#the actual show IS very ambiguous and open ended. on purpose imo | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

kinetic-elaboration · 4 years

Text

November 2: The Wanheda Tape, Writer’s Commentary

Today, some notes on The Wanheda Tape, my take-off of The Blair Witch Project.

This was my first idea for Chopped Choice: Horror, and the one I initially thought was more developed/easier, because I had the whole general structure for it: Octavia finds a tape, the tape has a ghost-hunting adventure gone wrong it, scary stuff happens, the end. As opposed to what became Mad Women, which was just two unconnected images at that time. But when I realized the Blair Witch idea was a literally a story in a story in a THIRD story and that I didn’t have any concrete ideas for the innermost story, the legend upon which the main ghost-hunting story would be built, I backed away and decided to work on developing Mad Women instead.

Then I finished that fic earlier than anticipated. And I still really liked my Blair Witch idea because I love the super cliche, traditional horror stuff: ghosts, witches, woods, autumn, etc. Sci fi horror was fun but it didn’t scratch that particular itch.

So one day after work, I took a walk, and suddenly all of the disparate, scattered ideas I’d been having for The Wanheda Tape came together, and I knew I just had to write it.

The big problem so far had been, as I said, the legend. I’d already decided I wanted to include Princess Mechanic exes as one of my tropes, and I wanted the legend to relate to them in some way, even just as a thematic parallel. I wanted the witch of the legend to have a lost love, too. I also figured the legend would have to be fairly old. And I toyed early on with the idea of like a utopia/commune/separate woods-y community that goes wrong.

The canon legend Wanheda was an immediately attractive option to base the rest of it around, because what’s creepier than a witch who controls death, a witch in some way associated directly with death? Plus I like canon parallels in modern au fics. But Clarke was already in the story, so that seemed impossible. I set it aside.

I thought about using the Grounders, and paralleling the woods-y community/main town war with the inter-clan wars of the canon. Perhaps Lexa as the witch, and Costia as her lost love? This was plausible but it didn’t seem to fit right, I think in part because Lexa isn’t a minor community leader; she’s not a separatist. She is the main one in charge, the Official Commander. Plus, it seemed complicated, trying to parse out Grounder drama and turn it into a legend that would then parallel a modern delinquent au.

What suddenly fit into place for me was using Wanheda, not despite Clarke’s presence in the modern au, but BECAUSE of it. The parallel between the two would then be immediately obvious, with really no work at all on my part, and it would allow me to try to do a story with multiple interpretations. I’m not the biggest fan of ‘maybe it was supernatural, maybe it was all in x character’s head’ but this was the sort of story that lent itself to ambiguity, plus I could always heavily imply that the supernatural reading was right.

So in other words, modern!Clarke and Wanheda would be paralleled, connected in the text, and it would be unclear if the creepy things happening were directly the witch’s doing, the witch through Clarke, or directly Clarke. Then Jasper, Monty, and Octavia would summarize the three possibilities in the final scene, to make it more clear. Octavia sees her as the mastermind of everything: she lured her friends to the woods, killed them, escaped herself, and got away with it. Jasper sees her as a tool used by the witch, even if his version doesn’t quite sound properly supernatural: something happened to her, through her, in the woods, and that broke her. And Monty sees her as a victim of the witch just as surely as the other three were. (I admit the three weren’t quite as separate as I’d wanted...and this was after re-writing!)

I’m not sure if all three possibilities are really equally convincing, but I do like to think they’re plausible, even that Clarke was somehow doing everything: going to the woods was her idea; she was in charge of navigation, and could have gotten them ‘lost’ on purpose; she was the last person to see Miller, and she wasn’t with Murphy and Raven when they saw the fire. And then of course Murphy sees her chanting in the woods--or he sees someone who he identifies in dialogue to be Clarke, and who seems to be her based on dress, although I was careful not to have the neutral observer of the camera actually name her, because--is it her? Really?

But still, there are distinctly unnatural phenomena going on, and distinct witch-iness. And Clarke’s involvement seems undeniable. That she either innately has or has created a connection to Wanheda is clear. To what extent the witch works through her, uses her body, and to what extent the witch exists as a completely separate, even physical, presence is what I hoped would be ambiguous. Is the figure Murphy sees a possessed Clarke, or the actual Clarke, or a bewitched Clarke (like Miller in the final scene)? Is the person holding the camera in the end a possessed Clarke? The witch herself? If the latter, where is Clarke? Dead? Still lost in the woods?

Wandering the streets of Arizona?

Does it matter that I chose to include four figures in the woods in Monty’s memory, and not five?

I didn’t answer all of my own questions, but I do have ideas that I worked off of, mostly to keep continuity.

First, Clarke imo is very good at lying and doesn’t mind lying if she feels she has a good reason to do so. So she is a liar in this fic, on at least one occasion. When she takes the book from the tree, it is not empty. She keeps it for the writing inside.

Another possible lie: that she doesn’t know why she thinks the witch is real. I think it’s plausible she’s been to the woods before and had weird things happen to her, or felt some inexplicable presence, in which case she is manipulating her friends by not being forthright about what they’re doing. Alternately, this is her first woods-y expedition, but her inherent connection to Wanheda allows her to ‘feel’ a presence the others cannot.

Second, the general outline of Wanheda’s journey and Clarke’s are the same: both using magic they cannot control and shouldn’t be messing with to defend/protect their loved ones, perhaps particularly motivated by residual feelings for lost loves (Wanheda’s need to avenge her lover in particular, Clarke’s need to protect Raven in particular), and both face consequences for their actions.

Wanheda was always a witch, and benevolent magic allowed her community to thrive, as the village believed. But after the villagers attacked, she turned to black magic for her revenge. It was successful, but the price she paid was that her community never thrived again. (Yeah this is kinda a moralistic story lol.)

Clarke tries to use witchcraft too, when she sees her friends being threatened--like Murphy, she reads the strung up dolls as a warning. So on the second night, after reading the book, she tried to protect the group using the circle of stones. It wasn’t successful, but the more magic she tried, the more caught up in it she became, losing herself in the process. Whether she was the active tool of the witch or a more general casualty, like Miller, I left open.

I didn’t think too much about the gender dynamics of it--except for the Wanheda legend, which is obviously about Competent/Independent Women Being Threatening, and the chaos that comes from men’s reaction to that--but now that I’ve rewatched the actual Blair Witch Project, I kinda want to poke at that more. Not totally sure I’ll like what I’d find in my own work lol. A tale of two women punished for their hubris? Maybe.

Still, it’s more problematic if women are punished where men are not. At least Wanheda and Clarke actually did something. At least they tried. Wanheda made a deal with the devil (perhaps literally) out of understandable rage and sorrow, and Clarke, called to that history, the physical manifestation of that memory, flew a little too close to the flame. To the extent that she and her friends are punished for their curiosity--this is just a trope of horror, which is in so many ways about allowing us to imagine what we cannot really see, and showing us the worst case scenario of the curiosity we can’t satisfy in real life.

#the year 2020 #2020: writing thoughts #the 100 chopped #the wanheda tape

4 notes · View notes

actualmermaid · 5 years

Text

Pieces of the Stars blooper reel

As I toil over the last 3 chapters (!!!) of PotS, I can’t help but think about what the drafts have been through over the past few years--specifically, some of the stuff that didn’t make the final edit, and why.

I thought about making this a grand retrospective once I posted the last chapter, but I don’t think the last bits will go through the same kind of shredding-and-reassembling process that the earlier parts did. And I also need to get some stuff out of my head tonight, so hopefully some of you will find this interesting. (PS this list is non-exhaustive.) Thing 1: My original concept for PotS included a prologue and epilogue. I got a few hundred words into the prologue before realizing that having it there was undermining everything I wanted to achieve with PotS, so I abandoned it and started with chapter 1.

