RIGHT

He’s a very committed guy. He works incredibly hard, especially at those dances that he would do, and he would have these long monologues in the movie, mostly directed towards Matthew McConaughey’s character that were really funny and hard to get through, but he was so focused on making it a character; like a person. He looked so crazy in it, but making Les Grossman a real force.

YES god I'm so glad Bill talks about it here. like whenever people bring up Les to Tom they only ever ask about the dancing, but never about the CHARACTER WORK. that's what I love about Les honestly. that he so easily could've been a one note character played for laughs. but you can TELL that Tom put thought into his character and motivations, keeping Les grounded and more human. I love it so much.

He played it very real, like when he would get really angry he would actually be angry. He was really committed to it. But working with him and hanging with him in between scenes and stuff he was the nicest guy on earth. It helped that he was in that makeup, because for me after a while you forgot, oh, that’s Tom Cruise, and then at the end of the day you’d be walking to the van or your car, and he’d be like, “Hey Bill, great job today!” — Oh my god, that’s Tom Cruise!

more points for Tom being really nice 🥺🥺🥺 and him complimenting Bill oueghdgdhh I'M NORMAL ABOUT THIS

JESSE THORN: Bill, you’re a married man with a child; I am too. I would be worried if I ever met Tom Cruise that I would accidentally kiss him or something.

BILL HADER: When he’s dressed like Les Grossman, you don’t.

this part made me laugh honestly dhkfhdj DON'T LIE TO ME BILL

(thank you for playing Rob like he wants Les to rail him anyway)

That is an interesting thing. That’s the kind of guy who will sit there and talk – – like, between doing the movie and doing the MTV Movie Awards thing, like, I had a kid and stuff like that, and he definitely was like, “How’s that going?” Very legitimately interested in what was going on in your life and just very cool. Telling me stories about making The Outsiders, he’ll sit and tell you stuff and it was really cool.

we've all heard about how people talk about when Tom talks to you he always gives you 100% of his attention and is very genuine so this isn't a surprise but it's just so good to see Bill confirming that yet again 🥺

but also ohhh my god Tom telling Bill about making The Outsiders. just telling him stories about movies he's made!!! BILL DID YOU EVER TELL HIM YOU LOVE FILM THE WAY HE DOES!!! DID HE KNOW ABOUT YOUR DREAM TO BE A DIRECTOR!!!!!

I'm so happy this interview exists. and I'm so happy to have confirmation on things I've wondered about for years (did they ever discuss their characters while filming the movie, did Tom and Bill ever talk about films, etc). I can't believe this information was out there for over a decade and I only just learned about it!! thank you Blu so much for sharing this 🥹🥹🥹

[driftwithme]

That deleted scene between Chuck and Herc haunts me because that is the ThesisTM of Chuck as a character.

Let's see:

He feels he was not raised by a man, but by the machines he grew up around. I'd admit this one is more implicit, so let me explain. When Chuck says that Herc did not raised him to be anything, he then admits he spend more time around the machines than with Herc. Chuck doesn't even mentions anyone else human, not even the j-techs or other pilots. He goes to straight up mention the machines. Herc might have not raised him to be anything, but those machines thought him how to be a pilot.

He is perceived by other people as a great ranger but not a very good man. Which yeah, Chuck is great at his job, but what about his social life? We never see him around other people, talking or anything else. The movie makes a good point of separating him from the bunch in every scene. The only mention of him having a life is when he tells Raleigh that he wants to come back, but hold on, it takes us to another point.

When Herc asks him who is him and follows it by saying everybody knows he's a great ranger, Chuck asks his dad what else does Herc want him to be. He doesn't understand the question. He is doing what he is required to do, isn't it? So why is it not enough? At this point is obvious Chuck doesn't have an identity beyond being a jaeger pilot. That's not a job for him, that is his whole life, who he is, what he was raised to be. Is that the life he wants to return to? The life Chuck likes so much?

He tells Herc that the only reason they still talk if 'cause their drift compatibility and the fact they are good at smashing things. To me it sounded more like they are good at destroying, which could be a reference to how they constantly fail at mending their relationship. This means that the only meaningful connection he has is only there because of his job. And I'm not counting Max here, but it's all the same to say this man's alone in the world with only a dog for company.

When all is said and done, this scene was as an explanation for Chuck's death, narrative wise. He was no one without the kaiju war or the ranger job. He had no identity beside the identity of a soldier. Every other character's storyline has a figurative anchor, except of course the ones who died: The pilots of both Cherno and Crimson died with their family and jaegers, Pentecost trade places with G. Danger for them to survive and Chuck? Well, Chuck gave his anchor (Max) to his dad, so Herc would have something after he's gone.

The PPDC and Team Danger also work as an anchor for Herc, since he still had to be there until the mission was over. Hannibal Chau had an anchor (his business) and ended up surviving as well.

So I guess, in the sense that New was born to study monsters and fall in love with them, Chuck was fight in that war and made it his mission to end it. He doesn't survive because his arc in the story was over, solved, done.

That's the genius of the Hansen meeting deleted scene. It sets the tragedy to happen.

[spectralsleuth]

Saw you were lookin’ for some asks dont mind if I do 👀

To start off, I’m such a big fan of your writing! I genuinely look forward to every single update of yours and find myself rereading a lot of work in the downtime. You are such a good writer!! My never ending praises aside, here are some asks!

-You incorporate OC’s into your fics so seamlessly! They feel so natural in your fics that I legit get excited anytime they show up (srsly can’t wait for Lou Jitsu vs Hidden City, Sal’s my boy) lol how do you find the right balance when introducing and maintaining OC’s in your fics? I feel like that’s a particularly difficult balance beam to tread but you absolutely crush it.

