![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Jan. 4th, 2021 03:38 pm So I've been feeling not so good. It's not the hell virus, just my gallbladder gone wrong, I hope, as it only took 6 months to diagnose. I'm terrified of surgery of dying and failure and missing my mom and leaving dad behind and pain. I have no idea what to do with myself. I may not be posting alot k.
Cobra Kai HIYA
Sep. 11th, 2020 10:50 pmSo I finally got to watch all of Cobra Kai after loving the first two free episodes on YouTube but not affording it or having access until Netflix.
Dad and I nostalgia tripped it together and it's so good and it was also a great little family thing to do for us, since we always watched the movies as a family and are missing Mom, and I cried and laughed and we both loved it and I can't wait for season 3.
What can you say about a show that picks up 30 years after a properties heyday and kills as a tie-in! That honors the themes, and even better the cheese and feelings of the originals. Be it kick-ass karate, 80s style and music, the over the top plotting, and the searching for inner life peace mixed with silly karate moves or metaphors and longing for Dad guidance.
( Read more... )
Last Of Us 2
Jun. 26th, 2020 11:10 amLast of Us 2 from a game watcher review.
Yes, I didn't get to play to original or sequel. I watched playthroughs and really liked the first, really disliked the second.
My problem with the sequel is mainly because I think reviewers and the game itself are failing to understand this story undermines the first game in a big way. The theme of revenge does not correlate to the first's theme of finding someone to live/and die for.
Simply no, Joel's decision at the end of the first game is nowhere near as morally or personally as unrelatable or cruel as Abby's decision to murder him. I hate the equation of revenge killing, hunting someone and killing multiple people, as Abby and Ellie do, consuming yourself in the desire to kill as if it will fix your psyche or avenge a loss, to what Joel did at the end of game one, which was choose in a specific moment to kill and then lie to Ellie for her and his personal and emotional survival.
Joel is definitely hinted as a character in game one to have become a hardened killer. It's debatable to what extent this is necessary and inline with survival in this apocalypse, as all characters have alliances and kill others, but Joel is hinted to have crossed into a ruthless or uncaring territory above others.
Except this isn't Abby's problem with him. In fact, Abby carries this forward. And this isn't or has ever been Ellie's problem with him, so Ellie loses her natural motivation, her struggle with her survival vs everyone else.
When you accept the argument of the second game, that Joel was inherently wrong to want Ellie to survive, which is saying the whole game that was keeping Joel and Ellie alive and bonding with Ellie emotionally, loving Ellie, is pointless, if someone seeks death or suicide, respect that, a direct contrast to every message in the game and conversely Ellie is wrong to be traumatized or connected to him in his brutal death, while instead Abby is right to express the same with her father and Lev, game two has forced you to break the immersion and connection to the survival aspect of the world, the message to survive of the first game, and to love or any love between the continuing characters of Joel and Ellie. Gee, wonder why that's a problem?!
It's a poor and trite story and sequel.
Also a note about this story, disconnected from the firsts re it's messaging and agenda. Jerks and bigots and the unsavory ilk who latch onto the homophobic or anti SJW or anti feminist arguments to suit their dislike suck. Problem is they are right in that this game is messaged directly and pointedly to be against them and to have LBGT and feminist themes, and it backfires because the story undermines the positives.
Abby being buff is cool but not in a story where this means she would have to do so by hoarding resources, and that is not likable in context to this world or shown to have impact.
Ellie being in an open relationship with Dina, or Lev's trangenderness. We accept this, the game says, you are bigoted to not accept, see the pride flag and acknowledge, dislike Joel and Tommy and destructive male violence and patriarchy. But have the two women leads engage and want the most violence. And in characters being gay, bi, or trangender have no real conflict in the character's themselves or in the story that doesn't implicitly moralize their rightness. These are people living in a apocalypse! Born after. It'd be an entirely different worldview and morality on being in non-traditional m/f relationships, on pregnancy, and on identity. And the old heralds like Joel who inexplicably goes from you dating/interested in Jesse to content she loves Dina, leading you the viewer to be, "Ok message there?", or the bigot you punch, or the WLF would have perspectives beyond a one-note that's the bad view that exist in current life. This isn't honest characterization, it's propped. That rankles me who wants to see more because it's not done with care or well, it's using LGBT or feminism, just contrary to exclusion but for inclusive points. It's like the opposite of ass shots, vapid females and gay jokes to signal belonging to a subset of acceptable gamer or story.
The first game therefore did true inclusive messaging better with the DLC and Bill.