The prologue started just after Arwen’s wedding, opening with Elrond having a meal alone in Pelargir and mulling over his sorrow and acceptance of her choice to become mortal when he happens to meet Maglor (still alive and currently a seafaring merchant) for the first time since his youth. Their conversation becomes a framing device for the rest of the story, which from the beginning is implied to be an adult’s understanding of the things he witnessed as a child and came to reconcile as he grew older. The epilogue picks up with them again after the end of the main story, and Elrond invites Maglor back to meet his family for the first and last time, showing that he still loves him even after coming to terms with what Maglor did in the past.

The main reason I got rid of this is that it took away almost all of the ambiguity I was going for regarding Elrond’s powers, Maglor’s eventual fate, the nature of mortality and immortality, and some other stuff. It wrapped it up in too neat a package. At the end of PotS I wanted to leave the reader still grappling with the questions that Elrond himself has as he comes of age—what exactly makes an elf or Man? How does he reconcile his love for Maglor and Maedhros with the knowledge of what they did to his family? What is the origin and extent of his psychic abilities? Will he ever see Maglor again? How about Elros? How about his parents? Why is he so uncomfortable with uncertainty? It’s messy, and giving absolute answers to any of it made that struggle feel cheap.

Thing 2: A “Maglor and/or Maedhros awkwardly explain the birds and the bees to the kids” scene seems semi-mandatory for E&E-come-of-age stories, so I started writing one, but abandoned it pretty early on.

For one, the humor in these types of scenes is almost always meant to come from the awkwardness, and I hate it when I get secondhand embarrassment from stories, so why would I inflict it on other people? Also, Elrond and Elros are farm kids. They know where babies come from. They might have some easily-debunked misconceptions (the early scene where they’re watching the hens with the chicks was funny because they think babies come from eggs and their mom is a bird, please laugh), but the general mechanics of reproduction are not a mystery to them.

The other reason why this scene wouldn’t work here is because I don’t write elvish society as prudish or awkward about sex, so making everyone act weird about it for laughs would be inconsistent with that. I'm much happier with having a couple of different scenes (like the pancake scene or the one where Osgardir explains the differences between elves and mortals) where the kids learn about courtship, gender diversity, and so forth as necessary for their character development instead of forcing an obligatory “birds and the bees” scene.

Thing 3: I planned to have Maedhros seriously attempt suicide at some point during Elrond’s apprenticeship, and Elrond uses his gift to save his life. I tested several different approaches to this and wasn’t satisfied with any of them, so eventually I scrapped that whole arc and several thousand words of prose. There was also an earlier bit when Elrond is experiencing visions and can’t control them yet, and he ends up seeing/experiencing a bunch of Maedhros’ past attempts, culminating in a terrifying vision where the floor was literally lava.

The biggest reason I cut this was that it was a plot tumor that contributed nothing to anyone’s characterization or relationships that I wasn’t able to distribute among other, more important scenes. Additionally, I was increasingly uncomfortable with assigning Elrond the role of Maedhros’ trauma-sponge in that situation. I know it’s really popular in these stories for Elrond to provide some psychological support to the Fëanorians, but IMO if it’s done poorly it’s just super dysfunctional and it’s awkward to see people act like it’s cute.

I’m much happier with the final edit and the implication that Maedhros is voluntarily working to keep it together for the boys’ sake. I also didn’t have to sacrifice the part where Elrond uses his gift to help Maedhros: I just drew on some stuff from my old fic “Reflection” and had Elrond experimenting with his gift to help Maedhros with chronic pain.

Thing 4: A whole character, Dúnith the herbalist, got fired. She was a green-elf and I liked having her around to explore cultural differences with the Noldor, but in the end, I spent too much time trying to explain why she was there and mentioning her in the background and I realized her entire existence was unnecessary. (I killed off Rythredion for the same reason--he served his purpose and I ran out of things for him to do, and keeping track of where he was got annoying.)

I was sad to lose a whole scene where she, Elrond, and Osgardir go foraging for herbs and Elrond gets poison ivy all over his whole body, but it moved nothing forward and was competing for space with more important scenes. She was also Osgardir’s friend-with-benefits, which was fun, but also unnecessary. All of Dúnith the herbalist’s necessary functions were very easily redistributed to other scenes and characters. The dwarf caravan, for example, brought news from the outside world and gave us an opportunity to look at cultural differences. The actual green-elf lore that Dúnith brought to the story went to Amrúnith, a pre-existing character with her own life, i.e. someone I didn’t have to micromanage.

Couple things I learned from all this:

you don’t have to include a scene or dynamic just because other E&E fics do

if you have to fight to explain why a character is there or why something is happening, seriously reconsider whether that thing belongs in the story

#pieces of the stars #dvd commentary

8 notes · View notes

newhumantype · 5 years

Text

ODAAT meta: Penelope x Schneider + what on earth are the writers thinking?

Okay SO I have not been able to stop thinking about Penelope and Schneider’s relationship in ODAAT season 3. The alvareider subtext was so fucking LOUD that I'm now beyond thinking that I'm reaching or that it’s all an accident, and I had to work out my thoughts.

IMO, The writers can only be doing one of three things at this point:

1.) Beginning to hint at a future of penelope x schneider by slowly dialing up the intimacy between them and emphasizing their importance to and reliance on one another in their lives so that a future romantic relationship seems not only plausible to the casual viewer, but inevitable and right.

2.) Purposely giving alvareider shippers little tiny things to hold onto because they have no intention of actually Going There with them but don't want to alienate those viewers entirely because they need all the support can get.

3.) They haven't decided either way about where they want to take them so they're toeing the line between friendship and potential romance so they can keep their options open.

Below the cut I’ll discuss why I’ve come to this conclusion and make my best guess as to which option is the most likely (which of course only matters if we get another season, but I can’t think dark thoughts right now).

I want to preface this whole thing by saying that I would still enjoy the show very much if Schneider and Penelope were established full stop as just friends. In fact I could probably be more easily swayed away from shipping them than I could for almost any couple I’ve ever shipped if the show were to really tell me why they would not work together.

But, in three seasons, they have yet to do that in any substantial way—by, for example example, giving either of them legitimate romantic partners who are clearly better suited for them and on whom they can emotionally rely. And yet, at the same time, we have to face the fact that everything that points to them being a match is only subtext. In season three it got very close, we're talking photo finish close, to becoming a surface level discussion, but it didn't quite make it.

To me, this all culminates in that scene at the wedding where Pen invites Schneider to sit with her. They smile at each other, she mentions that they're the only single people there, and then, BAM, another romantic option (whose character, though fun and cute, was not fleshed out at all this season...we only care about Avery because Schneider says he does, and even that is hard to believe because they were not shown bonding or spending any real time together) jumps in front of them. Pen and Schneider had been about to share a moment, their mutual singledom and strong emotional bond were just about to be discussed, and then the whole subject faded into the background in the blink of an eye.

Season 3 subtext, as @actuallylorelaigilmore adeptly explained in greater detail in her wonderful meta essay, can be read as Penelope and Schneider tentatively testing their interpersonal waters. Is Pen his much older sister? Are they best friends? Co-parents? Penelope had to face a lot of hard facts this season: Alex smoking weed, Elena having sex, learning to be unashamed of her anxiety attacks; what she’s never had to think about or look at closely is why she chooses to rely exclusively on Schneider for comfort during her darkest moments. For as much talk as there is about Schneider being another family member, this is a glaring example of how he doesn’t quite fit that mold. Why does she rely on him as opposed to her family, and as opposed to her current or past significant other(s)?