-A previous ask you answered about Cass and Raph in LSoW got me thinking; how do the brothers handle humans crushing on them? Would they be receptive or dismissive? Do they develop crushes on humans- and if so, how is that perceived (by family or the general public)? The drama 👀

Last ask, I promise:

-I absolutely loved your crossover with Empathy is Learned! Got anymore crossovers planned in the future? Oooor if you could do a crossover with any other fic, which one(s) would it/they be??

Thanks for taking the time to even look at this! I hope these are some fun asks for ya :) I hope you have a lovely day!!

Omg thanks so much... I'm so happy people enjoy my writing it's crazy to me. I've written before, but it's always been just for myself so I never really know if it was good or not. (Years of text based DnD is to thank lol.) (Okay I got carried away answering this so sorry in advance.)

On OC's:

I got a lot of comments on LSoW from people who say "generally I don't like OC's BUT-" which is so funny and flattering. Because I am absolutely one of those people who don't care for OC's in fic.

Let me be clear: I LOVE that people write self indulgent self-insert of OC based fic, where they make the craziest off the wall story etc. Every time a fifteen year old writes a story about the cringiest Mary-sue/stu self insert, or non canon character, an angel gets its wings and I mean that one hundred percent. It makes me so happy I literally grin when I see it. I HOWEVER generally filter out the OC tags on AO3 when I'm looking for something to read myself.

So when I started posting LSoW I was expecting to get maybe like, 100 kudos MAX, maybe one comment or so. Which is great! I love writing niche fic just for me, and one other person who I assume I must be drift compatible with. I just could not figure out a way to write the story I wanted without a few OC's- Rise didn't have a big enough character catalog for me to draw from!

When I went to write the OC's, I knew that they had to have a very simple backstory, that was also very fleshed out. (Xander and Sal have full family, Dr. Heo and Carter have full jobs and history together, etc.) For another contradiction I wanted them to be interesting enough that someone reading wouldn't just be skipping ahead to when they weren't present, or just simply plowing through to get past the part where they were doing exposition. They had to be enjoyable! While also forwarding the story!

They also had to be distinct. Anyone who's ever watched a Whedon show or movie (Buffy, Firefly, Avengers-) knows what I'm talking about. It drives me nuts when the characters in a show are constantly the funniest person in the room, with the same personality traits, and the same girl boss/badass tendencies.

(Fandom challenge Impossible: Give a female fan favorite character another trait besides 'girlboss/mom/lesbian'. I'm dead serious.)

(Also a disclaimer: I LOVE making jokes and doing bits. I FANCY that I'm pretty funny, and I love making people laugh. But you can do that without making it a character personality trait. For example: Xander doesn't really crack any jokes in LSoW! He's just funny because we the reader know more about the situation and his thoughts than he does.)

But the BIGGEST THING I kept telling myself while writing the story, was DO NOT TAKE AWAY FROM THE TURTLES. Because the whole point of the story is the turtles! And Yoshi! The OC's are there to facilitate that. It's a hard balance to hit. I have all sorts of touchstones I keep in mind while I'm writing, and that's a big one.

(A SUPER good example of this done super well is @faiakishi 's Bella from Dawning of the Hour. She's a great OC that's super interesting, and a super important narrative element, but she never detracts from the main story. Big Bella fan here lmao. There's also the rest of the OC's/interpretations of franchise characters (TIGERCLAW), but Bella stands out as truly original.)

On the Turtles dating Humans:

(CW: CSA mention, SA mention, non graphic talk of minors dating etc.)

I actually talked a lot about this to @/tangledinink in feverish discord chats lmao.

When the boys were growing up they got a very detailed talk from both Yoshi, and their Doctors. ONE: Because nobody will know better than themselves if something was medically wrong with their bodies, TWO: The boys are all intersex (minus Mikey) and they had to understand that there was nothing wrong with them on TOP of the turtle thing, and THREE: Because Yoshi knew the boys would be getting a lot of attention, and you never know what kind of attention that form will take.

THE BEST WAY to protect children (any child) from being sexually assaulted or abused, is making sure they know what that abuse LOOKS LIKE. You don't have to make them terrified of being sexually assaulted, but them knowing how their body works, and also how to say NO and set boundaries, will combine to help make them safer.

Yoshi didn't know what would happen in the future and in a perfect world the boys would never leave his line of sight, but that's not always how things happen. (In a Short Season, Xander parroted Yoshi's instructions before going out to make sure the boys knew what to do if someone grabbed them (in any way) and it was to bite and be loud.) So the boys grew up knowing their bodies, knowing how to say 'no', and knowing that there was probably going to be people out there who would treat them as a novelty, and who wouldn't be appropriate to them as celebrities OR non-humans.

(Remember Emma Watson having to deal with that countdown to her turning 18? Or any other amount of child stars who had to deal with adults being predatory to them.)

But ALSO THIS IS HAMATO YOSHI. His sons are HANDSOME and HEARTBREAKERS! Leo has dated a lot but never anything seriously, and his inability to be intimate with anyone but family kind of puts a damper on any more permanent relationship. (He is gay.) He's the number one turtle people ask out because he's the most approachable. Because he made himself that way!

Donnie is in a sort of relationship with Kendra. (THIS WILL BE A FIC I'm working up to it lmao.) I have a head canon that Yokai and other empyrean based creatures are capable of having rivalry based relationships. IE Yoshi and Draxum in the canon show, the unhealthy dynamic between Yoshi and Big Mama, etc. (Caliginous relationship) Donnie is in a puppy love version of that with Kendra, while also lacking the context of yokai society to understand why he wants to punch her very badly, but also if anything happened to her he would die. They hate each others guts and also she was his first kiss. She is not a nice person I am not a Kendra apologist she's terrible I love her. (Donnie is bi!)

