#was the author lampshading his bisexuality | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-hs-etaverse · 3 years

Text

What she says: I’m fine

What she’s thinking: Andrew Hussie, author of Homestuck, has stated on multiple occasions that Dave Strider is his favorite character to write and the one most like him. One of Dave’s character arcs over the course of the plot is his transition from someone who makes gay jokes and vaguely homoerotic comments (lampshaded by Rose) and says “no homo” to a realization that he is, in fact, bisexual, and was likely unknowingly suppressing it. Andrew Hussie himself has made numerous jokes at the expense of the gays in his previous works (e.g. his multiple references to gay pornography in his prior MS Paint comics). However, he has tended away from this and has transitioned to showing significantly more genuine respect and support for the LGBT community. Would it be safe to conclude that, over the course of writing Homestuck, Hussie came to the conclusion that he himself is bi? (I say bi because apparently??? he’s married???) I don’t know if this is a proper thing to theorize about, seeing as Hussie is a real, live person, and it’s morally reprehensible to headcanon things about real people. However, as John Mulaney claims, it is more acceptable to headcanon that Emily Dickinson is a lesbian, likely because she has passed away. This conclusion was reached by referencing her works of art. And so I came to a similar conclusion about Andrew Hussie. Not that I believe my claim to be true; it’s merely a hypothesis and has no solid evidence behind it. Anyway, while the extended metaphor of the 1 to 10 scale in the Epilogues in terms of realizing your sexuality might not have been of Hussie’s devising, seeing as he collaborated with several other people on it, but nevertheless the metaphor is used in conjunction with Dave. In this essay I will

#homestuck #andrew hussie #the homestuck epilogues #dave strider #headcanons

20 notes · View notes

thenightling · 3 years

Text

My scatter-brained review of Wonder Woman 1984 (written partly while watching and then revised afterward)

I finally got curious enough to watch Wonder Woman 1984.

Warning: There ARE spoilers here!

I was reluctant to watch it because I knew the plot would deal with wishes coming true “But at a price” and Wonder Woman’s love coming back as a result of this plot Magoffin. This is something I have seen many times before. And frankly I was bored with it years ago.

The predictable plot beats being a “Be careful what you wish for” theme. The Monkey’s Paw (and all adaptations of the story) and variations like The Twisted Claw in “Are you Afraid of the Dark?” It was obvious to me that such a wish would bring Steve back and he would eventually “have to “ return to being dead. Frankly, I’m tired of that. I think a great twist would be if the person didn’t have to return to being dead for once. I’ve seen this plot done too often in comics, TV, and film.

Now for the good. I LOVE the early 80s aesthetic. I even got a bit of Legend of Billie Jean vibes. It’s very accurate to the look and feel of a 1980s film. It felt authentic, not just “Hey, remember this!”

Nineteen minutes in and I saw the ham-handed tell-tale signs that Diana would have to learn to love again, to trust and open her heart, and to invite others in again. And to heal she would have to “learn to let go” of Steve. But as I said, I’m tired of these grief messages. Especially now, especially in 2020. I want a new twist . I want the lost loved one to come back, I want the happily ever after with the formerly dead loved one. I’m tired of this trope.

They even out-right compare it to “The Monkey’s Paw” story in the film. Acknowledging that something is a cliché doesn’t make it any less of a cliché. You’re just trying to lampshade it by pointing it out in story and it just didn’t really work for me.

The “Dreamstone” in this does not look like Morpheus’ ruby amulet but instead it resembles the “ruby” (this one is a citrine) from Justice League Dark (the animated movie). And no, the God mentioned is NOT Morpheus. The God in question is a “trickster and a liar.” Gee, I wonder who that could be? I suspect the “true name” wasn’t given because they were afraid of confusion with Marvel’s depiction of the same character. A lot of people don’t realize Loki is in the public domain. Even Joanne Harris (author of Gospel of Loki) thinks her book can’t be adapted into film because Marvel / Disney owns Loki but that’s not true. The character is as public as Snow White or Robin Hood. Anyone can use him.

