Thinking bout making an Inverted AU, just imagining everyone's personality being the opposite-- already biting my nail thinking of how I'm gonna approach Sarge's inverted self💀
This already looks cursed-(forgot to add Tex, but we already know she's wearing white armour 😭)
Did Simmons first, according to Google apparently the opposite of Ginger is Ash Green
What did I DO to him.
105 notes
·
View notes
I'm so tired of seeing people say RvB sucks like okay sure there are a couple bad jokes here and there, but thats like, it.
Red vs Blue is such a beautiful, beautiful show. The writing in every season is incredible, every single character is unique and lovable in their own way, just the amount of stories and plots there are is absolutely astonishing.
Every single story is heartwarming and emotional and suspenseful and captivating and hilarious and everything I could ever want from a piece of media. From sci-fi, to comedy, to tragedy, Red vs Blue is an all around amazing and beautiful show
If you really do think RvB sucks I dont want you here 🗣️
56 notes
·
View notes
Guys Who Are Multiple Guys Tournament, Semifinals
Evelyn
The alternate Evelyns are incredibly relevant to the way the movie plays out, and the movie itself is about love and identity and individuality and all those things, so she’s got the vibe. My friend suggested her :)
Church
“He's an AI copy of a scientist that was tortured into splitting himself into pieces, each of those pieces are different characters with their own names and identities. Although one is basically a copy of him” - User submission
186 notes
·
View notes
Actually I'm still thinking about it. Another interesting way in which RvB is anti-war is the way that the Director fills the role of a villain and antagonist (especially in the Recollections trilogy, where he's a faceless villain we never see but is responsible for everything that happens).
In his memos to the Chairman, the Director emphasizes his sense of duty and obligation to the military- he becomes irate for the first time when he feels that it's being implied that he was derelict in his duty... or that the work he did out of that duty is being criticized for being against the military's interests. He also talks about Allison's death in a way I find... interesting.
"You see; I never had the chance to serve in battle. Nor did fate provide me the opportunity to sacrifice myself for humanity as it did for so many others in the Great War. Someone extremely dear to me was lost very early in my life. My mind has always plagued me with the question: If the choice had been placed in my hands, could I have saved her? [...] But, given the events of these past few weeks, I feel confident that had I been given the chance, I would have made those sacrifices myself... Had I only the chance."
The idea of sacrifice is central to the way he talks about his wife's loss, to the way he talks about the war in general. He talks of sacrifice with a sense of veneration- that it's something he aspires to do, that he longs for. There's a few ways we can interpret "I would have made those sacrifices myself"...
-That in Allison's place, he thinks he would have laid down his life too.
-That if given the chance, he would have given his life to save hers.
But most interestingly...
-That he would have sacrificed Allison's life for the continued survival of humanity, if that was what duty called for.
...And personally, I think all 3 are true.
In most war media, the Director's perspective on sacrifice is very common. Sacrifice is glorious and heroic- to die in battle is an honour- and it's the only way to ensure the group you serve survives. This is a tool of propaganda- nobody wants to go to war just for the sake of it, you have to give them a reason that the risk of dying or being permanently disabled isn't just acceptable, but desirable. Beyond that, most people don't want to do things they think are immoral- you have to convince them it's important, a necessary lesser evil. You teach them to sacrifice their morals, too.
The way they train soldiers to follow orders and to kill, is to convince them that they, and the people around them, and the people they care about, will all die if they don't. It's drilled into your head from day one. It's the way they ensure their commanding officers won't shy away from sending their men off to die. The message is constant- sacrifice is your duty, and duty ensures your people's survival.
In the Director's eyes, the damage Project Freelancer caused was his sacrifice. He never got the opportunity to sacrifice himself during the war- so he sacrificed others, as military brass do. The Freelancers- including his daughter. The countless sim troopers. Any people he considered "collateral damage" on missions. And when the opportunity to do so presented itself, he sacrificed a copy of himself- Alpha- and he sacrificed a copy of Allison- Tex.
The very thing that derailed his life- the loss of his wife- he made it happen again. He put her copy in dangerous situations, let her exist in the position of constant repeated failure, created the circumstances that would eventually lead to her death. He put their daughter in deadly situations that nearly killed her repeatedly, provided her with impossible expectations leading to self-destructive behaviours in the name of duty, implanted her with two AI knowing they could cause her permanent harm. He was confident he "would have made those sacrifices himself" because he did.
The Director is the embodiment of the military war machine. As an antagonist, he is a warning against buying into the glorification of sacrifice. He's a condemnation of the idea that one should be willing to do anything to win a war- that duty to the military is the thing that ensures survival... All the messages that are pushed to ensure recruitment and obedience of soldiers.
He's a reminder that swallowing the propaganda leads to you doing terrible things... and in the end, you're a broken man left mourning the losses that you suffered even as you repeated them, convinced that it was all necessary.
69 notes
·
View notes
redemption in red vs blue, specifically with wash but we see shades of it in carolina and locus too, is portrayed not as something that is earned, but that is given. it is ONLY through being offered forgiveness and compassion that these characters are able to improve. wash kills, attempts to kill, takes hostage and generally antagonizes the reds and blues; carolina threatens and endangers them; locus attempts genocide. but wash is offered a safe haven, carolina is offered rescue, even locus is offered humanity by wash and santa. they don’t earn their forgiveness, they don’t even say sorry. they don’t deserve this compassion. they don’t deserve to be redeemed. but it is only through being shown this compassion that they are able to be.
i don’t know. it’s just. kind of radical. anti carceral? to say not only is there no one who is unworthy of redemption, but the way to redeem them is not to wait until they come grovel to you, but for you to go to them.
when wash is given a prison cell, he turns into a villain. when wash is given friendship, he turns into a hero.
315 notes
·
View notes