#and it’s Van who both understands the narrative of their new life and sets them all up to embrace it | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

themovieblogonline · 9 days

Text

Sweet Dreams Review: A Commendable Exploration of Community

Sweet Dreams directed and written by Lije Sarki is a unique comedic venture that throws light on the often-neglected narratives surrounding sobriety, addiction, and the personal growth that accompanies the journey to recovery. The premise alone—a mix of quirky humor, personal development, and sports comedy—makes for an interesting pitch. Set within the confines of the Sweet Dreams sober living house, the film follows Morris (played by Johnny Knoxville) who, in a bid to reconstruct his life, ends up coaching a misfit softball team composed of his fellow housemates. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey_sy6qhzAM Knoxville, known for his daring stunts and outrageous antics in Jackass, takes on a slightly different role here. While traces of his well-loved comedic style are present, he presents a more subdued, nuanced portrayal of Morris. His performance encapsulates the struggle of a man striving for redemption, balancing it with moments of vulnerability and understated humor. Opposite him, Bobby Lee brings a heartwarming performance as Cruise, adding depth to the ensemble with his impeccable timing and delivery. Jay Mohr's Frank, Kate Upton's Kat, and Brian Van Holt's Mike D round off the main cast, each contributing their quirks to the team's dynamic, although their characters beg for more development and depth. The humor in Sweet Dreams treads a fine line, leaning heavily on the personal shortcomings and the shared journey of its characters. Sarki's direction showcases an intimate understanding of the subject matter, infusing the script with genuine moments that resonate with anyone familiar with the trials and tribulations of recovery. However, it is in this tightrope walk that the film sometimes falters, teetering between exploring profound themes and dipping into the well of cliché sports comedy tropes. Cinematographically, the film delivers a compelling visual narrative. Sarki, alongside the director of photography, captures the essence of life within the Sweet Dreams house through a lens that is both raw and vibrant. The visuals offer a contrasting backdrop to the residents' battles, highlighting moments of triumph and defeat, both on the softball field and in their personal lives. Yet, despite these aesthetic achievements, the film's pacing seems uneven. It oscillates between high-octane comedic scenes and introspective moments. Although meaningful, sometimes slow down the narrative progression more than they ought. The softball subplot, meant to be the vehicle driving the residents towards unity and personal growth, at times, feels predictable. While sports underdog stories are a tried and true formula, Sweet Dreams struggles to bring anything new to the field. This isn't to say that the journey isn't enjoyable. Watching this band of misfits find solace, laughter, and camaraderie in each other's company is both entertaining and heartwarming. The film fails to delve into the complexities of its main premise, relying on stock characters and expected plot twists. Soundtrack and score are pivotal elements that underscore the film's shifting moods. From the exuberance of a hard-won match to the introspection of personal battles fought off the field. Here, Sarki makes astute choices. He blends a mix of upbeat tracks with more subdued, thoughtful scores that reflect the film’s tonal shifts. It's an effective method of engaging the audience, creating an auditory landscape that complements the visual storytelling. The film's strongest suit is perhaps its unabashed honesty in depicting the realities of sobriety. In moments where Sweet Dreams dares to strip back the layers of humor, it reveals a poignant look at the human condition. It explores themes of hope, resilience, and redemption. The characters' vulnerability makes them relatable, drawing the audience in with shared emotions. Overall: Despite its earnest attempt, Sweet Dreams does not quite hit the home run it aspires to. The execution is hindered by genre constraints and a predictable script. The performances, particularly from Knoxville and Lee, shine through. They give the film moments of brilliance that almost manage to elevate it beyond its shortcomings. Sweet Dreams successfully combines comedy, sports, and drama to convey the transformative power of community. It offers laughs, poignant moments, and softball antics for a pleasant viewing experience. It's a solid base hit, even if it doesn't quite clear the outfield fence. Read the full article

0 notes

rev3rb · 3 years

Text

Spoilers for the end of DGS2, but the thought has been plaguing me for a while now.

I just can’t stop thinking about how odd it feels that Asougi chose to be a prosecutor in the end. While some of that oddness definitely comes from DGS’s rushed wrap up post 2-5, I also just feel that Asougi’s own reasoning for becoming a prosecutor hits a little wrong.

Narratively I get why he became a prosector. It’s to set him up on an opposite but complementary path to Ryuunosuke (among other things), but I feel like for his own personal story, it doesn’t make a ton of sense the way it was done. At the very least, it feels like it’s a decision Asougi should have made much further down the line.

The rest goes under a cut bc this gets a little long.

When Asougi gives Ryuunosuke Karuma, he explains why he wants to become a prosuctor, saying the following:

“Because I’ve seen it now. I’ve seen what’s inside me. The demon that reared its ugly head that day. It was only for the briefest of moments, the last time I came face to face with that inspector... but it was unmistakable, I wanted to kill him. I’ve always known there are demons that live inside people. And now I know there is one in me. The fact that it very nearly consumed me is something I’ll carry with me until the end of my days... while I devote my life to fighting those whose demons have got the better of them... as a prosecutor!”

I don’t know if it’s just me, but if anything, it feels like this should reinforce Asougi’s want to be a defense attorney. Maybe that’s a little odd, but bear with me here.

He’s basically saying that while he knew that there were bad people out there with ‘darkness in their hearts’ (essentially), he’s come to realize that he too has this potential to do bad in him. If anything, shouldn’t that make him realize that good people can do bad things? Shouldn’t that make him realize that there are people out there who make mistakes? Wouldn’t it then make more sense that he’d feel compelled to help those people?

I understand that getting convicted of murder results in capital punishment here, but wouldn’t that make for a great new shift or addition in Asougi’s original goal of wanting to change the justice system? Now that he understands that good people can mess up, wouldn’t trying to change the law so that convictions aren’t necessarily so harsh be a great goal for him?

Sure, I get that Asougi’s goal wasn’t as noble as you’re initially lead to believe as it really had more to do with wanting revenge and all that, but with how he talked in 1-1, I can’t help but think it wasn’t all fake. I like to think that Asougi really did have ambition to change the legal system along with his goals of finding out what happened to/getting revenge for his father. But we’ll never really know since DGS2 couldn’t give us time to properly talk to Asougi about stuff like that.

Yeah, he can do this from the prosecutor’s side of things. No doubt that it would be much easier that way in universe, so in that instance his reasoning for becoming a prosecutor would track. However, from the way Asougi’s talking here, that doesn’t appear to be his goal at all. It really does come off more as “I want to contain the darkness within me while I punish those who let that darkness get the better of them.” It feels rather harsh, even if I’m unsure that it’s supposed to come off that way.

On top of all that, I feel like a character having this kind of goal would fit well with the themes of the game. DGS’s characters are not as black and white (for the most part) as the characters in the mainline games. Take a look at the true culprits across both DGS games. A number of them never intended to hurt anyone, and some that did never intended to kill anyone. There’s grey morality everywhere, and yet if a person is convicted of murder, they’re faced with capital punishment. (The games themselves sorta get around this by having the less guilty characters not actually kill anyone, which feels like a bit of a cop out, but I guess we can’t be too morally grey now can we?) A character trying to align the universe’s punishments with the grey morality seems like it’d be a nice fit, and interesting to boot, but I digress.

To bring things back to Asougi specifically, I suppose another way to read what he said is that this realization caused Asougi to lose faith in people, something he’s said is vital to being a defense attorney. In which case, becoming a prosecutor is his only real option if he wants to still become a lawyer, but there’s another issue I take with it.

When Asougi first tells Ryuunosuke he’s going to be prosecutor, he says he’s going to study under van Zieks to become as formidable as he is. The problem is that, not but a few days earlier, Asougi said that he’d never be able to forgive van Zieks. While that doesn’t mean that Asougi wouldn’t be able to work with van Zieks, it would no doubt be difficult due to those lingering feelings of resentment. On one hand, this tells us that Asougi is putting aside his feelings to better himself as a lawyer, which is good, but it feels very odd that Asougi would have such a change in attitude towards van Zieks in such a short time period.

Not only that, but van Zieks also no doubt has some conflicted feelings towards Asougi as well. Without getting into a big analysis on how van Zieks might feel towards Asougi himself post 2-5, I feel it’s safe to say that those feelings would be complex. Add on that Van Zieks has purposefully distanced himself from people for years, and while he’s shown that he's slowly moving past his issues, I can’t imagine he and Asougi would get along well at first for the same reasons I stated earlier. They could tolerate each other, yes, and ultimately, I do feel that they’d be able to properly accept everything and become good colleges... but again. That. Takes. Time. Likely a lot of time in their case. It’s just not going to be a good environment to learn in at that point in time.

It honestly feels like they’d get on better if they were rivals in the courtroom where they can grow to appreciate each other’s abilities without having to actually directly interact much at first like how van Zieks and Ryuunosuke did. From that point it would make a ton more sense if Asougi were to decide he wanted to change sides. Then again, maybe that anamosity and tentative truce would escalate if they were on opposite sides of the courtroom...

But look. All I’m saying is imagine if Asougi stuck with being a defense attorney and tried to change the law surrounding convictions. He ultimately could have become a defense attorney like Raymond Shields, where he takes guilty clients who deserve some sympathy in an attempt to get them less harsh punishments. It would have been cool.

TLDR: Prosecutor Asougi works, but it feels like a weird and awkward choice at that point in time. On the other hand, defense attorney Asougi could have been really cool.

#DGS #DGS spoilers #DGS2 #DGS2 spoilers #TGAA #TGAA spoilers #TGAAC #TGAAC spoilers #Kazuma Asougi #The Great Ace Attorney #The Great Ace Attorney spoilers #why are there so many tags for this game #anyways it's 3 am and this could be put together much better #Prosecutor Asougi probably isn't as odd as I'm thinking it is #The oddest thing is probably his decision to wear all white #please get a new outfit Asougi #I don't mean to say that Asougi becoming a prosecutor only makes sense in the ways I outlinned #I realized that in hindsight #I had some points about how Asougi feels like he's handling the prosecution from a defense attorney's perspective too #it drew on the difference between how van Zieks handles 2-3 compared to Asougi in 2-4 and 2-5 #but ultimately the situations are so different that it felt like it wasn't quite right to compare them #there were a lot of things affecting Asougi in 2-4 and 2-5 outside of the duties of a lawyer #it was doing Asougi a disservice to compare the cases #the way I was doing it at least #plus that new take on prosecution is sorta intentional too with what the story tells us #My posts

38 notes · View notes

letterboxd · 3 years

Photo

Blurring the Line.

As a new Space Jam film beams down to Earth, Kambole Campbell argues that a commitment to silliness and a sincere love for the medium is what it takes to make a great live-action/animation hybrid.

The live-action and animation hybrid movie is something of a dicey prospect. It’s tricky to create believable interaction between what’s real and what’s drawn, puppeteered or rendered—and blending the live and the animated has so far resulted in wild swings in quality. It is a highly specific and technically demanding niche, one with only a select few major hits, though plenty of cult oddities. So what makes a good live-action/animation hybrid?

To borrow words from Hayao Miyazaki, “live action is becoming part of that whole soup called animation”. Characters distinct from the humans they interact with, but rendered as though they were real creatures (or ghosts), are everywhere lately; in Paddington, in Scooby Doo, in David Lowery’s (wonderful) update of Pete’s Dragon.

The original ‘Pete’s Dragon’ (1977) alongside the 2016 remake.

Lowery’s dragon is realized with highly realistic lighting and visual-effects work. By comparison, the cartoon-like characters in the 1977 Pete’s Dragon—along with other films listed in Louise’s handy compendium of Disney’s live-action animation—are far more exaggerated. That said, there’s still the occasional holdout for the classical version of these crossovers: this year’s Tom and Jerry replicating the look of 2D through 3D/CGI animation, specifically harkens back to the shorts of the 1940s and ’50s.

One type of live-action/animation hybrid focuses on seamless immersion, the other is interested in exploring the seams themselves. Elf (2003) uses the aberration of stop-motion animals to represent the eponymous character as a fish out of water. Ninjababy, a Letterboxd favorite from this year’s SXSW Festival, employs an animated doodle as a representation of the protagonist’s state of mind while she processes her unplanned pregnancy.

Meanwhile, every Muppets film ever literally tears at the seams until we’re in stitches, but, for the sake of simplicity, puppets are not invited to this particular party. What we are concerned with here is the overlap between hand-drawn animation and live-action scenes (with honorable mentions of equally valid stop-motion work), and the ways in which these hybrids have moved from whimsical confections to nod-and-wink blockbusters across a century of cinema.

Betty Boop and Koko the clown in a 1938 instalment of the Fleischer brothers’ ‘Out of the Inkwell’ series.

Early crossovers often involve animators playing with their characters, in scenarios such as the inventive Out of the Inkwell series of shorts from Rotoscope inventor Max Fleischer and his director brother Dave. Things get even more interactive mid-century, when Gene Kelly holds hands with Jerry Mouse in Anchors Aweigh.

The 1960s and ’70s deliver ever more delightful family fare involving human actors entering cartoon worlds, notably in the Robert Stevenson-directed Mary Poppins and Bedknobs and Broomsticks, and Chuck Jones’ puntastic The Phantom Tollbooth.

Jerry and Gene dance off their worries in ‘Anchors Aweigh’ (1945).

Mary Poppins is one of the highest-rated live-action/animation hybrids on Letterboxd for good reason. Its sense of control in how it engages with its animated creations makes it—still!—an incredibly engaging watch. It is simply far less evil than the singin’, dancin’ glorification of slavery in Disney’s Song of the South (1946), and far more engaging than Victory Through Air Power (1943), a war-propaganda film about the benefits of long-range bombing in the fight against Hitler. The studio’s The Reluctant Dragon (1941) also serves a propagandistic function, as a behind-the-scenes studio tour made when the studio’s animators were striking.

By comparison, Mary Poppins’ excursions into the painted world—replicated in Rob Marshall’s belated, underrated 2018 sequel, Mary Poppins Returns—are full of magical whimsicality. “Films have added the gimmick of making animation and live characters interact countless times, but paradoxically none as pristine-looking as this creation,” writes Edgar in this review. “This is a visual landmark, a watershed… the effect of making everything float magically, to the detail of when a drawing should appear in front or the back of [Dick] Van Dyke is a creation beyond my comprehension.” (For Van Dyke, who played dual roles as Bert and Mr Dawes Senior, the experience sparked a lifelong love of animation and visual effects.)

Julie Andrews, Dick Van Dyke and penguins, in ‘Mary Poppins’ (1964).

Generally speaking, and the Mary Poppins sequel aside, more contemporary efforts seek to subvert this feeling of harmony and control, instead embracing the chaos of two worlds colliding, the cartoons there to shock rather than sing. Henry Selick’s frequently nightmarish James and the Giant Peach (1996) leans into this crossover as something uncanny and macabre by combining live action with stop motion, as its young protagonist eats his way into another world, meeting mechanical sharks and man-eating rhinos. Sally Jane Black describes it as “riding the Burton-esque wave of mid-’90s mall goth trends and blending with the differently demonic Dahl story”.

Science-classroom staple Osmosis Jones (2001) finds that within the human body, the internal organs serve as cities full of drawn white-blood-cell cops. The late Stephen Hillenburg’s The Spongebob Squarepants Movie (2004) turns its real-life humans into living cartoons themselves, particularly in a bonkers sequence featuring David Hasselhoff basically turning into a speedboat.

