#I get to make Frev jokes and they get them | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

everyonewasabird · 2 years

Text

Brickclub 4.15.2 “The Gamin an Enemy of Light”

This chapter title is a lot. It claims to be opposing “Light,” our most positive metaphor (and also, Les Lumières in French is the Enlightenment) against our most positive, revolution-oriented, future-oriented character.

I suspect a lot of the joke is that it’s only literal: whatever darkness may be in Valjean’s soul and the city right now, the only darkness about Gavroche is the very pragmatic one he’s causing by throwing rocks at streetlamps.

And that title seems to be making fun of the terrified bourgeois cowering behind their curtains who think it’s “Ninety-three all over again” when a child throws a rock at a lamp. I don’t quite have this thought, but I think there’s something happening here about the conversation between the French Revolution and the Enlightenment; Hugo would argue that the FRev was both the result of the Enlightenment and its rightful future, and the bourgeois cowering in his house would, presumably, disagree strongly with that. Gavroche is being identified heavily with the FRev here, with the bourgeois calling him ‘93 and him calling himself “incorruptible,” a famous epithet of Robespierre. The idea that Gavroche could be in opposition to both the Enlightenment and this book’s metaphorical usage of light is patently absurd--he’s the child of both those things, and their future.

But the bourgeoisie cowering in their houses are pretty dismal at grasping at that fact. I suspect that’s what the joke is pointing to.

Valjean and Gavroche interacting are a Delight. However stuffy and bourgeois Valjean has become, in this moment his disguise has slipped, and Gavroche sees him as something much more trustworthy than what he’s been pretending to be. And Valjean for his part finally, finally gets to give the lost coin back to Petit-Gervais--though it’s appreciated in value quite a bit since then.

It seems very good for Valjean to be broken out of his miserable meditations like this. He was broken out of miserable meditations by a child before--and even in the depths of his despair and dilemma, he’s changed profoundly in how he reacts to that. Hugo very, very rarely does with Valjean the classic screenplay thing of showing how a character behaves in a situation once, then showing them in the same situation later to show how they’ve changed. He’s doing it now, and Valjean has changed a lot.

That said, Valjean isn’t much better at grasping what Gavroche really is than the bourgeois in their houses are--they see a terrifying monster, Valjean sees a pitiable child. He takes Gavroche’s nattering for the result of hunger, when, in fact, Gavroche’s understanding of the current situation, and justice, and what matters is much better than his own. Valjean has changed in his charity and his care for his fellow man, but he hasn’t expanded much in politics.

And Valjean receives Marius’s letter to Cosette, which Gavroche refuses to believe (or admit, at least) is a love letter. I love how much Marius and Gavroche refuse to exist in the same universe: Marius assumed Gavroche would do his bidding because of personal debt; Gavroche refuses to believe any member of the barricade would have personal considerations at all when Revolution is at stake.

#brickclub #lm 4.15.2

13 notes · View notes

usergreenpixel · 2 years

Text

MALMAISON MEDIA SALON SOIRÉE 7: NAPOLEON (1955)

1. The Introduction

Hello, Neighbors! Welcome to the Malmaison Media Salon. Today we’re going to discuss yet another biopic about Napoleon! As if there isn’t a ton of them out there already...

Anyway, I’m talking about “Napoleon” a 1955 movie directed by Sacha Guitry, who also plays Talleyrand in it (actually he played Talleyrand twice, in two different movies). Looks like biopics about Napoleon and self-inserts go together quite well!

But, jokes aside, I first heard about this biopic while researching another movie about Napoleon (the Abel Gance’s one from 1927) for Jacobin Fiction Convention. I was unsure which review category the 1955 fits in, but I ultimately decided to do a Napoleonic review since, unlike the 1927 movie, this one barely touches on Frev so it wouldn’t make sense to call it Frev media.

So here we are. I got much luckier in my search for this movie than with the one by Abel Gance, as Guitry’s biopic can easily be found on YouTube in English, so most people in my audience shouldn’t have any trouble looking for it at all.

Personally, after a long list of failed attempts at cramming Napoleon’s life into either one movie or a short miniseries, I was a bit skeptical about the 1955 movie, but let’s take a closer look at it and see how this attempt turned out.

2. The Story

The story here consists of a series of key events in Napoleon’s life. So expect major campaigns, his time as First Consul, Frev, formative years, and so on. On paper, it sounds good, but the keywords here are “on paper”.

Unfortunately, this movie runs into a common problem. See, its length is about 2 hours yet it aims to tell as much of Napoleon’s story as possible. Yeah, good fucking luck doing that when there are just too many events to cram into a miniseries, let alone one movie!

Honestly, if you ask me, Napoleonic era and Frev are so eventful that our communities may as well do a full fucking series because that might just be the best way to portray our respective epochs without skipping over important events or rushing.

