#it's so true that so many war movies that claim to be anti-war

[itsyveinthesky]

#important #it's so true that so many war movies that claim to be anti-war #are really anything but despite the horrors they claim to show #which is why all quiet on the western front was such a breath of fresh air #and I never want to see it again #i hope it gets all the awards #movi

[sagegarnish]

So I’ve been watching the wank about Deborah Chow referring to Obi-Wan and Anakin’s relationship as a “love story dynamic” through Episodes 1-6, and how she hopes to channel that in the series. 

“For me, across the prequels, through the original trilogy, there’s a love-story dynamic with these two that goes through the whole thing,” Chow said in the interview with Vanity Fair. “I felt like it was quite hard to not [include] the person who left Kenobi in such anguish in the series… What’s special about that relationship is that they loved each other.”

Well, first things first.... calling Obi and Ani's dynamic a "love story" in an official interview is clearly intended as a non-sexual one. I would go further to say it's not romantic in our modern definition, but would likely fit into "Arthurian romance" with themes of adventure, courtly (chaste) love, and chivalry. 

It's interesting to me how the anti-Disney rightwing are REALLY focusing on it as a “gross gay groomer” thing. Bigots and homophobes are using the very idea of Obi and Ani loving eachother as some proof that Disney is “encouraging grooming” and using it to fuel their current boycott.

Meanwhile... anti-shipper, pro-censorship, pro-harassment types are either claiming “people who ship Obikin don't understand Chow meant it to be familial! freaks are taking it wrong!" or they’re taking it literally as the rightwingers are and saying “this is disgusting, I can’t believe they’re making this gross shit canon”. They’re just as furious as the rightwingers, despite being ostensibly left and many of them being queer themselves.

However... it's OBVIOUS TO ME that what Chow said about the story is absolutely true, but it's about these men loving one another PURELY, CHASTELY, NOBLY.

There is actually no way that Chow intended it to mean a sexual romantic relationship. I firmly believe this simply fits along with the recent trend of marketing things as “bromance” or “unconventional love story” between stuff like buddy cop stories, to get clicks and sound like they’re skirting the edge of things, when all they’re doing is showing men loving eachother AS FRIENDS. Which is great as a CONCEPT. You should love your friends!

Is it fun to go "HAHA THE CREATORS SHIP IT! OBIKIN WINS. OBIKIN CANON"? HECK YES. BECAUSE I SHIP IT! BECAUSE IT’S A GREAT DYNAMIC. (my definition of “ship it” is “I simply enjoy thinking about their relationship, and the many permutations of it, specifically in a romantic/sexual way. I don’t particularly care if it becomes canon and I don’t want to pressure the studio to do it, and I also am not a tinhatter, as in I don’t think they wrote it intending to be that way. Well, Matthew Stover’s book is borderline... but I digress.)

Do I actually believe they're going to make them queer and IN LOVE with eachother? Of course not. Like, literally, they NEVER intend that. And I won’t be disappointed! I like the canon relationship AS IT IS! But watching people get bent out of shape and super homophobic and calling people names and attack others over this is wild.

It’s canon that Obi-Wan cares deeply for Anakin, and if you look at the movies 1-6 arc alone, it’s really evident that their relationship as it exists is VERY IMPORTANT for the entire Star Wars narrative. Obi-Wan ignores the warning signs of Anakin going darkside because he’s attached. He cares about Anakin. He’s BIASED, and he’s a Jedi and they’re supposed to be above attachment, above bias. Meanwhile, when Anakin is manipulated into thinking that Padme and Obi-Wan were having an affair or conspiring or keeping secrets or turning Padme against Anakin... Anakin is SO DEEPLY HURT by that because he trusts Obi-Wan. He loves Obi-Wan and he is sure Obi-Wan feels the same. The betrayal is so much worse because he trusted him, loved him.

The script and novels make it more overt, since we can’t see what’s inside a characters mind onscreen, but it’s still there.

Obi-Wan goes to Tatooine to watch over Luke, Anakin’s son. He does this out of love. Once again, it’s NOT SEXUAL LOVE. Not in the canon. But simply saying they love eachother isn’t sexual, and I’m sick of people getting hostile over it.

I’m very intrigued to watch the upcoming show, because making sure the canon love is expressed there as PART of the reasons for the anguish sounds like a REALLY COMPELLING story.

(I love that she said ANGUISH, I want these men to SUFFER)

#vaderwan #obikin #technically #but also not obikin at all #this is about their canon relationship #and why i love it #long post #star wars meta

[accio-victuuri]

CPN : the argument of XZ being “single” + my reflections

Let me start this post with one Candy that stood out to me today before we get to a more serious is it really lol topic. You may find a few other ones floating around but this one got me:

The BGM of GG’s Douyin video is from the Soundtrack of Suicide Squad. The same movie features the character of Joker, which they both love. Tho for things like this, I feel like the team just uses what’s popular on Douyin. What got me with the BGM is how it seemed like something you would use for a hiphop theme. They are literally showing how gorgeous XZ is, a pop song will be more appropriate.

Now that I gave a little sweetness, Let’s go to the main topic of this post.

If you haven’t seen this talk going around then that’s fine, in the grand scheme of things— it should not matter. With all the content going on from both sides and Bobo going back to being active on screen, this is not an important topic. However, it made me reflect on this issue and how fans operate. Also how as BXGs we should take this things and I AM SURE some really toxic people will use this as leverage to bully turtles. the whole talk of his relationship status has been gaining some traction lately because of a recent incident that @rainbowsky already detailed here.

Today, this account which is called Opinion Book mainly for 🍤 posted.

What is this accout you ask? It’s basically one that posts fan etiquette especially in times of discord. It has good intentions and I have found it to be a pretty level headed account that aims to pacify fans when things are chaotic. They allegedly also are able to directly communicate with XZS. They published what was “communicated” to them and a lot of it are no brainers tbh. Do not believe in melons and just wait for announcements of XZ’s new work. Do not follow him and his family during his private itinerary. Don’t start fan wars and be instigated by antis. However the cause of the buzz is this particular statement:

In addition, We have recently seen many rumors about the romance of the artist circulating on the Internet. False rumors have even risen to attack the artist himself. Although it has been a question and had been refuted many times, but we have made clarification again, all rumors are false. The artist is single. please don't be maliciously led by unknown people.

and well you guessed what happened. this has been taken as truth and an absolute confirmation that XZ is single and that all CPF should cease to exist. There is a lot to unpack here so I want to start with how credible is this account. What the hell are the “refuted many times” they are talking about?

1. I mentioned that I found this account as a good one. Is it necessary? I don’t think so. However I feel like it had to be made so as not to have a repeat of the 2020 fiasco and just in general to guide fans because XZ has a lot. Other celebrities may have way more followers than him like 80-100M on weibo but the difference is, his are very active. I still maintain my stance that the only official source of news is XZ STUDIO and Xiao Zhan himself, especially if it’s something personal. for dramas/endorsements/etc then the projects involved are definitely the true source. If a statement is not sealed, stamped and posted by XZS then it’s not be taken as coming for Xiao Zhan’s mouth.

2. The only “fan account” followed by XZS is the one with Patrick’s profile pic on it. It’s job is to clarify.

I’ve said it in the past that I don’t really have much love for Clarification accounts especially for personal matters. I understand some fans may want to clarify but I think it should be for career reasons, like if someone claims that GG is taking unnecessary leave on set because he is lazy or something.

3. The next question here is did XZS ever say that GG is single? Did the Patrick Account every say that he is single? The short answer is No.

Patrick Account refuted the following ( most recent and relevant ) :

• That GG is secretly married and has a child all because of a photo of him holding a baby was leaked. FYI, it was his friend’s kid.

• Li Qin dating rumors, the most recent one is because she was seen in the same restaurant as him. having dinner.

• The rumor that Antis love to spread : That he is dating his Manager 😂

All of these rumors were specifically marked as false. They did not say single. Just false and do not believe it.

As for XZ Studio, they do not mention the name of the other party. It’s what these studio accounts do. However people know who they are referring to because of what rumor is going on HS and is being talked about on that day. There are times they will just mention the User ID, and you just gotta look at what person is posting to get the gist that XZS is refuting it too. For example a specific account was mentioned and it had a lot of posts about XZ dating MZY. If they think it’s getting too much talk— they release some statement. But never that XZ is single. The message is always more on do not participate in talks like that and concentrate more on his works and your personal life.

The credibility of that account and it’s confirmation all boils down ( I think ) to the person reading it. As with all things in this day and age, you will believe what benefits you. Confirmation bias is very strong. The people who are screaming this from their accounts are the very same people who already had this idea in mind to begin with. For me the most interesting thing that even got me into making this post is what can we learn from this? I will try and make my thoughts/reflections as coherent as possible lol but here you go:

1. As a CPF and someone who believes in SZD, I always leave a percentage that I could be wrong. No matter how the evidence says otherwise. Am I mad and screaming right now? Obviously not. This incident comes at the right time because I’ve been talking recently about the fact that not all things should be made into a candy. That in order to be in this fandom, supporting them both, we should be fans of them as individuals and their work. If you are here solely for the candy, then sure, I will still welcome you but you probably won’t be here for much longer. This is why I get personally triggered when I see so/os say that all CPF do is candy and obsess about their relationship. Which is well, if you look at my blog as an example — it’s clearly not. We have to multitask like hell to keep up.

2. There is a bad side to being a CPF and that is when fans start getting too loud. CPNs and whatever are for BXG circles only. This is why I stopped participating in the whole “i wonder what solos would think” practice because I realized that I don’t need their validation. Candies are not for them. The reason why this talk has gained attention in the first place was because a certain CPF group started asking a third party about it. If that person knows who XZ is dating. Is it really that important? Should we really invite other people into this? Same goes with their friends, don’t ask them. Don’t DM them. It should remain in CPF circle of your own as a form of respect too. Especially if the type of CPF is more on a real couple and not a fictional pairing in a drama they starred in. The latter is encouraged and considered normal to be talked about.

3. Whether he is single or not, CPF should be allowed to exist. It’s always been a part of the fandom ecosystem. There are other pairings of XZ/WYB that i’m not fond of but it’s their life— they can do what makes them happy. I find it particularly harmful when certain fans invalidate CPFs just because of the possibility of the relationship we support not being real. I could ask them the same thing. Xiao Zhan will not marry you, so why the hell are you still acting like you’re his wife or that you own him? LOL. But I don’t cause i’m not an entitled asshole.