David Hasselhoff picks up speed in ‘The Spongebob Squarepants Movie’ (2004).

The absurdity behind the collision of the drawn and the real is never better embodied than in another of our highest-rated live/animated hybrids. Released in 1988, Robert Zemeckis’ Who Framed Roger Rabbit shows off a deep understanding—narratively and aesthetically—of the material that it’s parodying, seeking out the impeccable craftsmanship of legends such as director of animation Richard Williams (1993’s The Thief and the Cobbler), and his close collaborator Roy Naisbitt. The forced perspectives of Naisbitt’s mind-bending layouts provide much of the rocket fuel driving the film’s madcap cartoon opening.

Distributed by Walt Disney Pictures, Roger Rabbit utilizes the Disney stable of characters as well as the Looney Tunes cast to harken back to America’s golden age of animation. It continues a familiar scenario where the ’toons themselves are autonomous actors (as also seen in Friz Freleng’s 1940 short You Ought to Be in Pictures, in which Daffy Duck convinces Porky Pig to try his acting luck in the big studios).

Daffy Duck plots his rise up the acting ranks in ‘You Ought to Be in Pictures’ (1940).

Through this conceit, Zemeckis is able to celebrate the craft of animation, while pastiching both Chinatown, the noir genre, and the mercenary nature of the film industry (“the best part is… they work for peanuts!” a studio exec says of the cast of Fantasia). As Eddie Valiant, Bob Hoskins’ skepticism and disdain towards “toons” is a giant parody of Disney’s more traditional approach to matching humans and drawings.

Adult audiences are catered for with plenty of euphemistic humor and in-jokes about the history of the medium. It’s both hilarious (“they… dropped a piano on him,” one character solemnly notes of his son) and just the beginning of Hollywood toying with feature-length stories in which people co-exist with cartoons, rather than dipping in and out of fantasy sequences. It’s not just about how the cartoons appear on the screen, but how the human world reacts to them, and Zemeckis gets a lot of mileage out of applying ’toon lunacy to our world.

Bob Hoskins in ‘Who Framed Roger Rabbit?’ (1988).

The groundbreaking optical effects and compositing are excellent (and Hoskins’ amazing performance should also be credited for holding all of it together), but what makes Roger Rabbit such a hit is that sense of controlled chaos and a clever tonal weaving of violence and noirish seediness (“I’m not bad… I’m just drawn that way”) through the cartoony feel. And it is simply very, very funny.

It could be said that, with Roger Rabbit, Zemeckis unlocked the formula for how to modernize the live-action and animation hybrid, by leaning into a winking parody of what came before. It worked so perfectly well that it helped kickstart the ‘Disney renaissance' era of animation. Roger Rabbit has influenced every well-known live-action/animation hybrid produced since, proving that there is success and fun to be had by completely upending Mary Poppins-esque quirks. Even Disney’s delightful 2007 rom-com Enchanted makes comedy out of the idea of cartoons crossing that boundary.

When a cartoon character meets real-world obstacles.

Even when done well, though, hybrids are not an automatic hit. Sitting at a 2.8-star average, Joe Dante’s stealthily great Looney Tunes: Back in Action (2003) is considered by the righteous to be the superior live-action/animated Looney Tunes hybrid, harkening back to the world of Chuck Jones and Frank Tashlin. SilentDawn states that the film deserves the nostalgic reverence reserved for Space Jam: “From gag to gag, set piece to set piece, Back in Action is utterly bonkers in its logic-free plotting and the constant manipulation of busy frames.”

With its Tinseltown parody, Back in Action pulls from the same bag of tricks as Roger Rabbit; here, the Looney Tunes characters are famous, self-entitled actors. Dante cranks the meta comedy up to eleven, opening the film with Matthew Lillard being accosted by Shaggy for his performance in the aforementioned Scooby Doo movie (and early on throwing in backhanded jokes about the practice of films like itself as one character yells, “I was brought in to leverage your synergy!”).

Daffy Duck with more non-stop banter in ‘Looney Tunes: Back in Action’ (2003).

Back in Action is even more technically complex than Roger Rabbit, seamlessly bringing Looney Tunes physics and visual language into the real world. Don’t forget that Dante had been here before, when he had Anthony banish Ethel into a cartoon-populated television show in his segment of Twilight Zone: The Movie. Another key to this seamlessness is star Brendan Fraser, at the height of his powers here as “Brendan Fraser’s stunt double”.

Like Hoskins before him, Fraser brings a wholehearted commitment to playing the fed-up straight man amidst cartoon zaniness. Fraser also brought that dedication to Henry Selick's Monkeybone (2001), a Roger Rabbit-inspired sex comedy that deploys a combo of stop-motion animation and live acting in a premise amusingly close to that of 1992’s Cool World (but more on that cult anomaly shortly). A commercial flop, Back in Action was the last cinematic outing for the Looney Tunes for some time.

Nowadays, when we think of live-action animation, it’s hard not to jump straight to an image of Michael Jordan’s arm stretching to do a half-court dunk to save the Looney Tunes from slavery. There’s not a lot that can be fully rationalized about the 1996 box-office smash, Space Jam. It is a bewildering cartoon advert for Michael Jordan’s baseball career, dreamed up off the back of his basketball retirement, while also mashing together different American icons. Never forget that the soundtrack—one that, according to Benjamin, “makes you have to throw ass”—includes a song with B-Real, Coolio, Method Man and LL Cool J.

Michael Jordan and teammates in ‘Space Jam’ (1996).

Space Jam is a film inherently born to sell something, predicated on the existing success of a Nike commercial rather than any obvious passion for experimentation. But its pure strangeness, a growing nostalgia for the nineties, and meticulous compositing work from visual-effects supervisor Ed Jones and the film’s animation team (a number of whom also worked on both Roger Rabbit and Back in Action), have all kept it in the cultural memory.

The films is backwards, writes Jesse, in that it wants to distance itself from the very cartoons it leverages: “This really almost feels like a follow-up to Looney Tunes: Back in Action, rather than a predecessor, because it feels like someone watched the later movie, decided these Looney Tunes characters were a problem, and asked someone to make sure they were as secondary as possible.” That attempt to place all the agency in Jordan’s hands was a point of contention for Chuck Jones, the legendary Warner Bros cartoonist. He hated the film, stating that Bugs would never ask for help and would have dealt with the aliens in seven minutes.

Space Jam has its moments, however. Guy proclaims “there is nothing that Deadpool as a character will ever have to offer that isn’t done infinitely better by a good Bugs Bunny bit”. For some, its problems are a bit more straightforward, for others it’s a matter of safety in sport. But the overriding sentiments surrounding the film point to a sort of morbid fascination with the brazenness of its concept.

Holli Would (voiced by Kim Basinger) and Frank Harris (Brad Pitt) blur the lines in ‘Cool World’ (1992).

Existing in the same demented… space… as Space Jam, Paramount Pictures bought the idea for Cool World from Ralph Bakshi as it sought to have its own Roger Rabbit. While Brad Pitt described it as “Roger Rabbit on acid” ahead of release, Cool World itself looks like a nightmare version of Toontown. The film was universally panned at the time, caught awkwardly between being far too adult for children but too lacking in any real substance for adults (there’s something of a connective thread between Jessica Rabbit, Lola Bunny and Holli Would).

Ralph Bakshi’s risqué and calamitously horny formal experiment builds on the animator’s fascination with the relationship between the medium and the human body. Of course, he would go from the immensely detailed rotoscoping of Fire and Ice (1983) to clashing hand-drawn characters with real ones, something he had already touched upon in the seventies with Heavy Traffic and Coonskin, whose animated characters were drawn into real locations. But no one besides Bakshi quite knew what to do with the perverse concept of Brad Pitt as a noir detective trying to stop Gabriel Byrne’s cartoonist from having sex with a character that he drew—an animated Kim Basinger.

Jack Deebs (Gabriel Byrne) attempts to cross over to Hollie Would in ‘Cool World’ (1992).

Cool World’s awkwardness can be attributed to stilted interactions between Byrne, Pitt and the animated world, as well as studio meddling. Producer Frank Mancuso Jr (who was on the film due to his father running Paramount) demanded that the film be reworked into something PG-rated, against Bakshi’s wishes (he envisioned an R-rated horror), and the script was rewritten in secret. It went badly, so much so that Bakshi eventually punched Mancuso Jr in the face.

While Cool World averages two stars on Letterboxd, there are some enthusiastic holdouts. There are the people impressed by the insanity of it all, those who just love them a horny toon, and then there is Andrew, a five-star Cool World fan: “On the surface, it’s a Lovecraftian horror with Betty Boop as the villain, featuring a more impressive cityscape than Blade Runner and Dick Tracy combined, and multidimensional effects that make In the Mouth of Madness look like trash. The true star, however, proves to be the condensed surplus of unrelated gags clogging the arteries of the screen—in every corner is some of the silliest cel animation that will likely ever be created.”

There are even those who enjoy its “clear response to Who Framed Roger Rabbit”, with David writing that “the film presents a similar concept through the lens of the darkly comic, perverted world of the underground cartoonists”, though also noting that without Bakshi’s original script, the film is “a series of half steps and never really commits like it could”. Cool World feels both completely deranged and strangely low-energy, caught between different ideas as to how best to mix the two mediums. But it did give us a David Bowie jam.

‘Space Jam: A New Legacy’ is in cinemas and on HBO Max now.

Craft is of course important, but generally speaking, maybe nowadays a commitment to silliness and a sincere love for the medium’s history is the thing that makes successful live-action/animation hybrids click. It’s an idea that doesn’t lend itself to being too cool, or even entirely palatable. The trick is to be as fully dotty as Mary Poppins, or steer into the gaucheness of the concept, à la Roger Rabbit and Looney Tunes: Back in Action.

It’s quite a tightrope to walk between good meta-comedy and a parade of references to intellectual property. The winningest strategy is to weave the characters into the tapestry of the plot and let the gags grow from there, rather than hoping their very inclusion is its own reward. Wait, you said what is coming out this week?

Related content

Rootfish Jones’s list of cartoons people are horny for

The 100 Sequences that Shaped Animation: the companion list to the Vulture story

Jose Moreno’s list of every animated film made from 1888 to the present

Follow Kambole on Letterboxd

25 notes · View notes

brian-in-finance · 2 years

Text

Kenneth Branagh on the set of Belfast. Photo: Rob Youngson/B) 2021 Focus Features, LLC.

With the idea of the future losing much of its luster, many of us spent the COVID era thinking about the past. But few took it as far as Kenneth Branagh, who used his sudden downtime to write and direct a black-and-white autobiographical drama. Branagh’s Belfast follows a cherubic 9-year-old named Buddy (Jude Hill) whose childhood is upended by the coming of the Troubles. Despite the creeping sectarian violence, the film is grounded in Branagh’s youthful memories of the city: neighborhood banter, schoolyard crushes, enough Van Morrison songs to soundtrack an anti-lockdown protest. “There is something genuinely bold in giving a movie about Belfast in 1969 the warm glow of the everyday,” wrote our critic Bilge Ebiri. “It reminds us that life goes on.”

Belfast premiered to an enthusiastic reception at the Telluride Film Festival and shortly thereafter won the People’s Choice Award at TIFF, catapulting the film into the Oscar conversation. That was exciting news not just for Branagh but also for my father’s family, a collection of siblings around the director’s age who grew up in Derry and were thrilled that Northern Ireland was getting the Hollywood spotlight. As Branagh made the awards-season rounds, I spoke to him on Zoom about fry-ups, his artistic evolution, and — as my aunts and uncles begged me to — how he lost his Belfast accent.

It might be different in the U.K., but in terms of projects that make it to the States, Belfast is the rare movie about the Northern Irish Protestant community. I have my own theories about why that is, but I’m curious about why you think that is.

What are your theories just by the by?

There’s two parts. The first is that, in terms of things made for the U.S., most Irish Americans are Catholic, and so stories from the Catholic perspective are naturally more appealing to the American audience. And the second — without getting into specific choices made by specific Irish Republicans — is that in general, the Catholic community was more of an underdog than the Protestant community. And thus in those stories, the narrative is a little easier to understand. The moral stakes are more legible.

A perfectly rational theory on both counts. I also think that there is an element of the Northern personality that is expressed, semi-comically in our film, through the preacher, who sets up this rather austere, severe view of life. Protestant ministers really were so fire and brimstone–y that there’s almost an innate suspicion in some Protestant minds of telling stories — that it’s rather indulgent, a bit of frippery. Whereas our job is to joylessly move through life getting ready to hopefully make our way out of purgatory.

Was your preacher in real life that kind of fire-and-brimstone Paisleyite guy?

One-hundred percent. My parents got out of churchgoing as soon as they possibly could, but they were stuck into the ritual of it, so we were sent basically to put money onto the plate. It was very theatrical, very stern. It was always presented in this visceral way, always around the word sulfur. You were going to burn — simple as that.

This is probably not the first time you’ve heard this, but the parents in this film are among the most attractive parents ever put onscreen. When you were a child, did you idealize your parents, turn them into these glamorous, larger-than-life figures?

What they had was this incredible fizz, this passion between them. Since the film was made, I’ve come across a few photos of them in the late ’60s. My mother had a big pair of Gina Lollobrigida glasses — very sort of sexy trexy and glamorous. They didn’t have the money, but she definitely had an innate sense of style. And he was very proud of her sassiness. She was one of 11. Her mother died giving birth to her. To survive in that family, you had to shove, fight, and scream, so she was a firebrand. And, of course, those qualities in people often are very attractive. And Jamie’s dry sense of humor was bang in the center of my own father’s. But ultimately, even I didn’t know quite how photographically zingy the pair of them would be. My wife saw the film and said, “Jesus. Please photograph me like that.”

There are some scenes in the film where you shoot Jamie Dornan like he’s a Socialist Realist hero, this titanic figure who’s twenty feet tall.

In those scenes, I felt like I was writing a western. A picture that I love is Clint Eastwood’s Unforgiven. You’ll recall from the poster, it’s shot from behind him, low, and his hands are on a gun. It was the idea of the kid seeing his dad as a mountain. That’s what he needed to see. He also needed to see a big Belfast sky as well. And then you’ve got Billy Clanton [the film’s Protestant militant] who is a kind of tinpot Hitler sneaking into a power vacuum, becoming Jack Palance from Shane: the raven-haired, implacable villain. Somehow we started to put those images together.

I read your book Beginning and was struck by how many scenes in the film come straight from those memories. But one thing that was different was the portrayal of school. You write about a very Dickensian, very cruel experience, which lines up with things my dad has told me. But the school in this movie is a much more positive environment.

What I wanted to retain about the experience of the school was the obsession with the girl, trying to get further up the class. At one stage, it was in the script. For instance, I got the cane from a headmaster for walking across some flower beds one time. But it just felt like too much. It became a different, almost documentary look. What was key to Buddy is that we all put up with this. It wasn’t like I was coming home going, “I can’t believe I got the cane.” My parents would’ve said, “Are you broken? No? All right, then get on with it.”

Did you ever catch up with the girl in real life?

I never did. I always felt that I just wasn’t good enough for her. And I was absolutely convinced that she basically liked people who could do maths better, and I never could.