Of course, this biopic is not a series, which is why we get multiple confusing pacing issues and the story has to portray everything in a rapid fire type of way, which really didn’t allow me to get into the story or to empathize with the key characters, as there simply isn’t much time spent even on introducing them or at least telling the audience basic information!

However, I do like the creative choice of having Talleyrand of all people narrate the story. I don’t know why the idea of Talleyrand as the narrator is so funny to me, but it just is.

Moving on, as there isn’t much to add.

3. The Characters

As I said in my previous point, unfortunately most characters who aren’t Napoleon don’t get introduced or developed properly due to the rushed pacing. Also there’s too many characters which makes it hard to remember them all, especially for people who might be hearing about them for the first time.

But there are some moments I liked that are related to the characters:

- Ney promising Louis the 18th to arrest Napoleon but not doing so

- Ney and Murat commanding their own executions

- Josephine not being a bitch

- Napoleon giving Eugène the sword which belonged to Eugène’s father

- Marie Louise of Austria not wanting to marry Napoleon at first but warming up to him

These are the touches I liked. If only the characters had proper introductions that would make me care about them during those scenes...

4. The Setting

The settings are truly gorgeous, most likely due to this:

Nice! I haven’t been to the aforementioned places but those who have might be able to recognize them.

Oh, and the costumes look stunning.

5. The Acting

Honestly, I think the acting is excellent, especially on the part of the two actors who played Napoleon. I also liked Guitry as Talleyrand, but it looks like everyone did their best with the role they had.

6. The Music

Gorgeous music! I love the fact that the melody of Ça Ira (a revolutionary song) plays during the scenes showing Frev. Yay!

Unfortunately, once again, it’s not enough to make up for the rushed story.

7. The Conclusion

Well, what can I say? I think it should be obvious by now that the Napoleonic era is just too eventful for one movie. It deserves a series of its own, because otherwise we get rushed pacing, characters who aren’t given enough time to become memorable.

Here the acting, music and settings are fantastic, but the clunky story and the flat characters ruin the entire experience, wasting the potential of the final product. Which is a shame.

But, with that, let us conclude today’s soirée at the Malmaison Media Salon. Stay tuned for updates and stay safe, my dear Neighbors.

Your Neighbor,

- Citizen Green Pixel

#napoleon 1955 #napoleon bonaparte #josephine de beauharnais #talleyrand #joachim murat #michel ney #empress marie louise #history #movie review #malmaison media salon #review #napoleonic media #napoleonic art #napoleonic movies

31 notes · View notes

ourlordapollo · 2 years

Text

Tagged by @shinekittenace (thank you!)

The game is a little long and I ramble a lot so. Read more.

I tag @piningforthefords @oftincturedwords @kyokyo866 (no blank, sorry)

1. Why did you choose your url?

I went through a couple URL changes, I landed on this one after I needed a change to avoid getting rediscovered by someone I had blocked who remade and made a half-assed attempt at internet stalking me

So it went [unrelated urls] > ourlordasia (my name) > ourlordmiguel (Road to El Dorado reference) > ourlordapollo (Apollo is cool. I engage in a lot of hobbies he's associated with: music, writing, archery, poetry, medicine)

2. Any side blogs?

Yeah, like a billion for my various interests

3. How long have you been on Tumblr?

12-13 years 💀

4. Do you have a queue tag?

I don't use the queue feature, so no

5. Why did you start your blog in the first place?

To see H*talia content (I Know) and later to see more content from The History Peeps (the 2012-ish era AmRev/FRev fandom)

6. Why did you choose your icon/pfp?

We read The Rime of the Ancient Mariner in my AP/CC English class. I already liked birds, so I looked up "albatross" in my big-ass bird book and was really taken by the fact that albatrosses have the biggest wingspan of any bird, because their bodies are so small. At age 17, sometimes I just felt like an albatross, you know? Bad luck and way bigger than myself.

7. Why did you choose your header?

'Cause I like The Monkees

8. What’s your post with the most notes?

...It's a post where I dressed up as a neckbeard/men's rights activist and made a bunch of jokes about Rainbow Dash being my waifu. (This was before that group became widely associated with Nazis. I was just making fun of those "not all men" brony guys)

9. How many mutuals do you have?

Idk I don't really talk to anybody on here

10. How many followers do you have?

1,530 on main

11. How many people do you follow?

1,386. A lot of inactive accounts tho

12. Have you ever made a shitpost?

Nah

13. How often do you use Tumblr everday?

It used to be like. All the fucking time. All the fucking time.