It’s my view that none of these parallels or almost moments could have been accidents because nothing on this show is ever an accident. I love it very much, but odaat is not subtle. This is a show that gets in its characters' faces and makes them confront hard truths head-on—truths about themselves, about the world around them, about their relationships. Look at Lydia and Leslie, for example. They have a very hard-to-define relationship, one which does not fit into traditional boxes. When they first started seeing each other, Lydia was happy to simply continue in secret or ignore Leslie’s concerns about the nature of their relationship until the end of time, but she was not allowed to. And, thus, by the third season we have them self-defining as non-sexual platonic companions.

This is a show about identity, about defining who you are and embracing it, no matter how uneasy, multifaceted, or inscrutable a concept that is. All they would have to do, then, in order to quiet the latent (and, increasingly, blatant) potential for Alvareider would be to follow their traditional formula and face the subject head-on. Of course, there have been several comments made over the years in this vein. Pen has talked about how she isn’t attracted to Schneider--but then again, there have been times when she’s expressed attraction. In season 3, we all heard Schneider refer to her as his sister, but at the same time their physical intimacy became much more pronounced and their romantic journeys paralleled each other in a way that is difficult to ignore or brush off as coincidence.

In a show based around a set of core values and hard truths, any ambiguity eventually becomes really glaring. They address everything, so why not Pen and Schneider? We know they are aware that some fans ship them. Justina, Todd, and Gloria all liked a tweet the other day from someone saying as much. Any conversation around the show, any tags, are bound to contain talk of it. After seasons 1 and 2, I would not have thought that the creators were saying much about Pen and Schneider’s relationship at all, but season 3 is a whole new animal.

If option 1 is the truth, I believe they’ve only been maybe planning to let Pen and Schneider get together this year. The Alvareider subtext really has just hit a fever pitch, despite nonetheless remaining absent from the actual text of the show. Since it does air on Netflix and renewal is not definite, perhaps they did this to give Alvareider shippers hope without feeling ready to address it directly, but with plans to do so in the future That would make sense. It’s always good to prepare an audience for getting two beloved characters together because that is a big deal and you want to not blindside your fans with something so monumental.

Option 2 is also possible, but I don’t want it to be. Odaat is so kindness forward. I don’t want to believe that they would drag fans along for the sake of it. They haven’t done that in any other respect, so I’m choosing to not think it of them now, although I will continue to recognize the possibility.

Option 3 is...most likely, I think. Maybe they see the potential we do, but just don’t know if they want to shake up the dynamic until they’re sure. As I’ve already said, the decision to put them together would be a huge one. I completely understand them liking Alvareider in concept but not quite being sure if they want to go there. Perhaps they added the subtext this season on purpose in order to say, “maybe???” In truth, a lot of the discussion around Pen and Schneider is like, “omg I love their friendshp a lot > they love each other and rely on each other all the time > their romantic lives always leave them unsatisfied in some way > they aren’t as close with any other adult as they are with each other > wait do I SHIP them? Is that weird? > omg I ship them!” Season 3 could be the writers feeling out the possibility for themselves.

No matter what, there has got to be some reason that they have not written the episode about why Pen and Schneider would never work romantically, or at least taken pains to more rigidly define the parameters of their friendship. Granted they are not an obvious match, and perhaps the writers had not thought of them together initially at all and did not see a reason to deny it so unequivocally then. But on a show where no emotional stone is left unturned, continuing to ignore the subject and leave the possibility open means that they are saying Something. What exactly that something is, I of course can’t say at this point. I wish I could. But for now I will take Pen and Schneider’s own advice on the subject, and won’t give up before the miracle happens.

Thanks for reading. Hope this made sense. I’m sure other people are saying this same stuff, and more succinctly than me, but I hope you got something out of it, anyway. :)

145 notes · View notes

orionsangel86 · 6 years

Note

Cas ans Jack barely had scenes together in the first half of the season and now he is trapped in the AU world? When will they share scenes again? They clearly dont care about Cas as a character, sadly he only exist as a ship fodder on the show these days. Cas meeting with Claire and Jody? Not possible. Jack and Cas having a bond beyond lipservice? Not possible.

Hun I’m really sorry that you felt this way after the last episode. But I wholeheartedly disagree with you about Dabb and Co not caring about Cas as a character. He is not ship fodder. I absolutely hate that very concept and would take Cas being amazing and having a deep and meaningful arc over canon destiel any day.

I have basically super dropped the ball on my reviews at the moment, and haven’t actually made any comments on tumblr at all about my 13x09 episode thoughts yet. So I will admit here that I am quite annoyed about Cas being pushed aside in the last episode. I don’t really understand the decision to lock him in a cage over the midseason story and for Wayward Sisters. Especially when Cas’s presence in Wayward Sisters would have only further encouraged viewership. Yet I guess they could argue that they didn’t want him pulling focus (which being Cas he would do regardless - he’s just that much adored by fandom).

I remain quite baffled at how he has been dropped from these supposedly super important episodes right after a 6 episode run where the subtext, empty space, and basically TEXT at certain times was all about Cas. After all, our season opening song was literally “nothing else matters” being played over a sweeping shot of Cas’s dead body.

To address your specific points, I imagine the ship fodder thing comes from 13x06? The whole cowboy thing was rather excellent for fanfiction purposes. But I don’t think it was there entirely for ship fodder. If you strip away the destiel reading for the time being, what the writers are trying to tell the audience with this episode is that Castiel is so important to Dean that he can literally lift him up to a level of pure happiness just by his very presence. Castiel is the embodiment of happiness for Dean Winchester. That is what that episode told us (as well as the very obvious lack of Castiel in the previous 5 episodes where the entire focal point was to tell everyone that Cas’s death has broken Dean.) This isn’t about shipping fodder. Shipping fodder is comments like “last time someone looked at me like that, I got laid”. Shipping fodder is also a mixtape (though honestly I’d say it’s less fodder and more proof of canon romantic love but that’s just me.)

What episodes 1 - 6 has given us is NOT shipping fodder. It is 100% undeniable proof of Castiel’s importance in the show. It is this show going out of its way to tell us that without Castiel, at this point, Dean Winchester is a broken shell of a man.

Also, if Cas was just shipping fodder, why would his fight for survival in 13x04 have been so freaking amazing and overwhelming and poignant and such a beautiful representation of overcoming depression? Castiel was made a phoenix in that episode. Reborn from the ashes of his own depression and terrible self hatred. I share your anger at his lack of screen time. Believe me I do. But Cas (and also Sam) often have character arcs that play out over a longer time period and with far less frequency than Dean’s. They often get overshadowed by Dean.

I still have a lot of faith that they will come back to Cas and his own awesome story (which imo will continue to be a journey of faith in himself and his found family and to finally make peace with his own past). So I’m not gonna get super bitter about that just yet.

As for your point about Jack being trapped in the au world, I don’t personally think that will last all that long. Yeah I can understand wanting Jack and Cas to be together and bond or whatever, but there is still a lot of ambiguity about what Jack is doing to Cas and others with his powers so I am less enthused by Cas taking on the daddy role just yet. In fact I am rather opposed to it. It makes me uncomfortable that he has had this satan child just thrust upon him. He didn’t ask for it, or want it, until the forced change of mind in 12x19 and now he’s just like “well I am responsible for this kid” and its just another thing for him to feel guilty about and yeah I’m side eyeing the whole daddy cas thing super hard. I don’t see how it is a good thing for his own development, so I’m not bothered that they have separated them (I would have just liked the Winchesters to have been shown trying to reach Cas in 13x09 when they found Jack though because not even having that mentioned that they tried to call him makes them seem idiotic and it was a major factor in me not enjoying the episode).