Day of The Dead 1985 Thoughts
Aug. 2nd, 2019 12:46 amBeen extremely depressed, and I worry it's warping me even in fan things I like. So I sit down and watch movies or TV on death. LOL. On my rec-list, so first watch was Day of the Dead 1985.
The trifecta of the original Romero. Night, Dawn, Day. Then he remade and revised and it only took the remake of Night to say no, that's not for me. I love Night of the Living Dead. I love Dawn. These movies are special to me.
Day...Day is interesting...I'll give it that.
( Read more... )
So I loved the new season even as it reminded me of a recent friend and therefore friend break-up.
( Read more... )
Because I'm depressed and dwelling in it, I had a Can't Trust Men double feature with my mom. As she said "Interesting movies, can't say enjoyed viewing."
First was Stepford, then Handmaid's. Must talk about them in reverse though, because Handmaid's didn't grab me the way the other did.
Handmaid's was interesting. I really liked the unnerving opening with the round up of women, of unwanted black men and women, of the putting them in livestock trucks and dividing them in lines. God, it was creepy.
There is alot of great touches this film does with moments. The ropes being pulled by the handmaid's, the marriage vows and interview with Serena Joy for placement, the moment with Janine after she gives birth.
But there is also something that really stopped me from investing, and it was the tawdry-ness. Moira was so liberal in words and framing I kept thinking I've never had a friend be that unabashed, and in the middle of being broken by this system?
Then there was Offred's nudity and relations with Nick and the Commander. Her scene with the Doctor. It felt like ...this sounds weird...but the movie was saying she and Moira had more agency or was giving her agency with her "lovers" and Serena than I found realistic that she could feel she had and that threw me right out of identifying.
The film's ending also bothered me in the same way the show did or does, implying a passive happy end, if she and women keep spirit, and that Nick (or Serena and Nick in show) was on her side being something that matters at all to her personal rebellion. I prefer the bleak warning of the book and also fuck them, fuck waiting/saying others save you, because it's implicit in the story that that thinking is what makes you vunerable and used.
Nick in the film is a different kinda of awful to the Commander, but still predatory and feeling her up and jealous of her when she's being raped!
Also, the movie can't be seriously saying it's the wife, Serena Joy, in control of the fallout of the Commander choosing to play with Offred and the handmaid's success or dismissal, but then kinda does just that? Creeps on a different level for saying men or the commander are honest putting the onus on women that way.
No. This is a story about men robbing women of personhood, not seeing it as inherently worthy, and no, don't give them the control over deciding when and how to put it back because they view this aspect as lovable enough or yours to be responsible for. Others loving you as a person cant save you, valuing yourself saves you.
Which kinda segues into Stepford Wives. What a fantastic disturbing movie! I watched it. I devoured podcasts and saw the Get Out inspirations. I feel so pleased to see such a great work like Get Out nodding to it.
I think what makes me most sad and disturbed watching the movie was I was in no way shocked by it, just haunted. Our main dies because she trusts her husband to love and value her, and she's an other to him. Her dog betrays her and doesn't recognize a difference. Her husband uses her kids, their kids, to lure her to her final death, FFS.
Like, I've seen people question or even seen Jordan Peele get questioned about Rose being in on it in Get Out. Maybe she didn't know her family, maybe she was brainwashed, maybe she can really love Chris, and how to him like duh of course she is in on it, and no she's one of the biggest villains. She doesn't see him as a person like her, even getting to know him the most intimately. Just an other. Walter in this film is the same. No giving him the benefit of the doubt when he is the biggest villian and monster of the film, and was 100% complicit from the start. You can't convince me otherwise. He moved there to do this. That scene where Johanna blasts him in the kitchen about how he said he was thinking of moving, had already been looking, was thinking of this town, already put a down payment on the house, etc.
The overwhelming truth of the film is that the women want to love or be loved and they stupidly pick men to trust to tell them yes, you have it, when it should be internal. They put the men above themselves to even come to Stepford. I cried when Charmaine tells her story at the Women's Lib meeting. Johanna wanted to be recognized for her photos, to be remembered independently, with a neat nod to her wanting it in her maiden name, but she had to have someone else tell her they saw it too. Men, this whole group of men down to your own partner, don't want your love, your personhood. They want you as a commodity, an object. They value you only in as much as it reflects as an image of themselves. They already love themselves, and they will always value themselves over you more.
Johanna takes photographes. Captured reality. Her joy and her light comes from her photographing reality, her seeing and catching a real moment of her and Bobbi's children.