I know a lot of people head canon Mikey as ace, but he is a thirteen year old child you don't have to be head canoning him as anything. it is the very rare 13 year old who knows their orientation, and even if they DO I bet you donuts to dollars it will change eventually. This is normal and healthy. Mikey in LSoW has had puppy crushes on boys, girls, teachers, Violet, the mailman, Adam, and Rupert Swaggert. (Eugh eugh eugh.)

Raph is absolutely irresistible to the entire student body and is completely unaware of it. He's not stupid but he's face blind and bad at picking up subtext in conversations. He's gone to multiple people's houses and spent the whole day with them, without realizing they were trying to make it a date. (Raph is bi.)

All the boys have considered identifying as girls since their Dad is the martial arts equivalent of David Bowie and Fine With That, but have settled (for now) on being boys (age 10 the last time they considered this) because quote 'Lou Jitsu and Jupiter Jim are boys and they're awesome' unquote.

They don't get any fucking privacy for their relationships, and Leo in particular had a very bad experience that closed him off from dating big time. (Stamps 'THIS WILL BE A FIC' on this as well.) But also, as of the LSoW canon they are like, 12-14 and not doing a lot of dating ANYWAY. They are BABIES.

(Enter Casey Jones)

ON CROSSOVERS:

I have one crossover with my white whale of authors (you know who you are) I have pecked at with them that I think everyone will go fucking nuts for and love, but I won't mention it in case we can't get it off the ground! (A completely okay and normal thing to happen lmao.) I think that one will end up happening though because I am too excited about it, even if it's not any time soon.

I am super open to crossovers and cowriting, especially since writing with Li because I learned SO MUCH it was like speed running improvement.

The thing is it has to fit! There's some crossovers that wouldn't have a lot of substance because there's not really a lot to cover. When it came to EiL for example, there was PLENTY to cover and do, it was so fun! But other fics might not have a lot we could do for each other. (At least, not until I get some more world building done.)

That being said I do love talking crossovers with other creators it's so fun...

If you guys ever want to use my OC's feel free, just ask me in advance! I don't mind pings.

THESE ASKS ARE FUN THANKS FOR SENDING THEM I feel like you just threw a steak into my zoo exhibit. I am recharged and rejuvenated my crops are watered my skin is clear. This felt very pretentious to write I am mortified.

[nockergeek]

For the past two years, my partner and I have spent October watching horror movies. Some are films we know, others are new to us. Each year, we try to theme the movies; 2021 had Undead October (all vampires, zombies, and ghosts), and 2022 had Otherworldly October (all threats from space or other planes of reality).

2023’s theme? Kingtober - all movies based on stories by Stephen King.

We try to watch a movie everyday, but sometimes life gets in the way. The last two years, we’ve ended up with around 21 movies watched. We’re just shy of three weeks in, and up to 14 movies.

Our reviews so far:

(Note: these reviews are our opinions. As always, your mileage and tastes may vary.)

Movie 1: Carrie (1976). Stephen King’s first published novel, the first film adaptation of his work, and one of the best. The direction and cinematography is fantastic, and while maybe not scary, it tells a tragic tale of a girl victimized on all sides. Highly recommended. A.

Movie 2: The Shining (1980). I’m a fan of the book, and… I have notes. I’m with King on this one - Kubrick did not make a good adaptation. He has a great sense of framing shots, but no sense of humanity. Jack’s slide into madness feels more like a facade cracking. C at best.

(Yeah, that one’s going to be controversial. I know it’s a very famous film, and Kubrick is a director with vision, but I don’t feel like he gets people well. Also knowing what he did to Shelley Duvall makes it hard to watch her scenes.)

Movie 3: Doctor Sleep (2019). An intriguing sequel to The Shining, and you definitely need to have seen that film to appreciate the visuals in this one. Better characters, but a far more complex plot that doesn’t quite fire on all cylinders. Decent use of Chekov’s boxes, though. A high B-.

Movie 4: Silver Bullet (1985). A passable popcorn werewolf movie. Good story (Cycle of the Werewolf is a good novella) marred by some rough acting, uneven pacing, and some really bad effects. I’m guessing they didn’t have Rick Baker werewolf money. A solid C+, and very watchable.

Movie 5: Cat’s Eye (1985). A perfectly serviceable anthology with two thrillers based on short stories, and one new kid’s fantasy/horror story. Really only marred by horrible synth music. It would get a B, but Drew Barrymore gets flipped off by a troll, so it gets an automatic A+.

Movie 6: The Dead Zone (1983). One of the best King adaptations so far, easily up there with Carrie. David Cronenberg is a fantastic director, and he and Christopher Walken tell Johnny Smith’s tragic story of unwanted psychic visions with craft and grace. This one gets a solid A.

Movie 7: Creepshow (1982). George Romero and Stephen King’s homage to old EC horror comics. It’s intentionally campy and wonderfully stylish, with vivid colors and dark comedy throughout. Good use of animated interludes, which really drives home the comic book feel. A fun B+.

Movie 8: Christine (1983). The tale of a boy and his evil, possessed, regenerating murder car. John Carpenter does a great job adapting the book to film, and has some fantastic shots, the best of which is Christine in flames chasing a bully down like the devil itself. Another solid A.

Movie 9: Children of the Corn (1984). Wow, this movie was bad. Poor pacing, terrible effects, high-school-level acting, multiple characters making dumb decisions, and odd exposition kids ruin what is otherwise a neat concept. Such a letdown after the last two films. D-.

Movie 10: It (2017). This one was solid, a very good adaptation. It did a good job of ratcheting up the terror, making you want to see how It was going to mess with the members of the Losers Club, and had good character arcs too. Let’s hope Part 2 holds up as well. This one gets an A.

Movie 11: It Part 2 (2019). So, yeah, the follow-up was just about as good as the first one. Excellent pacing with moments to breathe and laugh between the horrors, and a surprising amount to say about trauma and healing. Maybe a bit overlong, but still good. B+.