Do you think if she saw this movie, she’d recognize herself?

I sometimes wonder. I would like to think. Obviously, the names have been changed to protect the innocent. God willing, they’re all still alive and healthy. But I don’t know. There may be some of this she may not even have understood was coming in such a heartfelt way from me. So she may not remember me.

Judi Dench, Jude Hill, and Ciarán Hinds in Belfast. Photo: Rob Youngson/Focus Features

I asked my aunts and uncles what kind of questions I should ask you, and completely independently, they all wanted to know how and when you lost your Belfast accent.

It was in the two or three years after I came across. We left when I was 9, May of 1970. And by the time I left secondary school in the summer of ’72, it was probably gone. I think it was to do with wanting to disappear. I wanted to just fit in.

It’s funny: When we came across, there was no desire on my parents’ part to keep up with the Joneses. They had no interest in additional social status or anything. They came over, and they did the things that they did back home. My dad played the horses. My mother played bingo. But we were thrown into a very different social class. From working class, we went to lower middle class. And it was a world that didn’t really understand our world.

As we all became a bit more insular, [my accent] kind of rubbed off. There were a couple of years of not even knowing it was happening, then feeling a bit bad about it. So for a while, I was English in school and Irish at home. And then it started happening at home. My parents didn’t comment about it. I think they felt it was natural enough.

When you went back for the Billy plays [a trio of BBC dramas from the early ’80s about a working-class Belfast family that served as Branagh’s first big break], did you find yourself putting it back on again?

No, I didn’t, but it’s interesting. I went back with a friend of mine, the guy who plays the best friend — an excellent actor who’s a policeman now, called Colum Convey. When we got on the plane on the way to Belfast on the Sunday night before the first day of rehearsals, Colum said to me [in a Cockney accent], “Now, listen, Ken. From tomorrow, I’m going to be completely Belfast. All right?” And that’s what he did. The next day, it was like meeting a completely different guy. Whereas I didn’t feel comfortable with that. I had the mickey taken out of me left, right, and center, but I would do the part and then I would step back into the way I sounded. I’ve never been good at doing that totally immersive thing.

I first became aware of you in the ’90s. In the version of you that made its way over to American audiences, you were presented as sort of England incarnate. It wasn’t until later that I learned of your Northern Irish heritage. Were you cognizant of that disparity? And did that ever give you any sort of identity crisis?

I don’t know about an identity crisis, but I was aware of that disparity. This film, in a way, goes back to understanding what infused my storytelling DNA. It’s very much forged by my background. You can tell from this film: How far away could [working-class Belfast] be from doing Shakespeare in English accents? But my drive to do it was partly to say to my parents, “Look, we can enjoy this as well.” You don’t have to have been to Oxford, Cambridge, Yale, Harvard, Princeton. If it speaks to you, it speaks to you.

And yet I think there was an assumption that I was part of what you might call the English elite or that I would have come from one of those places. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with that; I’m just saying there were perhaps some assumptions made. I don’t know about identity crises, but all I knew was, God, I couldn’t be what people thought of me: a spoiled posh boy or something. It’s not important enough to try to correct people: “You realize I’ve got proper working-class Belfast credentials here, mate.” But this [film] was a chance to allow the truth that the mix of whatever spawned me as an artist was happening back then.

In the book, you mention that the phenomenon you call “Branagh-bashing” began fairly early on. What do you think it was that made you such an easy target?

I think it was as simple as overexposure in the media. I was absolutely unaware, though people might say, “How could you not be?” We ran a theater company that became a film company, and in doing what I felt was my duty to everybody else involved, I basically spoke to whoever I was pointed at to bang the drum for it. There comes a point where you go, Enough already. I was 27 when I directed Henry V. I was 29 when I got double-nominated as an actor and director in the Academy. For some people, that is incredibly annoying, and they think, Fuck him. As if I was wandering around talking about the cleverness of me when I can assure you I wasn’t. Although, no doubt, I’m sure I was capable of being cocky and arrogant and stupid.

In those early days you were putting yourself on a very ragged schedule: During breaks for one project, you’re writing something, directing something else, rehearsing yet another thing. How long were you able to keep up that pace?

I always had some sense of seizing the day, that you might not have the opportunity again. I had an enormous amount of joy in the work, and I think that always drove me. That kind of crazy schedulizing went through about 2000, when we made Love’s Labour’s Lost. I remember waking up at the Essex House hotel, Central Park South in New York, on the morning when the New York Times review, not good, came out for that film. And it was not alone. I remember thinking, Oh, fuck. That sort of took the wind out of my sails. It wasn’t that I couldn’t do it, but I’d just been in the boxing ring for quite a long time, and I’d taken quite a few punches. I didn’t feel burnt-out, but I did feel bashed-up. Didn’t consider it catastrophic, but I knew I had to ease up a bit.

Do you still pay attention to reviews, or have you learned to cut yourself off?

I have learned that, but you can’t help but pick up on it. You’ll get that response: “Oh God, I’m so cross with that writer X. Don’t you listen to a word of it.” I don’t know what you’re talking about, but now I know somebody said something appalling. You can’t be too insulated — otherwise, you won’t get feedback. But plugging into the sort of vast plethora of how the thing is spoken about, I resist to the maximum. And to be honest, I do respect the contrary opinion. I’m at a point in my life where I understand you can’t please all the people all the time, and sometimes the ones you don’t please are much more interesting.

Do you have a personal contrary opinion?

I believe that Tottenham Hotspur will win the Premiership this year. I would suggest that is contrary to most people’s opinions.

My uncle Thomas is also a Spurs fan. Why are there so many of you in Belfast?

Danny Blanchflower. He was a Northern Irishman who won the Footballer of the Year title in ’57 and ’61. In ’61, he captained the Tottenham Hotspur double-winning side. They’ve never done it since. He also captained the Northern Irish team to the last eight of the 1958 World Cup. He was the one guy in the history of the program This Is Your Life — where a celebrity is ambushed and all the people in their life come into the studio — who just refused to do it. That was how singular he was, Danny Blanchflower. There’s something about that character that is very Northern Irish. Some would call it belligerence; some would call it strong-minded and sort of inspiring. He had a strong position and held it even though it might be exceptional.

In early reviews, you were spoken of as an actor who also directed. At what point did you feel as if your filmmaking talent reached the level of your acting talent?

I didn’t think about my acting talent in any sort of particular high pitch or anything — simply that that’s what I did. I think it’s probably taken till now, to be honest, to begin to understand. This film is partly involved with that. I was surrounded by people who told stories all the time, told jokes, made stuff up. The telling of tales was something inbuilt. Sometimes you performed it, and sometimes you watched other people do it. But the idea that I’d ever do any of this [professionally] was so … I think of that little kid on the pavement reading a Thor comic. If you’d said, “Oh, by the way, 9-year-old, when you’re 50, you’ll be directing Thor, the fourth film in what will become the cinema-dominating universe of the 21st century,” I would’ve thought you’d come from Venus.

You lacked the context to know how a person would even get from there to here.

How do you make films? How do you tell stories? What is directing? What is acting? Work was, You’d be a plumber or a chippy; you worked in a shop; if you’re lucky, insurance company or whatever. Or you went in the army or British Rail. The other stuff wasn’t on our radar.

There’s been some discussion among critics about the wake scene at the end of the film with “Everlasting Love.” The first time I saw it, I just took it completely straight. But I’ve heard other people call it a dream sequence. Is it meant to be ambiguous, or is one of us completely wrong?

I don’t mind if it seems ambiguous. But the truth I was trying to get from it was that the moment after the burial had to be an expression of the opposite of what people had just felt: the dark, joyless, awful grief of losing someone so loved. These were wild nights in the sense of they were frenzied, they were passionate, and they were a release. People would try to make that moment bigger than their lives — a proper piece of closure that is a supernova for the end of this person’s life.

Whose idea was it for Jamie to sing? I’ve noticed he enjoys a musical number in many of his films.

He’s essentially singing alongside the recorded track there and then, but we recorded him afterward, and he has got a terrific voice. As you may know, he sang it live at the L.A. premiere. Ballsy thing to do, but he did a grand job.

Jamie is somebody who really goes for it, and he was ready to dance and sing. Also, it’s a great lyric for that moment in their relationship. What the film talks about is what Noël Coward famously wrote, rather patronizingly: “Extraordinary how potent cheap music is.” I would say that it’s a profound lyric even though it’s in a pop song. But that’s what we were: consumers of what others might call low culture.

You’ve written very movingly about the smells of Belfast. Is there a particular smell that brings you back to your youth?

Well, the sea you smell, or the loch, as it is. My mother used to eat cockles, and we would go to Donaghadee Beach to eat whelk. We’d get them off the rocks; you probably couldn’t do it now. But you get whelks, and you bring them back, and you boil them. Sometimes put vinegar on, sometimes put butter on. My mother used to have this deeply fishy smell.

The movie used to have a whole theme of dodgy food that was left out. The smell of tripe — Jesus Christ. Poached tripe in milk, you’d be tasting it for a month. And the other thing — not so bad but rough to look at — were pig’s trotters. Cooked for hours and hours. You’d try and find a piece of meat in there. It’s an incredible mystery to get a bit of protein out of a pig’s trotter. Fish and ham is what I smell.

There was a lot of family curiosity about food, particularly the ingredients that make a fry-up. They wanted to know if you preferred potato farls or soda bread.

Both. I had an uncle who used to make it this way: He would melt half a pound of white cap lard. Then he used to put the soda bread in, and he’d sort of boil it. And he would press down on the soda bread until it soaked it up. Then he put the potato farls in there, they’d swim around. All the pieces would soak up the fat. He’d take all the bread out, put aside. Then he would melt another half-pound of lard, into which he’d put sausages, black pudding, tomatoes, bacon, mushrooms. It was a beautiful thing to eat, but you really didn’t need to have another one for a decade.

Remember… I think of that little kid on the pavement reading a Thor comic. If you’d said, “Oh, by the way, 9-year-old, when you’re 50, you’ll be directing Thor, the fourth film in what will become the cinema-dominating universe of the 21st century,” I would’ve thought you’d come from Venus. — Sir Kenneth Branagh

#Tait rhymes with hat #Good times #BelfastMovie #Interview #Vulture #7 January 2022 #Belfast #Worldwide 2022

6 notes · View notes

anncanta · 3 years

Text

‘Dracula’ and ‘Doctor Who’. Blood is testimony

Stephen Moffat is often accused of using similar plots, repeating the same plot lines, and returning to a number of his favorite ideas.

Moffat really develops a certain set of specific, quite recognizable topics, and in his different scripts, he one way or another tells similar stories.

But with his recurring motives and ideas, as, indeed, with another stuff, not everything is so simple.

First, the outstanding authors are most often accompanied by craving for certain narratives and archetypal forms, as well as cross-cutting themes. Some of this authors create ‘frames’ for these ideas in the form of multivolume novels or novel cycles, others devote wreaths of sonnets and collections of stories to their favorite topic, and others choose whole genres for reflection on issues that are important to them. I think that none of those reading this article will have any difficulties with examples.

Secondly, there are not so many really interesting stories.

And thirdly, repetitions can be different. Like any feature, it can exist on its own, or it can – if the author has a large-scale talent – become another way to tell a story like no one else do.

In Stephen Moffat's case, we are dealing with a very unique situation where the author's stories are literally read through one another.

I will make a separate reservation: I am not talking about postmodern ‘intertextuality’ – a vile definition for references and quotations that have existed in literature since the emergence of storytelling and are news only for postmodernists themselves – but about a peculiar use of certain plots and motives.

If you want, you can find a huge number of such things in Moffat's scripts. The viewers who have been closely following his work since the period when he became the showrunner of Doctor Who will immediately name a dozen of them. But I would like to dwell on one example – the newest one for today.

When the TV series Dracula by Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss was released on BBC and Netflix in 2020, some viewers noted the similarity of its style, and in some places, the plot outline, with Doctor Who, and directly called the main character of the film, Agatha Van Helsing, the female version of the Doctor.

The first is obvious, and the second is quite understandable in light of the two years earlier release (absolutely disastrous, in my opinion) of the eleventh and twelfth seasons of Doctor Who.

But the beauty of both Moffat's game and the whole story is that there`s not Agatha who is the Doctor here.

Yes, by all appearances, it is this brave, interested in science, well acquainted with evil, fighting against it and even – partly – traveling through time, the heroine who seems most suitable for the role of the Doctor in the new setting. There was a calculation for this: Moffat, during his time as the showrunner of the series, who, it seems, tried all the plot possibilities except this one, and who left on the eve of the epochal transformation of the character, it would seem, had to offer the audience his version of the female Doctor. Well, he did: on the surface. As if he said: ‘Here is a heroine with such qualities. This is how you imagine her, isn`t it? Well, get it.’

And inside this shell, as inside the unfortunate Jonathan Harker (Moffat, as a true Briton, uses materialized metaphors and often literally shows what he means), there is another story.

In order to understand it, you need to take a close look at Dracula and – at Doctor Who written by Moffat.

With Dracula everything is simple. As soon as you start looking for the main character of this film who: a) lives for several centuries; b) collects human stories; c) travels in time; d) always has one or more people next to him – you instantly find him. And if you've watched an entire episode and a half and still don't understand anything, in the middle of the second one you will hear a direct quote.

'The sophistication of a gentleman, Agatha, is always a veneer.'

'Even a gentleman like Mr. Balaur?'

'Mr. Who?'

But that's just one detail.

A deeper level opens if you try to read Dracula through Doctor Who itself.

In the Christmas special Twice upon a time, which ends the last season, written by Stephen Moffat, the plot is centered on the Doctor's encounter with strange creatures, as if made of glass, which are living vaults of memory. The episode itself is full of layered ideas and references. But for us now only one dimension is important.

At the very end of the special, the Doctor addresses the glass creatures with an ardent speech – one of those that he loves so much.

‘You're just memories, held in glass. Do you know how many of you I could fill? I would shatter you. My testimony would shatter all of you. A life this long, do you understand what it is? It's a battlefield. And it's empty. Because everyone else has fallen.’

Does this remind you of anything?

It seems to me that this is a literal description of what is happening with Dracula.

What he says throughout the film, and what Agatha did not understand even at the end, because in order to understand this, you had to live his life.

And in order to understand this whole context, you need to understand that the Doctor was never a good guy. He always said this to everyone but no one believed him.

No one believed the stories of the horror before which entire civilizations tremble, about a creature that destroyed its entire species in order to stop the most destructive war in history, about the person who does not need weapons so that the captains of warships flocked from the most distant corners of the Universe, after listening to him for a couple of minutes, ran away without looking back.

The Doctor was never a good guy, but just as important, he always knew it. For the Doctor of Russell T. Davis, this position looks like a fact with which neither the character himself nor the people around him and aliens are very inclined to interact. I guess it’s a matter of Davis’ very outlook on the story and perhaps his own worldview.

But the Doctor of Moffat is a hero who lives with this knowledge and with the impossibility of passing this knowledge on to others.

Because the Doctor is always the one they are waiting for, the one they go to for advice, the one with whom they travel around the Universe, the one who opens the door to the magical world, the one they hope for.

He is never the one who sits on the roof of the TARDIS, surrounded by the loneliness of the starry sky. Not someone who lives longer than any human being, not someone who knows what it means to make monstrous decisions in circumstances that most of us cannot imagine.