14. Did you have a fight/argument with another blog once?

Yes lmao. Got a bunch of vegans I knew IRL very mad at me because I pointed out that Western veganism was largely racist and dependent on the exploitation of people of color in the global south and the whiteys at my liberal arts school (emphasis on liberal) did not like that. They started circulating my post bitching me out and I got a bunch of angry anons.

15. How do you feel about ‘you need to reblog this’ posts?

Fuck em and fuck the people who make em

16. Do you like tag games?

17. Do you like ask games?

Kinda. Obviously I like to talk about myself but I feel kinda pathetic reblogging them like. "Oh please pay attention to me"

18. Which of your mutuals do you think is Tumblr famous?

I'd say I have some Tumblr notorious mutuals, but not Tumblr famous

19. Do you have a crush on a mutual?

No. I do follow some hella cute butches though

#tag game

2 notes · View notes

fructidor · 3 years

Note

If you get this, answer with 3 random facts about yourself and send it to the last 7 blogs in your notifications, anonymously or not! Let's get to know the person behind the blog!💙

hey sam!

- i really would like to go to england and france, and just vibe in both places for some time. also try to tour a bunch of frev places.

- i used to hate history, somehow. i really only got into it this year, when i found…the other fandom.

- i sometimes also unconsciously tell dad jokes…my dad makes a lot of them and they kind of wore off on me (he also does this weird thing, that when he says something that no one likes he’ll do a fake laugh and kind of fizzle it out slowly…idk how to explain it but that wore off of me too.)

#sam ✨

2 notes · View notes

georgesdamnton · 4 years

Note

ok, uve roasted the amrev, can you roast the engrev??

CAN I?? JOKES ON YOU IM AN EXPERT ON 17TH CENTURY ENGLAND BITCH HAHA

If you want a more focused roast like individuals, parliaments, parties, etc, you're gonna have to send a different ask cus this is a vague infodump of my grievances with the commonwealth.

Warning: digression ahead.

Firstly, I've never heard anyone refer to the republic as "engrev" and I'm shook. The only time I've heard people even use the word revolution is for the Glorious """Revolution""", and I've written 2 separate papers on why that doesn't count as a revolution in any way, so don't get me started on that. I'm assuming by "engrev" you mean the no-more-king part, like frev and amrev does.

[[MORE]]

So which part of "engrev" (it's growing on me ngl) was stupid and lame? Most of it. No offence. Wait I'm the English person here why am I no offence-ing you? Yes offence. England sucks. Stupid clown country. A key part of "engrev" is that the British parliament sucked and still sucks. Full of morons since 1215. Our government is, and always has been, a joke. So since we hate the monarchy, we are pro-republic, autocracy is a terrible system and we actively fight it: we don't have an engrev fave. Both sides are embarrassing.

The main criticism of the engrev is the following: WE'RE STILL STUCK WITH THE FUCKING ROYAL FAMILY ITS 2020 AND THEY STILL HAVENT FUCKED OFF WHAT THE FUCK GO AWAY YOU PARASITIC INCESTUOUS BUNCH OF GHOULS

It didn't stick!! I will say this, however, Charles II was a boss-ass bitch and if he wants to come back anytime he's welcome to. To sum him up: religious freedom and getting shitfaaaced~. Now there's a cause I can get behind. Also pretending to be a scientist. Which I do a lot. Respect. He also tried his best to work with parliament, despite it being filled with talking penis's, so kudos my guy. But ultimately he was still a king (not a scientist) so like. Sad face. But the reason he came back, bringing the monarchy with him since we removed his dad's head from his body thereby rendering him unable to be king, or be alive, was that parliament SUCKED. Mainly, they couldn't get anything done. You see, only men were allowed in parliament at this time, and if you know anything about British men, you'll know this means they're all useless and stupid and likely ugly. And you know something? I don't blame Charles II for bringing back the monarchy either because what is Lord Protector if not king but without the small amount of sex appeal being king might bring? They deadass offered Olly C the throne as if that didn't completely defeat the point of getting rid of the king in the first place. Sure ya boi had the sense to be like "that's.. probably.... Not.. a great idea......" but then they basically stuck a sticky label on the crown that said "Not A King" and ran with that instead. Thanks guys. Bunch o' bitches. Tbf though, Olly C rocking up like "not a king, a protector ;)))" (The thought of Olly C doing a winky face make me kinda ill. Sorry.) is kinda the same as Napoleon rocking up like "not a king, an emperor ;)))" except Olly C was fucking repressed, though at least he didn't pretend to be hot like one Mr Boner Heart. No matter how hard David simped, we know Napoleon's dick was tiny and his hairline tragic. Same way we know that Marat wasn't a twink in any capacity. But obviously we appreciate the effort, Mr David. Even if your taste in men is embarrassing, your work is lovely.