I’m pretty sure that on a professional level, if I’m an agency, it would be fine with me. As long as they are fan of my artist — we’re good. If you watch the shows, buy all the things. engage and just support the artist then it’s fine. All these animosity between solos and cpfs are made by fans. In the outside world, if you tell someone about this— I bet they won’t understand what the problem is.

4. The idea of a celebrity being single for an “idol” like XZ has layers to it. It’s not unique to XZ. Being single will appease a lot of the fans who still cling to the boyfriend fantasy. There is also the possibility of his contract having a clause that says he cannot publicize any relationship and must maintain the image of being an idol which is a story for another day. Also if a relationship is publicized, I am pretty sure it will eclipse all the professional work. It will also invite more shady individuals to get insider info and follow him around.

It’s ironic cause the same people were “happy” when XZ had dating rumors last year because and i quote— “he now has normal rumors about him.” LOL. Okay.

5. Going off the point above, I absolutely hate labeling XZ as an idol. It is not good for him and his brand to be on Hot Search because of personal matters and his relationship status. He is not some starlet who is only good for tabloid-esque news. He is an Actor. I don’t know if fans realize the hunger that XZ has to succeed in this profession. His name should be out there because of his career or if it’s related to personal content ( i.e photos ) that XZS shares. I personally get frustrated when things like this get traction — just in case people failed to get the hint— XZS posts when stuff like this is being talked about. It seems like their way of diverting the fan’s / people’s attention. Like “Hey, look, have something so you won’t be idle and start doing unnecessary shit.”

I am a BXG. I support XZ/WYB. I believe in SZD. I love their love. I am fond of candies and everything the community has to offer. My mindset at this point is really more of what are they gonna do next career wise. It’s what excites me and engages me the most at this point in my journey. I won’t order anyone to be in the same place because we go on our own pace and maybe one day you will get there. 💕

#bjyx #yizhan #my thoughts

[valkyrieandstrangeridingaragorn]

Hi I am not too familiar with all the details but have some questions. I hope you don’t mind answering them. I thank you in advance for your time!

I think Tony and Peggy are more of the ends-justify-the-means kind. Is that why you are anti them?

I’m firmly Team Cap, I admire his steadfastness in principles though I wonder about Steve’s unquestioning faith in the flawed American ideals. Could that be also why he didn’t suspect Hydra has infiltrated Shield? But is that also why he is even more against Sokovia Accords?

Could you comment on this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0XWTA1n-6M&t=27s ?

Hey there dear anon, I'm always happy to answer asks so thank you for yours. I wasn't expecting this to get so long so my most sincere apologies! Also, I get political on this one, just a heads up. More after the cut.

First things first: my main issue with Stark and Peggy is the framing. I like heroes and villains and everything in-between, it's the self-righteousness that I don't like and if the framing positions them as good people who have never done anything wrong in their lives it tends to get on my nerves lol If those two had been portrayed as what they are I wouldn't have minded them all that much.

That video was interesting (thank you for sharing) and I agree on certain points but disagree on others, mostly on the assumption that Steve believes the American myths, that "he's incompatible with a rejection" of those myths and he "can't coexist with an acknowledgement of the fact that America was built by slaves, etc".

And I disagree with it because while we don't have Steve openly talking about it, it's quite clear in his actions and words that those myths wouldn't be something he'd believe in. Steve is portrayed in these movies as a socialist, but not the way the Americans understand that word, he's a European socialist. He may not speak of immigration but he protects Wanda and is completely against her internment in the compound, he speaks of her and Pietro in AoU as kids who "are at war" - and that's a direct reply to Maria's "WE are not at war".

And this scene in AoU (yes it was deleted but still counts):

He takes off the helmet and fights without it. To me this shows he doesn't like that anyone would ever think of him as a fascist but he understands why someone would look at his suit and the flag it represents and come to the conclusion that he's "one of them". He's aware of the past, he's no fool.

In CW he may not speak directly of it but it is implied in his words that their job as heroes and protectors is not a matter of borders, he treats everyone exactly the same no matter where they're from - as proved in TFA when Erskine asks him if him being German is a problem and Steve immediately says no. Make no mistake, saying that is no minor feat, many people at the time wouldn't have been so sure.

Also, another thing I disagree with is that the video claims Steve is portrayed as the last bastion for truth and justice, etc and we have him and only him when it comes to defending those ideals, but that's not true at all. And I'm not referring to the other heroes, when he gives his speech in TWS his last line is "the price of freedom is high, always has been, but it's a price I'm willing to pay. And if I'm the only one then so be it, but I'm willing to bet I'm not". One of the best things about Steve is that he believes in people, he trusts that there are others just like him who have faith in the same values he does, and in TWS we see just that in Sharon, in that other guy who refuses to launch the ships, there are many people who can and do stand up to Hydra, and Steve knows that.

Then this "Steve represents the old-fashioned" as if that was a bad thing. People in modern times really need to acknowledge that the fights for human rights didn't start with Twitter. This belief that everything in the past was anti civil rights and if it comes from the 50's then it's necessarily conservative is just plain wrong. Whoever watches a movie from those times is very likely to see women having so much more agency than they do now, plots with feminist points and while yes, some of them might be misogynistic and racist, a lot of them are not.

Old-fashioned doesn't equate republican any more than modern doesn't equate progressive. When Steve is talking to Fury in TWS he admits the SSR did certain things that made it hard for him to sleep at night, that they had to "compromise". This line would seemingly agree with the video but the truth is Steve doesn't know even half of what was done in that time after he crashed the plane. Hell, he was surprised to hear about Zola and he didn't even know about Operation Paperclip until Natasha told him. What else didn't he know?

Also, to pretend that freedom and justice are inherent American ideals is hilariously ridiculous which is what the video does. Every time they mention Steve talking about them they seem to think he's parroting some weird fascistic republican views when that couldn't be further from the truth.

Steve is patriotic? Yes, of course. Why do they think he stands up to some people in the government? It's not because he's America-centric or believes that America was built by angels and there was nothing wrong done in how the country presented itself in the past, it's precisely because he knows it that he fights against it.

Those ideals are not specific to America and Steve knows this. He's the son of Irish immigrants who moved to the US in a time where they wouldn't be exactly welcome (we all have seen movies about this, Steve grew up during that time), he was disabled at a time where eugenics were in vogue, and he lived his early life in a specific part of NY where he'd be surrounded by artists and the leftist movement (as left as it can get in America, that is) and he went to Art School. Steve has never been conservative. [There are great metas on this site about this].

I get the feeling though that the video gets a couple things mixed up. I'm in Europe and with the recent rise of the far-right here the fascists have been parroting the same idea over and over again: that they're all about patriotism. And so they act like the flag, the anthem, the army... in short, anything that symbolizes their country is inherently their property. This of course is bullshit.

And so I think that seeing Steve wearing those colours makes the author of the video believe that he's in full support of the American way but that's not it. I can grab the EU flag and hang it in my room and that does not mean I'm fine with all the shit we have done in the past, it doesn't mean I don't acknowledge it or the mistakes we're making now. Look, I'm in Spain, I know what we did centuries ago. But the very act of loving one's flag is not justifying your past, it's acknowledging it and knowing you can do better, that you can be held accountable. The flag is not property of a few, it's property of the whole. And Steve wears it because he wants to do better. Also, the video should have made a distinction between Steve and Cap.

Regarding your questions, he did show he suspected Shield back in The Avengers when he discovered the Hydra gadgets and confronted Fury about it in the helicarrier. And yeah, he's completely against the Accords because they're a direct violation of civil rights. Notice how in the chat with Fury he's thinking of society as a whole, not just the US. It's not a matter of idealism either, Steve is not someone who thinks people should love each other and fly on unicorns, he's seen the worst of humanity, he's seen first-hand what people with power do, some of it good and some of it bad. That scene with Fury shows pretty well how both of them were raised in different times.

And last but not least, Civil War! The points the video makes are not exactly to my liking.

First they say Steve kept Stark in the dark about his parents' deaths: Steve didn't know it had been Bucky, he had no way of knowing it had been Bucky, he could assume it might have been him but he didn't know.

Then they claim what Steve does in the film is protect Bucky and frankly that point has been made ad nauseum and it's not true, Steve's stance against the Accords has nothing to do with Buck, he's against them in principle.

They also say Stark wanted to sign the Accords so they'll do "less missions" and "cause less carnage"? He wanted to sign because he felt guilty and didn't want any sort of accountability at all for whatever he did, that's all. The UN wasn't going with "let's sign these Accords so there will be less violence and more accountability" The accountability angle was propaganda, nothing more.

I do agree with one thing though, CW is not ideological and that's the writers' fault and Disney's. They didn't want to tackle that because the only way you can talk about it is by having the characters literally discussing civil rights for everyone. Imo if there's someone who portrays those 'conservative' American ideals it's Stark, not Steve.

But the thing I dislike the most is when they say "Steve's position is in the right and the America state in the wrong, an elected government legitimately elected by the people, and Steve stands against it". Yes, and? I don't need to remind anyone that Hitler was legitimately elected, do I? And we need to be careful when it comes to a character standing up to a particular action the government has taken and trying to paint that as the character standing up to the entire government - those two are not the same thing.

It's not that everyone in the US congress is a villain, it's that some are. It's not that the system is inherently wrong, it's that some people in it are doing it wrong and need to be held accountable. To claim that since people had voted for them they should be allowed to do whatever they want is... concerning.

So I'm sorry but no, I disagree with Steve being a paragon of America's exceptionalism. The movies are America-centred, that's for sure, but to claim Steve falls prey to that and he's some form of defender of those ideals, that he protects the belief that America never did anything wrong in history and that they're better than everyone else is a wrong assumption - believe me, if that was the case people like me wouldn't like him! Let me finish this with words from the man himself:

“I believe in the American dream. But THIS…this is some sort of NIGHTMARE!”

“You people telling me how I just don’t understand? When it’s you people—you clever people—who don’t get it. I don’t let people die because it’s the lesser of two evils, or expedient, or because it serves the greater good… I don’t compare the act against something else—I see someone who needs help… And I help. You think it’s a weakness. You think it’s simple… But you’re wrong. It’s what makes us human… Which is exactly what we’re supposed to be fighting for. I know who I am. I rescue the helpless. I raise up the hopeless. I don’t measure people’s lives… I save them.”