(I feel I need to add a disclaimer here that I love Jack as a character and find him extremely interesting as a mirror for TFW and a comment on the nature vs nurture theory and love that he is a baby bird who has somehow imprinted on Cas BUT I don’t LIKE the relationship he has with Cas because it hasn’t been built by natural means but rather supernatural means which makes me uncomfortable. I hope they build on this and we get some proper answers in the second half that’s for sure. Or I’ll be pissed.)

My response to your point about Claire is similar. Now I get super annoyed when Cas doesn’t get brought up in Claire episodes. It is one of my big pet peeves of the later seasons since Claire came back. I don’t need her to be asking after him all the time, but it would be nice if he was mentioned in the background, or in an off hand comment or something in a Claire ep. There have been Claire episodes in the middle of HUGE mytharc plots where terrible stuff has been happening to Cas off screen and the fact that the boys don’t bring him up, or Claire doesn’t seem to mention him irks me to no end.

However I DO understand that they have a complicated history, and I DO understand that Claire needs to have her own story going forward and not be tied to Cas as a character. I don’t NEED Cas to be in Claire’s episodes, or in the Wayward Sisters episodes all the time. I don’t think that it is necessary for him to be a big part of that story at all, because they are going down completely different paths. HOWEVER I do think it is integral to Cas’s growth that he and Claire have a healthy relationship. Because they were only just beginning to build on that when we last saw them interact. I don’t need him there, I just need proof that they interact.

Also, because Cas now appears to have adopted two wayward children, I would like to think that his first adopted child at least fucking acknowledges him every now and again and actually HAS an ongoing relationship with him. I don’t need her calling him her father, but I do want it to be textual that she has forgiven him for Jimmy. I don’t consider that very complex and emotional story closed, and I think it is necessary. Especially since Cas haters still use it against him and us, as his fans.

As far as Jody is concerned I guess they haven’t ever had any reason for them to interact so far. Jody has only really been part of the mytharc since the end of season 12. I have a feeling they probably will meet soon. So this doesn’t bother me.

I guess you can say that whilst I don’t agree with you and your comments about Cas, I can understand where you are coming from and do understand your frustrations. They are also my frustrations, but I try not to let my own frustrations fester. I have faith in where they are taking Cas’s story. Sort of. I have a few gripes. If they get sorted out, I’ll be happy. I have been saying for a long time that Dabb is a huge Cas fan. Season 13 has not changed my mind about that at all.

#castiel #supernatural #destiel #season 13 #13x09 #spn meta #spn speculation #cas analysis #my poor angel #claire novak #jack the nephilim #nougat winchester #negativity for ts #asks #anon #Anonymous

37 notes · View notes

2nd-rate-film-school · 7 years

Text

Why Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End Is Actually a Masterpiece of Modern Blockbuster Cinema

This is a review written by my friend and fellow filmmaker, @kubrickking. It’s a bit long, since she is a huge fan (and good film critic, imo), but it is definitely worth the read.

Since my sisters and I saw Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl in 2003, we have all shared a sense of undying loyalty to the franchise. As BIG Disneyland people, the ride was a staple in our short lives long before we even understood how the concept could become a movie. Thus, we’ve enjoyed going to the midnight premieres, viewing the ride updates, and gathering pirate merchandise through the years. At this point, however, I think it’s fair to say that while we will see whatever film they release, we consider ourselves more fans of the original trilogy than what has followed with Dead Men Tell No Tales and - what was that fourth one called again?

To that point, this review is going to be biased as shit. I was an impressionable kid when I first saw these films and I will always remember them fondly. That being said, I just rewatched them at the age of twenty and feel my reaction is very similar. I was only fourteen when I saw the fourth film and was able to admit that it was terrible. In addition, know that this is not a reflection on Johnny Depp or any of the recent publicity he has faced. I am, and would hope you are as well, able to separate his work as an actor in this series from the recent revelations about his personal life.

As a side note, I am operating this review under the information given in the films, not the historical accuracy of pirates during this time. I don’t know if pirates regularly helped transport slaves and I acknowledge that the themes related to pirates having duality as both savage criminals and good men shows undeniable moral ambiguity regarding the historical truth. Jack, along with Will, is a romanticized version of a “good” pirate for the sake of a family-friendly protagonist in a story about pirates. And this analysis operates under a full awareness of that fact.

Regardless, one of the things that has always bothered me is the dismissal of the third film subtitled At World’s End. Common criticism of the film labels it as too long, too odd, and too exaggerated with little at stake and even littler sense to it. I do agree that any viewers expecting a simple, enjoyable action flick will be undoubtedly disappointed with the third Pirates offering. However, if you’re the part of the audience that is at all invested in Jack’s dive into the Kraken at the end of Dead Man’s Chest and is smart enough to realize the film is only truly 15 minutes longer than the other two, At World’s End delivers more than you could ever ask for as a conclusive chapter.

While the first film is obviously the most efficient and coherent on both a plot and tonal level, the third film acts as a bridge for cohesiveness between the entire trilogy without shying away from taking risks. And I firmly believe these risks pay off. Unfortunately, a majority of viewers feel it is more madness than brilliance. And to them I say, “It’s remarkable how often those two traits coincide.”

The film begins on such a dark note that it’s easy to see how people get the initial impression that it will not be a “fun ride.” A montage of hangings with a somber pirates hymn that ends with the murder of a child who can’t even reach the noose without a barrel to stand on is quite a way to open a film. And those are the kinds of risks you will see taken throughout the entirety of the movie’s 169 minutes. And I intend to prove to you that they are worth it.

From that first moment onward, you are given a direct association for the villain which up to this film is still underdeveloped and has done the majority of his evil actions off screen. The actions of Lord Cutler Beckett - or the pathetic cousin from another Keira Knightley film: Pride and Prejudice - now have tangibility. He’s no longer just the plot device for the evil Davy Jones, but a bastard in his own right. While Jones did senselessly murder sailors with the Kraken, his actions were motivated by a personal and justified search for Jack. But he never murdered children during a crackdown on pirate conspirators. Beckett’s actions serve as a power play, but also as revenge for Jack's refusal to transport slaves for the East India Trading Company; okay I’ll admit, Beckett’s motivations are still a little glossed over. But the film is juggling so many of the series' villains, anti-heroes, and “bloody pirates” with selfish motivations that a further explanation just isn’t necessary. Let me clarify that. Beckett’s specific personal motivations beyond greed for fucking everything up would simply distract from what we all really care about: Jack Sparrow, Will Turner, and Elizabeth Fucking Swann.

The film proceeds to build characters and set up future plot efficiently as the setting moves to Singapore, which is not a “random” or “meaningless” choice as some would have you believe. Dialogue from Jack in the first film and during the search for him in the second have previously established Singapore as a hub for a significant band of pirates. Their journey there serves a two-fold purpose of procuring mythological navigational charts that will provide a course to Davy Jones’ Locker as well as a ship and crew to get them there. They do all the pirate-y things like misdirect attention to allow an alternate plan of stealing the charts including a crew below the floorboards ready to provide weaponry and the secondary motivation of enlisting Sao Feng in the meeting of the Bretheren Court. It also gives just a glimpse of the assertion and decisiveness that Elizabeth has carried over from her choice to sacrifice Jack to the Kraken at the end of Dead Man’s Chest.

The number one thing I love about the romance at the center of Pirates is that Elizabeth and Will still have their individual character arcs, motivations, and plot. Even after the revelation that Elizabeth indeed left Jack, they do not immediately fall back into the simple conflicts related to their affections. A confrontation below deck parallels the scene from the first film as secrets and feelings are once again revealed. But instead of making this the focus, they both decide to carry on their journeys making their own choices. In fact, the root of their individual character arcs can be traced back to the first twenty minutes of the first film, Elizabeth’s being a more internal struggle and Will’s a more external one. Elizabeth continuously evaluates her own evolving moral beliefs and desires for her life; does she condone, participate in, and forgive the actions of pirates or does she condemn them. Meanwhile, Will must focus on the familial promise and connection with his pirate father Bootstrap Bill Turner that has been a source of conflict for him since the opening sequence of the series.