Movie 12: Graveyard Shift (1990). A movie about an old textile mill with one hell of a rat problem. This one is both over- and under-acted at the same time, and the lead has zero presence or charisma. Mildly entertaining, though, in a campy way. Still better than Children of the Corn. C-.

Movie 13: 1408 (2007). One skeptical writer vs. the most evil room ever. Purely psychological/paranormal horror, and excellently written and acted. Lots of fake outs and mean-spirited twists in this smallest of haunted houses. Among the best we’ve watched so far, and an easy A.

[mermaidsirennikita]

are you watching Mary & George? 👀 would love your thoughts if so

I have seen it! Loved it.

--Julianne Moore is obviously the standout, because she's Julianne Moore and let us be real, is one of the finest actresses of her generation even if Still Alice was not what she should have won her Oscar for.

Mary is the type of character we so rarely get to see onscreen, but I fucking love it when we do. Scheming, avaricious, wholly selfish, yet somehow human and also capable of genuinely caring about people and, very occasionally, feeling some guilt. Usually when the consequences of her actions directly affect her and hers, but still!

--Nicholas Galitzine is an actor I really generally like (I don't care for Purple Hearts... at all... I actually hate that movie and pretend it doesn't exist... Cinderella was obviously bad but he did his best, I really liked The Idea of You, LOVE Bottoms and RWARB, so generally our track record together is pretty good) and he was so good in this. Does a great job with the "from boy to monster" arc. Loved his chemistry with Julianne and Tony Curran. I also, as much as I find him more pretty than my type, was legit attracted to him during his Evil George Era, and he also has the type of appeal and charisma as George that makes me BELIEVE that he's the type of guy who could basically get by on everyone wanting him.

--Tony Curran was fabulous. The gluttony, the madness, the love, the lechery. He's like, at once this incredibly spoiled and indulged king who honestly shouldn't be running anything, let alone a nation, and this tragic figure who's constantly being used. His relationship with George is so ambiguous, too. Like.. is it all attraction and using? Is it love? Is it all of the above (my take). It kind of mirrors George's relationship with Mary in that sense, though obviously with the added component of sex and romance--you can't really tell what's love and what's control.

--Love the look of everything. I feel like they captured the Baroque really well, overall. THOUGH. I MUST SAY. We get basically like, a tiny snippet with the full Iconic Buckingham look (the giant feathered hat and cape) and Nick looked SO GOOD in it. Why didn't we have more of that???

--The one thing I can say is that they really could've changed the pacing a bit. A lot happened in George's life after the king died--he did a lot of puppet-ruling (which... did not go well). I get having to cut some of the wild stuff (like the Anne of Austria affair rumors) but they chopped out a lot. Like, I generally loved the climax of the story and I don't really care about historical accuracy as long as the story is good (and the story is good). But it was very rushed in the end.

That said, overall recommend. Mary and George reminded me of Atia and Octavian, if Octavian was a himbo until he wasn't. I'm so fond of a conflicted evil mother/ambiguous-to-evil son dynamic in a period piece.

[genericswordsmaiden]

OH MY GOD I LOVED THIS. It's like each one of these movies progressively gets better than the previous, even though I still like Ghost Protocol very much.

Rogue Nation just kept me on the edge of my seat for two hours, that's something few movies can do. And the fact I only made three posts instead of four for this entry in the series is proof of that, I think. Solomon Lane is a great villain and it's definitely an improvement from the paper thin one we got in MI4. He's basically Ethan's nemesis, the other side of the coin. A cool concept to play around for sure!

I loved the Benthan moments (the "I'm staying" speech had both me and Ethan speechless lmao) Actually, I think Simon and Tom should star in a sitcom together but that's a story for another day...

Let's talk about REBECCA FREGUSON OH MAN SHE'S SO COOL and I absolutely dig how they didn't make Ilsa a love interest for Ethan. In the end they hugged because they saved each other (pure gratitude ughhh <3) and that was it. I wouldn't mind if they got together in later movies, I just love when romances grow organically.

Now let's talk about Alec Baldwin. I think the casting choice for him was stellar. Hunley is, well, he's a bit like Kittridge in the first movie, in the sense he's just technically doing his job but for obvious reasons he can't see the bigger picture - and when he does, he just does what is right, recognising his mistakes.

Luther is growing on me, and I am so so glad he's still around. He's been in all movies since the beginning, he's like a constant... a familiar face, even though he seems to have a smaller role than the other characters. I like his humour a lot and the way he's so protective of Ethan ;-; (see: the scene where Brandt tells him about the CIA hunting Hunt down - pun intended)

Benji is precious. At this point I think I can say he's my blorbo. Not only he has what I'll call (quoting the title of a Pegg blog here on tumblr) the shelter dog rizz, but he's so genuine and sweet and brave and just... Human. I actually think him and Brandt are the most relatable ones, like, they're not necessarily an archetype of a certain character like Ethan is ("The living manifestation of destiny" sounds so fucking epic tho ngl)

Also, about Brandt, legends tell that he still can neither confirm nor deny details of any operation without the Secretary's approval.

[akajustmerry]

Thoughts on Gattaca? I think it’s a pretty cool film. Very pretty, and while it’s not a perfect commentary on disability (Jerome shouldn’t have killed himself), it does create an interesting scenario of a world that in an attempt to ‘erase’ disability and human ‘imperfections’ actually creates more disability in its refusal to accommodate or accept any human ‘imperfection’.

