theswanhero

[theswanhero]

how do y’all think haymitch felt when katniss came back to him all “i want wiress, beetee, and mags as allies” in catching fire? hand-picking his two and a half men(tors)!!

“of course you do” as his response now means so much more bc he’s not just exasperated he’s like “you really are me with a braid”

[theswanhero]

Joan Crawford as Helen Wright in HUMORESQUE (1946) dir. Jean Negulesco

[theswanhero]

My Lady Jane 1.04 “Bluebird Is Dead”

[theswanhero]

Faraway views (right lens of my binoculars)

[theswanhero]

they don't know how you've haunted me so stunningly

— for @claire8216

[theswanhero]

OSCAR ISAAC for Brioni

[theswanhero]

i think it's extremely unfair for you to say the actors are spineless. the producers and directors, yes. but the actors were literally having their livelihoods and future career prospects threatened if they spoke out or refused to perform.

grennell, the president of the kennedy center said, “Any performer who isn’t professional enough to perform for patrons of all backgrounds, regardless of political affiliation, won’t be welcomed. In fact, we think it would be important to out those vapid and intolerant artists to ensure producers know who they shouldn’t hire - and that the public knows which shows have political litmus tests to sit in the audience. The Kennedy Center wants to be a place where people of all political stripes sit next to each other and never ask who someone voted for but instead enjoys a performance together.”

and, i want to point out, that acting in Les Miserables is a job, not a life commitment or a political statement.

I stand by what I said: every single person involved in putting on the Les Miserables Kennedy center performance was either a spineless coward or a Trump supporter, and they should ALL be utterly ashamed of themselves. They're an insult to the novel's legacy. I'm shocked people are defending it. I used to sometimes wonder whether Victor Hugo's actions-- speaking up against Napoleon III's attacks on democracy-- were genuinely that important. After all, it's not like Hugo literally shot Napoleon III in battle or raised barricades against him with his own two hands-- he just used his platform to publicly criticize Napoleon III's attacks on democracy, knowing that he was doing it at a great personal risk. And he was right about the risks-- publicly speaking against Napoleon III did radically change Hugo's life, it did radically alter the course of his career, he did lose a lot of the power he used to have, and he was forced into exile away from everything he knew.

And Les Miserables was the product of that sacrifice. it is the novel he wrote from exile, and it is thematically about his exile. It is a novel that was written as a defense of the principles of a democratic republic, and as an encouragement for people to speak truth to power and stand against tyrants even when it came at great personal risk. But like... I'm honestly starting to respect Hugo's sacrifice a lot more now that multiple people have reached out to me claiming that it's ridiculous to ask that people starring in a musical adaptation of Victor Hugo's novel accept any level of personal discomfort to stand up to a modern dictator. I'm obsessed with the idea that Les Miserables shouldn't have to mean anything-- that these performers can cosplay as revolutionaries Risking it All to stand Up to Powerful People, while also being spineless cowards claiming they can't accept any personal discomfort/risk whatsoever to stand up to an actual modern dictator. Even when- again!-- they are starring in a story that is literally the product of Hugo's personal sacrifice standing up against Napoleon III! No, I wouldn't care as much if it were some piece of hollow corporate trash like "Back to the Future the musical" or some other garbage. I wouldn't' even care as much if it were another hollow "stick it to the man musical" like Wicked, where all the revolution theming is just hollow window dressing. I do care when it's Les Miserables, because the original novel was written by a man who WAS willing to make that personal sacrifice, and wrote the novel ABOUT that sacrifice. I care that now these people are making their living off of Victor Hugo's legacy-- but start crying about how "they're just poor smol beans who can't do anything uwu" when asked to make even a fraction of the sacrifice that he did, the sacrifice that Les Miserables is about, the sacrifice it exists to encourage. Thousands of people were out on the street demonstrating this weekend to send a message to Donald Trump-- and when this group of artists had a direct line to make a statement to him, the thing thousands of people are out on the streets trying to get, they cowered in fear and refused. Instead they sang to make him feel good, like he was the Hero of the musical--something he already believes-- all while playing pretend as brave revolutionaries making big risks. A democratic lawmaker was shot to death this weekend, but asking a performer to care about the meaning of the art they're profiting off of is "too big of a sacrifice." give me a break. Despite everything, I do think art means something. I think art is more than "a job," I think art is more than a hollow corporate product and vehicle for profit. Les Miserables means something, and it's important that it means something.

But that means it's also important to call out the shocking hypocrisy of what the story has been warped into. The novel does have meaning and even the musical does have meaning-- and that's why I am so outraged that people are dismissing that meaning as irrelevant. It's like Orwell's description of art in dystopia as being a simply "a commodity that had to be produced, like jam or bootlaces."

Honestly, if the actors wanted to sing songs about how it's ridiculous to ask them to take any personal risks or sacrifices to speak truth to power.... they shouldn't be in Les Miserables. Instead they should just get onstage and sing this song from The Sound of Music about compromising with Nazis for three hours:

[theswanhero]

MARGOT ROBBIE as Barbie BARBIE (2023) | Greta Gerwig

[theswanhero]

The Night of the Hunter 1955 | dir. Charles Laughton.

[theswanhero]

365 days of paceyjoey → day thirty eight

[theswanhero]

Before you came, I was all alone. It is bad to be alone. THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN 1935 | dir. James Whale

[theswanhero]

The Princess Bride (1987) dir. Rob Reiner

[theswanhero]

Andor Ever Been to Ghorman? | 2.04

[theswanhero]

Being murdered in cold blood is not nonsense. Why don't you try it sometime?

Audrey Hepburn as Regina "Reggie" Lampert in CHARADE (1963) dir. Stanley Donen

[theswanhero]

Annabel is a strong-minded girl. And her determination today, it seems, is to save her sister. One daughter's sacrifice for the other daughter's freedom. Nan's a clever girl too, of course. She understands the severity of what Jinny is about to do. And a young girl running away from her husband, taking his unborn child... She'd never make it. It could never happen. Nan and Jinny leaving together would be just two powerless young girls. But as a duchess... As a duchess, Nan has absolute power to protect her sister... her whole family.

THE BUCCANEERS (2023 - )

[theswanhero]

Walter: "You know, about six months ago, a guy slipped on a cake of soap in his bathtub, knocked himself cold, and was drowned. Only, he had accident insurance, so they had an autopsy, and she didn't get away with it"

Phyllis: "Who didn't?"

Walter: "His wife. Then there was the case of the guy who was found shot. His wife said he was cleaning his gun and his stomach got in the way. All she got was a 3-to-10 stretch in Tehachapi [a California women´s prison]

Walter: ...

Phyllis: [Wearily] Perhaps it was worth it to her.

Double Indemnity (1944)

Director: Billy Wilder.

[theswanhero]

A Boy Named Charlie Brown (1963) dir. Bill Melendez