Just as it has always been, their love story at the heart of it is pulled apart and put back together by the choices they make and, thus, the people they choose to become. Neither needs the other for fulfillment per say - this is why Will always waits until the last moment to profess his love or insist they marry - but they work better together than they do apart. And that is why their ending is both ironic and essential. Their marriage being officiated by Barbosa in between sword fights with cursed pirates is the only appropriate setting for the unification of the two and one of the best damn scenes.

Call me dumb or sappy, but this romance still feels honest and emotional to me in its restraint. Even though I know it was cooked up in some board room meeting of Hollywood execs, I still genuinely feel invested in it. I think it comes down to the fact that they don’t hit you over the head with it. They allow the female character room to breathe and grow independent from the romance; which is perhaps why you can interpret her ending as either the greatest or worst conclusion to a character arc. Elizabeth’s speech to the crew of the Black Pearl before they enter into battle with the Flying Dutchman gives me chills every time. Because of her heart, dedication, and true duality, she is able to understand and act on the conflict with a decisiveness and purpose that none of the other pirates can. She has allegiance to her beliefs unlike the fickle criminals around her. She fights with and for values and a purpose, enjoying the adventure and adrenaline along the way.

In a similar way, Jack Sparrow’s character is fairly consistent through this film. There is justified criticism about Depp’s performance becoming a parody of the original idea as the series has progressed, and I would agree that it has never been as pure as it was in the first film. However, I don’t feel that Sparrow becomes a full caricature until the fourth film onward and I will tell you why.

Sparrow has always been defined by equal parts wit and luck. The details of his plans or the existence of them at all has always been left up to the interpretation of the audience, with rather blatant characterization from British soldiers about if he “plans it all out or just makes it up as he goes along.” While we can assume he gets lucky a lot and doesn’t always win - i.e. the mutiny that is ingrained in his character’s history - there is obvious intelligence lurking underneath all his actions. He’s persuasive and charming in the way a dirty, murderous pirate shouldn’t and doesn’t need to be. For example, Jack spends most of the second film convincing others that the only way to get what they want is to help him first. He weighs their desires and presents ultimatums, using whatever he has as leverage against them. Jack’s long-winded dialogue scenes where he talks someone around his finger function in the same way that deduction scenes do for Sherlock Holmes.

What makes this most impressive, or the laziest writing ever, is that the people around him are often not unintelligent people. Elizabeth, Barbosa, and Will have all outsmarted Jack on screen by the beginning of the third movie, Elizabeth’s trickery even proving fatal for him. Because of this, Jack’s character is only half what’s written for him. He is also half Depp’s performance, which does not feel strained in the original three films. Some classic Jack Sparrow moments you may have forgotten actually take place in this film include the canon firing springboard onto the pearl with Beckett’s toy figure in the mouth of the barrel, the discovery and following flipping of the ship to return home, and the manipulation of the Bretheren court to approve a vote for pirate king and subsequent battle with Beckett.

Also, if your argument is that Jack became the main character when he should only be a strong supporting character, HE DOESN’T EVEN APPEAR ON SCREEN UNTIL THIRTY-TWO MINUTES INTO THE FILM. He is a supporting character in this movie. That is tremendous restraint considering the major draw for most viewers, which was heavily capitalized upon by Disney, was Depp’s performance as Captain Jack. And when they finally do show him, it is a lengthy eight minute sequence of him arguing with himself, eating peanuts, licking rocks, and rocks becoming crabs that roll the Pearl over sand into an ocean. Not necessarily the audience-catering character re-introduction you’d see in a Marvel film. Jack is in a mythological purgatory or hell that represents the silly and truly odd essence of pirate lore, and the filmmakers honor that. From the moment Jack is back with the crew on the Pearl, his comedic moments hit every time - with the exception of the angel and devil shoulder Jacks. His interactions with everyone from Barbosa to Will to Davy Jones to Beckett are spot on. Jack is witty, wily, and wondrous as ever while twisting the desires of those around him to spare his life time and time again.

But it’s not just the comedic moments this film gets right, it also nails the emotional and dramatic ones. Particularly Will’s final moments after being stabbed by Davy Jones and Jack’s confrontation with the now dead and beached Kraken hit perfectly. Still, my favorite scene of the whole film has to be Elizabeth’s speech which leads the Pearl into battle with the Dutchman. Dialogue from three male characters plays out in the background as the camera circles Elizabeth, in solemn reflection over the release of Calypso and the impending fight. “Then what shall we die for?” she questions Barbosa. Then she continues with the fiercest fifty second monologue, throwing Barbosa’s words back at him and using them in a way he never could to inspire the pirates aboard the Pearl to rise to the occasion and “hoist the colours” - effectively answering the plea of the chain gang in the beginning of the film.

As with many blockbusters, there is a dramatic scene where the audience typically laughs out of turn. So let me be clear: if you even laugh a little bit during Elizabeth’s desperate attempts to bring her ghostly father aboard, you have no heart whatsoever. It is quite obvious to the audience, who has already been told the people in the boats are dead, that Governor Swann is beyond help. However, to the eye of someone who has seen the mythical Kraken devour the living person beside them, it may not seem so impossible that her father can also be saved. As a matter of fact, why couldn’t they save him?? I am still crying during this scene ten years later. Not because I loved his character, but because I can easily imagine my own parent afloat in one of those boats and my own hysterical attempts to reach them. Take a moment, please, and imagine your parent in this position. Not so stupid now, is she??

And this brings me to my favorite thing about the film: the visual language. Working with supernatural fables and period piece restrictions, At World’s End utilizes an array of solid and effective visuals that stimulate on levels of both the studium and the punctum. An Asian pirate ship floats on still water like glass that reflects the starry night into a mirror image, as they travel into a dimension of suspended time and space at the world’s end to retrieve a dead soul from eternal purgatory. Jack Sparrow gazes into his own reflection in the dead eye of the rotting beast that killed him and contemplates the true nature of freedom in relation to immortality. “The world used to be a bigger place,” says Barbosa and Jack responds, “The world’s still the same. There’s just less in it.” The wrath of a scorned lover materializes into a swirling maelstrom that becomes the setting for the separation of another pair of lovers. Jack holds the heart of a monster in his hand, blade at the ready, and hesitates in completing the task for fear that he faces his own future cruelty. These images as well as others in the film elevate interesting and elaborate themes into dynamic expressions of consciousness. Don’t even get me started on the coloring. And you get all those layers with an amazing dose of action and thrills.

Also, the effects in this movie still look great because they are 90% practical. Wait, you mean the series with skeleton and fish pirates has practical effects? Yes, you asshat, CGI was only used to supplement the majority of the special effects you see. While certain settings and the crew of the Dutchman are obviously computer generated, all the scenes involving ship effects were either done with the built-to-scale, fully functioning set pieces or models before receiving any post-production visual effects aid. The scenes underwater were actually shot underwater with all the lead cast and the final twenty-minute storm battle was shot on the ship decks with manufactured torrential rain for 10 weeks straight. Not cool enough yet? They also actually blew up Beckett’s ship and layered the shots of him and the other soldiers on it. That Singapore set they blew up was indoors with at least four feet of water and an entire series of buildings on stilts. And honestly that’s almost nothing compared to the shit they actually did in the second film.

Okay. I think I have to wrap this up now because if I even get started on Hans Zimmer’s score, this could double in word count. If you can’t tell already, I really enjoy this super under-appreciated film and I absolutely adore this series as a whole. It has flaws, it can be stupid at times, and sometimes moments fall flat. But the code for a “good” film is "more what you’d call guidelines than actual rules." I still feel my love for this series has been well-founded and well-intentioned for 14 years strong (nearly 70% of my life). Now if you remember "Pirates 3” as being a dud, I encourage you to rewatch and rediscover the magic within. If you were waiting for the "opportune moment," this is it!