I feel like it’s one of those movies that would lend themselves real well to a remake/sequel/other movie set in the same universe. Just because we only see Vincent’s story, and there’s a lot of other interesting stories that could be told in this world, especially if you include people of color and LGBTQ. Wdyt?

i agree wholeheartedly! i think gattaca would benefit from a thematic anthology-style reboot in the style of Brett Goldstein's Soulmates series, or Janelle Monae's Memory Librarian! In those, you have a collection of stories set in the same world, portraying different class struggles and cultural experiences of a specific technology. The gattaca movie is narrow in part because it only has 1hr 40 minutes to not just tell the story, but get people to understand the world, themes and ideas. It's been a lot of years since i watched it, but I do rmr at the time thinking elements could have been handled with more nuance and intersectional perspectives. But I still think as a film portraying government intervention and control of vulnerable populations, it does a great job centring and critiquing the system itself even if it doesn't show the people most impacted. personally, i think the real problem with Gattaca is that it's about a man succeeding in an oppressive system and that being better than changing or overthrowing it. But either way, I think the film operates well as an introduction to the world that could be built upon in really interesting ways! I'll always have a special spot in my heart for that film though because between watching it and reading hunger games when i was 15, i was introduced to my favourite genre: speculative fiction! and now i am a published author in the genre! also seeing uma and ethan in that movie was v formative for me as a bisexual so i do love that movie a lot despite its flaws <3

[sednonamoris]

fran's 2023 read it and weep 🫵

a comprehensive list of everything i read this year and why you should (or shouldn't) read it as well...

how to read literature like a professor by thomas c. foster

i picked this back up again when i took on a teaching job as a refresh - it was my fourth or fifth reread and as always my main man thomas c. did not disappoint!! not joking when i say i quote this thing on the reg: it's a symbol if you think it is became a permanent fixture in my vernacular ages ago. this book aligns perfectly with my yes the curtains are blue on purpose agenda and serves as an excellent foray into deep/active reading, which i am constantly preaching about to my kids. fun and fresh literary analysis, just the way it should be!

tiny beautiful things by cheryl strayed

gritty, witty, and full of heart. this advice column-turned-book is shocking but so very human, and it got me out of a months-long reading slump.

bridge of clay by markus zusak

yes, a boy named clay builds a bridge, but it’s sooooo much more than that. this book weaves the past and present together in a beautiful way and really brings meaning to the concept of haunting the narrative. the descriptions are vivid and lived-in which makes the setting - 1980’s australia - entirely accessible, even to a foreign homebody like me. the family dynamics at play are outrageous and charming and the whole thing is gorgeously written and it made me cry. read it right now.

the hunchback of notre dame by victor hugo

i LOVED this book but unless you are just as obsessed with the story as me, this is not a rec. victor hugo anything is more of a warning or an i-read-it-so-you-didn't-have-to. did i learn more than i ever wanted to about french gothic architecture and the paris catacombs? yes. was i still utterly enthralled by the layers upon layers of tragedy woven together? also yes. it was so neat to see the (obviously many and major) differences from the children's movie and musical that i grew up loving. so many good quotes for my commonplace book in this one.

song of solomon by toni morrison

i had read just about every toni morrison book except this one, and since this is like theee book i figured it was high time i rectified that. to no one's surprise, i loved it. a brilliantly written coming of age novel with family history and family mythology in dialogue with cultural history and cultural mythology. who are we but the stories we tell ourselves? is common history alone enough to have in common? morrison is an author who poses difficult questions and lets her readers grapple with difficult answers and i always come away from her work feeling exhilarated. if you let me influence you in anything let it be this - whatever book of hers you choose, Everyone should read toni morrison and experience her brilliance firsthand.

the first law trilogy by joe abercrombie (the blade itself, before they are hanged, and last argument of kings, respectively)

gritty political fantasy with the most lovable evil bastards of characters you ever met - it's safe to say i'm obsessed. each and every character has themes and lines of repetition that carry through the series, but they're Anything but one-note. this trilogy is all about cycles, and what i love is that everything - literally everything - comes full circle while still feeling fresh and true to both the story and its characters. also logen ninefingers is my wife now.

the pale blue eye by louis bayard

i watched this movie first on netflix and had a great time, but to no one's surprise i'm going to tell you that the book is better. the character voices are strong and enjoyable - the kinds of personalities that keep you turning pages - and the mystery itself is full of wonderful twists and turns. it's in dialogue with sir arthur conan doyle, as all post-holmes detective fiction is, but does not feel shadowed by or beholden to it. the historical fiction aspect is fun as well!

[kittyandco]

Hi, Kitty!! my brain's in fnaf mode– if you have a minute, tell me the story about how Bobcat got into clowning with the fredbear's/freddy's locations! And like, do they like their job and the kids and everything, or is it more of a necessity with the added bonus of letting them work around the animatronics? I am curious about them and their horrors - @frankmillerturnonyourlocation

@frankmillerturnonyourlocation THANK YOU FOR ASKING ABOUT HERR EEE AAAA i'm sorry this is so late. i haven't been online much/very mentally well, but i have been in fnaf mode since last august 😭 the movie definitely reignited my love (even more)!

kitty reinhart was a lonely kid. she spent a lot of time by herself; she couldn't really relate to kids her age, and adults thought she was "troubled." her parents weren't really around. most of her companionship was found in objects -- primarily her toys -- and in her imagination. she tried to focus on her studies as she entered high school, and she was a great student, but she didn't find fulfillment in it. very distant from just about everyone and everything.

and then fredbear's family diner opened in the late 70s.

she attended opening day, and instantly she fell in love. she's a kid-at-heart like me, and stood starry-eyed watching these huge robots move around, dance, and sing.

she spent all the time she could there. sometimes she'd sit there from opening to closing. sometimes after closing, when she began to get close with william and henry (though primarily the former). sometimes she wouldn't really speak much, but it was clear that she loved being there. they, and her love of the animatronics, brought her out of her shell eventually. she rediscovered her love of entertaining (even though before then it was just to her toys), and it was more comfortable and fulfilling being someone else, so she began to develop an alternate persona: a clown named bobcat.