But honestly, dare I say it, the engrev walked so frev could run. The Cordeliers club took a lot from the English republicans, particularly John Locke, and not to be childish but WE CUT OFF OUR KINGS HEAD FIIIIRST~ NA-NA-NA-NA-NA~ We had the right idea in deciding that a king couldn't just ignore his duty to his people. Putting forward ideas that democracy should have a bigger role in the state and that the monarch's powers should be limited and that they should answer to the people not the other way around was pretty sexy of us actually. But it stopped there. The commonwealth was poorly managed and execution gets a 2/10. We flopped. And then we immediately brought back the monarchy! And kept them! For 360 years! How cringe is that!!

I think timing had something to do with it though. The 17th century was a weird time for everyone really. You think if they tried to pull frev with Louis XIV it would've been as cool? "Hey, you, king man, stop screwing us" "Haha no" and that's frev 1689 edition. Don't fuck with the sun king is all I'm saying. Wait omg call that a.. sunburn, amirite ladies? That wasn't really a burn in any way but I thought of the joke and.. someone say something mean about Louis XIV! I wanna use my sunburn joke! And idk enough about him! He was mean to protestants? Haha take that Louis you protestant-hater! Ha! Idk what I'm doing. Uhhhh right England! England is terrible. Engrev was also terrible. I mean, at least they tried. And the political thinking/theory was pretty sexy. But ultimately a flop. Thanks a lot Cromwell. Lord Protector more like.. Lord.. Bitch. More like.... Lord Spectre?? Lord Erector? Haha erector. Haha. Penis. Haha. Basically he was lame. I don't like him.

SO IN SUMMARY: British parliament is consistently terrible at everything, engrev was a flop but we committed regicide first so haha suck my dick, Charles II was a sexy mf, David needs to stop simping for funky looking dudes since he obviously wishes they were dark-haired twinks (ANTOINE IS RIGHT THERE DUDE), I'm a little scared of Louis XIV, Cromwell was a lameass loser, I didn't proofread this, and I'm keeping the term engrev I love it.

Also I once saw someone who shipped Robespierre and Cromwell and that really messed me up for a few months I won't lie to you like that's next-level fucked up dude

12 notes · View notes

theravenclawrevolutionary · 4 years

Text

You guys have no idea how bad I wish I could animate and voice act. Like I’ve been wishing I had those skills for a solid year and a half just so I could make a an animated Frev show on Youtube.

The rev boys could just joke around and have a great time while talking about and dealing with real stuff that happened during the revolution. And as it would go it would get a little bit sadder and more dark, kinda like the actual Frev did until suddenly oh no! People who just watched for laughs realized how attached they were to the Frev bois and we all know what happens to them. And I’d get to break everyone’s hearts including my own.

But no. I can only write and (kinda not really) draw well. Little to no animation or voice acting skills here. So instead of breaking my heart that way I’ll just break my heart by NOT doing that. Also that would never happen because no one would actually want to watch it lol.

BUT STILL!

7 notes · View notes

frevandrest · 2 years

Note

I'm curious. How did you get interested in Saint-Just specifically?

Asdfdsfdsg It was a long time ago, and tbh I don't really remember exactly, but I believe it was - don't laugh - because it looked like there is not much known about him. This stuff still appeals to me (see my interest in some people that only have limited info/sources that mention them). Saint-Just was like a ~mysterious and fascinating figure of the revolution that we don't know much about. Keep in mind that I got interested in frev before the Internet (yes, I am old) and information was limited to what I could realistically find. Most info was about Robespierre, Danton and Marat, with only some side mentions of SJ. So, it seemed that you could read and research what's there quickly? Hahaha the joke's on me.

But yeah. By the time I realized there was a LOT, I was hooked already. Finding a random mention of Saint-Just's name would make me go "yay!!!!11" (and that didn't seem to change sdfsadf).

Also, the fact that he was labelled The Youngest appealed to my pre-teen/teen mind, although at first I didn't get that it meant "the youngest member of the National Convention", and not, like, "the youngest revolutionary in existence" safasdfds.

The weirdest (?) thing was that I was originally limited to Eastern European sources, which were generally more sympathetic toward the revolution and Robespierrists. They also took SJ seriously as a politician and a theorist. So I was very late to the whole "bratty pretty demonic boy" narrative and, in a way, I am still learning how he is viewed in the Anglo sphere (and France, I suppose).

#ask #anonymous #frev #french revolution #saint-just #i suppose watching lrf at 13 had its impact #but i denied that my interest in sj was in any way related to his physical appearance #i was an 'edgy' teen who believed movies always prettify actors #so i was all hahaha they picked a hot dude for sj what losers #don't get me wrong - i oogled #but i firmly asserted that my ~historical interest had nothing to do with it #no way

15 notes · View notes