The men craft sketches of the women. Idealized mind's eye views they use to build their perfect fakes. They share their approval amongst themselves. They modify the women to these fantasy ideals.
I saw there were sequels. They sound kinda dumb. But oh the potential I see. What happens to these monsterous men and their poor children?
They really are bores. Do they think they'll never change? Never desire different? Never tire of a doll that fulfills expectations like love every sex move I make, get the groceries and clean kitchens and make me casseroles, be demure but perfectly beautiful and respectful in public for me and know nothing beyond what I teach you, want a pool like me instead of a tennis court, and...It will be like the men never have to think around a woman again. It will be very repetitive very quickly, living with a mirror. Hey, I simply must get that recipe. Or are robot women upgradable? What happens when your robot ideal woman is ideal for you, but not for other men? Loves you, coos at your sex technique and cleans your house to perfection but gives no fucks or understanding to your kids? Does that matter to you? How do you handle that men? The robot can't teach personhood to the next generation. You certainly can't, you can't even play monopoly with them. Who is going to comfort your daughter the next time she misses home? When she grows up is she a person or a robot potential to you and the men around you? Whose going to teach your son what it means to be a man versus a woman or robot? Are your kids up to be made into robots next, to be perfect for you, to reflect back an ideal family you wanted and can make, or so they don't bother you? But surely not, because you can't be remembered by an automaton.
I think it's fitting the brain behind this scheme is a childless bachelor.
First was Stepford, then Handmaid's. Must talk about them in reverse though, because Handmaid's didn't grab me the way the other did.
Handmaid's was interesting. I really liked the unnerving opening with the round up of women, of unwanted black men and women, of the putting them in livestock trucks and dividing them in lines. God, it was creepy.
There is alot of great touches this film does with moments. The ropes being pulled by the handmaid's, the marriage vows and interview with Serena Joy for placement, the moment with Janine after she gives birth.
But there is also something that really stopped me from investing, and it was the tawdry-ness. Moira was so liberal in words and framing I kept thinking I've never had a friend be that unabashed, and in the middle of being broken by this system?
Then there was Offred's nudity and relations with Nick and the Commander. Her scene with the Doctor. It felt like ...this sounds weird...but the movie was saying she and Moira had more agency or was giving her agency with her "lovers" and Serena than I found realistic that she could feel she had and that threw me right out of identifying.
The film's ending also bothered me in the same way the show did or does, implying a passive happy end, if she and women keep spirit, and that Nick (or Serena and Nick in show) was on her side being something that matters at all to her personal rebellion. I prefer the bleak warning of the book and also fuck them, fuck waiting/saying others save you, because it's implicit in the story that that thinking is what makes you vunerable and used.
Nick in the film is a different kinda of awful to the Commander, but still predatory and feeling her up and jealous of her when she's being raped!
Also, the movie can't be seriously saying it's the wife, Serena Joy, in control of the fallout of the Commander choosing to play with Offred and the handmaid's success or dismissal, but then kinda does just that? Creeps on a different level for saying men or the commander are honest putting the onus on women that way.
No. This is a story about men robbing women of personhood, not seeing it as inherently worthy, and no, don't give them the control over deciding when and how to put it back because they view this aspect as lovable enough or yours to be responsible for. Others loving you as a person cant save you, valuing yourself saves you.
Which kinda segues into Stepford Wives. What a fantastic disturbing movie! I watched it. I devoured podcasts and saw the Get Out inspirations. I feel so pleased to see such a great work like Get Out nodding to it.
I think what makes me most sad and disturbed watching the movie was I was in no way shocked by it, just haunted. Our main dies because she trusts her husband to love and value her, and she's an other to him. Her dog betrays her and doesn't recognize a difference. Her husband uses her kids, their kids, to lure her to her final death, FFS.
Like, I've seen people question or even seen Jordan Peele get questioned about Rose being in on it in Get Out. Maybe she didn't know her family, maybe she was brainwashed, maybe she can really love Chris, and how to him like duh of course she is in on it, and no she's one of the biggest villains. She doesn't see him as a person like her, even getting to know him the most intimately. Just an other. Walter in this film is the same. No giving him the benefit of the doubt when he is the biggest villian and monster of the film, and was 100% complicit from the start. You can't convince me otherwise. He moved there to do this. That scene where Johanna blasts him in the kitchen about how he said he was thinking of moving, had already been looking, was thinking of this town, already put a down payment on the house, etc.