There’s some subtle hints of Diana’s bisexuality. I’m glad for this, I still come across fans who refuse to accept she’s bi and insist word of author (Gail Simone) don’t count because she didn’t “create” Wonder Woman. The same people should REALLY look up the behind the scenes life of the man who did. Anyway, I almost thought Diana lean in and kiss Barbara after the rescue in the park but she didn’t.

Maxwell Lord offers Diana a nineteen inch TV. Note to kids: that is NOT big even by 80s standards. We did have large screen TVs back then. My grandfather had a very big one back in the 80s.

I also really like the soundtrack.

When the camera spun around Diana and Steve’s reunion it made me dizzy. I don’t like that effect. It’s so common with romantic scenes but I found it dizzying. Flashbacks of the film Legend of Hercules from 2014...

The dreamstone in this appears to have been made of sand all along so maybe it is one of Dream of The Endless’ dreamstones after all. But that’s the only hint to even suggest this.

When Steve shows up, it’s like the writers forgot modern history. He shouldn’t be THAT impressed with an escalator or a a subway. Subways were already in existence when he died! The New York City subway, for example, opened in 1904. And he knows what trash cans are! I know that was meant to be funny but that’s stupid. He’s from the early twentieth century, not five-hundred-years-ago.

How did Maxwell Lord know Steve Trevor was inhabiting someone else’s body but didn’t know for certain Barbara had made a wish? Does he just know everything the stone touched or does he sense the desires of others? How did he know to suggest “Don’t you want to be a real boy?” with Steve?

Steve’s fate was painfully predictable, so much so that I felt nothing when she had to let him go. See, these “realistic” / “have to stay” dead plots they’re shoe-horning into comic stories are now done so often that they are trite. You know what’s coming. You know what they want you to feel and you (or I, at least) went numb instead. I think I would have felt more if she somehow got to keep him . But the fact that he wasn’t even in his own body was the first clue that my prediction was right.

Finally, I actually really like how they resolved the Maxwell Lord (Trump-esque) plot and his character arc. It was very late in the story that they decided to show a sympathetic side to him, and flashbacks of his upbringing and I feel it should have been done earlier in the film but it still worked. I like that love for his son is what saved everyone. I am a sucker for a redemption story.

I like the themes of love and hope even though I still resent the predictability of what happened with Steve Trevor and the hamhanded “She needed to learn to move on” part.

The Steve plot was the weakest part of the story, in my opinion. But as far as superhero movies go this was decent . It wasn’t boring and the morals weren’t too preachy. Sure, it had some corny and predicable moments (Not just with Steve Trevor) but in general it was enjoyable to watch.

I don’t think it was as good as the first Wonder Woman movie but I do like it more than most of the Marvel sequels so that says something. I’d like it a lot more if the Steve Trevor plot wasn’t even in there or had a new and interesting twist rather than the “You have to learn to let me go.” As I said, I’m tired of death. I’m tired of grief plots. And I’m tired of how predictable this new obsession with perma-deaths in comic book-inspired stories has become.

I’d say the film is a seventy nine out of a hundred for me, maybe three and a half out of five stars. Not the best superhero film and definitely not as good as the first Wonder Woman movie but still better than many other superhero movie sequels.

Also a certain outfit was added to the movie shamelessly to sell a new action figure. Even kids know the trick. A superhero movie gets a sequel, that means the hero has to get some new costume, or their look has to change in some way, just to sell a new action figure distinctly from this movie and not the first. Marvel did this all the time. Loki went through three distinct outfits for three films.

I loved Lynda Carter’s cameo in the end credits bonus scene for her. That was the perfect role to her and very respectful to her legacy as having been the 1970s Wonder Woman. That was one of the nicest and most respectful “original actor” cameos I had ever seen.

Something else, I kind of wish the films would reveal the Greek Gods aren’t dead. It really bugs me that they have implied since the first Wonder Woman movie that all the Greek Gods are dead / gone. Then why do things imbued with their power still work? I wish Hollywood would be more respectful to the old lore and polytheistic beliefs that many people (such as Neo pagans) still have.

Anyway, good. Not great. But still god and better than a lot of other superhero sequels and still better than more than half of DC’s other films of the last ten years.

#Wonder Woman 1984 #DC Comics #Wonder Woman #Spoilers

8 notes · View notes