“Patriotism taken too far is fanaticism. No matter who you are or where you’re from. Foreigners aren’t your enemy, son. I’m the son of immigrants. When I was a kid it was my father’s people, the Irish, who were looked down on. Called filthy foreigners. Discriminated against. Is that the xenophobic America you want? All religions, all nationalities, we all want the same thing. To see our children grow strong. To provide safety to our families. To live in quiet times. Peace, son. Isn’t that why we became soldiers in the first place? To fight for a peaceful world?”

“There’s nothing patriotic about corruption or cover-ups…or defending them. But exposing them, well, that takes a hero.”

Sorry this got so long 🙊

#Steve Rogers #Captain America

[spider-xan]

Do you think it makes sense for Nemo to have joined the League at all?

I think you can definitely write entire essays on this topic with regards to both the comics and movie, but I'll try to keep my answer to this short and maybe return to write a more detailed post later.

From a Doylist perspective, even though Nemo is neither British as a character nor Victorian by virtue of being from French rather than British literature (the term 'Victorian' is technically only applicable to Britain between 1837 to 1904, not the entire world or the 1800s as a whole), if you're going to have a 19th-century character as your Victorian superhero team tech guy, Nemo is the most famous and obvious answer, plus the Nautilus makes sense as both a means of transportation and war machine, and as far as Western literature from the era, you're not going to find many characters of colour who are as famous and well-characterized if you don't want the team to be whites only and need someone to more explicitly comment on British colonialism, at least in the comics where that was overtly critiqued to varying levels of success and failure.

As for Watsonian explanations for Nemo joining the League within the universe, I think this is where the movie had a more plausible reasoning for his involvement, even if I think it softened him a little too much in terms of his attitude towards the British and wanting to atone for his actions against them - a world war that would threaten everyone, including the oppressed, and would eventually reach the sea itself has no borders and isn't an issue that would solely play to British interests, so I can see where Nemo would go along with the plan, even if it's not out of concern for the British Empire; the film novelization actually takes it further with a scene where it's noted that M (falsely) offered the possibility of negotiations for India's independence if Nemo joined, which may be a deleted scene, which also works and keeps his anti-imperialism and anti-colonialism beliefs.

By comparison, I never liked the comics' reasoning of his wanting another adventure and feeling so disconnected from humanity that he no longer considers himself Indian (though we later see that while he claims that, it's not really true), which feels flimsy and weak when he doesn't need the League to go on adventures and they ultimately didn't really do much in the way of adventuring anyway, especially Neko himself; with the cavorite plot in Volume 1, there is the pretence of an enemy of Britain stealing it to wage war against the British specifically if the League doesn't recover it, but I can't really see Nemo giving a shit about that.

#asks #lxg #league of extraordinary gentlemen

[samgphotography]

My mate posted this. He was so much more than Hagrid.

Robbie Coltrane passed away. I’d like to take this moment to highlight his impact on British Culture.

Without argument the highlight of his career was the Ghost of Christmas in Blackadders Christmas carol. (1988)

However his impact started as early as his role of “man at airfield” in the 1980 sci Fi masterpiece Flash Gordon. And who can forget his role as the CB voice in classic British sit com “are you being served?” Although the mid 80s proved triumphant for him with a role as Rhun, in the movie Krull, arguably an equally shit movie akin to Hawk the Slayer was it not for Jack Palance. Multiple roles in The young ones, French and Saunders and other sketch shows and various movies like Absolute beginners, as putting him next to skinny David Bowie might make him look like a half Giant. What few British comedic actors can claim to have supported Lenny Henry in the brief time he was actually funny? Not many.

As a true Scotsman, he nailed the role of “Man in a Bathroom” in a little known movie and easily forgotten sequel National Lampoons European vacation.

Star Wars actor Mark Hamill and Aliens foul mouthed kick ass commando Bill Paxton starred in Slimstream (of course you haven’t heard of it) but Coltrane stole the screen with the loveable best friend role of Montclaire. Clearly this catapulted him into 2 Bond movies, one of which was not shit and had a fucking awesome Nintendo game. And again showing his comedy chops alongside mildly famous Eric Idle in Nuns on the run.

Then a stint as quirky criminally minded perverse interrogator in the long running show “Cracker” showing all the best of a quirky, criminally minded perverse Scotsman.

Then sadly, he was type cast as a fat jolly fellow for some anti gender equality authors novel film adaptations who had the audacity to reuse the exact same fucking costume from blackadders Christmas carol, because they gave all the money to Hans Gruber and the kids. And he was forced to do that like 8 times. 11 if you include the Disney shorts to watch while you’re in line.

Rip Robbie Coltrane, who was so much more than just Hagrid.

[denimbex1986]

'At last count, Oppenheimer, the latest Wagnerian monument by the British film-maker, Christopher Nolan, has raked in over Rs 100 crore in India. While Oppenheimer is distinctly second to Barbie in the global box-office stakes, in India the situation is dramatically reversed.

The Indian cult around Nolan has always seemed to me somewhat curious and puzzling. Especially when you take into account that Oppenheimer is perhaps the most intellectually demanding of Nolan’s movies. At a running time over three hours, the movie straddles multiple timelines: the feverish climate of scientific discovery in inter-War Europe, the exodus of Jewish scientists in the light of the growing Nazi menace and their subsequent participation in the Allied cause, leading to the fateful development of the atomic bomb in the New Mexico desert in July 1945. Running parallel to these are post-War narratives that interrogate the titular character’s tragic fall, as he finds himself ensnared in the hostile web of McCarthyism. The movie demands more than a passing acquaintance with mid-20th century America: the Truman era, and the birth of the military-industrial complex.

Like the great cellist Yo-Yo Ma, Nolan’s immense popularity does a disservice to his intellectual seriousness and formidable artistic achievement. In what is also true of elite sport, the accessibility of the spectacle masks its complexity and depth.

Consider The Dark Knight trilogy which, once you get past the thrills, remains the most vigorous defence of the elite conservative worldview. In the trilogy’s prophetic conclusion, three years before the election of Donald Trump, Nolan’s argument was that even a flawed establishment is worth defending because what lies on the other side is demagogue-fuelled chaos. In recent years, Nolan has transferred the conservatism of the Batman movies to the 1940s — Winston Churchill’s evacuation at Dunkirk, the birth of the atomic bomb — the most recent epoch in history when white men reigned unchallenged, achieving things of global import.

Watching Oppenheimer in a Delhi theatre, I began to grasp the nature of the Indian cult around Nolan. What may appear to be benign fandom on the surface reveals pathologies, insecurities and psychological fears of elite Indians that go far beyond admiring a Hollywood celebrity director. Beneath such affinities lie deep cultural anxieties: hyper-masculinity, anti-intellectualism, and a fraught relationship with the West, craving acceptance and familiarity but also battling alienation and cultural incomprehension, what Ashis Nandy memorably termed the “landscape of intimate enmity”. These anxieties make the globalised Indian a troubled entity and, consequently, a large number of them fanatic votaries of Hindutva.

The masculinity thesis is the easiest to prove. A quick eye-test at the theatre put the gender ratio at roughly five to one. I had met many such men (derisively but perhaps not inaccurately referred to as ‘Nolan bros’) who claimed to have found definitive explanations to the director’s most opaque movies, deliberately curated puzzles such as Tenet and Inception, that seek not so much to provide answers but pose phenomenological questions about the nature of consciousness and existence.

As Oppenheimer intricately navigated the arcana of American politics and government — Senate hearings, security clearances — the movie’s detail tested the familiarity of even the most dedicated junkie of modern American history. Much of the audience seemed visibly bored, staring at their phones for long periods, not expecting to confront an oppressively idea-driven film. Two hours in, as the movie staged Trinity, the successful testing of the first atomic weapon in history, I could feel the audience relax, finally having been granted a morsel of visual grandeur.

Trinity is a deeply sobering philosophical moment in the movie that sets in motion Oppenheimer’s tumultuous internal conflict. As I took in the powerful sequence, cheering and clapping erupted in the theatre almost as if the birth of the atomic age and the prospect of nuclear annihilation was a wonderful thing. It struck me that the majority of my fellow film-goers had been watching an entirely different film; they had interpreted the movie through a lens which was both uncomprehending and illiberal. In the ambivalent character of Oppenheimer, they saw an undisguised hero, and the atom bomb to them was a spectacular technological event worthy of celebration. This confirmed something I’ve always suspected about Indian Nolan fans: that they love the visual operatic spectacle, drawn by the surface plasticity of what the West embodies, mostly without understanding even the barebones of the ideas upon which such spectacle is mounted.

It is, however, important to ask: why should someone born in Delhi (or Mumbai or Bangalore) be expected to fully absorb the very American story, at one level, that Oppenheimer seems to be telling?

That is unless we understand what torments the elite, urban Indian is not the perplexity of foreign cultures, but that they are strangers to their own civilisation that they for­ever trumpet as superior to every­thing else. As the Trinity explosion goes off, Oppenheimer, for whom the Bhagavad Gita remained the sin­gular metaphysical influence in his life, recites in his mind a verse from the text: “Now I Have Become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds.” The Gita citation is the birth of a remorse that would eventually drown Oppenheimer and yet this Indian audience was seemingly oblivious to the canonical Hindu text, the anguish and ethical doubt at the prospect of unleashing Armageddon-scale violence. It was plain that they were as incognisant of the Gita as they might have been of the scientific jargon and American specifics that populate the film.

I was reminded of a piece Aakar Patel wrote many years ago where he suggested the adherents of Hindutva had no interest in Hindu high culture. They were illiterate about their own classical traditions: art, music, architecture. Patel did not fault them for being unaware of the intricacies of Bach’s cello suites. “What about knowing something like Kumar Gandharva?” he asked.

As the end credits rolled, I was witness to another dissonant audience moment. In the concluding scene, Oppenheimer has a conversation with Albert Einstein, where he sombrely tells the famed, floppy-haired scientist that his work on the atomic bomb may have set off the world on the path of complete destruction. Following the conversation, the closing shot, hinting at a cascade of weapons testing, offers an alarming vision of a world with ever-greater capacity to destroy itself. The extraordinary affect of Nolan’s final act comes from how viscerally the movie conveys its pessimism and dismay about the atomic age, which seemed an unlikely cue for the rambunctious applause that followed.