The overwhelming truth of the film is that the women want to love or be loved and they stupidly pick men to trust to tell them yes, you have it, when it should be internal. They put the men above themselves to even come to Stepford. I cried when Charmaine tells her story at the Women's Lib meeting. Johanna wanted to be recognized for her photos, to be remembered independently, with a neat nod to her wanting it in her maiden name, but she had to have someone else tell her they saw it too. Men, this whole group of men down to your own partner, don't want your love, your personhood. They want you as a commodity, an object. They value you only in as much as it reflects as an image of themselves. They already love themselves, and they will always value themselves over you more.
Johanna takes photographes. Captured reality. Her joy and her light comes from her photographing reality, her seeing and catching a real moment of her and Bobbi's children.
The men craft sketches of the women. Idealized mind's eye views they use to build their perfect fakes. They share their approval amongst themselves. They modify the women to these fantasy ideals.
I saw there were sequels. They sound kinda dumb. But oh the potential I see. What happens to these monsterous men and their poor children?
They really are bores. Do they think they'll never change? Never desire different? Never tire of a doll that fulfills expectations like love every sex move I make, get the groceries and clean kitchens and make me casseroles, be demure but perfectly beautiful and respectful in public for me and know nothing beyond what I teach you, want a pool like me instead of a tennis court, and...It will be like the men never have to think around a woman again. It will be very repetitive very quickly, living with a mirror. Hey, I simply must get that recipe. Or are robot women upgradable? What happens when your robot ideal woman is ideal for you, but not for other men? Loves you, coos at your sex technique and cleans your house to perfection but gives no fucks or understanding to your kids? Does that matter to you? How do you handle that men? The robot can't teach personhood to the next generation. You certainly can't, you can't even play monopoly with them. Who is going to comfort your daughter the next time she misses home? When she grows up is she a person or a robot potential to you and the men around you? Whose going to teach your son what it means to be a man versus a woman or robot? Are your kids up to be made into robots next, to be perfect for you, to reflect back an ideal family you wanted and can make, or so they don't bother you? But surely not, because you can't be remembered by an automaton.
I think it's fitting the brain behind this scheme is a childless bachelor.
Game of Thrones Final Sexist Season
May. 15th, 2019 01:45 pmI haven't watched Game of Thrones since season 4 because of the sexist way it treated Shae as an object to love and then be murdered for Tyrion's sake, it bothered me so much I just followed discourse instead, but have been watching this final season and it never changed. Still tearing down the female characters to prop the men.
This whole Dany versus Sansa arc and Dany's downfall is a prime example of who is really to blame. D&D and in show, Jon. Men. They are pitted against each other because Jon does not have an ounce of good worth or he doesn't care to express his wants, or talk to them like they are people he values, but he's rewarded with the good guy edit, while they are made to be bitchy or crazy.
Sansa's problem is the North elected Jon and Jon bent the knee. Jon says he loves Dany. Jon is now in succession but doesn't act on it. Leaving Sansa nowhere to go because he doesn't listen to her and she doesn't trust him to put anything above what he wants while it leaves her to handle the worries of managing the North and her own needs for safety and independence.
Dany's problem is Jon bent the knee to her, saying the North would follow her as Queen, got her to the North, and says he supports and loves her but doesn't back it up when the North, his sisters, and others don't follow her. Jon is in competition with her for something she's worked and wanted her whole life, and he doesn't even acknowledge that. How can she trust his words of support if he never backs them up? He leaves her to manage all this conflict with the North alone and doesn't help shut down people who are conveniently trying to push him to overtake her control.
Of course, rather than these two women bonding over their frustrations and past struggles, and desires for independence from male entitlement, cutting out the middlemen, instead they have to fight each other to maintain any power, because it's automatically already given to Jon.
And the show doesn't care to comment on this. Jon will be rewarded or emotionally sympathized with, given the heroes edit, while they are torn down by fans and creators.
Cause women be the problem, not Jon, not male power. That's what the show is selling. That's what D&D see. It's so tiring to deal with over and over as a female fan. In real-life too. That's what's underlying this blow back and it's making me so angry. You can feel the rage in fans because people admired Dany as a woman driven to rule, with powerful dragons, taking what she wants and no shit for seven seasons, and now she's brought low for this? Same with Sansa. I admired the strong kind girl of the books, or the survivor trying to have control in the show, these are true stories to women. So is getting torn down for men. Men like Tyrion and Jon who talk smart or fight but never struggle half as much, never get this judgment, this overlook. I'm talking show Tyrion, because book Tyrion actually deals with the ableism and his self and public issues. And fuck that!
So Steve in Endgame?
