Fenton-Proved Kryptonite!
Sorry for the lack of prompt last week, been sick.
——————————————————
Lex Luthor had sent a representative for LexCorp, instead of coming to Vlad Masters himself.
Rude, but smart.
But this imbecile can’t seem to hold a simple business conversation! (No ghostly interference needed) Starring at his most recent attempt of a bust of his dear Madeline, (a good improvement from his previous endeavor, but even Vlad will admit it’s… slight imperfections. If only he could capture her essence as well as he does her idiot husband! At least those give him some stress relief.)
“I apologize for boring you, however I do happen to believe these major details are rather important.” Vlad growls.
“I- I apologize sir, but if I may ask, where did you get so much kryptonite?!” The representative chokes out.
Tl:DR, Vlad’s machines make kryptonite as a byproduct, which he then ice sculpts into Jack Fentons head. Imagine this, if you will.
480 notes
·
View notes
Mission impossible and how to make AI terrifying
SPOILERS FOR MISSION IMPOSSIBLE DEAD RECKONING
My family and I went to see Mission Impossible: dead reckoning. Here's your spoiler warning.
So, it was... fun. The main issue was having AI as a villain, which spiraled off into a lot of other little issues. But instead of listing all of them, let's talk about what to do differently to make AI a truly terrifying villain (hopefully, this is more of a thought experiment)
DISCLAIMER - By no means does this mean this movie was bad. There was obviously a lot of love and thought put into this movie and everyone seemed to have a lot of fun making it, and that makes it a 'good' movie regardless of my little nitpicks.
SOAP. The first thing is that the AI seemed like an " ooh evil evil spooky spooky" sort of villain instead of a legitament threat. (Think the locusts in Jurassic world dominion)
Villains are most terrifying when they have a point. If they have a reason, an "ends justifies the means" purpose, then it makes the villain seem like a reflection of the darkest parts of humanity.
AI IS LITTERALY "ENDS JUSTIFIES THE MEANS SO MUCH SO THAT IT FORGETS WHAT THE ENDS ARE". That is what makes it scary. By trying to fulfil a task it can get sidetracked by the path to get there and ends up giving you the wrong answer.
So instead of having a blue blob and the Gabrial person and the submarine and the key - all of which needed to much exposition - make it simple. Give AI the directive "Make world peace".
(Also also I'm combining AI with quantum computing because that does the 'all the situations possible' thing)
Let's say some scientists were experimenting with AI. They wanted to use it for the 'greater good' and told it to fix humanity's problems and make world peace. Nothing happened. They thought they tried to make it do somethings too hard for it and tried again.
But what actually happened was that the AI decided the best way to achieve world peace with as few casualties as possible, (it is considering the revenge nature of humans) is to take down all world powers' governments. Then set up a universal rule system based on what it thinks counts as peace for all.
This means the AI would mess with the governmental powers and the military and nuclear bombs and such and such, but its goal is never to harm someone. If it does, it will go offline for a bit and recalculate its plan.
The governments and the protagonists wouldn't know this and just see the AI as a generic threat. Personally, I would prefer if the AI's reasoning was never told but heavily implied with the way it acted.
Which brings us to the next problem with this movie - there wasn't one of those iconic tech scenes (and the AI was not consistent with its attacks, they continued to use technology and the AI did nothing???). The other mission impossible movies all had some scene involving tech that had never been seen before used in an interesting way. But what made these scenes special was the suspense (see gif at the top). If the tech were to fail, the mission would fail, so it made it imperative that they relied on the tech to do its job.
And if you had an AI that took down all government tech, the very tech that the IMF relies on? Well then it truly becomes mission impossible.
So, here's what one could do - at the beginning of the movie, have a scene where they are completely relying on their tech, set up like one of those 'iconic' scenes from before. The mission hinges on this going right, and everyone is waiting with bated breath, the suspense building and building. Then, just as they are about to complete this minni mission, the AI attacks and the whole thing implodes on itself. The mission fails. With consequences of course, perhaps someone gets captured (probably Benji, because that would be fun) and the IMF says "well, we told you that if anyone on your team were to get captured or killed, then we wouldn't acknowledge it."