#pirates of the caribbean #at world's end #potc 3 #film review #jack sparrow #will turner #elizabeth swann #davy jones #cutler beckett

136 notes · View notes

tsunrugi · 7 years

Text

So I have a lot of thoughts about Ares that I haven’t been writing down/sharing on here! I was going to go through point by point with that trailer they did a few months ago, going in to my personal opinions/predictions for each team, situation, and what I think that means for the characters in them… but then I realised I really just want to talk about Teikoku. So i’m gonna. do that.

so aliea is a super influential arc for a lot of characters, and three of those have ended up at teikoku - sakuma, fudou and kazemaru (just mentally add + genda every time i mention sakuma, i love him but unfortunately he doesn’t get built on much after aliea). and actually the minute hino said this was an alternate timeline i was v. concerned in regards to the development for these characters bcs i see them as being v important to them growing up in to strong healthy beautiful adults! very briefly:

- it reaffirms sakuma’s sense of self in a teikoku w/out kidou. it helps him define himself w/out kidou. also like it’s super fucking mature of him to be able to encourage kidou to go to raimon when he knows it’ll hurt him in the process!! props for sakuma, look at all that Character Growth.

- it sets up fudou’s whole deal. on subsequent viewings it actually also sets up his isolation which is super super important for his later development.

- it shifts kazemaru’s perspective, shows us (and him) how destructive it can be to cling to things like being the best, how having high standards for yourself can, when left unchecked, be self destructive. the whole dark emperors thing makes him grow up very fast and kind of refocuses his priorities in sport (and life?).

so in ares, these things haven’t happened. maybe they won’t happen! that concerns me because i love that these things happened because it’s a testament to how well i11 develops its characters subtly and continuously through the series. i want to have faith but lbr, this is going to be one fucking crowded series. here’s maybe my thoughts re: all of these characters being together, on what appears to be the most fucked team in the competition. like, rip teikoku, you’re not getting anywhere and it’s not fair because you’re beautiful and you deserve it.

first up with sakuma. he’ll probably suffer enough being a captain on a team coached by kageyama, but i’m curious to see exactly how. not just because i enjoy suffering, but because kageyama brand suffering is pretty bland at this point, so the real question is - will this suffering bring about as nice character moments as shin teikoku did? shin teikoku was such a good story arc. it had purpose in the overall season as well as for the characters involved! and i’ll say it again, i really love how sakuma Grew because of it. it takes a lot to own up to your own mistakes, let alone as big as the one he made. he wasn’t just trying to absolve kidou of his guilt by telling him he was better at raimon: he was also in a way repenting himself, giving himself a stern talking to, to try and see past his own desires and fears and paranoia and to fight his loneliness with his friend’s happiness. it sounds so petty but this can be hard!! fomo is a Real Thing. and i think this kind of shapes sakuma later, in ffi - he gets setback after setback but he works through it and it’s Brilliant. he works hard to get back in to shape so he can play again. he works even harder to try and be on the representative team, and then gets knocked back. picks himself up and keeps going. puts aside his own beef with kageyama to support kidou. he works on himself constantly, physically and mentally and just As A Person, and it all starts with that guilt from shin teikoku. will ares have these moments for him?

i can see the whole “kidou come back to teikoku :cccccc” thing being solved by a casual conversation. it might even be OFF SCREEN. and that feels super anti-climactic considering the lasting impact of shin teikoku? what i want is for sakuma to lose it again - maybe have his anger at his own inability as captain boil over, have him lash out at kageyama in the Worst Possible Way. he’d have to be isolated. he’d have to ignore support from genda and kazemaru and whatever interaction he has with kidou. but it would be FUN and we also get to have his development and learning growth and i’d be happy*

i want to jump in with kazemaru next. because he’s kind of similar with sakuma in how dark emperors impacted his character, only his attachment was to the idea of winning/being the best rather than a person or idealised team/friendship situation. kazemaru doesn’t look like he’s in a good position in aliea which ngl gives me Life, but the question is - will this lead to his realisation and reconfiguration of his toxic mindset?

there’s nothing wrong with wanting to improve, or with having ambition or goals. but we all know how that ended for kazemaru, because of the way he internalised loss and failure and was eventually tempted by pure power. he’s very de-powered in ares. he has to play second fiddle to KAGEYAMA, of all fucking people, and idk i got the vibe from the trailer that he’s trying to start a coup with sakuma at least to usurp it all. but… is this consistent with s1 kazemaru, or even early aliea kazemaru? he feels very ffi kazemaru already. again, no doubt he’ll Suffer, but there was something to dark emperors that was so shocking, so impactful, that you can’t help but want something just as big? i don’t think there’s space for it in the ares story. and like sakuma, i don’t think he’s isolated to the point he was in aliea for it to happen all that naturally. so the question is - will his toxic mindset get addressed? will the dark parts of his ambition be dealt with, or will they still be there ready to explode?

i think that’s my major concern. aliea built kazemaru’s dark emperor turn so well. i don’t want that aspect of his character to just be ignored like it was never a thing, because imo it’d make the whole thing feel less like natural, human development and more like contrived plot device. and yeah, i know this is fiction, i know things have to happen for the plot, but i like i11 because it does treat character seriously, and does have the plot evolve along character lines. even in s1 kazemaru talks about how he wants to fight on the world stage. his break in s2 is believable. his stress, his fear, his anxiety, his despair, it’s all believable! please let elements of that stay in whatever he has to go through in ares.

and now for fudou! i love fudou. i was v. concerned when he turned up in the outer code and seemed Actually Stable. see, the thing with these three in aliea is that they were all isolated (sakuma you could argue had mentally separated his own suffering from genda’s, when you consider the extend he went to in shin teikoku in comparison). and they all dealt with that isolation by taking the power of the aliea meteorite. sakuma and kazemaru did that with a whole lot of passion. they let it consume them. fudou… didn’t. fudou was in control. and he seems to discard it without having to break like the other two did.

fudou is so interesting, i’d recommend an aliea rewatch just focusing on him. he’s all about the calculated revenge agains the world. he wants chaos, but he himself is not chaotic. he wants it to come apart around him, but to stay above it all. that’s why the only real moment of shock for him comes when kageyama rubs it in his face that he’s just as much of a pawn as the rest of them. this is a Deep Cut for him. this is Huge. and it’s huge because, as much as he wants to stay separate, he is still insanely affected by his family situation. it follows him in to ffi in that he can’t open up or trust any of his teammates, and how he deliberately antagonises them to keep them away. he doesn’t want, closeness. he doesn’t think he needs it, even though in many ways he craves it (snarky comments to himself that just serve to show how lonely he is, the fact that 90% of his hissatsu are combo moves, etc).