May. 6th, 2019 04:36 pmI just can't with people going it's a happy ending or he deserves to be selfish for once. Selfish = Happy? What a fucking horrible message.
Or being with a lover at the expense of everything else = happy and a good end? Again, fucking horrible message.
What are we selling as heroes? As romantic and life goals? As good for people?
It's Smallville. I'm pulling my hair out like it's 2004 Smallville.
Heroes are moral tales for me. Don't give me bad morals and intentionally call them good.
Here is some thoughts from real smart people that nail how much this fucks me up in all the small and big thought ways. I highlighted what really hit me but read the whole things at the links.
( Read more... )
Or being with a lover at the expense of everything else = happy and a good end? Again, fucking horrible message.
What are we selling as heroes? As romantic and life goals? As good for people?
It's Smallville. I'm pulling my hair out like it's 2004 Smallville.
Heroes are moral tales for me. Don't give me bad morals and intentionally call them good.
Here is some thoughts from real smart people that nail how much this fucks me up in all the small and big thought ways. I highlighted what really hit me but read the whole things at the links.
( Read more... )
Avenger Endgame I Saw It
Apr. 25th, 2019 09:22 pmOh sweet jesus. I just watched Avenger's Endgame. It's worse than I thought it'd be. I'm digusted.
Also SPOILERS
( Read more... )
Netflix's Black Summer
Apr. 15th, 2019 04:59 pmSo I kinda watched Netflix's Black Summer. Had it bookmarked since I heard about it on the Z Nation podcast last year. Was super excited for Z Nation continuity. Disappointed it distanced itself from Z Nation, but tried to give it a fair shake as a potential zombie hit.
I made it 2 1/2 episodes and change. I really kinda hated it.
Didn't have characters with any personality. I didn't like all the needless profanity, which didn't help endear me to the characters. Color palate was dull. No overall plot, or world building, or character moments, and what little story action wasn't engaging and also felt very preachy in an aren't we all miserable way. Some of the beats felt very illogical as well.
For example SPOILERS ( Read more... )
I think my overall feeling was it's pretentious. Styled with bland colors and long one-shots and stupid title cards, it has no earned emotional weight to anything it does and it does nothing interesting to boot.
CATWS OVERINVESTED COMMENTARY I NO LIKE
Apr. 5th, 2019 09:07 amI'm so disappointed in Overinvested's Captain America Winter Soldier commentary. I'd been looking forward to it for weeks.
You have to talk about a movie to be a commentary. SO MUCH dead air.
No analysis, just vapid comments on the scenes or actors or fangirling reactions.
Look I'm not into the MCU at the moment anymore either, and have also only enjoyed Black Panther and the style of Thor Ragnarok, but you can tell you are scathing against the universe's development and the way it has gone and just bringing it into a movie you supposedly love instead of talking about why you love or loved the movie, and it is not a good time. It's not even valid critique of now vs then either because you never elaborate on your points.
And the bit about disliking Zola and Hydra, which was the one minor real discussion of the film's plot... shows a real misunderstanding of the role of the villain in this movie imo. Hydra are meant to represent current day government, or the fascist Nazi ideals in First Avenger, without actually having to say it to the audience, because that would break the immersion of the superhero fantasy genre if a superhero actually was at war with a very real historical or current collective us. It's all about subtext.
Making it entirely Shield or just regular governance in the MCU ruins the evil lurking within of the spy narrative, and the symbolism of watch out for old foes, clever disguises, and becoming your enemy.
The algorithm is very current considering the role of government oversight and analytics online in our first world society. No, we in RL aren't using it to target people for attack. Our own people. Yet. But we are collected and grouped and watched. Currently gaslit to think that we are one wrong tweet away from being branded the enemy.
Ugh to the Bucky fangirling.
No, the movie doesn't need more Bucky or Seb. This movie is about Captain America and Steve's character, and therefore his POV. Be invested in his emotional stakes and journey independent of fandom! Bucky would be a mystery and painful ghost on the edge of Steve's view. As a thriller, the Winter Soldier needs to be nebulous to be threatening. That's what makes the reveals and emotions work.
I had such high hopes for this commentary because I loved the takedown on Captain America Civil War and thought you got the heart of this movie. I was hoping for a beloved insight that was a needed reminder that the MCU franchise once had depth. That you can find Captain America's role in the superhero zeitgeist of Marvel and in this film and give it meaning. That you can cherish the character's in the Cap trilogy and cherish Stucky as a really interesting and deep take on friendship and potential queerness in the MCU and take it seriously, where other commentaries and reviews brush all aside to straight praise Marvel or absolutely not consider any of these things as having depth at all.