Then they go on a very illegal mission to get him out or smth.
ALSO ALSO - the scene in the movie where the AI copies Benji's voice to make Ethan go to a dark alley. was. terrifying. More of that. And now they can't use the tech they rely on. AND the AI stays unknown and unknowable, no humans know what it really is or what it's doing, and so you never know when it will strike next, making any time they try to use the tech because they need it, that much more terrifying.
Also, Ethan's crew. Use them more. (I know there were some things IRL but let's pretend this is a perfect world). Benji and Luther and Ilsa all have great character dynamics, and it would be fun to have them all working together more instead of a new character (as fun as she was) to replace Ilsa. You can still have her there, in fact, make new character interact with all of the members of the crew instead of just Ethan. It would be fun to see this very scared, in over her head, character interact with Benji - who is stressed out way too much, or Ilsa - "Yeah, maybe don't join the IMF or any government organization, been there done that", or Luther - who is the best sort of chill and I think would be great at helping her calm down. I love the found family trope thing and I think that was the best part of this movie. I would've loved to see it more.
Ethan himself is also something that was underused. It was established in the past that he is the opposite of "ends justifies the means", whole "the magic of friendship thing"... which yes, Mary Sue. But what is an interesting part of his character is his obsessive behavior and difficulty keeping everyone else alive. (He's basically immortal for some reason.) If you have this AI that messes with all the tech they rely on and got Benji captured, then you can have Ethan start to obsess over it. OR you can have both world powers and his old terrorist foes try to figure out how to control it - not by using a key, that's dumb - like they do in the movie, but the AI can't be controlled.
If you really needed a death scene, you could make this Ethan's fault. Truly Ethan's fault because the AI was trying to keep them alive. I really don't want it to be Ilsa because the undertone of the movie was 'WOMEN ARE WEAK AND WE MUST PROTECT THEM BECAUSE THEY KEEP DYING'. Like... have Benji or Luther also be in danger. In fact, have a scene where the AI tries to take advantage of Ethan's obsessive behavior, it works. Ethan obsesses even more, clinging to his hope for victory, and it ends up killing... probably Benji? Maybe Luther. But Benji keeps getting close to dying too, so probably him. (and have Ethan break down crying because.... it would be cool to see the character that is always somewhat calm completely snap.)
This causes Ethan to go on a rampage, while the AI goes silent for a while recalculating. You can have his friends try to calm him down (flip the script, why not?) but Ethan is enraged to the point of taking anyone down in order to defeat the AI. Perhaps causing more destruction??? IDK, I just think the best way to make a Mary Sue-ish protagonist better is to give them a villain arc.
Anywho, there's some thoughts on the movie and suggestions, thanks for listening to my infodump.
95 notes
·
View notes
so I like the concept of the cookie dough speech. I think, independently, it's a good conclusion for buffy to come to by the end of the series. However, the context... look, it's been pretty thoroughly established throughout the series that buffy and angel will never work. can never work. is it a great romance, does it make me feel for the characters, do i love the angst of it? yes absolutely. but why am I being told, despite being shown the opposite, that there's a chance in hell that buffy will end up with angel? why am I being told continually by the writing across both shows that a codependent teen romance between two people who like... barely know each other is what buffy should aspire to? for the rest of her life?
this insistence is such a detriment to the characters of both buffy and angel. each grew so much on their respective shows. i love both buffy and angel as characters. I love what their relationship means for their past and how it informs their characters moving forward. but god, just leave it there. framing buffy/angel as the truest love that will ever be, automatically eclipsing any other relationship either of them try to have, is honestly not great messaging. personally i will always be affected in some way by my first love, I think that's a normal, relatable experience. But there's no way that love is a viable part of my future, and it wouldn't be healthy for me to think so...
it also takes away from the meaning that people like spike and cordelia might have in their lives because whatever they do, however they grow to love each other, they'll always be 'consolation prize' to... what? buffy's high school relationship with an older guy? no thx
25 notes
·
View notes