And the one in whom there is so much testimony that it is able to break the vessel that they will try to fill with.

In Dracula, all these details, motives, and meanings are repeated sequentially.

The most obvious is ‘blood is testimony’. This is not self-quotation, as it might seem, but a literal proposal of the author to look in a certain direction.

The blood in Dracula is not only memory. It's also a way to watch. And to see a bright and diverse world, which otherwise would have become boring long ago.

In the fifth season of Doctor Who, there is a moment when Eleventh says to Amy Pond, ‘You don't understand. I have the whole Universe in my backyard. I'm used to it. I don’t notice it. But when you appear, I look with your eyes. And it becomes a miracle again.’*

In this sense, the ‘brides’ and everyone that Dracula ate are in some way his companions. If you remember what a great sense of guilt towards most of his companions the Doctor felt and how some of them ended up, the comparison turns out to be not so poor.

Dracula, like the Doctor, has companions with whom he has a very special relationship that he cannot explain to himself. He travels through time and space, discovering one day that all human experience is stored and cataloged somewhere in his head, and there is nothing new.

And – as is often the case in Moffat's stories – here one character completes and harmoniously implements a theme started by another.

If the Doctor, being who he is, and fully aware of this, tormented by endless insatiable loneliness and memories of life as an empty battlefield, invariably continues the path that seems to him more and more meaningless, then Dracula decided to end the life like that.

And all this, the whole story, is organized as a transition, as a movement forward and backward in time, which unites and brings to life what is dissolved, inherent, basically exists, and ‘spilled’ in blood. The blood here is also the same as the space in the Doctor Who, it is the Universe, which belongs to everyone and flows inside everyone, and inside which everyone exists, and which determines everyone. In order for blood to become an individuality, it takes time, a specific moment at which each specific individuality comes to the surface. So, for example, the return of Agatha takes place. There must be something she wants to come back for. Like the TARDIS, blood is always within us and speaks through us. In the case of Dracula and Agatha, this is their bond, their love for each other. Even if this love is unaware, – sometimes the TARDIS acts on her own and travels wherever she wants, forcing the Doctor and his companions to act in the circumstances she suggests.

And all this, this whole context, the whole story, with all its dimensions and additional meanings, became possible only due to the fact that Stephen Moffat, the author of both series, is not afraid to describe ambiguous heroes, to reflect out loud on their adventures, and – sometimes – to repeat.

* The words of Eleventh quoted from memory.

#dracula 2020 #bbc dracula #count dracula #agatha van helsing #doctor who #moffat

9 notes · View notes

bookandcover · 3 years

Photo

I really, really enjoyed this book! Philip Pullman is simply a masterful storyteller, and you feel throughout this book that you’re in the hands of a pro, comfortable and content to follow as he pulls you through twists and turns, reveals and connections as circuitous, and yet as inescapable, as the powerfully overflowing Thames.

If you summarize this book, it sounds simple: two kids rescue a baby from a flood. I could imagine a version of this book that would be boring, with none of the honesty and realness that pervades these pages. I’m not sure what it is about Pullman’s writing, but you are simply invested from the beginning. Even in the early section of the book that sets up Malcolm as a character, his simple life at The Trout, and his relationship with the nuns across the river, I was fully engaged. Often, when I sit down to read, I have a bit of detachment for a while—I’m aware that I’m reading—before I can enter the mind space of the story. That was never the case for this book; I always dropped immediately into Malcolm’s world. That world is real, present, fully-formed. Part of this is that the world of The Book of Dust: La Belle Sauvage (and of all of His Dark Materials) is not over-written nor over-explained, but it’s fully imagined. We sense that this is a real and complex place without knowing all the ins-and-outs of its complexity. It’s not hinted at, nor teased to the reader, because it doesn’t need to be; it simply is.

Once Malcolm, Alice, and Lyra set off down river, the tension in the book rises along with the flood waters. Their pursuer Gerard Bonneville is relentless and terrifying. I could not believe how scared I was at certain points in this book and, in a similar current (ha!) to the above, the writing never got in the way of my fear: the pacing and immediacy was always ideal to keep me inside the scenes as they unfolded. Malcolm and Alice’s quick departure from The Trout, escaping in La Belle Sauvage with Bonneville on their heels, is stressful and all the other actions scenes are similarly experienced through Malcolm’s limited viewpoint (although this is third person narration). We get the fragments that Malcolm has time to process and experience (I felt this in particular during the final sequence when Asriel rescues them from the CCD boat and Malcolm doesn’t really know what’s going on), which brilliantly keeps us inside the action. Sections of the book jump away from Malcolm’s perspective (to closely follow Dr. Hannah Relf primarily and the actions of the anti-CCD group Oakley Street), but while we’re with Malcolm, we stay with Malcolm.

I noticed one glaring exception to the centralization of Malcolm, which therefore stood out to me, and felt intentional. Very close to the end of the book, there’s a the close cut in (almost like a movie edit) on the conversation that occurs through gyrocopter headsets between Alice and Asriel. This conversation happens while Malcolm is asleep, as the small group travels to Jordan College, and it seems to be a moment where the burden Malcolm has carried and shared is, instead, carried fully by Alice. The trajectory of Malcolm and Alice’s relationship is one of increasing trust and mutual dependency, and so this moment felt like it formed the bookend to the beginning of the story, where Malcolm was the most informed, the most committed to the mission of protecting Lyra. Alice’s grit and determination is increasingly revealed to the reader, just as it is increasingly revealed to Malcolm, which shifts her closer and closer into his mental and emotional orbit. This final moment, of her being their shared spokesperson, of her carrying their joint mission while Malcolm is injured, seems to me like the true equalizing moment of their relationship. They have both been in this 100% for a while, but this is the moment where they operate fully as one entity.

Malcom and Alice are both incredibly crafted characters. The story relies on us as readers deeply understanding Malcolm from the get-go, and we do. He’s resourceful, clever, practical, stubborn, righteous, tactical, and still a kid. He’s an awesome character. Alice plays a beautiful counter-point to Malcolm; it takes us longer to like her and to understand her, to see her many layers, but that is because that’s what is happening for Malcolm himself. I didn’t expect her to be a main character during the first section of the book, just as Malcolm himself would not have. Her inclusion on the trip south on the floodwaters is circumstantial. Before Malcolm gets to know her more fully, she is simply a quintessential teenager—grumpy, claws out, edgy, but also just getting her work done, just there. Later on, we see her vulnerabilities, her compassion, her ways of showing care that she keeps sheltered beneath a tough veneer. She seems her age in every way—older than Malcolm, and more self-aware, yet also young, confused, and easily hurt, but too proud to show that hurt. As she grows in complexity for the reader, she too grows in complexity in Malcolm’s eyes, another aspect of the novel that keeps us close to Malcom’s perspective, merges his experiences—fear, compassion, understanding—with the reader’s.

Bonneville is also an incredibly drawn villain—another nod to Pullman for literary genius. In this novel, the scene where I felt most genuinely afraid (the maximization of Pullman’s ability to keep his readers in the moment of action) was when Bonneville appears on the other side of the cellar door at Lord Murderer’s abandoned mansion. Bonneville’s voice seems to defy the properties of sound and physics at a few points in this book, but only barely and in a way that is perhaps justified by our protagonists’ focused attention: Malcolm is listening for Bonneville, Alice is listening for Bonneville. More than once, he speaks to them from a very close range when he is not (yet) attacking them, and there is something about his sudden proximity, the sound of his presence, that induces a real terror that I felt keenly. His body, too, borders on the impossible, transcending the properties of physics. He could be close or far from Malcolm and Alice at any given moment because he closes gaps of distance in strange ways. They hear him at great distances across the water and struggle to gauge his exact location. He survives and survives and survives. This gives him a ghost-like quality, immaterial, like a night-ghast who haunts them.

At the same time, Bonneville’s presence is deeply physical, which we know and understand from his character introduction (when he fights with Coram Van Texel and his dæmon loses a leg) and through Alice’s understanding of him as a man who flirted with her, who approached her as a man. When Bonneville’s voice whispers through the darkness and through the door in Lord Murderer’s mansion, I felt Malcolm’s terror as my own. After reading this part, I paused and said aloud, “isn’t this supposed to be a children’s/young adult book? This is way too terrifying.” The final confrontation with Bonneville has a similar charge of terror, impossibility, and yet inevitability. We understand the insanity with which Bonneville has pursued Malcolm and Alice, the emotional/psychological impact he has on them (particularly Alice), and we feel their terror.

In addition to character development and narrative perspective, Pullman also navigates plot with dexterity. I loved that details from early in the text circled back around without feeling heavy-handed. Part of why this succeeds is that every detail seems to serve multiple purposes within the narrative. For example, when Mr. Boatwright flees The Trout after a confrontation with CCD men, I did not expect him to circle back around and re-enter the plot. His character introduction seemed to develop the role of the CCD in this universe, the level of threat they pose, and the understanding our characters have of that threat. That’s enough. Yet, he re-enters Malcolm and Alice’s lives at a critical moment, helping them hide out along with his band of outcasts in the woods. As a kind of casual Robin Hood (a bit foolish, a bit foolhardy though he is), Mr. Boatwright further shows the texture of this world where defiance of the CCD, even trivial defiance, has consequences. But, as many characters in the book remind us, the flood changes everything, and in this new world of the flood, Malcolm doesn’t expect to happen upon a character from his past and neither do we.

My conviction that Pullman leaves no stone unturned, highlights nothing with intention, brings me back to two key questions. First off, what happened to Mr. Taphouse? The night of the huge flood, Malcolm learns from the nuns that he’s unwell, and so he’s not at the priory when the flood hits, when Bonneville is there and seduces Sister Katarina. Was he actually unwell? Did Bonneville injury him or do something to get him out of the way? Will his character feature in the story again? These questions also bring up my concerns for Sister Fenella. Did she survive the flood? Will she appear again? A second set of questions exists around The League of St. Alexander, which poisons and pollutes Malcolm’s school space, changing the character of his small and seemingly innocuous community. While The League returns to the plot when Andrew (from Mr. Boatwright’s band of outcasts) betrays Malcolm and Alice and reveals Lyra’s whereabouts to the Office of Child Protection—refreshing the theme of betraying your family in the interests of a higher cause or system the buys or seduces your loyalty—this does not necessarily seem like the end of The League’s role in the plot. With the second book of the series teased—The Secret Commonwealth, which appears to jump ahead about 18-20 years—it’s curious to imagine how some of these questions might be answered or these ideas circle around again in the series. I trust that they may, in unexpected ways.

#the book of dust #philip pullman #la belle sauvage #malcolm #alice #lyra #good reads #storytelling #plot #fantasy novels

4 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 3 years

Text

Critters: The Making of a Comedy Horror Cult Classic

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

Rupert Harvey knew he was on to something with Critters after one memorable test screening. Specifically, it was the scene where the Critters, who had already been terrorizing the Brown family, were standing on the doorstep of the family’s home talking in their guttural language with subtitles translating for the audience…until one of them is blown to gooey bits by a shotgun blast (wielded by none other than E.T. mom Dee Wallace), and the other lets out a subtitled “Fuck.”

“It totally destroyed the audience,” Harvey recalls. “They just howled. We lost the next scene because they were laughing so hard and I thought: ‘Okay, this is probably going to work.’”

It had already taken a lot of work for Critters to get this far.

Bringing Critters to Life

Released on April 11, 1986, the horror comedy about a small town and farm-dwelling family under attack from little furry space aliens with a taste for human flesh was unfairly dismissed by some as a Gremlins knock-off.

But that did a disservice to the unique tone of Critters; a sci-fi comedy featuring belly laughs alongside genuine moments of terror. A film that owed as much to 1950s sci-fi B-movies as it did anything else, with its tale of picturesque Americana under attack from aliens.

It also overlooks the film’s quirkier narrative aspect like the pair of shapeshifting alien bounty hunters who arrive on Earth to hunt the Critters down, with one of them assuming the form of a popular Jon Bon Jovi-esque rock musician.

This surreal sci-fi tone, coupled with the copious violence, occasional bad language, and general unpredictability of it all helped give Critters the feel of a rebellious younger brother to the more mature Gremlins.

To many, it was the cooler, edgier movie and one that boasted underlying themes that remain universal to this day.

More importantly, the accusation of imitation was incorrect. If the two films were related, it wasn’t by design with screenwriter Brian Dominic Muir first writing the script for Critters back in 1982, two years before Joe Dante’s film hit cinemas.

“I don’t think I saw Gremlins until we were in post-production,” Harvey, who produced Critters and worked on two of its three original sequels, tells Den of Geek. “It was certainly not something we were thinking about very much at the time, if at all.

We were dealing with very different creatures and the fact that they were so different in concept meant I wasn’t terribly bothered by it. Gremlins were these mythical, earthbound, magical beings whereas Critters were extraterrestrial. People who say there are similarities are just influenced by the fact Gremlins was such a huge success, but it was a much bigger budget movie.”

Muir’s script didn’t see the light of day for nearly three years before he showed it to friend and fellow budding filmmaker Stephen Herek who developed it further. That was where Harvey came in.

The three men met while working on Android, a distinctive low budget sci-fi film Harvey was producing alongside independent movie trailblazer Roger Corman.

“Brian gave me Critters to read and l loved it,” Harvey recalls. “It was an archetypal American story about foreigners invading the homeland. It’s quite prescient given the current state of politics in America. There was this quintessentially American setup with this almost pioneering family struggling through adversity to come out the other side.”

35 years on, that notion of protecting the homeland is one Harvey feels is reflected in the inward-looking politics increasingly prominent in America and the UK today. That sentiment was already bubbling under the surface when Critters came out in the Reagan-era of the 1980s.

“It was novel to look at that then through the lens of Critters,” he says. “No one was seeing the film in those terms but that human fear of outsiders coming in has always been there and has been a fundamental part of cinema and drama since forever.”

Harvey agreed to develop the film under his production company, Sho Films. Though he mulled over an offer to produce a low budget version of Critters with Corman, everything changed when Bob Shaye and New Line Cinema came calling.

Writing Critters

“New Line was really a mom-and-pop operation at that point. They hadn’t made A Nightmare on Elm Street yet. They weren’t the New Line of today, but Bob offered to double our budget, so I did the deal.”

Even so, Shaye took some convincing on the choice of director.

Herek would go on to helm Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, Don’t Tell Mom the Babysitter’s Dead, and a string of big budget Disney movies in the years that followed but had never directed prior to Critters, having previously worked as an editor.

“Stephen, to his credit, even though he had no leverage other than a script we wanted to make, absolutely insisted that nobody would direct it but him and if he didn’t it wouldn’t get made,” Harvey says. “He stuck to his guns and there was never any shift in that position on Brian’s side. I had to convince Bob on several occasions to go ahead with us and, even during production, to actually stick with Steve. But we were all very glad that he did.”

On the writing side, Harvey enlisted Sho Films’ in-house writer Don Opper. A fellow Roger Corman acolyte, Opper had written and starred in Android where he also worked with Herek and Muir.

He was seen as the ideal candidate to work alongside Herek after Muir became unwell.

“Brian, unfortunately, became quite ill not long after we started making Critters,” Harvey says.