This was a superficial gaze brought to this commentary and that wrecked me.
The Prestige. Are You Watching Closely?
Mar. 10th, 2019 04:32 am I love this movie so much.
For various reasons been rethinking on it and have some random thoughts.
1. Cutter is a great heel turn. I love that he turns on Angier at the end and truly I think it's not because he cares whether Angier would murder Borden. I think it's because Angier used him. Cutter who has been the backbone of devising tricks, used in a trick of this fake murder and trial and not told by Angier.
2. Olivia knew about the twins? I think with as smart as she appears she figured that out, but was disgusted with herself and Borden by the end because Sarah's death confirms that there is no lengths the twins will not go to put the secret first, just like Angier.
3. Angier is still about revenge and his lost wife. I think people put too much weight on his convo with Olivia and "I don't care about my wife, I care about his secret". Yes, his obsession and their rivalry in magic is overwhelming but he immediately undercuts this line with remorse and telling Olivia he accepts her love of Borden and will cover for her. He's still profoundly upset over Borden's not revealing/knowing which knot was tied. He's drowning himself in effigy to his wife. The truth of Borden's trick and Borden's inability to be honest about Julia's death is linked for Angier. If you refuse to tell me the truth, I will rob you of your greatest hidden lie. In the end he doesn't even take Borden's secret at the jailhouse because he hurts him more by up-staging Borden's lie with what he thinks a better more truthful trick.
4. I love that their rivalry is also about the nature of a magician and performer's part in their acts. One gets off on the belief of the audience. The Prestige. One on the mastery of the skill of tricking the audience. The Turn. These are both the parts where they self-destruct themselves and ironically outdo each other in the opposites as Angier's true Transported Man unnerves Borden in it it's true reality. The Turn being taking the ordinary and making it extra-ordinary. While Borden performs the final Prestige to bring himself back to his daughter, Jess. Giving true wonder to his audience by bringing her father back, and of course having no pleasure in the skill used tricking her with the reality that his brother truly died.
For various reasons been rethinking on it and have some random thoughts.
1. Cutter is a great heel turn. I love that he turns on Angier at the end and truly I think it's not because he cares whether Angier would murder Borden. I think it's because Angier used him. Cutter who has been the backbone of devising tricks, used in a trick of this fake murder and trial and not told by Angier.
2. Olivia knew about the twins? I think with as smart as she appears she figured that out, but was disgusted with herself and Borden by the end because Sarah's death confirms that there is no lengths the twins will not go to put the secret first, just like Angier.
3. Angier is still about revenge and his lost wife. I think people put too much weight on his convo with Olivia and "I don't care about my wife, I care about his secret". Yes, his obsession and their rivalry in magic is overwhelming but he immediately undercuts this line with remorse and telling Olivia he accepts her love of Borden and will cover for her. He's still profoundly upset over Borden's not revealing/knowing which knot was tied. He's drowning himself in effigy to his wife. The truth of Borden's trick and Borden's inability to be honest about Julia's death is linked for Angier. If you refuse to tell me the truth, I will rob you of your greatest hidden lie. In the end he doesn't even take Borden's secret at the jailhouse because he hurts him more by up-staging Borden's lie with what he thinks a better more truthful trick.
4. I love that their rivalry is also about the nature of a magician and performer's part in their acts. One gets off on the belief of the audience. The Prestige. One on the mastery of the skill of tricking the audience. The Turn. These are both the parts where they self-destruct themselves and ironically outdo each other in the opposites as Angier's true Transported Man unnerves Borden in it it's true reality. The Turn being taking the ordinary and making it extra-ordinary. While Borden performs the final Prestige to bring himself back to his daughter, Jess. Giving true wonder to his audience by bringing her father back, and of course having no pleasure in the skill used tricking her with the reality that his brother truly died.
If You Don't Respect Catelyn Stark GTFO
Mar. 5th, 2019 08:57 pmThis discussion on Catelyn Stark got my goat up!
You know why I still read about ASOIAF or Game of Thrones? Because seeing how people write about Catelyn Stark is a reaffimation of my belief in sexism in our lives and how no matter how they couch it, people are bias as fuck against women.