ANYWAY. why does this matter? well, in what we’ve seen of him in ares he’s…. playing nice? he’s sitting quietly and listening? he’s involved in team play? HE’S WEARING THE NO. 10 JERSEY JFC. this fudou already feels post-ffi. i can give them the benefit of the doubt - he doesn’t know why he’s at the teikoku meeting, and he doesn’t seem to have an established relationship with kageyama. maybe he’s just playing it save, sussing things out. but i hope there is some chaos. i hope he doesn’t play nice from the get-go. ffi was really fun in deconstructing his actions vs. everyone else’s intense dislike of him. it’s a really subtle unravelling of a villain, one that i missed on first watch because i was too god damn mad at him. but!! it’s so good. it’s so well done. and there are so many layers: we see fudou as we know him, just that Shithead who caused shin teikoku. we see fudou from the POV of kidou and sakuma, as someone who can’t be trusted, as someone who might still be working with kageyama. and then we see him through his own actions: he was fucked over too, and he wants to get back at kageyama just the same as everyone else. he’s insanely attentive to his teammates, even in the early stages of the season. he’s alone. and he grows. i love adult fudou because it’s such a lovely transformation from this isolated kid who dealt with his pain by causing chaos, to an actual well adjusted human being who has Friends and who Coaches and Helps people and Supports them while still retaining his own sense of self. IT’S REALLY NICE. BUT WE CAN’T HAVE THAT ARC IF HE’S ALREADY THERE.

so hino, please, make fudou a shit. make him the biggest shit. make him ambiguous and unpredictable and look I know there’s not that much time to deal with this but make him chaotic, just for a little bit. he is the joker - let him act like it before he joins up all buddy with sakuma and kazemaru, as per the implications of the trailer. you can do it, i have faith in you.

*i will most likely be happy with anything they do anyway this is all moot

#inazuma eleven #inazuma eleven ares #magic soccer

11 notes · View notes

him-e · 7 years

Note

You're the only one I know that have seen the oa, I liked the show but I was really confused about the finale so I would like to know your opinion on what happened, especially cause I love all your analysis of got and star wars

Thank you, you’re so kind!

Okay, about The OA (spoilers below):

Like you, I loved the show and was very puzzled by the ending, and tbh I’m not sure if I liked it or not. Wasn’t really disappointed, because I had been smelling an unsatisfying resolution or non-resolution since halfway through the season. Still, the school shooting felt completely random—which might have been the entire point, sure, but that’s not particularly clever, just infuriating. Who is this guy? Why didn’t we see him before in the show? Why the fuck should I care? It’s like those mediocre storytellers who don’t know how to create a climatic moment and write a random tragic accident completely unrelated and unsupported by the narrative, but that gives the viewer the cheap thrill of worrying for the characters for twelve seconds before the story ends. Also, the five all suddenly jumping up to perform the choreography was surreal and a bit unintentionally hilarious imo. It’s not clear what they were trying to accomplish, or if they did in fact accomplish anything beyond dumbfounding the shooter long enough for a worker to sneak up on him and disarm him, but the episode is titled “Invisible self” and maybe something invisibledid happen and the fact that we saw nothing was 100% intentional, idk.

I do wonder whether I’ve watched something incredibly clever or incredibly pretentious. However, I appreciate the ambiguity, because it allows the story to maintain its surreal/liminal quality, its evocative vagueness. The finale doesn’t offer clear answers—it does not “reveal” any angels with badly cgi-ed feathered wings or any actual miracle, nor it definitively confirms that it was all a fantasy Lost-style. The viewer is required to make a leap of faith and insist to believe it was true, or find a metaphorical meaning to the psychotic trip OA told us. The interpretation of the finale depends entirely on what you believe to be real (and on whether or not there will be a second season tbh).

SO, has Prairie made up the entire story— her father being killed by the Russian mafia, the dreams, the near-death experiences, the abduction, Hap, Homer and the others—has she made it all up in her mind? Is she mad? That’s certainly what the show wants you to believe when Alfonso finds the books in her room, suggesting that everything she told them is information gathered from her readings and re-elaborated. If that’s the case, then the five movements don’t really have a purpose or a meaning… until the four kids and the teacher perform them during the school shooting.

In that moment, the five movements—the product of a delusional mind who made up an elaborated fantasy of fallen angels conveniently modeled on her newly found friends, hunters and interdimensional portals to cope with a yet-to-be-explained horrific trauma?—become something: they help five people find the strength and the courage to deal with a very real life or death situation which in turns allows a school shooter to be stopped before he could commit a massacre. The five movements, in themselves, are nothing, but Alfonso, Jesse, Buck, Betty and Steve eventually made the choice to believe in them—rituals only have a meaning because we decide that they do—and in doing this, they stopped being five disparate people barely knowing each other and became a group. They instantly recognize that they are indeed similar and part of something bigger. They make the leap of faith.

And this happened thanks to a mentally ill survivor of unspeakable (literally: we have no idea what really happened) abuse, who, like a modern Scheherazade, each night tells these kids and this woman (each of them lost in their own singular way) a piece of her “story” and in doing this she makes them fall in love little by little with her, with each other, and with themselves (don’t they all start wondering “why did she choose me? Am I special, after all? Do I matter?” Don’t they start paying attention to their individual stories, too?)

This, in itself, is great and I’d be willing to accept that none of what we’ve seen in the flashbacks is real except it doesn’t matter because what really matters is that the story brought these people together and prepared them to subvert a tragedy.

But I’m not entirely convinced, because that doesn’t explain:

where has Prairie been in these seven years?

was she really from Russia? was that a lie?

how did she manage to calm an attack dog and turn it into a harmless puppy?

what caused her nosebleeds?

when exactly did she order those books from Amazon (also considering that right after she came back she didn’t have access to wifi)? And how could she read them all in such a short time and make up an elaborated story based on them? Or are they from before she disappeared? And if that’s the case, how come they’re all so conveniently gathered in the same amazon box instead than, idek, getting dusty on her shelves?

how did she get a correct premonition of the school shooting?

why does Steve hear the whooshing sound of the *departure* of a conscience while the ambulance leaves?

if Prairie based Homer’s character on “Homer” the writer of the Iliad, isn’t it a great coincidence that there’s actually a football player named Homer Roberts who had a NDE?

what was the FBI guy doing at night in Prairie’s house?

and most importantly,

how did Prairie get her eyesight back?

because she was blind, and then she wasn’t. And she did disappear for seven years. So something QUITE unusual—maybe not as unusual as finding your own inner fallen angel, but still—MUST have happened to her. So if the idea is that it all happened in her mind, well, then it’s frustrating, because the show doesn’t reveal what actually happened, and the results is that the final puzzle is still missing a lot of pieces. Which, again, is fine if there’s another season… if not, well, The OA will remain as an interesting, subversive, but flawed project.

Anyway, in support of the theory that the flashbacks are real, I’ve seen people theorize that Elias (the FBI agent) was the one who planted the books so the kids would no longer believe Prairie’s story, which is entirely possible (who the fuck knows what the FBI is up to, and interestingly, it’s not clear what Prairie told Elias). Other people noted that the movements must be real, because every time someone performs the fifth movement (the key of everything, in a sense), that person dies. Or, apparently in Prairie’s case, opens the portal and walks into another dimension.

Myself, I don’t know what to think. I like both interpretations but I think they both could have been better executed, whether it is “it was all a psychotic trip but it ended up influencing some real people” or “it’s all real but of course people won’t believe it because it’s too crazy”. But it’s such an unconventional show that it’s really hard to classify it, and tbh it did absolutely have excellent moments (especially in the first half, I was legitimately captivated).

#anon #asks #**#the oa #the oa spoilers #abuse tw #mental illness tw

14 notes · View notes

kinetic-elaboration · 3 years

Text

April 18: Blade Runner 2049

So I have finally watched Blade Runner 2049 (which I have been hoarding since Christmas whoops).

Overall, I did enjoy it. I would say I liked it more than Blade Runner, which makes me feel pretty guilty. I hate that I find Blade Runner dated, but I kinda do. In particular, I think it’s too traditional a noir to me--I like the aesthetic of noirs but I think they’re too slow. I wanted more sci fi, less sad lone detective-man very slowly sifts through evidence in between walks in the rain. Also, so many subsequent sci fi narratives have stolen so blatantly from Blade Runner, and expanded on its aesthetic ideas (and its sci fi ideas) that the original starts to seem... simple in comparison. So I do think its very success altering the landscape of sci fi works against it, in a way.