they needed a more human touch to the location, even if it was just an experiment, so william promised her a job. they got very close; he was her mentor in many ways, and her only human friend for a while. in 1982, she went to work! she makes appearances at each location at some point, also.

she does enjoy working with the kids. deep down, she wants to give them the support and attention she never really had. working with the animatronics is the best part, though. sometimes she'll wander backstage and talk to them. (eventually this gets... almost literal once they're possessed, though i have canons where this doesn't happen. I HAVE A COUPLE OF ALTERNATE CANONS AND HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE DETAILS STRAIGHT IN ALL OF THEM BECAUSE FNAF LORE IS WILD)

but in normal canon, yeah... she gets suspicious of william after a while. he's acting more erratic as he realizes that he can't get away with it forever. but she wouldn't assume anything that bad like... help, but she does know there's been a change in him, and in the animatronics. and then the disappearances... she spends the most time with them out of anyone, and when they start acting strange/acting out... she knows there's something wrong.

even though she's an adult, they don't target her. they know she's safe (and this is also where being a "kid-at-heart" kinda saves her). they remain friends, and if the truth comes out somehow and she's still able to help, then she tries her best. 🥺

[greypetrel]

I see you've been asked several already, so for the Tolkein asks: whichever question you want to answer most, but haven't been asked c:

Hi Mo! :D

Thank you! The temptation to answer all the questions left was there... But I don't want to pester you with basically an essay, so I'll select a few x°D

Edit after writing it: *it's still an essay* Oops.

2. If you were the Middle Earth race that your personality most matches, which would it be?

I'm a Hobbit. Definitely a Hobbit. No love for being on centre stage, will eat six meals per day (listen, snacks are important ok), is very comfortable at home, but resourceful when needed. I miss the love for gardening, my thumb is very black and I have little interest for plants that I can't eat because what's the point. But Bilbo in the book dreaming while camping in the cold of a cozy afternoon spent reading with the kettle on the fire speaks to my soul.

10. Favorite performance by any actor in the Tolkien film projects? Bonus: What's your favorite scene with them?

Bernard Hill as Theoden always gets me. He's just the right level of intensity, melancholy and grieving because he's old and feels like he hasn't accomplished anything. The tenderness and the respect he has for Eowyn as his beloved niece AND a wise woman he can be happy leaving his kingdom to (Eomer goes with him to a potentially suicidal mission. He's saying, to me, that his heir is HER, not him). And his speeches are all-!!! The Pelennor Field's one always have me shivering. The words are nice, sure, but his acting was just great. All of the Rohan part is just peak casting and great. Miranda Otto did a stunning job, her singing the mourning song haunts me. And THAT SCENE where Karl Urban just screams himself raw when he finds apparently dead Eowyn. I still don't know why exactly it was cut from the cinematic version, it was a pity.

Andy Serkis. I am appalled that he doesn't appear in more movies because honestly find me any other person who would have delivered a Gollum in the same way. (and please Hollywood cast him in more diverse roles, make me see his face, he's GOOD, give him a chance)

Since no one named him: Sean Astin as Sam. REALLY. The way he can go from grumpy and pouty to bright and happy seeing Frodo and absolutely EPIC. He's a whole journey by himself. Favourite scene: I can tell you the PO-TAY-TOES scene by heart, mimicking Gollum as well. But his speech at the end of Two Towers.

And also. Not a favourite because it's down for lines that are not so good, but... I know it's highly unpopular, but I really liked Morfydd Clark as Galadriel. She's not Cate Blanchett, and she's not supposed to be. That's still Edgy!Galadriel that she plays, she's younger and still hot-headed and please read the book and find out that Galadriel is not an ethereal lady, she's a Noldorin and she can and she WILL kick your ass. Clark does it, she has the right look for it. (her lines could have been better? Yes. I still think she did good with what she had.) (I'm all for edgy and angry, more human-like elves, and thought I know it's flawed, but I liked Rings of Power.)

12. Tolkien's work contains a lot of interesting themes: devastation of war, things lost that cannot be restored, rebirth/renewal, holding true to one's companions even when it is darkest, and others. Which is the most important to you?

I'll try to be brief here, I could fill a dissertation over this.

But mainly:

“It's like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were. And sometimes you didn't want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you. That meant something, even if you were too small to understand why. But I think, Mr. Frodo, I do understand. I know now. Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn’t. They kept going, because they were holding on to something. That there is some good in this world, and it's worth fighting for."

This.

The fact that no matter how dark it is outside, there's the promise of light and joy at the end of the tunnel. Hope in spite of everything.

And the fact that it doesn't matter where you come from, it doesn't matter who your ancestors were, how tall are you, how much your people has been involved in a situation before. You are valuable, your help is not in vain, there's some good you can do. See: Pippin's arc. Going from fool of a Took, basically a baby thrown in a world so much greater than him... And standing up to the situation, in the end, just because he wants to help, even if he's scared. His taking the Palantir and talking to Sauron, in the end, is one of the biggest assists given to Frodo... and he's the member of the Fellowship that had the least reasons to be there, the least experience and knowledge to help the mission. In the end, he's just as useful as everyone else.

[antigonewinchester]

hiya, since you said you were watching You... what do you think of it? i'm a big fan of the books, but haven't seen the show. not sure i trust them to adapt it with any kind of nuance, but i was intrigued to see that sera is involved. how is it?

Thanks for asking anon! :)

You're the opposite of me, in that I've only seen the show (just finished season 1; I'm a slow watcher) and never read the books. I found S1 to be pretty good overall, with a few minor quibbles.