As the lights came on, I felt an irritation but also pathos at my fellow film-goers. These were the subservient, bewildered children of globalisation; the primary audience to swallow whole the boosterism about India’s rising place in the world but culturally unmoored, lacking civilisational confidence and, therefore, psychologically defenceless against the cultural power of the West. For them to admit to being perplexed by the movie, let alone reject it, seemed out of the question. This uncritical adulation revealed a form of subterranean unease; almost as if they admitted to not understand or like Nolan, they would be forthwith ejected from membership of Westernised global citizenship to which they are so eager to belong.'

#Oppenheimer #Christopher Nolan #Barbie #The Dark Knight Trilogy #Tenet #Inception #Bhagavad Gita

[kurt-wagner-official]

Post #69: UXM issue 199

This is a very special issue to me, because it's the first X-Men comic I ever read. When I was little, I watched a lot of superhero cartoons, cause they were what was on and I liked them and so did my dad. My favorite ones were always the X-Men ones, and when I got older and started watching superhero movies, the X-Men ones were my favorite of those too. Then one day, I went to the library and found the comic book section. I went for the X-Men obviously. My library only carried the Essential Marvel TPBs, and the earliest one that wasn't checked out was volume 6, which started with this issue and went through the Mutant Massacre. I didn't really understand what was going on, especially with the Secret Wars II tie ins, but I was hooked. I can honestly say that this issue changed my life. It starts with Scott in the Danger Room, a sign that even though he was just called there to talk about Xavier, he hasn't really let go of being an X-Man. Moira calls him into the control booth, where she and Logan are waiting, and tells them that Xavier is dying. He doesn't want anyone to know, but he can't fool Moira's medical exams. She believes that that's why he's brought Magneto into the school, to take his place. Scott is shocked to learn his father might die before his child is born and angry that he might be leaving the school to a man Scott grew up fighting. In DC, Mystique goes to Valerie Cooper and volunteers the Brotherhood to become basically a Suicide Squad in exchange for protection from the recent anti-mutant bills. She's intrigued, and offers them a trial run to sell her on the idea- find and capture Magneto. Back in New York, Rachel visits Jean's grave and house for the first time. She reflects on the true moment of divergence in the timelines: in Rachel's world, when Jean went Dark Phoenix and visited her childhood home, her parents were afraid but didn't reject her, instead helping her bring the Phoenix under control. She goes to her grandparents' bedroom, where she finds the crystal orb that Lilandra gave to them. It contains an impression of Jean's personality that allows them to feel her telepathic aura even now that she's gone. Using the orb, Rachel summons the Phoenix Force and claims it as her birthright. She says she'll use it to honor Jean's memory, redeem herself for her crimes as a hound, and defend mutants from hatred and the world from the Beyonder. In DC, Magneto and Kitty are at the National Holocaust Memorial with Lee for an annual meeting where survivors and their relatives come to try to find people they lost track of during the Holocaust. Kitty is there on behalf of her late grandfather, who was separated from his sister. Miraculously, Magneto knew her, and so did an old couple that comes up to meet Kitty and tell her her great aunt died in Auschwitz. They also knew Magneto, and tell Kitty that he was an inspiration and a leader to them and many others in the camps. Mystique chooses this moment to reveal that she's been impersonating Lee, and the whole Brotherhood, now called Freedom Force enters the room. They have a new recruit, a weird six armed sorceress named Spiral, who's origins will be explored in the Longshot miniseries. Magneto tries to subdue them while Kitty goes to find where Lee is being held and call for backup. The X-Men get there shockingly quickly, I guess they all came to the Memorial and just waited outside with their uniforms handy? Anyway, Freedom Force has the initial advantage due to Destiny's instructions, but Kitty turns the tide by nerve pinching her. Destiny doesn't mind, though, saying their victory is inevitable. Peter gets his reunion and revenge on Pyro, Kurt teleports Blob up to the top of the Washington Monument and leaves him there, and if any readers still have the slightest doubt about Anna's loyalties, they should be persuaded by her knocking out Avalanche. Scott came on this mission, which seems like it should be a really big deal, but he got knocked out by Avalanche between panels and doesn't recover until the end, when he returns in the nick of time to kayo Spiral. The X-Men prepare to leave, but Magneto says he's staying and accepting his arrest. The looks of terror on his friends' faces when he revealed his powers reminded him of Magda, and he's tired of torturing himself questioning whether that fear is justified. He wants to stand trial and accept his fate, whatever it may be. Impersonating Magneto's girlfriend fo sneak into a Holocaust survivors meeting and then calling all her friends to wreck the Memorial is one of the most vile things Mystique has done. This is also a great showcase of mutant intersectionality; as interesting as it is, the mutants-as-minorities metaphor will never be as powerful as Magneto taking Kitty to the Holocaust Memorial. That doesn't at all mean the metaphor is weak; I think the vagueness of it is a huge strength, because it can fill in for so many different minorities. But it can't truly replicate the emotion of a tragedy that really occured and the bonding of the people affected by it. Now that I've grown up and read hundreds of X-Men comic books, this one doesn't feel quite as transcendent and groundbreaking as it did when I first picked it up, but it was still a very good issue with a special place in my heart.

#wes reads xmen

[toriasimmons]

Oh, hey, it’s been a while since I self-promoted my CBR work. Here are some favorites from the past months.

Agents of SHIELD Should Have Committed to Fitz Being a Villain (this is my anti-Fitz agenda in full swing, inspired by someone else pitching an article about greatest SHIELD betrayals and not mentioning Fitz on the list despite the fact that he threw everyone into a digital dystopia, killed several people, tortured his friends, and constantly lied to the woman he claimed to love)

Agents of SHIELD's Most Tragic Character Never Had a Chance (this is my pro-Kara Palamas agenda in full swing, inspired by someone else pitching an article about most dark/scary storylines and not mentioning Kara on the list despite the fact that she was 100% in a dark/scary nightmare)

My Little Pony: A New Generation Is Just as Progressive as the Rest of Canon (hot take, I loved the new MLP movie, and here’s why)

Twilight: Breaking Dawn's Surprise Battle Is Deceptively Brilliant (this movie is hilarious and this battle is hilarious and that is the end of that)

Guardians of the Galaxy's Most Tragic Character Got Justice - on CBS's Elementary (in my humble opinion, Kitty Winter was karmic justice for Carina, and this is how)

True Blood: The Truth Behind Its Vampires' Many Origins (this was edited by an editor who took out some of my favorite anecdotes but I still love it because I love talking about True Blood)

Twilight: How Each Cullen Family Member Became a Vampire (there’s the Twilight equivalent, which is still pretty interesting)

Black Widow Isn't Subtle - and That's a Good Thing (essentially, Black Widow was full of “we are not things” energy, and I wanted to talk about it)

The Fast & Furious Franchise Still Has One Big Character Who Should Return (#justiceandscreentimeforsuki2k21)

Rendering the Pre-Disney+ Marvel TV Shows Non-Canon Is a Problem (when the shows are great they’re really great and they’re also waaaaay more diverse than the films, and you can’t just be like “our first ___ hero” on TV and then pretend that didn’t happen and get accolades for your first ___ hero in the movies but there’s already been one and they deserve credit)

In the Heights' Film Adaptation Gracefully Adds Queer Representation (the non-slangy version of me talking about this, because holy shit it made me happy)

Inhumans: Crystal Amaquelin Was Actually Pretty Great (#justiceforcrystalamaquelin2kforever)

Elementary: Sherlock and Joan's Relationship Is Unique and Powerful (this is exactly what it says on the tin)

True Blood: How the Show Saved and Destroyed Tara Thornton (this is my pro-Tara Thornton agenda in full swing, inspired by someone else pitching an article that wanked Bill off and talked about how he was so tragic and mishandled and like... no, you are not allowed to say that when Tara exists [not to mention all of the other female characters])

Falcon and Winter Soldier: Karli and Other Female Villains Deserve Ghost's Treatment (REDEEM WOMEN LIKE YOU REDEEM MEN)

Falcon and Winter Soldier Had a Chance to Do Right by Sharon - and Failed Miserably (making Sharon a surprise villain FUCKING SUCKS)

Star Wars' SILLIEST Detail May Be the Ballet From Revenge of the Sith (Squid Lake. Squid freaking Lake.)

#agents of shield #anti leo fitz #kara lynn palamas #my little pony a new generation #twilight #guardians of the galaxy #elementary #true blood #black widow #2 fast 2 furious #runaways #cloak and dagger #daredevil #in the heights #inhumans #crystal amaquelin #tara thornton #the falcon and the winter soldier #karli morgenthau #sharon carter #star wars #shameless self promotion

[storiesforallfandoms]

pranks ~ cody fern

word count: 1569

request?: yes!

@kellysimagines​ “Can you maybe make a cody one where him and the reader have been dating before they both got on American Horror Story and they play also love interested and she is also a youtuber and one day she wants to prank him on set by scaring him and recording ir and him being in his costume and she also scares him at home and records everytning and when they are on an interview for ahs they show all the clips?”

description: in which she loves to scare her boyfriend, who claims to be afraid of nothing

pairing: cody fern x female!reader

warnings: swearing

masterlist (one, two)

“Is Cody in costume yet?” I asked the makeup person as she put the finishing touches on my makeup.

“He is,” she confirmed. “He’s waiting in his trailer to come get his makeup done. Why do you ask?”

My eyes flickered to my vlogging camera, which was set up in front of me, then to the closet that was just behind me. The makeup artist noticed my look and raised an eyebrow at me. “What are you planning?”

I looked at her through the mirror and simply smirked.

Nearly ten minutes later, I was tucked away in the closet with the door only opened a tiny bit. My camera was set up to film both the makeup chair where Cody would be sitting and the closet.

The door to the makeup trailer opened. Through the slight crack of the door, O could see my boyfriend walking in wearing his Michael Langdon costume. He sat down in the chair I was sat in minutes before.

As I expected, his eyes automatically drifted to my camera. “Is that (Y/N)’s?”

“Yeah, she left it here,” the makeup artist replied.

“She never just leaves her camera around. That thing is basically her life.”

“She was rushed to set for something and forgot it. Could you bring it to her when you go, though?”

Cody looked at the camera again, a slightly skeptical look on his face, but agreed anyways.

The makeup person started on Cody’s makeup. His eyes were closed as she applied the red eyeshadow to his eyes. Taking this opportunity, I pushed the door open very slowly, purposely causing the door to creak. I ducked away from the crack as Cody’s eyes snapped open to look at the closet.

“What was that?” he questioned.

“What was what?” the makeup artist asked.

“The closet door made a noise. I think it moved.”