Muir was reportedly battling Hodgkin’s disease at the time. Though he recovered, the writer, who often wrote under the pseudonym August White for Full Moon Entertainment later in his career, sadly died from cancer aged 48 in 2010.

“He was a very sweet, nice man,” Harvey recalls. “In Brian’s absence, Don worked with Stephen on polishing the script. One of the ways was to enhance the family and their relationships.”

By then the distinctive looking Opper had also been cast in the pivotal role of Charlie McFadden, the town drunk and a conspiracy theorist convinced the fillings in his teeth are picking up signals from outer space.

Like a cross between Randy Quaid’s deranged pilot from Independence Day and Billy Bob Thornton in Sling Blade, Charlie would eventually emerge as a fan favorite, appearing in each of the three Critters sequels.

He was one of several quirky locals introduced early on in Critters with much of the first third of the film dedicated to establishing the Brown family, their farm, and the characters of the fictional Kansas town of Grover’s Bend where the Critters land.

In one picture postcard scene of the perfect nuclear family, the Browns gather round the breakfast table in a primary colored kitchen, blissfully unaware of the approaching danger and disruption to follow.

That slow build-up may be less commonplace today, but it’s something Harvey believes was crucial to the success of the film.

“That was one of the things that appealed to me about the script,” he says. “If you set that up properly and the audience is in there with you. They gain an understanding of the family dynamic right away and they are engaged. It helps you then feel for each one of them subsequently…The rules are the same, and they have been since the first Greek dramas; storytelling is still about humans and the human condition. Just making stuff about what the monsters are doing has no appeal.”

Critters came during a time when horror comedies were commonplace in multiplexes.

“Studios started to notice in test screenings that the audience response was often bigger when you capped a scare or moment of high tension with a bit of wit or humor,” Harvey explains.

Post-screening surveys bore this out; using humor to emphasize or punctuate a terrifying moment drew a bigger response from the audience. Regardless of the visceral impact of the scare itself. It made it more memorable to viewers.

The Cast of Critters

It helped that Critters boasted an impressive cast to bring the script to life.

Blade Runner’s M. Emmet Walsh appeared as the grouchy local sheriff while Dee Wallace, who had starred in E.T. only a few years earlier, was also convinced to sign on as the Brown family matriarch Helen. Billy “Green” Bush was cast as the hardworking man of the house Jay Brown with Nadine van der Velde as his high school teen daughter April.

Despite some impressive names, Harvey ranks the casting of future Party of Five and ER star Scott Grimes in the role of mischievous central teenage protagonist Brad Brown as the most significant. It’s Scott who first discovers the Critters and Scott that begins to fight back against them using his slingshot and potent firecrackers coming off like a hellish Kevin McCallister from Home Alone.

“Scott was tailor-made for the role,” Harvey says. “He was at the center of the craziness and he had the audience’s sympathy and support because no one was paying attention to him.”

For all the acting talent on display, however, much of the movie’s success rested on the tiny shoulders of a few hedgehog-like puppets.

“The biggest challenge was making the Critters appear to be a viable threat as the antagonists,” Harvey says. “We were really fortunate that we found the Chiodo Brothers.”

A trio of siblings who specialized in stop motion and animatronic work, the Chiodos were relative newcomers to the movie business and would go on to projects like Elf and Team America: World Police.

“We knew from the script we were dealing with a fur ball that got around fast by rolling around and was all teeth and voracious,” Harvey says. “That was the extent of the design parameters. They came up with the drawings and the details as to how they would work.”

Harvey cites the Critters’ distinctive, almost limbless design as both a blessing and a curse.

“From a construction and manipulation point of view, they were relatively straightforward,” he says. “But from an action perspective, there was not a lot you could do with them.”

While other projects, like New Line’s later Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movies, would struggle with glitchy animatronics, there were no such problems with the Chiodos’ creations with each running impressively well thanks to a crack team behind the scenes.

“Even though the Critters were fairly simple creatures, there were times for some of those shots, when we had 10 guys running different cables and things to them to get them right,” Harvey recalls. “They had eye movement, mouth movement, lip movement even their little arms and legs move because these things needed to look as believable as possible. But it was still tough to make these things that rolled around something scary and frightening rather than cute and laughable.”

That was where Billy Zane came in. A good horror villain needs a good victim. Cast in the role of April’s unsuspecting boyfriend Steve Eliot, the then unknown Zane ended up falling afoul of the Critters in arguably the film’s standout gory death after encountering the furry fiends while enjoying a makeout session in the family’s barn.

“It was the first thing he’d ever done. I think he’d arrived in L.A. a week before,” Harvey says, recalling how uncomfortably hot that barn scene was for everyone involved. “It was 100 degrees in the barn. He had little furry creatures stuck to his stomach and was covered in fake blood. It was so hot and sticky. We stayed there for the whole day, getting all the inserts and various other bits and pieces to make the scene…But that setup in the claustrophobic space of the barn helped to make the scene much scarier because we could set it up in a kind of way that made the punchline, the payoff, much more visceral.”

The Bounty Hunters

For all the machinations of the Critters themselves, it’s their pursuers from outer space, the two faceless bounty hunters, who almost steal the show.

Especially after one decides to take the form of fictional hair metal superstar Johnny Steele, the singer of “Power of the Night” a song so pitch-perfectly cheesy, you had to wonder if Steele is a real artist rather than musical theater actor Terrence Mann.

“I went to see Terrence who was appearing in Cats on Broadway. He’d been suggested by a friend and was seriously interested in doing the film,” Harvey says. “We had a friend in New York who was in the music business and had a recording studio. He put together some tracks and we created this imaginary band that he stole the identity of the lead singer from.”

Despite some striking similarities to artists of the time, Harvey insists Johnny Steele wasn’t set up as a deliberate lampooning of any one artist.

“The band was generically inspired by particular bands of the time,” he says. “There wasn’t any one group or individual. We were post punk and before real heavy metal. There was more of a glam goth influence.”

Teaming up with Charlie and Brad, the bounty hunters eventually destroy the Critters though it comes at a cost to the Browns, with the family home blown-up in the process. It was a powerful symbol of the way these invaders had shattered their lives but not their spirit. Unfortunately, New Line Cinema didn’t like it as an ending.

“Bob wanted it changed so that the house was rebuilt in the end but I was against it so we had a few arguments about that, but it was Bob’s money, and we did it and it came out very successfully.”

Shaye and New Line would occasionally prove tricky customers, with Harvey often forced to traverse the familiar pitfalls of independent filmmaking.

“We were in production and things were really tough and there was one point in time when Bob and I sat down in the trailer and he explained to me some things that I won’t go into,” Harvey says. “Things were very tricky for a week or two financially, but they sorted themselves out. That was a typical attribute of an independent movie. ‘Oh God you’re spending $150,000 dollars a day, can you spend $100,000?’. Not unheard of but no fun at the time.”

For all the trials and tribulations of the film, cast, and Critters themselves, however, he has fond memories of working on the film.

“We weren’t stuck in Los Angeles in some smoke-filled space,” he said. “The set was built on Newhall Ranch, this huge bucolic area of land outside of L.A and there we were for five weeks shooting in relatively hot temperatures.”

Critters Sequels and What’s Next

After a quick turnaround in editing, Critters was released in cinemas, proving to be a hit with over $13 million made at the box office off a budget of $3 million. This kind of success made sequels inevitable.

Though Harvey was unavailable for the second film, he returned for the third and fourth movies, which were filmed back-to-back and released direct to video.

“By then video cassettes were a huge component to New Line’s early success and helped finance the Nightmare on Elm Street and Critters sequels and all of the other movies that they then started making in order to become the powerhouse they became,” Harvey says. “I think it funded something like 40 to 40 to 50 percent of New Line production for that period of time.”

Harvey was initially hesitant to get involved, citing Shaye’s wishes to make the sequels for even less money than the first film. However, he ultimately relented after agreeing to film them back-to-back.

Harvey has mixed feelings about the two sequels, particularly the third movie, which he had conceived as being “much darker and much more violent” than what eventually made it to the screen.

“I wanted to do a George Romero homage for the third film,” he says. “I was very much interested in the claustrophobia of the tenement building in New York City, that kind of atmosphere. Boy, did it ever turn out differently.”

Having also agreed to direct the fourth film, which was set in space and wrap up the franchise, he found himself too busy to oversee work on the third movie.

“It was different. I didn’t have as much to do with Critters 3 because I was directing the fourth film. We were shooting back to back. We had a week down in between the two. All the time we were shooting Critters 3 I was prepping Critters 4.”

While the fourth film featured both a young Angela Bassett and Brad Dourif on top scene-chewing form, the third entry has become among the most noted in the years since thanks to the presence of a young Leonardo DiCaprio in the main role.

“It’s the movie that shall remain nameless on Leo DiCaprio’s resume,” Harvey jokes.

He doesn’t have a lot of memories about DiCaprio on set though there was already a sense he was destined for big things.

“One day he told me he needed some time off. He had to go and audition for this movie. After he came back I asked ‘How did it go?’ and he said ‘Robert De Niro is really great’. he’d been off auditioning for This Boy’s Life…And of course, when he did that movie, it was like, ‘Holy shit. Well, where was that actor when we were making Critters 3?’”

While Leo is unlikely to return to the Critters franchise anytime soon, Harvey, who had no involvement in a recent TV revival, believes that there is life in the old furballs yet.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

“It’s not a franchise that’s going to go away,” he says cryptically. “Whatever comes next needs to be something that is responsive to contemporary sources. I can’t really say too much about it, because nothing is final. All I can tell you is that I don’t think this is the end.”

The post Critters: The Making of a Comedy Horror Cult Classic appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/2RHGEEI

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

2 notes · View notes

cateringisalie · 3 years

Text

Village: Resident Evil ramblings

(Some spoilers)

Ethan Winters is a goddamn idiot.

I say this without a shred of nostalgia; I first encountered him in RE7 and feel less than nostalgic towards the guy. RE7 without the benefit of the former entrants was a FPS horror and pretty good. Though you couldn’t escape that the characters you remembered were the Baker family and Mia; Ethan was a walking camera with a gun and some very simplistic emotional responses (fear, rescue wife, escape, swear occasionally). Having now run through the whole sequence of games, Ethan stands out starkly as the blandest and least interesting protagonist the series ever produced. He is possibly worse than Piers. Village updates Ethan’s personality. A bit. Well. Not really. Still got that fear, still got the swearing. Still got a mind to escape. But rather than rescue his wife, it’s about rescuing his daughter. I mean; Mia was gunned down and shot a further 9000 times by infuriating series stalwart Chris Redfield a little under ten minutes into the game proper. Not that Ethan really comes to terms with the trauma. By minute fifteen of the game the van you’ve been shoved in by Chris (who doesn’t shoot you for no reason he feels like explaining) has crashed and Ethan’s daughter is missing. Mourning Mia doesn’t actually enter into Ethan’s thought process. Goddamn idiot. Not to say that life with Mia was exactly picturesque; a few years after RE7 the couple are now somewhere nebulous in Eastern Europe in a very lovely house with a distressing number of empty wine bottles in the kitchen. A happy marriage this does not seem to be given Mia doesn’t want to get into the events of RE7 anymore, but Ethan does – but also failing to understand that the cover-up of the incident might be why no one is talking much about the whole mess in Louisiana and that bringing it up both distresses and angers Mia. But; the inciting incident has occurred and we’re propelled into our new scenario. Ethan; once again fish out of water, and its not like we have a choice. This is not to say Village does not repeat the same narrative trick of changing POV character, but there is both less of that, and the Half-Life-style regimented first person view jarringly completely goes out the window in the last quarter. It was less than consistent at points, but sparingly when occasionally and jarringly camera angles shifted to depict an introduction. But the game is also perfectly happy to render whole FPS sequences with gun visible and everything as it plays out a story beat, so... I don’t know? Fortunately Ethan’s environment and the setting are much more interesting. The unnamed Village is a satisfying knot of tangled streets, locked doors and environmental obstacles. Enemies don’t respawn per se, but additional enemies are added on subsequent visits to the effective hub of the game. There’s livestock to kill and give the Duke – the merchant playing a similar role to the pirate-like guy from RE4. Duke’s an entertaining character (some have objected to his physical and hugely overweight depiction); chatty and far more knowing than he will let on. He has a dangling thread come the end so perhaps will reappear elsewhere. He’ll sort the gun upgrades, supplies, let you sell treasure and point you towards your next destinations. Which is just as well as the human population of the village dies out somewhere between the first and second hour. No one left and any futile attempts to save people end in almost hilariously disastrous tragedies (no Ethan, don’t go higher in a building that is on fire). Leaving you with Lycans, zombies and gargoyles to fend off. Occasionally there’s some bigger foes on the level of the Executioner from RE5 but nothing on the level of the Tyrants. That kind of thing is left to the Village Lords. The villagers – before they all die – have a curiously unfamiliar religion and praise a figure known as Mother Miranda. She reportedly kept the village safe, but something has changed and now the Lycans run amok and without restraint. Not hard to pin that the reason for the change is Rose’s arrival (or could it be Ethan? COULD IT? No. Man is a goddamn idiot). The only door out of the village you can open is to Castle Dimitrescu and... It feels unnecessary to even get into what awaits. Given fandom have been so noisy about the tall lady and her vampiric daughters since the first trailer. She is so very, very tall. The castle is the first mode of Village. Possibly closest to RE7; Dimitrescu’s daughters are vulnerable based on certain environmental details (read the notes!) but otherwise should be fled from. Dimitrescu herself is invulnerable to everything bar one weapon and you need to work at getting that, so she needs to be fled from. Otherwise, explore the castle, find treasure. Sneak. Solve puzzles. It all looks suitably gorgeous and you get multiple chances to see if as you loop through the rooms and unlock more doors. The Village macro mechanics wrought as micro here. There’s a canny hint at a late reveal in the blunt utility of in-game mechanics to be had too. But – really should have been obvious given their prominence in the trailer – given Castle Dimitrescu is the first level, it means we must say goodbye to the very Tall Lady with knife hands and move onto someone else. In between levels, we get the first reinforcement of a tease from the trailer; the symbol of the Umbrella corporation. Its engraved into a location called the Ceremony Site. Its daubed on a cave wall as high as the Tall Lady. Its on the strange structure you insert the yellow flasks each Village Lord guards. And it means... almost nothing. RE's meta-plot has always been a mess and everyone’s favorite pharmaceutical company hasn’t been so active for a while, so the idea that we might be getting into some interesting weirdness with them again is oh so appealing. And yet – I was disappointed. Despite the repeated glimpses of the familiar white and red logo, the connection ultimately comes down to one letter I found at about 7/8s of the way through. Oswell Spencer – founder of the company – visited the Village years ago and saw the cave painting and adopted it as his logo. Oh. That’s... underwhelming. The same letter does at least prod at wiring Village’s latter reveals into the formation of the company along with tying in some parts of RE5 but if you thought this would be the company or the family dynasty origins or anything like that, you are in for a disappointment. It’s a tease and one that goes nowhere and does little. Oh we might now see how Spencer got into the whole inadvertent zombie making mess but its not a factor in the plot of this game nor does it really change the stakes of the previous. Perhaps I should be glad it’s so frivolous given other retcons in certain other franchises, but it feels so suspect to have drawn the attention and then shuffle the implications out the side-door. At least the other village lords have their own appeals. The second level is RE once again stealing PT (the PS4 demo to announce Silent Hills) given Konami outright don’t care about it anymore. Stripped of your guns and inventory, it’s a claustrophobic puzzle level requiring you to hide with mechanics familiar to both Evil Within and Alien Isolation. That same loop of rooms as you seek out puzzle solutions and hide from a staggeringly distressing malevolent entity. The third is combat light until the final confrontation; the fight staged in a flooded village – oh and Chris who still doesn’t shoot you but refuses to explain anything. And the fourth cheats. Heisenberg is thoroughly entertaining and grabs two levels for his own; an assault on a stronghold and his horrible cyborg factory outside of town. He has Magneto metal powers. Heisenberg is the camp villain to outdo the other camp villains. He’s having fun, he kinda likes Ethan and is oddly on his side. He found time to put together massive signposts to direct Ethan onto the last two levels (a good thing too given his lack of sense). But both levels are lacking. The Stronghold is a relentless firefight against hoards of mook enemies; the factory is overly long and maze-like. I am as tired as Ethan when he exclaims “What more?” And after Heisenberg is dealt with; the long, convoluted lurches to the ending. First person goes out the window. The game dabbles in characters toying with your understanding of what was going on but in a strangely limited way and completely ignoring the other implications of the reveal. Suddenly you mow down more and more enemies than ever before, bullets scarcely a concern. The final reveals of who/what/where/how come through. Not exactly explicable for what’s on-screen, but the effort’s been made to tie Village’s overt supernatural tendencies back into a world setup in RE. Its not magic and those are not truly werewolves. And the villain’s motivation is! Hugely disappointing. Connected as it is to the Umbrella letter, you might hope for something completely out there, but its unsatisfying and feels pretty sexist too. Or at least lacking in imagination to an astonishing degree and yet here we are. The game feels sloppiest as the final boss fight arrives flitting between characters without the shaky but workable character hand-offs RE7 deployed. Back in first person mode to talk to Duke one last time before engaging in.... a relatively simple boss fight. All the boss fights have been pretty easy – there’s nothing on the level of RE6’s sometimes horrendous contextual fights, or the annoying two-player RE5, nor the demanded accuracy of hitting specific weak-points as in RE7. And I don’t mind that. Unload all your weapons and keep your health up. And victory. There are fix-it fics already, but really, I don’t see the point in trying to fix the issue these people have. There’s an obvious setup for a game past this one with a strange throw-away reveal in the end-sequence (whither RE9, Revelations 3 or something else there are no clues as yet). There’s a spoiler for the sting given the end-credits lists a character who didn’t appear in the main game. The sting itself might wind up drawing on the sting from Revelations 2. Village is not RE at its best, but is at least more in the spirit of goofy, campy nonsense than 7. It at least is more at home with playing with the trappings of horror while not actually trying to be outright scary. As with 7, the villains are more interesting and more memorable than the good guys. And – as I found out after completing the game – we were robbed of Ada Wong dressed up like a Bloodborne character somewhere in the game. And that I think is the biggest shame of all this.

