one-paper-bag

[one-paper-bag]

i honestly forget that autism mums say 'autism won today' to mean like their kid had a meltdown and that they are ableist. like nooo autism win means something like i found something cool out about my special interest or i managed to avoid a meltdown or i got to infodump!!!!! autism win is good!!!!!!

[one-paper-bag]

Wizard worm just emerged from a wizarding hole! Lucky you!!!✨🪱🪄🍀

[one-paper-bag]

[one-paper-bag]

[one-paper-bag]

I had a very interesting discussion about theater and film the other day. My parents and I were talking about Little Shop of Horrors and, specifically, about the ending of the musical versus the ending of the (1986) movie. In the musical, the story ends with the main characters getting eaten by the plant and everybody dying. The movie was originally going to end the same way, but audience reactions were so negative that they were forced to shoot a happy ending where the plant is destroyed and the main characters survive. Frank Oz, who directed the movie, later said something I think is very interesting:

I learned a lesson: in a stage play, you kill the leads and they come out for a bow — in a movie, they don’t come out for a bow, they’re dead. They’re gone and so the audience lost the people they loved, as opposed to the theater audience where they knew the two people who played Audrey and Seymour were still alive. They loved those people, and they hated us for it.

That’s a real gem of a thought in and of itself, a really interesting consequence of the fact that theater is alive in a way that film isn’t. A stage play always ends with a tangible reminder that it’s all just fiction, just a performance, and this serves to gently return the audience to the real world. Movies don’t have that, which really changes the way you’re affected by the story’s conclusion. Neat!

But here’s what’s really cool: I asked my dad (who is a dramaturge) what he had to say about it, and he pointed out that there is actually an equivalent technique in film: the blooper reel. When a movie plays bloopers while the credits are rolling, it’s accomplishing the exact same thing: it reminds you that the characters are actually just played by actors, who are alive and well and probably having a lot of fun, even if the fictional characters suffered. How cool is that!?

Now I’m really fascinated by the possibility of using bloopers to lessen the impact of a tragic ending in a tragicomedy…

#tghe things i could do if i adapted little shop #the way i would make another film adaptation of it go so hard

[one-paper-bag]

a star going supernova or whatever. i don’t care it doesn’t even bother me i don’t think about it at all

[one-paper-bag]

[one-paper-bag]

[one-paper-bag]

the king has returned

[one-paper-bag]

Please don’t look at me like that you two

[one-paper-bag]

Look up victory in the dictionary, there’s a picture there of me!

Natasha Hodgson as Ewen Montagu in Operation Mincemeat

#him

[one-paper-bag]

[one-paper-bag]

[one-paper-bag]

got called into the living room because "they're talking about something you'll like on tv" and it was a documentary about arsenic poisoning

[one-paper-bag]

[one-paper-bag]

how did those guys who had to be the refuge kids laying w crutchie in letter from the refuge not start sobbing on stage

[one-paper-bag]

when i came out as trans i had an old friend from my church days message me to congratulate me and ask me for my name and pronouns. and i was shocked tbh cause he was such a head-deep-up-the-church’s ass kind of guy so i was super wary.

and after digging a little deeper i found out that he was very supportive of transness, saying that trans men are men and trans women are women

BUT

he also believed in the church’s gender roles meaning that trans women had to marry men and be submissive wives and trans men had to marry women and be strong christian husbands.

which is like ????

the weirdest and most surreal form of trans inclusive misogyny i’ve ever seen.