“Probably something in there pushing the door open. Stop moving or we’ll have to start over.”

I covered my mouth to stifle my giggling. I hoped Cody couldn’t hear anything. I peaked out the door again to see his eyes were closed again. The makeup artist saw me through the mirror and smiled mischievously.

I pushed the door again, causing Cody to turn and glare at the closet again. “The door is definitely moving!”

There was a moment of silence where neither of them spoke. I decided to take this opportunity to pop out, screaming something intelligible and scaring Cody so bad that he toppled over from the chair.

“(Y/N)!” he exclaimed. “You scared the shit out of me!”

I couldn’t stop laughing as I collected my camera and filmed Cody on the floor, trying to recover from my scare.

“It was a good one though, wasn’t it?” I asked.

He playfully glared at me before starting to laugh as well.

~~~~~~

Some months later, I was laughing at the clip again, this time on a talk show with Cody. We were promoting Apocalypse and the talk show host had brought up mine and Cody’s relationship outside of the show, specifically my pranking videos on him.

“The amount of times she’s pranked me is a little embarrassing,” Cody admitted once the laughter died down. “I felt like I should’ve figured this out by now.”

“You trust me too much,” I teased and playfully bumped his shoulder.

“You really do,” the host agreed. “She has scared you so many times that there are compilations online that are upwards of 10 minutes long of her just pulling scaring pranks on you.”

At this, the host pulled up a shorter compilations videos of me scaring Cody at home, as well as another few times on set with the help of our co-stars.

It was true, I had pranked and scared Cody more times than I could count at that point. Besides just normal couples vlogs, my viewers seemed to be really into videos where I scared Cody. Whenever I asked on social media what type of content they’d want to see in upcoming videos, it would always be the same answer: “Prank Cody more!”

After it was announced that Cody would be playing Michael Langdon, and pictures and videos of him in his costume started coming out, it was like the requests for these pranking videos became more and more, especially after I was also announced to be on the show playing a meek witch that was charmed by Michael to help him do his bidding. Everyone wanted to see the fictitious anti-Christ being scared by his both on screen and real life girlfriend. After the first episode of Apocalypse premiered, some people even said it felt like a funny parallel to see me being the one in control in real life when my character was so timid around Michael.

I giggled as a video of me in my costume played, in which I popped out in the middle of a scene Cody was filming with Evan and scared the both of them. I got Evan so bad that he nearly hit me when he jumped. That clip became one of my most viewed for so long.

“(Y/N), why do you do this?” the talk show host asked, also chuckling along with the videos. “What inspired you to start filming these pranking videos?”

“I don’t know exactly how I came up with it, but I remember it started shortly after Cody and I started dating,” I recalled. “We had done a couple’s Q&A video on my channel and one of the questions asked was what scared us most. Cody had the audacity to say that nothing really scared him all that much, and that got the wheels turning in my head.”

“I never said nothing scared me,” Cody argued. “I said there was nothing I could think of at the time.”

“That’s the same thing!” I said. “If you can’t think of what scares you most off the top of your head, it means nothing scares you. Or you think nothing scares you.”

“Well then, what scares you?” the host asked me.

“Easy, the dark and spiders. I’m terrified of both. I always have to have even a tiny bit of light on at night, and if I see a spider I will start crying.”

Cody playfully rolled his eyes at my explanation, but I continued with my story. “Anyways, because he said that I had this idea that I wanted to scare Cody. So, I set up this prank where when he came over to my apartment next, I had the shower running. When I heard him walk in I started calling out and telling him I had slipped and badly injured myself but couldn’t get to the phone to call anyone.”

“That alone had me so scared,” Cody added. “I was terrified that she had done something to really hurt herself and had been there for a long time.”

“But, when he came into the bathroom, I was actually stood behind the door wearing a Ghostface mask and holding a prop knife from a movie I was working on at the time. Cody ran right past me to the shower at first, which made the scare so much better when he opened the shower and I wasn’t there, only to turn around and find me wielding a knife right behind him.” I couldn’t help but laugh at the memory. “He jumped so high and screamed so loud! I’m so glad I caught it all on video.”

Cody gave me a look and stuck his tongue out at me. I did it in return and smiled.

“After that, it just became a highly requested thing on my channel,” I finished. “People liked to see what I could come up with to scare Cody, and frankly I like trying to be creative to try and do it.”

“I don’t like it,” Cody muttered.

“Do you think you could ever get revenge on her?” the host asked Cody. “Or have you tried before?”

Cody and I shared a look before we both started laughing.

“Please,” I said. “There’s no way he could scare me. I know him too well for that.”

“I wouldn’t even try. She would figure it out right away I’m sure.”

Before anyone else could say anything, I felt a pair of hands grab my shoulders and someone scream in my ear. I screamed and jumped up from my seat, narrowly avoiding straight up punching whoever had grabbed me. The audience erupted into laughter and cheers and Cody and the host laughed together.

The culprit of my scare was one of the crew members, who was snickering as they ran back to their place on set. I watched with wide eyes before turning my attention back to Cody, who was still cracking up laughing.

“You jerk!” I exclaimed, hitting his arm as he just continued to laugh at me.

“I finally got my revenge!” he proclaimed. He stood to try and hug me, but I backed away with him. “Come on, babe. You have to admit that was clever.”

“Oh, I’ll admit it was clever,” I told him. “But you just started an all out prank war. No holding back now babe.”

Cody’s eyes widened to match mine, which the audience and the host laughed at again. I merely smirked at him before placing a kiss on his lips and sitting back down to continue the interview.

#cody fern #cody fern imagine #cody fern x reader #imagine #one shot #request #american horror story #fanfiction #fanfic #fandom

[just-antithings]

As someone who used to casually ship harry/hermione (H/Hr)... holy shit the batshit fuckery that went on with the self-proclaimed Harmonians! They were pretty much anti-prototypes. Fandom Wank, a community for reporting fandom drama involving adults, featured them so much that they had to start a separate community to not be overrun. And it was 100% deserved, especially after the sixth book! Their the reason the trope for character bashing is "Ron the Death Eater" for a reason! Some highlights from the top of my head:

- taking anything and everything in the books, movies and interviews to be hints to Harry and Hermione's Pure and Sacred Love, including JRK saying they were platonic friends. Because see, platonic love is totally The Highest Purest Romantic Love (and yet so many H/Hr fics had her turn hot over the summer…)

- my memory's a bit fuzzy on this, but mods from a Harmony forum invited people from Mugglenet to have a chat. The members weren’t told about this, because their reaction was to go “OMG we’re being infiltrated!”

- Literally argued it'd be unfeminist if the books didn't end with H/Hr. Implied at first, didn't take long before people said it out loud.

- the comparison to slavery mentioned by the other anon. Were the ship wars viscous? Oh hell yeah. Were Harmonians poor innocent victims unjustly prosecuted by everyone else? Bwahahahano

- insisted that Harry/Ginny (H/G) is incest-lite because his mother was also a red-head. Because auburn hair and green eyes is exactly like red hair and brown eyes. Later on they'd argue it'd be incest because Harry sees the Weasley's as his family.

- took JKRs joke about Hermione "acting on her own" while writing to mean that book6!Hermione wasn't the REAL Hermione because she's supposed to be The Heroine and Harry's Equal dammit! Aka canon!Hermione kept following canon characterization instead of their Mary Sue-headcanon.

- JKR was unable to be at the premiere of the fourth(?) film because her husband suddenly got very sick. Harmonians seriously claimed she faked it so she wouldn't have to face “her disappointed audience” over the non-canon H/Hr. For context, no one outside of fandom cared about ships that much or… at all.

- insisted after the later books that the movies would correct things by ending in H/Hr.

- One Harmonian did a rewrite of the 6th book so it’d be H/Hr. Wait, did I say rewrite? Sorry, I meant “outright plagiarized it, only changing enough so Hermione was a Mary Sue*, the Weasley’s demonized, and she and Harry turned into an OOC sickeningly sweet couple whenever they were next to each other”. It got slapped HARD with a C&D. The plagiarist swore she would somehow “get out the true version”. She got support for this by the other Harmonians.

*I still vividly remember a scene where, in canon, something lands hard enough on the bed Hermione and Ginny were sitting on that they bounce off to the floor. In the “rewrite”? Only happened to Ginny, while Hermione “graciously landed on her feet”.

- You were considered suspicious if you shipped H/Hr and liked Ron, Ginny, and the Weasleys in general. I left a forum over this shit, and was told later that people kept excepting me to “reveal” myself as a shipper of H/G, Ron/Hermione, or both… and were genuinely confused when I didn’t. (that came about a decade later. Multishipping ftw!)

Sorry for the TLDR.

😬😬😬😬

#incest mention #slavery mention #mod erin #ask

[antiloreolympus]

8 Anti LO Asks

1. the thing is like even the poets we draw from get critiqued too. a lot of people thought hesiod was an evangelist with an agenda to push, homer (if they existed) was often lampooned for contradicting lines and spending too much time making lists than developing the story, aeschylus and euripides were both seen as biased and cynical and were often mocked, along with many more, and yet LO fans think their kiwi tumblr fave is somehow above all of them and shouldn't be critiqued? Get over yourselves

2. the problem with the 'make your own story" argument is that, assuming you try to retell hxp at least, youll have LO fans attacking you for "stealing" from rachel, who in turn never promotes or supports other retellings unless it adheres to her worldview (such as OSP). say what you will on punderworld or ficlets, but they always prop up lesser known creators with their platforms, meanwhile rachel when tasked with helping others (like Lets Play) she made it about herself. that speaks volumes.

3. a lot of LO fans think antis are just randomly haters but that's not true. Most of us were once devoted fans who couldn't ignore all the issues anymore and who still remember when it had promise and effort put into it, not the rushed husk it is now. It isnt just blindly hating it, it's being annoyed & disappointed of what could have been and how much the comic has declined and how the fans refuse to acknowledge its faults. How would we know how badly its gone down if we weren't fans once?

4. idk man i wouldnt tell people who dislike lo to make their own comics because those end up being way better. reylos did the same thing to disney over how badly they hated the last star wars movie and now their fanfics are becoming NYT bestsellers. just saying.

5. Maybe I'm dating myself here but one of the funniest parts of fandom used to be the most devoted fans calling out the bad stuff in what we liked and discussing it, because it was fan to pick it apart and clown on it. IDK why now LO fans and people like them are so convinced they can only mindlessly praise with no dissent and all critique is invalid. It's basic critical thinking skills that one can like something and still acknowledge the flaws. It's a bad look to admit you can't do so IMHO.