Catelyn is the greatest fucking character of the series because she is a spotlight of real in bullshit fantasy narratives and bullshit protagonists for women. She is a whole person; not an ideal, not a sexy fantasy, not a self insert or power fantasy, or a demure backround figure, or saintly icon. She's dealing with life as it happens, and aging, and thinking, and feeling; all for herself and others, and as mother, and daughter, a wife; her own POV in all of it. She tells her view on her life, through her own lens and both her POV input on others, and her actions in the story as a whole have game-changing impacts on other character's emotions, actions, and the overall plot. Even as she exists in a fictional patriarchal fantasy, she shows and represents so many things women have to do or deal with to just fucking live, and it all applies to right here, right now society as well. I think men don't have a fucking clue how to relate to it and other women don't like looking at the dark mirror, hence she gets so much hate. Just like a woman does.
What really makes my blood boil about discussion on Catelyn Stark? Motherhood. Love. Her relationships with Jon and Ned. She must fit the perfect ideals of mother or of wife, even as they hard conflict in this case. I mean it makes sense. That's the common accepted avenues of narratives for women. Lover or mother, heaven forfend you don't fit the good vs evil role for either.
Cat isn't Jon's mom, she's a woman daring to mom her own kids instead, over her husband's bastard, or even her husband's approval, and it's a crime. Because? Seriously, why does she have to be Mom to anyone else, let alone Jon?
Speaking nothing of the fact that she's also tasked to be perfect Mom to her kids; failure is not allowed, and has ALL the responsibility for any and all poor decisions or circumstances if they befall Robb, Bran and Rickon, or is giving poor example if it's a possible feminine flaw in Sansa and Arya because as girls they'll be sure to get some blame too, without it being in anyway also another parent's Hi Ned responsibility. Responsibility like that, 100% control is only on women, not on male parents or society or influences like other adults and kids and influences that everyone, including the woman, interacts with. Women as mothers or lovers are responsible for managing all that and it has to be the right way.
Cause Ned is her husband and is saying he's the daddy to Jon changes what exactly for Cat in responsibilities to Jon over herself and her kids? Because Jon's her husband's son, and in her house? All of those are things she can't even control. She can control how kind she is, they say. Or take it out on Ned instead. *Insert Thor But Really GIF* But really, can she? Is it her or is it her society making it hell for her and Jon to navigiate? Would you honestly like her if she hated Ned? Or would she just get derided more for being a bad wife and uncaring towards her own kid's feelings on that? If she was kind to Jon would that solve anything in their sucession woes or in the hurt of Ned's affair and secrecy or would that actually be dangerous and hurtful to Catelyn herself and her kid's place in their society? Is there anyway for this woman to fit the ideals or maybe can we accept that she shouldn't have too? And where's Ned's part as husband and daddy? He's absolved of fostering Jon out, or talking to Cat or Jon, because *plot reasons* and his trama.
Ask yourself how much Catelyn owns control of this entire situation and dynamic and how much you value both Ned's feelings and Jon's feeling over Cat's. Cat has to be the better just because she's the woman. Tell me that's not sexism.
Why is it the time she said the worst thing to Jon was when she was outta her mind, outta control mentally and physically and left all alone, and even Jon whom she hurts deeply here, has more recognition that she is a person dealing with her own shit and lashing out than fandom will grant her that ability to have personhood.
If you think their isn't stigma around step-children or children of affairs and how that affects inter-family dynamics today you are lying to yourselves. Westeros may worry about whose grandkids get the castle and legacy, and therefore survival, but today we worry who is left what in the will and who gets to attend the funeral and when. It's still about whose respected. And it doesn't come from the woman pushing it either. Family resemblances, family favorites, who gets the most presents vs who gets cards, where you vacation and visit and live and with who, who you idenitfy with more and how; you learn no one loves unbiased. What you know about all the circumstances of you and/or your siblings birth or your parent's relationship vs their parent's relationship; it all mingles together. It comes despite the best of intentions, and Cat could be as dead as Lyanna and it would still happen.
Fuck off with women, or Cat, are the only ones who control how that happens in a family. Take a good hard look at life and what women do and don't get to control in their lives and then maybe ask yourself why instead of at least sympathizing or understanding it's a reality there is automatic assumed blame and dislike on just them.
You know why I still read about ASOIAF or Game of Thrones? Because seeing how people write about Catelyn Stark is a reaffimation of my belief in sexism in our lives and how no matter how they couch it, people are bias as fuck against women.
Catelyn is the greatest fucking character of the series because she is a spotlight of real in bullshit fantasy narratives and bullshit protagonists for women. She is a whole person; not an ideal, not a sexy fantasy, not a self insert or power fantasy, or a demure backround figure, or saintly icon. She's dealing with life as it happens, and aging, and thinking, and feeling; all for herself and others, and as mother, and daughter, a wife; her own POV in all of it. She tells her view on her life, through her own lens and both her POV input on others, and her actions in the story as a whole have game-changing impacts on other character's emotions, actions, and the overall plot. Even as she exists in a fictional patriarchal fantasy, she shows and represents so many things women have to do or deal with to just fucking live, and it all applies to right here, right now society as well. I think men don't have a fucking clue how to relate to it and other women don't like looking at the dark mirror, hence she gets so much hate. Just like a woman does.