#village spoilers #resident evil village spoilers

4 notes · View notes

rokutouxei · 3 years

Text

the wonder that’s keeping the stars apart

ikemen vampire: temptation through the dark theo van gogh / mc | T | [ ao3 link in bio ]

The challenge seemed pretty simple: to try to befriend the university bookshop’s most sour employee, Theo van Gogh. As a literature major with a boatload of book recommendations on her back, it ought to be a simple task indeed. But as she uncovers what lies between Theo’s pages, the more she finds it harder to become closer to him without having to put the feeling directly into words. What can she learn from Theo about what it means to stay—and how can she teach Theo about what it means to let go? | written for ikevamp big bang 2020!

[ masterpost for all chapters ]

CHAPTER 15 OF 22

So every day I was surrounded by the beautiful crying forth of the ideas of God,

one of which was you.

- "So every day", Mary Oliver

The new year enters restlessly.

January is generally a busy time for the university—the long holiday break at the end of the year translating to a refreshed, pinpointed focus. The Office of Student Relations resumes its scholarship selection process as soon as the offices reopen. Official enrolment to the university begins in early January. Classes begin in the second week.

Theo registers for the last class he’ll have to take before he can do this thesis—and that matched with the exhibit slowly coming into shape, it feels like the beginning of something ending.

And he’s running right for it.

Theo had a dream, once. Maybe not the kind that she would have expected when she asked him, but a dream nonetheless. He’d always looked up to his brother’s art from when he was younger, long before they thought of university or exhibits or the future. A seed of a dream had grown in him for the longest time—a gallery of artists, a collection of art that make the world shine just a little brighter by simply existing. Every week, every month, every year, something new—always something else given out to the world.

A childhood dream that no longer holds the same glimmer as it did when he was seven years old but—still the same one that lives inside of him if he listens hard enough. The one that led him here.

The one he knows but refuses to bring to light, to give a name.

But it’s here, still.

No matter how hard he denies it.

He used to tease her for being relentless about going abroad, but now that it’s his eyes that are set on something, there’s an inexorable hum thrumming underneath Theo’s plain old daily. This semester, his only classes are on Thursdays. He spends the rest of the week in the bookstore as he always does but—he is preoccupied. Spends afternoons when the bookshop is a little quieter going through his phone looking at potential art space and galleries. Reaches out to his professors when he was taking his specialization classes in museology, art curatorship, and art history, to see if they have any suggestions for where to hold Vincent’s exhibit. And at night, he works with Vincent, stares at the paintings, going through the old ones, looking through the brainstorming notes between him and her, of course, the other artistic brain working alongside them.

All art and wild wonder.

Theo writes pitches. Drafts them with Vincent, pours their hearts into it, revises them, rewrites them, shows them to her, throws them away—and then, when they’re just right, sends them. To every viable email, to every possible lead. Theo has a vision; one that used to be through a curtain of fog, but now clear like the summer sky. Now that the paintings are drying along the studio’s walls, he feels like the impossible is so close to his reach. Even Vincent, who is usually a little more reserved about reaching out with his art, has managed to gather up some courage to talk to some professors, by emails, visiting during consultation hours on his day off.

It’s happening, Theo thinks.

This is really happening.

He won’t tell it to her face, but her company is both needed and appreciated as they maneuver through the process of setting it up. The first half of spring is a blur only punctuated by dinners spent with her, Thursday evenings after classes talking with Vincent, sometimes with takeout boxes sitting in the studio, sometimes out of the house for a breath of fresh air. Theo walks around the topics with a nervousness that only goes away when she is there to mediate. He feels safer when she is there. And so does Vincent.

Theo doesn’t know when he’d started to miss her the way he does now. It was as if he had woken up one day missing the sound of her laughter, the loops of even her craziest insights.

Like the way raindrops continually falling can dig a curve into the sturdiest rock, Theo leans into her with an ease he wishes he does not understand.

He does not know if she knows.

At this point he thinks, it doesn’t matter if she does, because what matters is not what his wants, but hers.

He does not want to be another anchor tying her down.

So instead, he does what he does best with her: talk about books. The time they can spend together on their little dialogues have lessened dramatically, what with unmatching schedules, but they still exchange books; what they lack in time now they have in connection. The slide of a new book is enough to prompt the other; a reference to a previous read dropped into conversation and a nod to each other’s direction. Sneaking what little discussions in the 20 minutes it takes to walk her home. Phone calls when the opportunity—and patience—provides.

This is enough.

One afternoon, he and Arthur are at the bookshop. Theo has his head down on the counter, the book she lent open to one side, while he composes a response to an email on his phone. A potential gallery space responded to him, saying they were open to giving Vincent a discount.

“Nice to see life in your eyes,” Arthur comments, as he returns from shelving the canceled book orders. “I’m impressed.”

“Not flattering considering you don’t take anything seriously,” Theo quips. Arthur crosses his arms over his chest.

“You should really grant yourself at least a little bit of that energy.” It’s friendly advice, but arguably so grating coming from Arthur—who spends too much of his energy on his little whims.

Theo doesn’t even blink when he answers, “My brother is the only one who deserves my energy like this.”

To which Arthur says, tone joking: “And? What about our little miss?”

Theo doesn’t quip his denial fast enough for it to be entirely believable.

The visits to the van Gogh house are scheduled for Thursdays now, after Theo’s classes. Vincent somehow always makes it seem like her presence there gives so much, but really, she only comes to check in on him and see how the pieces are going. Sometimes, they talk about the exhibit’s flow and how one piece can continue the narrative into another. Over the past few weeks, they’ve built a sturdy collection of possible paintings with leading storylines. The exhibit is going along smoothly.

At first, she had some apprehension that Theo would not appreciate her being there often, as being with his brother and being at their house once a week is a little different from their practiced usual at hiding at the Rooftop with only each other—but Theo had softened in the few weeks they’d been jointly working at the exhibit, much to her relief. He buys her iced coffee, the kind she likes; gets her pastries, getting her favorites right; and for most of the time, he’s an angel compared to how he used to be toward her.

She figures it’s because Vincent is there.

It doesn’t take long, however, for her to see a growing imbalance in their little workflow. It doesn’t take long for Theo to try to carry all that can be sorted out on his own.

Vincent pulls you aside one evening, as Theo heads to the kitchen to get you some juice, saying, “I’m worried about Theo.”

He doesn’t need to expound for you to figure out what he means. It’s not that Theo has been sluggish, but it’s easy to see the exhaustion seeping under him, the whirr of stress and anxiety going around his brain non-stop, keeping him up. Vincent mentions fitful sleep, if there is any sleep at all. The dark circles underneath Theo’s eyes might be enough to make a panda bow in shame.

“Is something going wrong?”

“Arguing out the space is taking a lot out of him,” Vincent explains. “You know how spring and summer is graduation season, and so a lot of exhibits are being held.”

“There’s no way no gallery is taking you, even downtown.”

“The current students in the department just have better funding,” he admits, sheepishly. It’s true—the students in the department get financial support for their final projects as part of the university budget. But each student only gets one. Vincent had already tried to set up an exhibit before—but it didn’t push through. The money has since then been spent on things like art supplies and basic necessities. “Besides, you know how the university is with prioritization.”

It’s true. Because of the large influx of students and the limited spaces both within the campus and the city downtown, the university has pretty stringent guidelines as to how to hold a proper exhibit. With all that added to the thing with finances and also building a strong pitch… there’s just so much talking to be done. “Theo’s a great persuader, though.”

“He is,” Vincent agrees. “But every time he misses a mark just a little, he blames himself.”

Which is very Theo-like to do.

Vincent turns to her with eyes filled with concern. “I know I’m already asking you for a lot, but… can you keep your eye on him, when you can? I’m just so worried about him, and you’re the only one I know who can look over him.”

Theo enters the room, all tired eyes and loose shirt and sweatpants, half-meant glaring: “Hondje. Not too close to broer.”

She puts out her tongue at him, but the rule stands: one does not say no to Vincent.

Between books and food, she figures food is the more useful option.

Her classes have a weird schedule, so it’s not every day, but whenever she can, she visits him at the bookstore to bring him food. Arthur mentioned to her—after much prodding and only after she promised to take him and Dazai out for dinner—that Theo had been skipping out on lunch break in exchange for sitting out at the back, so she decided food might be one thing she can do.

It’s not much—she usually catches herself eating in the cafeteria most days, because of her schedule—but when she does make her own meals, she makes a small portion for Theo too. Sandwiches, maybe some soup; pasta, or rice. She brings the same lunchbox she brought that day they were studying at the Little Owl. She doesn’t leave until she’s seen Theo eat.

“Missing me a little?” Theo teases, on the fourth or fifth day she’s randomly come in at Dragon’s Hoard with a lunchbox with a warm meal. It’s been around two weeks since Vincent asked her to keep an eye out for his little brother.

And it’s true, she does miss him a little, because their new schedule this semester has made it so that they could no longer meet on the weekends like they did last time—she has internship work on the weekends for a publishing company—but she’d rather be shot than admit that yet. “No, I just can’t say no to Vincent.”

He hums as he takes a bite out of the small meatball she’d made for their little pasta lunch. Bolognese—her own recipe. “How is the application?”

“Hell,” she says, sighing, as she turns to her box of food. “They added an extra step in, so there’s one more test, and then the final round of interviews. I get that it’s an expensive scholarship but geez…” She shakes her head. “How’s the looking for a space?

“At least five potential places right now,” he answers. When he does, he looks down back at the lunchbox to twirl a forkful of spaghetti. She takes the time to observe the blue of his eyes. “Three is a little more expensive than expected, and two can hold it but with an interruption in the middle of the run.”

And then, quiet. The same kind of quiet they’ve always nurtured between each other, the one where they both get to just let go.

It would be a lie for them not to admit to each other the feeling of hollowness, the one you feel when you’re wrung dry, the not-quite-burnout-yet-but-getting-there exhaustion of just coming at the world, daring it to shoot you down. But at the same time, admitting it feels like some sort of defeat too. They are great at the strategy of not acknowledging the monster that is there, to not give it the power it wishes it wields over them.

What matters is that—even if it is unsaid—they have each other’s backs, and—

Even just that is already enough.

[ 01:37 | coolest person on the planet ] theo u asleep?

[ 01:38 ] when did you change your contact name?

[ 01:38 ] and why are you still up?

[ 01:38 | coolest person on the planet ] readings… just wanted 2 check on u

No response.

[ 01:39 | coolest person on the planet ] i’m sleepy

[ 01:40 ] I’m okay. Go to bed.

[ 01:40 | coolest person on the planet ] hav u even slept this past week?

[ 01:41 ] yes

[ 01:41 | coolest person on the planet ] how many hours

Pause.

[ 01:42 ] 8

[ 01:42 | coolest person on the planet ] …

[ 01:43 | coolest person on the planet ] total or per day

Pause.

[ 01:45 ] Did Vincent put you up to this?

Pause.

[ 01:46 | coolest person on the planet ] u shd take care of urself a lil bit more

[ 01:47 ] and yet we’re both up.

Pause.

[ 01:48 | coolest person on the planet ] i mean it

[ 01:48 | coolest person on the planet ] im ur friend ur my friend

[ 01:48 | coolest person on the planet ] let’s worry abt each other

[ 01:48 | coolest person on the planet ] make sure wr both ok, ok?

He sighs, but the smile creeps up his face anyway.

Closes his laptop, goes to the bathroom to wash his face and—

[ 01:50 | coolest person on the planet ] gnight theo

[ 01:50 | coolest person on the planet ] c u tmrw!

Crawls into bed.

[ 01:51 ] goodnight

#the wonder that’s keeping the stars apart #ikemen vampire #ikevamp theo

4 notes · View notes

themovieblogonline · 11 days

Text

Sweet Dreams Review: A Commendable Exploration of Community

0 notes

daredevile · 4 years

Text

BOOK RECS!

Well, I read a bunch of books during the quarantine and most of them were great! So, if you're looking for something within these genres - mystery/thriller, sci-fi, romance and horror - I got your back :) Also, my favourite genres are mystery/thriller and sci-fi which is why those lists are huge. Everything is linked to Goodreads, go check out the blurbs but, watch out for those reviews with spoilers!!

THE SILENT PATIENT - Love, love, love this book - second favourite of all time! Seemingly innocent woman randomly shoots her husband in the face and never speaks again. And we primarily follow a criminal psychotherapist's perspective as he uncovers details about the why, the how and much, much more. If you're into human psychology and are a mystery/thriller aficionado in general, READ THIS BOOK. Also, has one of the best plot twists ever!