6. lo fans really need to get off this high horse that lo is perfect and therefore can never be criticized. even the best pieces of work ever have actual things to critique within them, and lo is not somehow better than all of them  to not be critiqued as well. its an ever growing list of issues lo keeps adding up because of who is behind. sorry, rachel, if you want sole credit for the writing and art, you have to own all the critiques too, and the fans needs to accept it. 

7. sorry, LO fans, but we are allowed to critique a work that gets so much privleges that even other webtoon creators dont get (seriously, the majority stull have to live off commission work while working on a full time comic) meanwhile rachel gets away with bad writing, cliffhangers that aren’t resolved for years, worsening art, and her bad and entitled attitude all while the company constantly promotes her while the majority of their catalog doesn’t, she has a full team rushing work for her while she at best does sketches and the occasional banner art, and gets her a bunch of media deals that the rest won’t ever get even a scrap of, all while already being a well off, privileged white woman who cries to her thousands of fans when her ego is bruised because more and more people are noticing her shitty politics and morals put into her work and are rightfully calling it out. at the very least you’d think someone in such a high rank at one of the worlds biggest media houses would actually put in the effort to make the best product she can and respect the people and culture she’s making bank off of, but she’s not and frankly does not seem like she ever will. She quite literally said it’s HER story and she’s allowed to do what she wants with it, and has spoken over Greeks time and time again that their input doesn’t matter over her personal feelings and thoughts. you don’t see other people in her position who also made bank (such as Rick Riordan or Madeline Miller) treat Greece and it’s people so awfully as her, her fans, and her product do, yet she gets all the excuses in the world while the above mentioned and others work on their mistakes and try to always put their best products out there, all while respecting Greece and it’s stories and even giving platforms to the underrepresented, meanwhile Rachel herself can’t even keep colors in line or keep designs on model while her writing gets more and more nonsensical, with her status only going to enrich herself and her ego while the rest are clinging to survive. God willing, maybe another mythology webtoon will be picked up to give her some competition and actually force her to put in the work for the rewards she earned off the backs of others, and that can’t happen soon enough.

8. NGL, kinda funny that LO Stan defends it by claiming people who dislike it are just “hacks like the woman behind 50 shades” like … uh … you know LO is ripped off from 50 shades, right? Like quite literally, it’s almost point for point exactly the same as 50 shades, down to the CEO with mommy issues and BDSM mixed with weird obsessions over a college girl’s virginity and a jealous ex who is into it versus the pure MC. Rachel is literally the hack ripping off 50 shades that that stan is claiming antis are. Wild stuff.

Anyway both the 50 shades woman and Rachel owe Stephanie Meyers a lot of money Bc they both in turn just ripped off Twilight anyway lol

Based on this post:

https://alatismeni-theitsa.tumblr.com/post/663420719494053888/why-not-write-a-take-of-your-own-on-the-myths

#anti lo #anti lore olympus #lore olympus critical #lo critical

[twh-news]

Tom Hiddleston on The Evolution of Loki: From Villain to Hero and Back

After playing the cosmic superbeing and anti-hero Loki for a decade in six Marvel Cinematic Universe movies, actor Tom Hiddleston says he was “surprised, delightedm and in some ways completely thrilled” by the notion of continuing to personify the God of Mischief in the new Marvel/Disney+ series Loki.

“When I first started playing the character, I did a lot of research,” Hiddleston tells Den of Geek. “And the thing I realized at that time was the character has so much range and contains all these different characteristics sometimes which contradict each other. I loved what Marvel Studios had invented as a context for exploring and externalizing some of these things that he’s always contained.”

In Loki, an earlier version of the character than the one we have seen in recent years manages to escape the custody of the Avengers in 2012 with the help of an errant Infinity Stone. But he inadvertently creates an alternate timeline by doing so, bringing him to the attention of the extra-dimensional bureaucracy known as the Time Variance Authority, who are charged with keeping the timeline secure.

“I think the TVA, the institution that claims to govern the order of time, is a fascinating place to put Loki,” says Hiddleston. “Loki represents chaos and mischief and transgression and disruption, and he’s playful and charming and can be very dangerous. To have these two forces of order and chaos meet in the middle is really exciting.”

We first met the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s version of Loki, God of Mischief and member of the royal family of Asgard, in 2011’s Thor. He was a loyal brother to the title character and a dutiful son to Odin, ruler of the Nine Realms.

But doubt and ambition began to quickly chip away at Loki, especially once he found out he was not a true Odinson but the child of Laufey, leader of the Frost Giants, taken by Odin after the last major war between the Asgardians and the Giants.

Feeling hurt, betrayed and passed over in favor of the full-blooded Thor, Loki schemed to align himself with Laufey and his people, bring down Thor and Odin, and rule Asgard himself.

Defeated at the end of Thor, Loki survived a plunge into the void of space and aligned himself with the Mad Titan, Thanos, gaining possession of the Tesseract, vessel for the Space Stone, and leading an army of Chitauri to invade Earth in 2012’s The Avengers.

Although he was beaten back by Earth’s Mightiest Heroes in that epic battle, Loki would appear in four more MCU films — Thor: The Dark World (2013), Thor: Ragnarok (2017), Avengers: Infinity War (2018) and Avengers: Endgame (2019). Over the course of the first three, he would gradually evolve from a complex villain into an anti-hero of sorts — fighting once again alongside his adopted brother — and finally into a hero who sacrificed himself in a doomed, fatal bid to stop Thanos.

But it’s in Endgame that a trip back to 2012 by several Avengers goes astray and allows that version of Loki — the still unrepentant trickster who just tried to conquer Earth — to snatch the Tesseract and vanish into space and time. So the Loki we meet in the new series is not the regretful and ultimately noble warrior who gave his own life in Avengers: Infinity War.

“I had to un-stitch some of the evolution that Loki had gone through in The Dark World and Ragnarok,” says Hiddleston when asked about resetting the character back to an earlier stage in his development.

“It was kind of like time travel in its own way, because I was going back to a time when I performed the character again in a particular context, in the first Avengers movie,” Hiddleston elaborates. “It was really interesting, because obviously Loki hasn’t lived through the successive evolution, but I have. I actually have real memories of doing those things. It was a really curious day at work.”

For director Kate Herron, who is guiding Loki’s progression as a character through all six episodes of the series, picking up with the God of Mischief as he was nine years ago was a “unique opportunity.” She explains, “I’ve loved Loki’s arc over the last 10 years of Marvel. I just was so pleased that I got to be the one that goes back in with him.”

Herron continues, “But he’s from Avengers, so he’s in a very different emotional head space. A really cool question I wanted to explore in the show was, is anyone truly bad or truly good or in that gray area in between? I feel Loki lives in that gray area so often for so many of the films. That to me was really exciting — can he move past decisions that he’s made in his past or will he always be defined by them?”

Although Hiddleston has had other successes on the stage, TV and in the movies — including hits like The Night Manager and Kong Skull Island — Loki remains his breakout role and, for millions of fans, the one that defines the actor in pop culture. But even after inhabiting Loki for more than a decade (and perhaps more to come), Hiddleston is careful to separate himself from the character.

“I can tell you, I am not an iconic character from ancient Norse myth,” he says with a laugh. “That’s not one of the strings in my bow, as it were. (But) I found him such a fascinating character and I understand that he means a lot. He means a great deal to a great number of people and that something he represents is something that’s part of the experience of being alive. He is unpredictable and spontaneous and playful, but he’s also emotionally complex and there’s some fragmentation there.”

As for the appeal of Loki, Hiddleston adds, “I think his kind of chaotic energy is something that people are drawn to, as well as his vulnerability at the same time. Tricksters in all mythologies occupy this position, that you can’t ever pin them down. You can’t put them in a box or categorize them. It has been a real honor to step into those shoes for the time that I’ve been able to do it. Loki will live on in the minds of human beings for some time, I think, and I’m just a temporary passenger.”

#loki #loki series #tom hiddleston #interview #kate harron #den of geek

[ladybirdwithoutdots]

do you really need to bring shipper wars in the Austen fandom too?

Full offense but people who deny Emma is in love with Mr Knightley and hate on him because they ship her with Harriet, and pretend she should’ve ended up with her, are bullshit.  I’m tired of these posts (including the Harriet stans whom I saw bashing even in some emma/knightley posts when fans of the latter are the first to make cute posts about Harriet too), and honestly, you all just make me feel very negative about Harriet and unable to truly appreciate her scenes with Emma.

Maybe I just don’t care about being a bitch but here’s what an Emma fan who is just tired of the anti Emma/Knightley crap honestly thinks about your nonsense:

Hating on the last Emma adaptation because Emma is in love with Mr Knightley and marries him in the end is as disingenuos and idiotic as hating a Pride and Prejudice adaptation because Darcy and Elizabeth are in love. Le duh!  You can ship him with Bingley and her with Charlotte (or Wickham, if that’s your mood I’m not judging shipping choices here) but if you watch a movie based on an Austen’s book you know what you are getting yourself into, especially when her canon romances tend to be very important plot elements for the protagonists and their character growth. 

I get it’s 2021 and hating all het romance makes some people feel woke and edgy, and I totally get alternative readings and things like that, but out of ALL Austen ships and all her female heroines, Emma is the one female character who doesn’t even need, neither want,  to get married and truly only does that in the end because she is in love.  Emma is the LEAST Austen heroine whose romance you should even question because she honestly only married the guy because of love and no other reason.   Furthermore, unlike most of romances from that time, the guy Emma marries isn’t just some random guy she has met two seconds ago, it actually is her best friend, someone she knows since years and the one person who knows her best and loves her in spite of her flaws. Austen was very forward for her time with their romance, especially given the fact her male love interest actually decides to live with Emma and her father in the end instead of doing what every married man had the right to do at the time (take his wife to his own home where she’d have little to no power). Knightley and Emma are the (original) best friends to lovers relationship. He’s the best friend Emma had loved from the beginning without realizing it. It’s one of the main points of her story and the great irony of the novel that she thinks love isn’t for her, and she had never been in love, but she already is in love with him without realizing it because of their friendship. I’m sorry bro but that had never been Harriet, and it seems hypocritical tbh for some of you to want to give Harriet the story that Mr Knightley has with Emma, all the while hating on him and the romance. Even with the last movie, you have people take quotes de Wilde said about Knightley and Emma (e.g., the one about the movie making you think about ‘the best friend you maybe should have kissed’) out of context to manipulate others into thinking she was talking about Harriet instead (and queer baiting, which would be homophobic)