What really makes my blood boil about discussion on Catelyn Stark? Motherhood. Love. Her relationships with Jon and Ned. She must fit the perfect ideals of mother or of wife, even as they hard conflict in this case. I mean it makes sense. That's the common accepted avenues of narratives for women. Lover or mother, heaven forfend you don't fit the good vs evil role for either.
Cat isn't Jon's mom, she's a woman daring to mom her own kids instead, over her husband's bastard, or even her husband's approval, and it's a crime. Because? Seriously, why does she have to be Mom to anyone else, let alone Jon?
Speaking nothing of the fact that she's also tasked to be perfect Mom to her kids; failure is not allowed, and has ALL the responsibility for any and all poor decisions or circumstances if they befall Robb, Bran and Rickon, or is giving poor example if it's a possible feminine flaw in Sansa and Arya because as girls they'll be sure to get some blame too, without it being in anyway also another parent's Hi Ned responsibility. Responsibility like that, 100% control is only on women, not on male parents or society or influences like other adults and kids and influences that everyone, including the woman, interacts with. Women as mothers or lovers are responsible for managing all that and it has to be the right way.
Cause Ned is her husband and is saying he's the daddy to Jon changes what exactly for Cat in responsibilities to Jon over herself and her kids? Because Jon's her husband's son, and in her house? All of those are things she can't even control. She can control how kind she is, they say. Or take it out on Ned instead. *Insert Thor But Really GIF* But really, can she? Is it her or is it her society making it hell for her and Jon to navigiate? Would you honestly like her if she hated Ned? Or would she just get derided more for being a bad wife and uncaring towards her own kid's feelings on that? If she was kind to Jon would that solve anything in their sucession woes or in the hurt of Ned's affair and secrecy or would that actually be dangerous and hurtful to Catelyn herself and her kid's place in their society? Is there anyway for this woman to fit the ideals or maybe can we accept that she shouldn't have too? And where's Ned's part as husband and daddy? He's absolved of fostering Jon out, or talking to Cat or Jon, because *plot reasons* and his trama.
Ask yourself how much Catelyn owns control of this entire situation and dynamic and how much you value both Ned's feelings and Jon's feeling over Cat's. Cat has to be the better just because she's the woman. Tell me that's not sexism.
Why is it the time she said the worst thing to Jon was when she was outta her mind, outta control mentally and physically and left all alone, and even Jon whom she hurts deeply here, has more recognition that she is a person dealing with her own shit and lashing out than fandom will grant her that ability to have personhood.
If you think their isn't stigma around step-children or children of affairs and how that affects inter-family dynamics today you are lying to yourselves. Westeros may worry about whose grandkids get the castle and legacy, and therefore survival, but today we worry who is left what in the will and who gets to attend the funeral and when. It's still about whose respected. And it doesn't come from the woman pushing it either. Family resemblances, family favorites, who gets the most presents vs who gets cards, where you vacation and visit and live and with who, who you idenitfy with more and how; you learn no one loves unbiased. What you know about all the circumstances of you and/or your siblings birth or your parent's relationship vs their parent's relationship; it all mingles together. It comes despite the best of intentions, and Cat could be as dead as Lyanna and it would still happen.
Fuck off with women, or Cat, are the only ones who control how that happens in a family. Take a good hard look at life and what women do and don't get to control in their lives and then maybe ask yourself why instead of at least sympathizing or understanding it's a reality there is automatic assumed blame and dislike on just them.
Fannish Friday Due South
Feb. 22nd, 2019 05:14 amHere it goes an oldie but a goodie Due South. It's a small sampling of my favorites over the years, mostly F/V and Gen and Fraser centric.
Fanfic:
Atlas
Still Love
Stars I Have Seen Them Fall
Is That You?
Voices in The Dark
Repeat Offender
Options
Shot, and in the Dark
In Between Time
Wicked Games
Changing Of The Guard
Extras:
I love reading Due South Scripts and seeing what got wrote versus aired.
My favorite fanvid is Sdwolfup's Satellite. Find it and other DS vids HERE
This one is a current youtube favorite.
And finally some songs that make me think Due South, specificly Fraser
Refuge
Cathedrals