THE TURN OF THE KEY - The story follows a very unfortunate and young nanny who ends up being accused of murdering a child in her care. No parents in the obscenely technology-controlled house that malfunctions all of a sudden. Ah, the horrors of digitalisation. And she's neither innocent nor guilty. The atmosphere created by the author is truly remarkable and you cannot stop reading. I'm warning you. Prepare to be absorbed for a few hours because this is one chair-gripping story.

THE ONE - We're getting into the Black Mirror zone here. DNA tests that pair people with their genetically matched soulmates. What could possibly go wrong? Hint: one of the characters is a murderer - don't worry that's not a spoiler! Everyone has their secrets and issues and have to navigate through a complicated mess that morphs into a different problem for each character. Have they found The One?

GONE GIRL - Do I even need to explain?

EIGHT PERFECT MURDERS - We got a killer who replicates murders from fictional books and the FBI enlist the help of a bookstore owner to solve the case. Quite entertaining and major book-nerd vibes from this one. Not gonna lie, this started phenomenally but fell a little short with the ending. Still worth the read though! Also, it spoils a few classic, well-known books [ listed on Goodreads ], if you're planning to read any of those, I'd advise you to finish them before starting this one.

THE KIND WORTH KILLING - I'd say this's the better Peter Swanson novel out of these two. Quite Gone Girl-esque in nature but equally well-written and amazing! It's a type of story that makes you question humans and our moral code. Think intense Tom and Jerry with 200% more stress, nail-biting moments and of course, murders.

AND THEN THERE WERE NONE - A classic whodunit. Who doesn't love those? Group of people trapped in a remote island and one by one they drop dead in mysterious ways. Everyone seems like the killer, but who is actually behind these murders? Edge-of-the-seat feels with this one! And as the group becomes smaller and smaller, the criminal gets closer and closer till there are none.

LONG BRIGHT RIVER - This one delves into quite sensitive themes and topics such as addiction, struggles with withdrawal and ultimately, the devastation caused by it all. The relationship between the two sisters is portrayed with powerful emotional language and it's truly heartbreaking. Tension arises when one sister goes missing the same time when murders occur in the area. Not an easy read by any means but an exceptional story indeed.

NO EXIT - Four strangers stranded at a secluded highway rest stop and one of them has kidnapped a little girl and locked her in the van. And our main character has no means of communicating with anyone but has to figure out how to save the child from the psychopath. This has thriller written all over it! My stress levels were through the roof but, the action and the twists just blew my mind! Love this book!

LOCK EVERY DOOR - Creepy high-end hotel. Check. Disappearing people. Check. Dark secrets. Check, check, check! Again, another author who perfectly conjured a ghostly ambience as the plot thickens and the main character is so close to the killer. I'll be honest, I was scared at some parts. But it was a good kinda scared, you know. 100% will read again!

DARLING ROSE GOLD - Sounds like a cute story right? Don't be fooled by the title. This twisted mother-daughter story evokes an unsettling feeling as we follow both the daughter, who became overwhelmingly ill due to malnutrition and her abusive mother, who recently got released from prison. I found the narrative style to be very unique as they're both unlikable characters with hidden motives beneath their now-tolerant attitudes to each other. In other words: this book is CRAZY AND GOOD!

DARK MATTER - This is my favourite book. Ever. Written by one of my favourite authors. Ever. It's the perfect blend of a seemingly confusing narrative, a true mind-fuck, thought-provoking themes, slightly disturbing yet very much stress-inducing plot progression - in short: I love it!

SCYTHE - The premise caught my attention and it didn't disappoint at all! This universe is remarkably built through Shusterman's compelling imagery and mystery revolving around a Scythe's morals, ethics and concerns with their profession as they have to randomly kill people due to overpopulation. And good news, this is a series!

THE PASSENGERS - Listen, if you like Black Mirror-y stories, then you're gonna love this one! It's set in a world that's transitioning from manual to autonomous vehicles where eight driverless cars are hacked and programmed to collide in one location at a specific time! Initially, keeping up with so many POVs was challenging, but, it's completely worth it and possibly one of the most stressful books I've read in a while. John Marrs just understands writing.

THE TEST - This one's a short story - a hundred pages or so, yet thoroughly entertaining and has an intriguing plotline. Again, kinda gives Black Mirror vibes and jumps straight into the action. It's also severely messed up and horrible to think about. Dives into human behaviour and psychology in terrible this or that scenarios. Definitely one of my favourites! Are you sensing a pattern?

WE ARE THE ANTS - Alien abduction? The world in danger? And the fate of it rests upon a hesitant teenage boy's shoulders? Caught my attention. The plot is quite touching, emotionally-driven and weaves through several heavy issues such as depression, suicide, bullying and marginalisation, however, lightens up around wholesome themes like love, family and friendship. Great story and also, the book cover is pretty cool!

RED, WHITE AND ROYAL BLUE - Yet another book that needs no introduction. Just read it fam. No regrets!

THE UNHONEYMOONERS - Looking for the fluffiest of fluff story ever? Here ya go! Christina Lauren has nailed the romance genre and this one's nothing short of spectacular. Humour, wit and banter are smoothly intertwined into both main characters who hate each other with a passion... for a little while. Also features the classic and unsurprisingly entertaining hate to love trope!

THE HATING GAME - Can't seem to get enough of this enemies to lovers trope! Hilarious writing paired with two lovable characters - definitely a mood-booster. Just the mere chemistry between the characters as you experience their both funny and tender moments is *chef's kiss*.

THEY BOTH DIE AT THE END - Another favourite! A tear-jerker that's incredibly raw and thought-provoking. It explores the connection between two strangers spending their End Day with meaningful conversations, dealing with love and loss and going on that one last adventure before - well, you know how it ends.

PET SEMATARY - If you're into severely disturbing and horrific imagery spiralling through your mind - okay, why would you do that to yourself? Major theme of death described in a terrifying and a very Stephen King manner. Personally, I found the writing to be a little boring but still eerie, however, my friends and a lot of other readers love this book! To each their own, I guess?

THE CABIN AT THE END OF THE WORLD - Two words. Home invasion. This book made me question all the fundamental things in life and the writing speaks volumes! Filled with subtle symbolism and allusions to real societies and how they operate under crises. Possible heartbeat escalation, intense moments laced with undertones of sadness for the family. Gets straight into the action and it's utterly overwhelming. I don't read much horror but this is probably one of the best [ though some have contradicting opinions ]!

I spent a lot of time making this, so reblogs are very much appreciated! Hope you found something interesting :D

#book recs #book recommendations #books #lit #literature #mystery #thriller #scifi #romance #horror #arya.txt

36 notes · View notes

rochey1010 · 4 years

Text

PART 2: 👋

Lucas: Ok, so Lucas's arc this season is connected to Eliott who has focus, instead of Eliott being connected to Lucas like always. His arc is a relationship one and he's also there as background in the insulated intimidating crew contrasted with the isolated lonely outsider in Lola.

So in S5 Lucas moves in with Eliott and we see them in love and domestic. Lucas has independence and has matured. The show really builds his connection with the group too. He is around a lot and basically boy solidarity to support Arthur's story. 🤘Lots of boy group instas fill Lucas's account. Friendship is just a huge theme this season. Lucas also was part of the girl group and had a special connection with manon in S3, Imane in S4 and was more loyal to the boy group in S5 (more on that later) in S6 he is seen having a special connnection with Daphne.

Lucas makes mistakes in this season 5 which i feel is genuinely consistent with who Lucas is. We saw Lucas in S3. And it was his story and a huge part of this story was his epic love with Eliott so he was loving, soft, vulnerable, hurt, angry over his identity. But generally it was exposed Lucas. In S5 we are in Arthur's narrative. Arthur hasn't been there for Lucas crying, spilling his heart, cuddling and loving Eliott. All the things that would make you see just how soft a person can be. In the boy group is how Arthur sees Lucas. That is stupid, silly, chaotic and affectionate. But they're boys so they're moody and annoying and prank each other and can act like assholes. All things we see. Also Arthur's Jerome is Bas and not Lucas.

Lucas is being set up for S6, so we see the slow creeping abandonment issues come back. We see him saying ignorant and prejudiced things. Again all consistent with the character and his behaviour. Things happen with how Lucas treats people and situations that crop up again in S6, and Lucas shows his moral line too. So first the prejudiced things. This time he acts inconsiderate and ableist to Arthur on Valentines. and Arthur tears him a new one. Lucas looks guilty but also strained (something is going on which comes up big time in S6- home issues) he lashed out and was a hedgehog (prickly and reactive)

He apologises some time later after he calms and thinks about it. We repeat this behaviour in S6 and Lucas dismissing Lola's problems, and Eliott calling him out for his judgement. He's prickly and reactive and then clearly calms down later. All consistent with wanting to protect yourself and your environment. Hedgehogs show their quills to the unknown. Lucas all over. 🦔

Lucas in his new home opens it up to the group. They sleep there, don't leave, have meetings, scream and play video games and Lucas joins in. It's a chaotic loud mess basically. This crops up in S6 when Eliott has a new friend Lola who needs a place to stay after a horrible ordeal and Lucas acts hypocritical and says to Eliott "This is not a hotel" and yeah she slept in their bed because Eliott is decent and respectful and gave her the bed, just like maya did too, because she needed it more. And yes i can see that Lucas felt blindslided but as i said before, the moral line with lucas. It is a pattern with him. If you are close and known it's a free for all. If you are unknown and an intruder have some quills. And i genuinely feel if Eliott copied Lucas and brought home loud friends who wouldn't leave. Lucas would not have that at all = Insider v outsider.

Lucas hides stuff from Arthur because he and the gang don't know how to approach Arthur and be honest with him. They love him but the HOH is a new world for them too, so they mess up a lot. They lie and attend a concert that Arthur sees them at. He calls them out in detention. But generally the mistakes are well meaning. They don't want to hurt his feelings. But they set Lucas up as someone who hides things to try to protect those he cares about. Sound familiar?

The big one the fanbase rioted about: Lucas's advice to Arthur about Alexia. Like i still feel this is consistent with Lucas and again the moral line. The 2 groups have merged but they clearly show the boy group is more tightly knit. So now it becomes about group v group. Arthur is a great friend of Lucas's and Alexia is a friend. Like Lucas isn't close with Alexia. So it becomes about Loyalty. He's already failed Arthur so when he gives the advice to keep the kiss from Alexia i feel it stems from him not wanting Arthur's world to implode and knowing the drama of Alexia finding out could bring to it. Like Arthur even says it to the girls. Don't punish the boys, they were just trying to protect Arthur. So i don't feel that Lucas was OOC because he's generally a dumbass in a group of guys chatting in that dynamic, and doesn't want his friend hurt. His moral line is Arthur is more important. I'm not in agreement with fans saying you learn from your mistakes and that's it. It's not though, your own issues can affect your mistakes, your environment can affect your mistakes, your feelings can even affect your mistakes. Like different circumstances can change how you view something e.g. eliott and his problems v lola and hers.

Finally the biggest development with Lucas, and that is the ongoing abandonment issues. So basically how Lucas's abandonment issues work is again very consistent. They stem in the show from S2 but overall it's a life thing. So Lucas's mum is mentally ill and has raised Lucas in that environment. That's trauma, and especially from a young age. The father and the mother obviously have an unhappy marriage. And enventually it breaks down and the mother is in a clinic and the father leaves the family. Lucas is abandoned and feels it too. He runs off to live elsewhere and in S3 he's with Mika and Lisa.

His father is dismissive and his mother very unwell. I don't know but i think the mother is schizophrenic. I'm unsure on that though. But Lucas has issues. But what he starts to do and how they manifest is that he projects them on to his environment, and if he feels a danger of someone leaving he twists it to him being unlovable and people getting sick of him. Now some of the things he does, he creates some of these issues for himself e.g. Mika and Eliott, and some are out of his hands e.g. Yann. But overall he's generally wrong and get's the wrong idea because of the reflection of how he sees himself.

So Yann leaving becomes about Lucas not being worth it instead of Yann leaving because he's hurt that several times over the season to that point, Yann cornered lucas and begged him to confide in him, and Lucas wouldn't. So lucas gets the wrong idea and Yann handles it badly.

So Eliott ending the relationship and going back to his girlfriend is about him being a party/fuck boi and using Lucas, instead of Eliott leaving because lucas broke his heart and inadvertently revealed his skam to him.

So Lucas through the abandonment issues ends up twisting perception and judging people. Like i said before. No favourites here. Lucas had a lot of trauma so i understand what he carries. Roll on S4 and they're back and Eliott isn't ready to tell his story because it was so painful that he never told Idriss he was bipolar and cut the friendship in shame and ran away. "He was alone for a long time i think" and Lucas pushing out of insecurity and fear and they end up fighting. And yes i believe like Imane said it's Eliott's story to tell and he'll tell it on his terms. So i don't agree with what Lucas did there. But abandonment issues are irrational, so i get it. (Roll on S6 with it being Lola's story to tell)

Roll on S5 and there's a talk about cheating and perception. They're in a group and chatting at the van about cheating. And you notice each boy gives their version of their story. So Yann cheated but justifies it as he fell in love with Emma. Eliott is more realistic and calls it like it is. He cheated on Lucille and he's not proud of it but he found Lucas. (And roll on S6 and the mental illness talk with Lola focusing on the need for lucas to the point he hinges his mental health on it.) So pretty consistent with "but i got to be with Lucas" Bas is niave i feel, and gives a very black and white view of the topic. Just end it and move on.

But i've always had this view myself. I have experience with cheating. My dad cheated on my mum and yet i still feel this view. That sometimes it's not that simple. It's not that black and white, and in Eliott's case burying your mental illness in the relationship to the point you're afraid to leave. And in my dad's case. Being in a failing marriage with a mentally ill wife that you still love, children and a mortgage. I'll always maintain that cheating is wrong but i have sympathy and understanding in certain cases.

So anyway, Eliott in answer to Bas's POV does the Eliott thing. He comes at the topic in a empathetic and non judgemental way. He says generally sometimes human want more and are not satisfied so seek it. Now Lucas does the same thing again, twists the perception and projects his insecurities onto Eliott. Eliott who is petting Lucas's hair isn't even thinking of the relationship. It has nothing to do with Lucas at all. It's basically philosophical thinking in that hipster way. That humans are greedy and they want everything e.g house, car, money, job etc. And he's right. Humans have done horrible things to each other in the pursuit of what they want.

But it eats at Lucas because his abandonment issues are more than just a relationship. They are deeply rooted and a huge issue. In reality he should be seeking help. It has to get to the point where you can't blame others and you need to accept that they're bigger than you. And he confides in Arthur instead of Eliott out of fear (roll on S6 Eliott doing the same thing with Lola) this is the establishment of the love bubble and they're both doing it as we can see. So lucas tells arthur that eliott cheated on Lucille and he could do it to him.