On one hand, we really do need more stories that put an emphasis on female friendships too and on other relationships that aren’t just the romance. On the other hand, it’s completely useless for writers to try to give us that  (e.g. de Wilde in the last Emma) if everytime two characters care about each other and share screentime together, people claim that relationship (and all scenes that make perfect sense with a normal platonic relationship) must be romance and romance only. It’s almost as if some of you never had a friend and therefore believe that everytime a character cares about another character they must be romantically in love with them. It also makes me believe, more than anything, that romance is the only kind of love that exists or is important for many of you. And if that is the truth, why even bother with fictional friendships then? Why even complain when writers don’t give us that if we are unable to appreciate those relationships as something of equal importance with romance?

I really can’t take people serioustly when they overinflate Harriet and her relationship with Emma all the while they minimize Emma/Knightley’s mutual feelings.  I read people who apparently find it harder to erase Harriet’s baseless crushes on every guy who gives her attention, than erase the actual love story and feelings of the protagonist! Tbh, even if you wanted a gay adaptation of Emma (and not one that is that just for the sake of), it would make much more sense to simply turn Mr Knightley into a female character, therefore still respecting the canon couple and Emma’s character arc, than ship her with Harriet. The latter is a weak alternative and frankly baseless for me because the only things she and Emma have in common is the fact they are both girls and they have an ‘e’ in their name. Full stop. Intellectually, Harriet is no match for Emma and their ranks in society are so apart that their relationship could never ever be equal (and it never was). I don’t want to be harsh but tbh I was never convinced they are actually friends in the novel, and the last movie made it even worse for they emphasized Harriet’s blindness about Emma’s feelings, and how one sided that dynamic is for it’s just Emma who makes an effort to be a friend in the end. Let’s be real here, Harriet doesn’t even know Emma and never really acts as a friend to her, unless your definition of friendship is ‘someone who worships you, and pretends you are the best and right even when you aren’t, as long as they perceive you as a savior who can help them'.  That’s not what being a friend means to me. It speaks volumes to me that the one and only time movie-Harriet actually notices that Emma is a human being with flaws and feelings too is when she gets angry because Emma wants the same guy she wants. I don’t know if Austen’s ‘naive and completely clueless Harriet’ is worse or better than de Wilde’s version but the latter really emphasizes one of the biggest issues of Emma/Harriet even more, to me. As a book Emma fan, before an adaptations fan, I read all kinds of comments about this novel and character but honestly, I never read any real convincing argument why Harriet and Emma should be a couple instead of her and Knightley. Most of what I read boils down to people taking things out of context and/or claims that Harriet is ‘better’ for Emma just because she’s a woman and she agrees with her all the time, while Mr Knightley is the bad guy because he’s older than her (he’s only 37, btw) and criticizes her ( as if Emma doesn’t need someone to criticize her, and her character growth isn’t dependent on precisely that). I get some people wouldn’t like to have someone who is criticizing them but worshiping someone is =/= being their friend or appreciating their real qualities. I also read people point up how much Emma praises Harriet in the book as proof that she’s in love with her, but the same ignore the many instances, especially after Harriet tells her that she loves Mr Knightley, that truly show Emma’s real colors and how much she still considers Harriet her, and especially Mr Knightley’s, inferior to the extent she regrets their friendship and thinks Harriet is ‘uppity’ for thinking Mr Knightley would ruin his reputation to marry someone like her. When I read those arguments it seems, if anything, that people want to have the cake and eat it by saying that Austen’s own story doesn’t matter (and she doesn’t understand her characters’ real feelings) when it comes to the things those people don’t like (eg the fact Knightley is the one Emma is in love with and all the explicit hints about that ), all the while still selectively using some of her writing to support their alternative version of the story. Now with the last movie adaptation, it’s even worse for me. It’s telling that the two scenes people romanticize as pro Emma/Harriet are two phrases/moments that actually emphasize the bad side of their relationship, and why their friendship isn’t good for either of them. The first is the scene when Emma says she ‘wants to keep Harriet for herself’: not only there is nothing romantic about that ( that line is in the book too as well as Knightley’s ‘your infatuation is blinding you’. You are reading a book written in 1800 with modern goggles though, and that alone doesn’t really work) but that phrase should actually make you cringe for it emphasizes how selfish and manipulative Emma is by treating Harriet like her new pet project just because she’s lonely. She doesn’t care about the girl’s feelings for Robert Martin, and what is truly the best for her due to her rank (and how dangerous it actually is for Harriet to not marry and find someone who can offer her protection), even if it’s what she tells herself, she only cares about her own desire to have a new female friend because she lost Mrs Weston and she feels lonely and bored. It’s also true, though, that she is still lying to Mr Knightley too because she does actually want to match Harriet with Mr Elton, that which is obvious in the other scenes, but even that is an expression of Emma’s selfishness and not really a hint of her caring, let alone loving, Harriet as a human at this point. If you read the book, it’s particularly obvious given the fact that Emma isn’t blind about Harriet’s feelings for Robert Martin for she knows that her behavior is bad and the girl actually cares about the guy, but she manipulates her into thinking Mr Elton is better because it’s her choice and she prefers him (until he proposes to her, of course. Then she thinks Mr Elton is trash for being so arrogant to believe someone of his rank could marry her) The second phrase people romanticize is only in the last movie and it’s that annoying ‘I refused Robert Martin because of you’ phrase by Harriet later in the movie. I hate that because, once again, that phrase has nothing ‘romantic’ about it unless you obviously ignore the context and what is actually happening there. Harriet is being passive aggressive with Emma there, gaslighting her and blaming her for the loss of her first suitor BECAUSE HARRIET WANTS MR KNIGHTLEY for herself. Harriet is angry with Emma there because she realizes she loves Mr Knightley TOO and Emma has more chances than her. The most likely sentiment behind that flippant phrase for me is something along the lines of Harriet impulsively telling Emma to move aside and let her have Mr Knightley because she made her lose Robert Martin already. She is trying to make Emma feel guilty, subconsciously or deliberately, but this surely is how Emma herself perceives Harriet’s words too for the poor girl really thinks it makes her a bad person to accept Knightley’s proposal in spite of loving him back. Harriet made her believe she was stealing her man and yet, AND YET, had Harriet been a real friend, to begin with, she should’ve realized Emma’s feelings for him way before she deluded herself into thinking the guy wanted her. But Harriet never cares about Emma’s feelings and even their reconciliation in the end is all, still, about what Emma needs to do for her. Not a word from Harriet about being happy for her friend too. Nothing.

Listen, I really appreciate de Wilde’s attempt to make the Harriet/Emma dynamic better than it is in either the novel or other adaptations, even if it personally doesn’t convince me it’s friendship. But I get it. Like I said at the beginning, it’s important that movies display different kinds of love too beside romance and if you can’t do that with characters like Emma who are the protagonist then when you can even do that? I think it was valid for her and Catton to want to emphasize the fact that Emma, at her core, is truly young and lonely and she doesn’t have friends in the truest sense of the word (Mr Knightley is one, of course, but their point is more about her having a female companion too whom Emma could do more ‘girl’ things she can’t do with her husband or father) but, honestly, I maintain no adaptation ever truly got their relationship right. No one.  Overrating them and pretending that they are best friends forever when there is no substance for that is as incorrect as an interpretation of Austen’s writing as it is treating Harriet as a silly girl Emma barely tolerates. I appreciate the movie shows Emma’s conflict about Harriet when Knightley proposes to her because most of adaptations don’t do that: in the book she really, for a moment, feels so bad for Harriet and feels simultanously happy Mr Knightley loves her but also bad for taking the guy Harriet wants. She is no hero who wants to give up about him to let Harriet have the guy instead, though, but it isn’t like she doesn’t care either. She does and it’s a source of anguish for Emma and part of her character growth that she actually cares and feels empathy for Harriet.

However, if you want Emma to have a real female friend that’s not Harriet and that’s not really the story Austen wrote and the role she gave to Harriet. Like many academics pointed up, like many of Emma’s ‘mirrors’ in the story, Harriet is put there by Austen to emphasize Emma’s immaturity at the beginning and the fact she deliberately doesn’t choose her equals as friends and picks Harriet, instead, as her new pet project because her inferiority makes her easier to manipulate and, like Mr Knightley very eloquently points up, she makes Emma feel superior and more accomplished than she is. Emma doesn’t want to be friends with Jane, for example, because not only she could be more her equal but she actually does see her as superior in the aspects that make Emma the most vulnerable and insecure.

It’s great the movie gave more space to Emma’s relationship with Harriet, and I get that if you want to put the spotlight on female friendship too it’s either Harriet or Mrs Weston but also, let’s not pretend the movie wasn’t focused very much on her romance with Mr Knightley too, perhaps more than other adaptations did. People commend this adaptation for showing his feelings for her more and it’s true, but I will also argue that this movie does emphasize her feelings for him more than adaptations usually do for you really see Emma’s feelings and jealousy towards him before she even realizes her feelings. It’s obvious since their first scene when she’s waiting for him and runs to her piano because she wants to get noticed by him. Her breath constantly hitches when he’s close to her or because of her feelings for him, and she definitely reacts to dancing with him. She may not know her feelings from the start, she might be in her own ‘work in progress’ to figure everything out, but the movie makes it obvious to me that she loves him. If there is any adaptation where you want to be disingenuos about their chemistry and deny their romance, this really isn’t the one tbh. Look, if you want to headcanon Emma as bisexual you’ll find me agreeing with you, but pro LGBT readings and actual representation doesn’t mean, for me, shipping two characters together just because they are the same gender and the writers make them care about each other a bit, or give them screentime. Like I said at the beginning, if I wanted a gay adaptation of Emma I’d rather make Mr Knightley a woman than ship Emma with Harriet or Mrs Weston or Jane. Because regardless their genders, it’s the Knightley character the one Emma loves and wants to be with, and it’s this character who truly represents her best friend and the person who knows her best. It’s Knightley the only one who cares about her well being so much that when she is being the worst version of herself and no one cares, he is the one willing to tell her even if he hates doing that and he feels he’s destroying every chance he has to make her love him back. It’s the Knightley character who ultimately inspires her to be a better person and loves her in spite of her flaws.