I'm fond of stories picking apart The Ideals of Romance, so Gamble describing S1 as needing to be both a love and a horror story in every scene rang true. It's a cliche but a ton of romantic tropes are, if taken more realistically, pretty creepy, and I'm right there with the show in terms of noble fairy-tale princes hiding secret horrors underneath. The use of voice-over for what Joe says versus what he was actually thinks worked very well, could've been cheesy but it's not. Joe's voice is very strong thru the whole season. The show walks a tough line with Joe as the main character, because he's such an unreliable narrator, but imo they did a great job. In the last ep, Beck screams at Joe and calls him a sociopath but, at least in S1, he really didn't read that way to me; it's much more than Joe's understanding of love and what love means is very very messed up. He's an incredibly self-deluding character with very warped perceptions, so while I never bought into his charm, he and that dissonance remained compelling to me throughout the show, who Joe thinks he is vs. what he actually does (and then how much he judges other people too, like he's so much better). It's also his humor, and the show's humor, that's the final ingredient, I think. The show can be quite funny! Then quite horrifying, and sometimes funnily horrifying. The writing uses bathos particularly well, which is a form of humor I don't always like (thanks Marvel movies...) but the undercutting of Joe's obsessions or idealizations or the romantic moments really works. Overall, its balancing of tones from lighthearted to horrifying to funny is quite deft, and I enjoyed its range.

For what worked less well, I found some of the social media stuff a bit dated (altho Facebook stalking and all that was more relevant at the time). While I think the writing of the various female characters was better than what I've seen of Gamble's past shows (particularly SPN), her bias towards male characters was definitely still at play. Say, it took me a bit to figure out what the writing was doing with Peach, but eventually Peach as Joe's female foil -- the woman who's secretly in love and obsessed with Beck, who will manipulate and gaslight her, and who's implied to also have grown up in an emotionally abusive and homophobic household -- worked... except it felt like it came pretty late in the season, and I would've liked more hints earlier on. Maybe it’s more obvious on rewatch, tho.

The other part is a bit tricky, because I'm still not quite sure how I feel about it. As far as I can tell, both of these elements are unique to the TV show: first, Mr. Mooney being physically abusive in raising Joe; and second, Claudia and her son Paco as Joe's neighbors and her boyfriend, Ron, being emotionally and physically abusive. Thru flashbacks over the season, we see Mooney abuse Joe, including locking him in the book cage as a kid and manipulating him into thinking he was doing it for Joe’s own good, out of love, and Joe then reenacting that hurt on later people, most obviously Beck: in the last ep, there's literally a match cut from Joe as a kid in the book cage to Beck as an adult. We also see Ron's abuse of Claudia and Paco thru the season, with Joe's care for Paco clearly connected to his own hurt and trauma, and ultimately leading up to Joe killing Ron to protect Paco. If, as I understand, none of this is in the books, I could see someone not liking these additions, or seeing them as a way to humanize Joe and make him more sympathetic in light his stalking, kidnapping, murder, etc.

In terms of Gamble as a creator, it was striking to see her return to such distinct ideas around men, masculinity, and violence -- she's talked about how she likes writing male characters because she can get into their heads and figure out what makes them tick, but it seems to me she's particularly interested in men who've been abused/traumatized (esp by fathers/father figures) and how they react to, and reenact, that violence. Do Gamble & her writers use nuance and thoughtfulness in dealing with abuse & its consequences? That's a tougher question to answer, and depends on the person watching, tbh. I've read some pretty harsh critiques of Gamble’s writing around this topic, and understand where it's coming from, but what makes me a little more generous with Gamble is how it feels she wants to understand, and that she's working through something in continually returning to these ideas in her work.

[goodsirbeasts]

tagged by the ever lovely @zaegreus, here we go!!

do you make your bed? I used to as a kid, mostly because my mom made me lol. But when I reached my teens I gave up - no one but me is seeing it anyway!

what’s your favourite number? I've always had an affinity for 4, though couldn't say why. I've always associated it with the color purple as well.

what is your job? assistant manager at a shoe store 🤷‍♀️ it's not bad but man do the customers get on my nerves

if you could go back to school would you? absolutely not. I'm 37 and still have nightmares about being late for class or forgetting to show up. I liked college but I'm not capable of that level of homework anymore.

can you parallel park? never learned how to drive LOL

a job you had that would surprise people? janitor I guess?? I actually liked it a lot though. We'd clean the local museum, so I got to see some art, and then we'd drive all the way up into the hills to clean the wind turbine research center.

do you think aliens are real? I hope they are, and I also hope they stay the fuck away from humans cause we are NOT going to treat them well.

can you drive a manual car? don't drive don't like cars~

what’s your guilty pleasure? I don't rly believe in guilty pleasures ...

tattoos? two at the moment; one of Sailor Saturn on my left forearm, and one of a lily of the valley with lil skulls in place of the buds on my right ankle.

favourite colour? any shade of purple, teal, baby pink, chartreuse.

favourite type of music? literally anything and everything! that being said I tend to gravitate more towards electro.

do you like puzzles? like, jigsaw puzzles? haven't done one in years but they're okay. puzzles in general? yes! I love figuring things out lol.

any phobias? not fond of large spiders but I always try to capture and release them outside. I'm also a lil nervous around any animal bigger than I am. deep water wigs me the fuck out. if I ever got any sort of parasite my soul would leave my body.

favourite childhood sport? volleyball and tennis! I loved playing those, and was fairly good at them :3

do you talk to yourself? oh definitely. not a lot but usually when I'm doing an annoying task or playing video games.

what movie(s) do you adore? favourite movies are:

1. Only God Forgives. Most films by Refn leave me very cold but something about this one is just my jam. The music, the acting, the story, Vithaya Pansringarm beating the shit out of Ryan Gosling - immaculate.

2. Ravenous. Caught this one randomly one night on IFC when I was younger. Couldn't believe I've never heard of it as it has both Guy Pearce AND Robert Carlyle, two of my fave actors. Anyway it was life changing and I'll never recover.