Anyway, 2049 was more... modern, it felt more familiar to me in its aesthetic, and I felt more at home in it.

So I did think it was good. But. I would probably give it a B, B+. There were a lot of aspects I liked but I had complaints too.

Complaints first:

Way too long. It does NOT need to be (nearly) 3 hours and quite frankly, while I felt like the OG Blade Runner was a little slow, too, I think it was slow because it was being true to its primary genre, the noir mystery. This one felt long because hey if we put the words Blade Runner on it, people will sit through anything, so let’s not bother taking any sort of editing eye to the work. It was self-indulgently slow and my mind DID wander. A lot. Including at times when really it needed to be paying attention!

It was very depressing. I don’t need everything to be a comedy-drama but this was very grim and it has left me feeling honestly pretty down. I laughed like 2 times, once when K straight out ran through the wall and the other I’ve already forgotten.

I was very uncomfortable with the whole Rachael dying in childbirth thing. Like... I feel a bit uneasy even with this critique, because I know it does happen (know too well, sadly) but still, this is a narrative. It’s constructed. Someone made that choice to kill her off that way and it just struck me as a choice made for narrative convenience. In other words, a classic fridging. She was an important character from Blade Runner and yet she has NO importance in this film except to be a womb. Killing her in childbirth just emphasizes to me that she’s being used/treated as a means of reproduction: proof that replicants can reproduce, the mother of the mystery baby at the center of the plot, etc., and that’s it. As soon as she’s fulfilled that role, off she goes, because now she has no purpose. The story treated her like Wallace treated that replicant he sliced open so callously and that’s just... honestly upsetting imo. I also think it’s unnecessary because I prefer reading the OG Blade Runner to imply that she had a built in expiration date and so she could have just as easily given birth and then reached that expiration date, and died, which would also tie in that whole expiration concept--which was central to Blade Runner and nearly completely missing from 2049.

I guess I must grudgingly accept that it does make more sense for Ana to be the baby than for K to be the baby. It fits together very well and I do... appreciate that to an extent, all the little clues ultimately coming together: the two babies, the track-covering, the mysterious illness, the ambiguous description of the memory as “real to someone” etc. But like... I really wanted K to be the baby and my first thought was sort of that I’d been cheated? Maybe I just identified with him too much, but it felt like ‘well what’s the point then? Why is he the main character?’ I can answer that: because it IS his story--it’s his radicalization, and even though he wasn’t born, he still is human in some way by the end of the film. But STILL. Another way in which it’s all just GRIM.

Slow as the plot was, I could not always follow it. Actually, it being slow made it harder to follow because I would zone out a lot, possibly when helpful information was going on. Also I thought it lingered on some parts of the story while just straight up skipping over other things.

The stuff I did like:

I loved the aesthetic. They really went all in on the costumes, the sets, the advertisements, the sci fi concepts, etc. Similarly, the world building, especially the expansion of the technology, was great. I also liked that so many of the machines were very 80s looking, even if they were doing very futuristic things (for example, the scene where K has the wood of the horse analyzed shows this off well).

I especially liked the world building in relation to the advancement of the technology. Like.. I’m not sure how to describe this, but in both films, there is a very strong awareness of human nature as it relates to our own inventions, ambition, and hubris. Te replicants were created by human tech companies specifically to be tools, and all of this, all of the plot of both films, is about that technology going awry, being uncontrollable, and yet humans continuing to try to control it. They try to use the replicants only off-world. They try to put fail safes in the replicants. They try to make more obedient replicants. But they never give up on replicants, and in fact Wallace is really expanding them, taking out the fail safes on purpose: longer life spans, working on reproduction. The original problems haven’t even been solved! But we need to get to that tenth world!! That tension between human greed and human fear, that inability to put the toothpaste back in the container even when you really know you should, is so deftly portrayed. I think this is particularly true of the sequel specifically because it depicts the original company going bankrupt and another one taking it on, and the different ethos that goes with the new owner.

Similarly, seeing the technology advance between the two films was really interesting and felt right: that replicants are easier to spot, for example.

I don’t get the “test” in the original film or the “baseline test” in this film but I do think there’s something interesting in the concept of testing the replicants using personal questions. I especially liked that line of Luv’s: “There’s something exciting about being asked personal question. Makes you feel desired,” or whatever it was. And then she tries to ask K a personal question: a sort of replicant flirting?

I’m too close to the viewing experience and so this is just a bit of a thought but I do think the films, viewed together, have something interesting to say about what it means to be human. What’s-his-face’s speech in the first one. The concept of memories, giving them memories to make them feel more real and thus allegedly make them more stable--but then it also makes them more human? Perhaps perhaps? As soon as they exist, regardless of what safeguards are put in--the short life span, the “inability to lie,” the obedience--if they can remember, if they can experience, if they can imagine the future, they are human. I’m not as big a fan of “if they can reproduce, they are human,” (I’d uh rather not put all my own humanity on my ability to make future humans thanks) but certainly the movies consider different possibilities of what human means, and I appreciate that.

And if you combine the K and Joi relationship/romance with the above thought.... wowowow. I mean first of all I am a Sucker for Romance and I did instinctively think what they had was real. But then I wonder, especially given the overall Grim mood/morality of the movie(s), was it not? Was I suckered in this just like K was? In other words, is it possible for a sci fi AI to come to love? Yes. But did this particular one love? I don’t know. She was made to be whatever he wanted! And everything she did and said could fall into that category, right down to giving him a name and telling him he was special. Except perhaps one thing: asking to be erased from the home itself. That was self-sacrifice. That was for his benefit, and not hers. So was it real? And if it was not on her end, was it on his? Like, the concept of a fake human and a fake intelligence, or a human-designed human and a human-designed intelligence, falling in love, and whether or not that’s possible, and if it’s not or only possible on one side, of the synthetic human truly longing for love and seeking out a version of it just as a human-human would, but in the form of just another human invention, created by the same company that created him, is kind of heartbreaking. Very heartbreaking. Does his very longing make him human?

Also as a side note to that K/Joi parallel--he gives her the ability to leave the house at the beginning and the first thing she does is go out in the rain and “feel” the rain, and this parallels, imo, both the death scene of the last replicant in Blade Runner, and K’s final scene in the snow. I felt like he was experiencing the snow like she was experiencing the rain. Do Joi’s increasing number of experiences, including physical experiences (the rain, travel, sex), such as she can have them, make her more human?

While I was disappointed that K wasn’t the baby--I think because I felt like I’d been duped a little bit, made to think I was watching one story, the Deckard/Rachael’s baby coming to consciousness, while actually I was watching a different story, a random replicant’s radicalization--I did like that the real baby was not... a total success as a model. Like, Wallace will have a hard time creating replicants who can replicate. And the replicants will have a hard time using Ana to lead their army. You would expect the first known child of a replicant and human (or replicant and replicant, as I think the case is) to be a little off in some way. And she is! Her immune system is so bad she has to live in a single room for nearly her entire life. That seemed...about right, yeah.

I liked how the movie expanded on the aesthetic of the first: MORE rainy urban California, MORE big glowing holographic advertisements, but also MORE Earth dystopias, dystopian farms, dystopian irradiated Las Vegas, dystopian snow. The various holographic Vegas performances in Abandoned Vegas were particularly inspired. Also the gigantic dead-eyed Joi at the end was (depressing but) cool.

I liked K a lot. Like every other character, he didn’t get much to do emotionally.. but I was into following him through his extensively-long narrative, and I could see how he was changing, becoming less obedient and more human. Also, I do NOT think he died at the end. He was just being emo in the snow.

Mmm that might be it. I can’t think of any other thoughts currently though I’m sure I am forgetting stuff. I am very hungry though, so I am going to eat.

#the year 2021 #2021: fandom thoughts #2021: movies

0 notes