#emma 2020 #emma woodhouse #emma #harriet smith #mr knightley #emma x knightley #may delete later but I needed to rant because some of you are getting old

[snapedefender]

im sorry, i need somebody to vent to djfjrjfjdj i was debating w a snape hater, and they hit me with the CLASSIC "unlike snape, james grew up" and when i told them there's no actual evidence that james ~grew up, bc he died in his 20s, they told me - and here's the kicker!!!? - that there's no proof or record of james' (or lily's) age when he passed away NFKFKDNFOSKFJS I WILL LOSE MY MIND I SWEAAAAARRRR TO JESUS

OMG AND THEN!!!!! THEY ASKED ME IF I HAD, AND I SHIT YOU NOT, READ THE BOOKS DISJDDIJEEIWKDJ i have had some stupid snape arguments - though definitely not as bad os as many as you - but never has anybody had the sheer AUDACITY of asking me if I've read the books (implying, y'know, that i have only superficial knowledge of the series) while wildly claiming lack of evidence on one of the most easily google-able facts in the entire series. on god. (sorry this got long)

alsjflakjfakfjaf i’m LOSING IT this made me cackle out loud

like. we don’t know much about james, that’s true. one of the only things we know is, in fact, when he died and when he was born and thus how old he was when he died akjsjahfjha

one of the major thematic points in the books is the effects of war on young people and a major part of that point is the tragedy of people like lily and james dying so young like that is the POINT that is what they are meant to represent and we know that bc we know they died in their fucking 20s asfajfjhk im just!!! this is such an easy fact to know!!!! this isnt deep lore!!!!!!! snape went to school with them and he’s in like his early thirties when the books start. it’s not hard!!! it’s basic maths!!! snape antis proving yet again that they only have one brain cell and they dont know what to do with it!!!!

did you ask them if they’ve read the books bc maybe theyre confused about when james and lily died bc they hired like 40-something actors to play them in the movies. but seriously why.... is that always the argument. like you said, the implication is you can only have superficial knowledge of the books if you are stupid enough to actually like snape. which is ridiculous. just bc you like an unlikable character doesn’t mean you have no knowledge of the canon or that you’re just too idiotic to know any better. that’s fucking infuriating to me, like sorry you don’t like this character but it doesn’t make me stupid bc i like him!!! it doesn’t mean i didn’t read the books or that i’m just horny for alan rickman!!! and it’s doubly infuriating when it’s so clear that these people just haven’t thought critically about the books at all or when they mess up something as basic as the age when james died. 

anyway you were RIGHT and you SHOULD say it bc yes we don’t know that james did change!!! we don’t see him as an adult except for when he’s sacrificing himself for his wife and child - a very noble thing, yes, but also something that james would have done regardless of if he had left behind his bullying ways (james is a bully to those he doesn’t like and good to those he does like, remember? of course he’s going to sacrifice himself for his family). that doesn’t make it any less heroic but we can’t use that sole moment in his adult life to figure out if he stopped being a bullying toerag. and he never got to actually grow up because he DIED in his TWENTIES which antis can find out if they ever actually read the goddamn books alkfsjafjaklfj

sorry that you had to deal with that nonsense. you’re always welcome to come and vent to me, i am very bitter and petty and i love being bitter and petty with other people.

#Anonymous

[armenelols]

Hey, sis, the country ask: 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 22, 27 and 30. Thank you, if you do them! 😊❤️

*it got pretty long so the answers are under the cut*

1. favourite place in your country?

As a lover of history and mountains, in a country full of both, it’s a bit difficult to choose :D I am going to limit it to places I’ve been to to make it easier for myself. Of those, my favorite would be probably Orava Castle. It lies in the northern part of my country and is one of our largest castles. I’ve been there when I was perhaps ten years old or so, so my memory of the place is a bit blurry, but I remember parts of it and I loved it. Nosferatu was actually shot there. I’ve never seen the movie (I am not one for horror), but I heard it’s pretty popular? :D Anyway Also, we have some caves that are worth visiting - of those I’ve been to, my favorite was Belianska cave. Open-air museums (skanzen in my language) are worth visiting as well.

2. do you prefer spending your holidays in your country or travel abroad?

Depends on what place in my country and which country abroad. Going abroad is always an amazing experience, seeing all the different cultures and places. I long to visit some of the countries in Northern Europe, as well the Mediterranean area for its history. Switzerland is one of my favorite places to visit, I’ve been there twice. But my country can be certainly fun as well - we have beautiful mountains in most of Slovakia, and we are the country with most castles per capital (alongside Wales, each site claims something different :D). I probably prefer going abroad for holiday, but for a simple trip, Slovakia is the best.

5. favourite song in your native language?

I tend to listen to English music more, and most of the new songs in my country are pop (which I don’t listen to), so it would probably be something older from my childhood. So the bands my dad would play in the car - Elán, Lojzo, IMT Smile, Horkýže Slíže, Tublatanka and so on :D No specific song, really.

6. most hated song in your native language?

I have no idea what it’s called, but my classmates listen to it all the time and it always gets me into a murderous mood.

9. which of your neighbouring countries would you like to visit most/know best?

11. favourite native writer/poet?

Well, I’ve been only in two of them - the Czech Republic and Poland, tho I did pass through Hungary a few times. I don’t have any real preference. We have much of common history with Czechs and it's been the country I’ve been the most times to, but really, as a lover of travel and learning about new places, I don’t have a preference.

Edit: oh god I forgot Austria :D been there several times, loved it

From most of our writers/poets, I’ve read only some of their shorter works. But my favorite was Bloody Sonnets, written by Pavol Országh Hviezdoslav in the early 20th century, so I am gonna say him.

12. what do you think about English translations of your favourite native prose/poem?

I’ve never read any, but I’ve just searched above mentioned Bloody Sonnets (it’s an anti-war poem) and found parts of it in English, so for comparison:

ENGLISH:

What caused this wreck, this brutal and ignoble

collapse of morals? What provoked the breach?

What led mankind, in spirit grand and noble,

to plunge in the mud? What vampire? Oh, what leech,

sucking the sap of life out of the breast,

constantly thirsting bloody parasite?

Ah, selfishness! — and to destroy this pest

today we have no troops, no heroes to fight.

Yes, it will twist and tear and rend, and fall,

a tyrant, on the weak and innocent;

although the world is wide enough for all,

it would have sole control of earth’s extent

and even possess the universe, no less,

pitching the other into emptiness —

SLOVAK (same paragraphs):

Kto zapríčinil tento úpadok,

zosurovenie, zdivočenie mravov?

Čo ľudstvo zviedlo s ducha veličavou

vbŕsť do bahna? Ký upír to a mlok,

z pŕs sajúci mu i dnes žitia mok,

krvožíznivec s večnou záhou žhavou?

Ech, sebectvo! to! — a niet nad ohavou

tou zvíťaziť, vojsk, rekov po dnešok.

Hej, ono krivdí, hnetie, zdiera, týra

svevoľne, kde len stihne, slabšieho;

hoc zem je pre všetkých dosť šírošíra,

chce, aby strela sa len pre neho;

ba končiny si svojí všehomíra,

kams’ v prázdeň vytískajúc iného —

Personally, I prefer the original, tho the translation isn’t bad - it’s just that Slovak and English are different in every possible way, so the translation is difficult and the words sounds more poetic in the original :D

14. do you enjoy your country’s cinema and/or TV?

I don’t watch TV at all and rarely go to the cinema so can’t say. I am more for literature.

16. which stereotype about your country you hate the most and which one you somewhat agree with?

My country isn’t very well-known so I didn’t encounter that many stereotypes - thus I am not passionate about them, so I will be speaking in general, rather than hate or agreeing. The only occasion when a foreigner said something about our country was in Switzerland, when a random guy immediately went ‘Peter Sagan!’ (our cyclist), and once in Italy a guy went ‘Hamšík!’ (our football player) and said to us three words in Czech. So I had to google a bit what people think of us, and what I got was ‘drinking too much, problems with internet, constantly grouping as with Czechs and Russians and eastern Europe in general, us having beautiful women, us not having a sense of humor, thinking Czechoslovakia is still a thing'.

So.

About alcohol - I don’t drink, but many Slovaks do. However, not to the extent that they would be constantly drunk - usually only in restaurants, on visits, celebrations, holidays, and when they aren’t driving. At home, it’s not that often. It doesn’t seem too much to me, but I don’t know how much people from other countries drink so can’t judge. By the way, this extends to the part of the country where I live so can’t say about other parts of Slovakia (goes for all stereotypes).

Problems with internet - false. The only places where I have problems are public spaces and my dorm.

With Czechs, we have much of common history, and to this day, we consider ourselves brothers and sisters and easily understand each other’s languages. But in the end, we are separate people, so Czech and Slovak aren’t the same. Czechoslovakia hasn’t been a thing since 1993.

Older people here speak Russian since it was mandatory for them in school (for us, it’s English). I was never taught the language - in school, we got to choose between German and Russian and I chose German since it would be more useful for me. I don’t understand the Russian alphabet (don’t not how it’s called in English, for us it’s azbuka), and I understand very little of the language itself since I’ve never really encountered it. However, after a little exposure, it probably would be more understandable to me. In Croatia, we didn’t have much trouble communicating while speaking, despite us talking in different languages. But really, it depends on the person and the language. I’ve heard that Slovak is the language easiest for all Slavs to understand, but if it’s true, I don’t know.

We aren’t in Eastern Europe. We are in Central, and we are more of a mix between West and East, so grouping as with one or the other is incorrect.

Can’t judge on beautiful women and I have no idea how did this become a stereotype - one of the rare ones I’ve actually heard about :D

About the sense of humor, once again depends on the person. Period. But we are private people, so that may be where the stereotype is coming from.

18. do you speak with a dialect of your native language?

Not really, the only difference between my way of speaking and the ‘correct’ one is that I pronounce words with ľ harsher. For example, ľudia is pronounced with ľ (basically soft l, closest to pronunciation would be ‘li’ but it’s still very different), but here we pronounce it ludia.

22. what makes you proud about your country? what makes you ashamed?

Proud? Our nature, culture, historical monuments. Ashamed? Politicians.

27. favourite national celebrity?

No one, I am not very interested in celebrities in general.

30. do you have people of different nationalities in your family?

My dad has a few distant cousins in the Czech Republic, but other than that, I am not aware of anyone.

#thanks for the ask sis! ❤️ #had to edit it like billion times because the poems kept making a mess :D #and oh god they are wrong again #screw it :D #slovakia