3. Suspiria (2018). I like the original as well but man. MAN. Everything about Guadagnino's version was made specifically for me.

4. Taboo (Gohatto). Accidentally came across this one when I was def too young to watch it lmao. I was going through a samurai phase and so naturally I was like oh cool, and they're gay? Sign me up! Let me tell ya, this one is a doozy. Basically it's about a bunch of samurai vying for the affections of a beautiful youth who also happens to be a full on sociopath (affectionate), and it does Not End Well. Also has Tadanobu Asano and Takeshi Kitano, who are awesome as usual.

coffee or tea? I like both but coffee is just SO GOOD.

first thing you wanted to be growing up? earliest thing I can remember wanting to be was an FBI agent? I was very into the X-Files as a kid and thought it would be a great job haha.

Not sure who to tag for these fjkskdkskkskd gonna go with my besties @porternash and @iwantoseeafrigatebird cause I'd personally love to read your answers :3

[fureverbookworms]

Plain Bad Heroines review

This book has EVERYTHING. Eerie atmosphere, vintage lesbians, contemporary sapphics, apples, a French curse, yellow jackets, some Blair Witch shit, a reminder that HP Lovecraft was a racist, and a boarding school!

This book tells two stories. The first follows a cursed all-girls boarding school in the early 1900s, where sapphics are dropping like flies (or yellow jackets?). You get glimpses into the daily lives of the students, the school’s founders (a closeted lesbian and her secret lover), and the land itself. It’s very gothic, very atmospheric, and the yellow jackets will have your skin crawling.

The second story follows a trio of young women in contemporary Hollywood who are trying to bring the school’s story to the silver screen. Here, they have to dodge the trials and tribulations of filming in a haunted school while also trying to discern what is real and what is movie magic.

I really enjoyed this book! The dual timeline felt very cinematic and reminded me of a season of AHS or The Haunting of Hill House. I also liked how both storylines achieved a differing degree of spooky. The older story is more ostentatiously spooky, but the film story does a great job of blurring the edges of its reality. Sure, there are elements of each “spooky” scene that are clearly put there by the movie crew. And then there are the unexplainable parts, the ones that start wearing away at our trio of heroines.

I’ve read a few other reviews for this book and they take issue with the ending. I disagree with the claims that one timeline is anticlimactic. The Hollywood story works best as a slowburn on the spooky elements. If it went too big on the scares, it would detract from the build up in the Brookhants story and its twist. Additionally, for me, the dread in the Hollywood story is derived from the characters never being sure who exactly is pulling the strings: the director or something unseen?

This isn’t the most gruesome book or a scared sleepless tome. But it’s engrossing. I couldn’t put it down once I got invested. Danforth does a great job of bringing life to both storylines and her characters. The girls feel human, especially Libbie and Alex. They get jealous, they get flustered, they get mad, they fall madly in love. They fit so effortlessly into their stories.

4/5 stars

[zevfern]

Alex Rider season 1 review! Spoilers below:

What a ride, pun intended. It's not perfect, and it's far from accurate, but it's still pretty fun and entertaining.

First off, let's get the complaining out of the way:

Quite a bit of the casting isn't accurate to the books. Blunt doesn't look like Jeremy Clarkson, Mrs. Jones and Eva Stellenbosch are much too pretty, Dr. Greif was cast to look more like Herod Sayle (especially odd since he's supposed to be from Apartheid period South Africa) and Yassen Gregorovitch looks like Noel Gallagher if he had been a successful boxer and not a rockstar.

No SAS training for Alex like in Stormbreaker means that Wolf isn't much more than just an interrogator who shows up later to shoot people. Really disappointed, as Alex gaining Wolf's respect and Wolf reappearing in Point Blanc are highlights of both books and could have been included in the series (maybe budget constraints prevented this?)

WHERE ARE THE GADGETS? All they give Alex is the Walkman MP3 player and it doesn't even work for sending out the distress signal like it does in the book. No exploding earring or CD player buzzsaw :(

The secondary storylines with Tom and MI-6 investigating Scorpio are somewhat hamfisted, and if not for the final episode would not have a good payoff.

Alright, now for the good stuff, and there's a lot:

Alex and Tom's friendship is great, and Tom finding out about Alex's spy recruitment and visiting him at the Friend mansion is great! It helps to humanize Alex, who at times came off as a mix between James Bond and (name redacted) in the books, and Tom gets to be a supporting hero in the story, as he is crucial in the final fight between Alex and Alex's clone since he manages to tell them apart.

Point Blanc (as in the school) is exactly like I imagined when I first read the book, hats off to the producers and scenery department. The uniforms and such are also really cool, and helped with some subtle storytelling (the Kyra clone reveal!)

Speaking of Kyra, despite being an original character who's not in the book I still liked her. She somewhat supplants James Spritz as Alex's main friend in Point Blanc (he's still there, he's just focused on less), and I did like that the writers restrained themselves from using her as a love interest for Alex. I wonder whether she'll show back up later or not.

Yassen, despite not looking all that tough or imposing, still managed to keep the intense intimidating aura he has in the books. Will be looking forwards to seeing him again next season.

As mentioned earlier, if not for the Tom/MI-6 side storylines the final confrontation between Alex and his clone would be much as it was in the book, a swerve that came out of nowhere but was still very exiting. Giving it real stakes for Alex really improved it! A shame the clone got killed, but maybe that's a good thing since Scorpia Rising won't get adapted (as it was the original ending for the book series before Horowitz decided to write more for some reason and the writing suffers for it)

Overall, I'm still really happy I finally watched this, the show runners did a great job with their adaptation. I'm pretty sure the next season will do something similar to season one where elements of another book bleed into the one actually being adapted, but this is still much better than butcherings like the Stormbeaker movie.