My issue with that was, Lucas cheated too but he justifies with him being gay. But the simple fact is he played Chloe and he pursued Eliott behind her back. And when Eliott hurt or disappointed him he played her even harder. So i do find this hypocritical i must say. Then he acts panphobic, but the thing is lucas isn't panphobic. His abandonment issues project and he feels fear but it's really about Eliott leaving him. So he says Eliott goes down the street and he has more choice e.g. Both boys and girls. Add aliens and robots etc. Eliott is pansexual. So he's showing he's scared that eliott will get sick of him and eventually leave (roll on S6 and Eliott having a friendship with a girl, and Lucas scared to be real, and what is about to happen with the spoiler movie)

He very clearly says he hasn't confided these fears in Eliott for fear it may rock the relationship. Oh hi love bubble again. Arthur emphasises Eliott's love for Lucas and how greater it is than his love for Lucille. (Roll on S6 and Eliott emphasising the importance of Lucas and his need for him)

The last we see of Lucas is him crying looking at the friendship mural and Eliott in love and gratitude.

So guys i said this would be 2 parts but i think it'll be 4 because again length here. And i wanted to do Eliott in this post but it's too long now. Next part will be Eliott.

#skam france #skamfr #lucas lallemant #eliott demaury

39 notes · View notes

its-a-branwen-thing · 4 years

Text

On Qrow: Part II

Back at it again with the white vans an over-analysis of one of my faves! In my last post on Qrow, I focused a lot on how legacies play into his character. How he’s slowly becoming a character who can leave a legacy, but that the journey there is still ongoing. And it always is.

Disclosure, as always, this is all pure speculation, enhanced by my personal opinions, and for fun! :)

Legacies play into all of these characters. RWBY is about stories. Especially in regards to our heroes: specifically Ruby, Yang, Oscar, Juane, and Ren. All of them have character legacies that inform who they are today. Summer, Raven, Ozma, Pyrrha, Li Ren. These are all characters that we know had/have their own motivations, destiny, and ideals--and those echo through the narrative in such grand ways.

Mementos are a big part of these characters’ stories. While not all of these are explicitly physical items that serve as reminders, there are stories behind these shots and the objects or focus of them. Ren killing the Nuckelavee with his father’s dagger, Ruby’s mother and their shared silver eyes.

That’s why taking a look at a particular spot in V4 sparked a new idea:

Qrow is also a part of legacies. But this is one he was upholding. In V6 we saw his realization that his own followed legacy was in jeopardy--the one thing he’d staked his life on--and that continues to inform his faith in his nieces and the younger generation going forward. Because it isn’t Oz’s path he’s following, but theirs. Even if it is is hard letting them go it alone.

Qrow chooses his path at the end of V6, and it’s to help uplift this new generation, so that they can create their own stories in honor of or in spite of the ones that were left for them. It’s subtle, but it illustrates that Qrow’s growth has been in doing the things he believes is right, which is why he cautions James on so many of his decisions, why he seems to hang back, to lash out less, why he seems...well, softer. He’s not drunk, for one. And two he’s not as worried for his proteges. They’re taking fine enough care of themselves. Which is why the emphasis on his connection to Clover is so fundamentally important. Because if I look at it from a storytelling standpoint, we see these two characters express very similar ideals with completely different views of how to follow them. But it’s the story Clover has, the one where he’s a beloved leader and soldier, that impacts Qrow’s future the most.

It’s also between them that we witness one of the most brutal death scenes in RWBY.

My knee-jerk reaction to this scene was that it was the beginning of the Scarecrow “losing his mind”, so to speak, because it has been the pattern of the Oz generals to fall by the thing they were seeking in their allusions. But every time I followed this thought I couldn’t realize why it felt so wrong to me. I thought for a bit that Qrow might turn, the he might really and truly go crazy, but I honestly can’t see it. Why? Because if I’m reading Clover’s character right, we see that the fundamental differences between him and Qtow are what the story’s been pointing to all along: one is part of a legacy he never questioned, while the other has no tethers to his old legacies. Qrow’s placing his faith, quite certainly, on the future. (Also, if you wanted to make a point about the cruelty of reality, you could do it elsewhere. RWBY hasn’t really been that kind of show). And what really hit me as an important factor in this is the final shot of Qrow:

He isn’t angry. He isn’t gunning immediately for Ironwood. He looks heartbroken. He looks as he has all season--quiet, but in control.

He’s also holding onto...that’s right, a memento.

Yeah, back to talking about mementos, I am.

In seeing what was said about their relationship by the writers (communication not being 1:1 with writing/animating--also, again, not looking to discuss the implications of that at the moment, I understand and sympathize), I think I’m beginning to see some of Clover’s decisions, as they’re written, in a completely new light.

He’s cocky. He’s proud. But he’s a good guy. He encourages Qrow. He obviously likes him as a person. And this whole season we’re rooting for them to be good partners why’d you sneak in all that sexual tension though, yo, in whatever way that is. But then it’s made clear that Clover and Qrow both prioritize entirely different things until E12 when Qrow nods to Tyrian and...you know what I won’t even....no, I’m not even gonna poke that. The same different things that ultimately split team RWBY and the Ace Ops up. It’s even in their fights. If Qrow is the “Clover” to RWBY, Clover is the “Qrow” to the Ace Ops. Both the oldest and wisest of the de facto teams. Those fights are set up like that for a reason. Even them sharing shifting focus in E12 is significant. And RWBY wins because the Ace Ops don’t “care” about each other as they do, that’s the whole point that I can see. And so Clover shares his teams’ fate...but, like, way worse.

Clover knows when his orders seem harsh but he doesn’t question them. He’s never been shown to do so. He hesitates, sure, but so does Marrow. And unlike Marrow, Clover isn’t a new addition. He’s older. He’s their leader. It’s his charge they’ll follow. He’s not a character easily changed. We knew who he was the moment he swung in to arrest our heroes.

(Side note: I used to think this was a conspiratorial look that they were planning something. But I think now what I see is Clover noticing and then ultimately ignoring Qrow’s concern. His look hardens back to Ironwood with what I can now see as resolve. It’s why Qrow looks down. It’s almost like he’s hurt.)

So when we encounter this duo in the tundra, after their plane crash, and we see Clover’s character attempt to negotiate with Qrow, we see Qrow’s resolve harden. He isn’t going to follow Ironwood’s orders. He finds them wrong. But Clover is Ironwood’s right hand, he can’t listen to any personal feelings he may have, as Qrow and Robyn do. He even parallels Marrow in his conversations with Robyn, in that they both advise her to follow the law on two separate instances, and she makes it abundantly obvious that she thinks the law is rubbish. But Clover is the law. He’s supposed to uphold that trust. Because he’s entirely loyal. He’s a good person upholding a man he trusts. We don’t know his history, but I assume as the elite of the elite he earned his position. He spent years earning Ironwood’s trust (as Winter says--”You can’t buy loyalty you have to earn it”). And he isn’t a disingenuous character with sneaky ulterior motives. He’s how he’s presented. Point blank, heart presumably on his sleeve. I thought he’d turncoat to join our heroes, but now I see why he didn’t. (Then again, not having all the information is...testy)

Which is why this hits so damn hard.

“Sometimes the right decision is the hardest to make. I trust James with my life! I wanted to trust you.”

I wish I could emphasize that last line more. Clover is making an extraordinarily hard choice. He’s choosing loyalty to Ironwood over his partnership and relationship with Qrow. Because he trusts Ironwood more. This isn’t a character failing, it’s just tragic.

And with that last line I think he feels that Qrow betrayed Ironwood as well and, by effect, him. Because if Qrow had just listened to Ironwood’s plan and given himself up, none of this would have happened. But now that Qrow’s gone rouge, so to speak, he has to see him as an enemy. He has to use tactics to lure him to cooperate. Clover wanted to trust Qrow too. And at the end, like a lot of other trusting partnerships this volume, it ended in a loss of that trust. Also Qrow breaking Clover’s aura after the Ace Op has Tyrian on the ropes is SO. GODDAMN. PAINFUL. And when Qrow sees that Clover’s willing to follow these orders, he probably thinks he’ll follow any, and likely why he sees this as a betrayal. Because he’s used to that which i will discuss next time thank you.

What makes this scene so poignant, what makes me realize Qrow’s next arc is going to tie into what Clover left for him, is because Qrow likely understands exactly what Clover was going through. Once upon a time he defended Oz. He ran Oz’s missions. He put those priorities first. He bet his life on this fight. And in the end he didn’t even know the truth of what he was fighting for. Oz lied to him (Yes, I understand why). Meanwhile this whole season has been built on the prospect of lies. Qrow knows the cost of blind trust. He’s trying to tell Clover to listen to his conscience, not silence it. He’s trying to tell him to do the right thing.

And at the end, Clover seems to do just that by telling him, infuriatingly, “good luck.” Not just in the broader sense, although what an absolute madlad. But in the sense that he understands why Qrow chose that path. Why Qrow made that decision to refuse arrest although I’d be hella pissed about him teaming up with Tyrian! tho Why you done did me like that, bruh?!.

Clover’s telling him, really, to do what Qrow thinks is right. It’s the final note of evidence for my theory. Clover’s spent this season prepping Qrow to have faith in himself, and now it’s Qrow’s turn to realize that potential. It’s a blessing, really, that he gives him. To finish what he started.

And Qrow clearly keeps Clover’s charm. Because he’s carrying on Clover’s legacy too, and the mistakes that may have been made along the way. He has to remedy them. And this isn’t the only instance of a “baton pass” between these two. If Qrow is in search of a new legacy (which, truth be told, might involve bringing Ironwood down), then he needs a new team to do it with. And, as it’s been stated countless times by this show, he isn’t the waste of space he say he is and it is a damn shame he doesn’t have a new team yet.

Which brings me to my final desperate reach point.

“What would you guys do without me?”

#awe yeah carpal tunnel #rwby #qrow branwen #there will be a part III!#one day....#rwby meta #long af sry #im so flexible now ive reached so much #look i want qrow to also join the happy huntresses but i want him to interact with the ace ops too #savvy?

54 notes · View notes

theonceoverthinker · 4 years

Text

Why Clover Isn’t Going to be a Traitor

So, @fairgame-is-endgame made a great post this last night debunking some of the more ludicrous pieces of evidence as to why Clover’s is not a traitor. It’s an awesome post and if you’re a Clover or Fair Game fan, you’re gonna want to check it out.

This is a continuation of sorts because as opposed to taking down the minute details being honed in on as evidence of why Clover might be a traitor, I want to compile the evidence presented by the show and secondary material (Ex. Amity Arena) that show strong signs that whatever Clover’s character direction will ultimately be, it won’t be as a traitor to the larger group fighting against Salem (And possibly not even against Ironwood).

So, what is my goal here? To reassure my fellow Fair Game friends that we’re not headed straight for a pitfall? To give the haters a piece of my mind? To speak into the bottomless chasm that is the Internet as a means of dealing with my fandom-based RWBY loneliness? ...A little bit of all of that, if I’m being honest. In any event, I don’t post a ton of analysis pieces, but this is something I feel strongly enough about to give voice to, so let’s see how it goes!

Everything’s under the cut because this is fairly long!

1. The Clover/Robyn scene from 7X5

If Clover was ever going to be set up as a surprise antagonist, it was going to start to show itself in this scene -- a scene that pits Clover against a character he views in an antagonistic light that didn’t end up being a misunderstanding -- more than any place else.

And it did the exact opposite.

I mean...it did a little, even with the context of Clover and Ironwood’s true goals. Clover is pretty cold to her under his veneer of carefreeness and stops Ruby as she even tries to relate to Robyn (Perhaps that’s out of a fear of Ruby telling her too much, or perhaps it’s just a sense of distrust, but that will probably be revealed soon enough). I’ll walk with you that far and admit to some slight shadiness. But I’m going to argue that that only goes to a certain point, and a small point at that by highlighting the biggest takeaways of that scene.

The scene between Clover and Robyn tells us a few things.

-Clover and Robyn’s opening dialogue, tone, and animation make it very clear that they’ve met before, but are not on good terms with each other. This is further communicated by Clover’s adamant refusal to disclose information to Robyn about the supplies. Now, I’m going to argue that in Clover’s defense, it just makes sense that when faced with a frenemy (That’s being kind) who is looking for information he has no desire or order to give to her (As we’ll learn later, Clover is a by-the-book guy), that he be in no hurry to tell her what’s going on. Additionally, while he lies to her face about his intentions, he’s very clearly speaking in a way that communicates that something IS going on that he cant speak of (His vocal inflections show that he clearly doesn’t expect Robyn to believe that the tower is getting a checkup, but hopes that it will be enough to shut her down for a bit), giving her that much information to work with at least until she gets elected.

-Clover’s not especially excited about the prospect of Robyn being elected onto the council, but he still wishes Robyn good luck in the election. Not only that, but the facial expressions he gives her, the tone in which his words are said, and the fact that he delayed his return to the van just to do so heavily imply that it’s a genuine wish. Granted, we later learn that this may only be for reasons amounting to the fact that she’s not Jacques Schnee, but still, he knows she wants to help, and while they don’t get along, he’s receptive to that desire.

-Robyn trusts Clover enough that she reasons that asking for him to disclose information is a worthy pursuit (She does so twice) before attempting to attack the group. Otherwise, she’d have gone after them the moment they stepped out of the van. Since Robyn’s a character we’re supposed to end the scene having trust in, the fact that she does have lingering trust in Clover leaves the impression that we should as well.

All in all, while we don’t know a lot of tangible information pertaining to what they are to each other at this point in the story, we do get a surprisingly large emotional understanding here of their complicated dynamic. We know Robyn is correct in how the people of Mantle deserve to be informed of these goings on, but also why Clover is right to keep his mouth shut until the time comes to reveal all, and I think the attention to this dynamic paid here shows that both of these characters have their hearts in the right place.

2. Amity Arena Card (And Its Follow Up Twitter Post/Introductory Loot Drop)

There are two things I want to point out about this description that I want to touch upon here.

First, “there’s nothing subtle about what the Ace Ops leader Clover is about.” Now, that’s not to say he has no hidden depths to his character (It would really suck if there wasn’t any more to him), but I feel like these few words communicate a lack of secrecy as to his values, personality, and alignments. Can having all three of these things be positive still amount to a villain? Sure -- you can kind of say that makes him like Hazel in that regard -- but I think my next point will solidify that’s not the case.

Second, I’m gonna make this one short and sweet. There is no way to basically say that ‘this new character (Clover) is going to kick a beloved protagonist’s butt (Qrow’s butt) and that will be a good thing for said protagonist,’ and then have that new character end up being a baddie. While my knowledge of the game is a limited since I don’t actually play it, I did do some research today, looking at various cards for both protagonists and antagonists, and they overwhelmingly geared the framing of these card descriptions towards a more hero-focused outlook on the characters. Basically, this game is not about to cheer for a hero like Qrow to be defeated by someone who will turn out to be a villain, if for no other reason than it’s a poor choice for the game’s long term posterity.

But just in case that card’s second-to-last line left anyone with lingering doubts about its intentions, the RWBY Amity Arena Twitter page was kind enough to elaborate on it!

I feel like that wink emoji should be doing my work for me here. If there was ever a doubt as to the intention of the wording, this tweet should clear it up. Clover is so clearly being shown by the Amity Arena card as a positive influence on Qrow’s life, and in a way that implies that that’s not about to change anytime soon.

Like, if they wanted to convey ambiguity as to Clover’s moral alignment, they could’ve just said something along the lines of “Who knows,” or “Guess you’ll just have to wait and see.” In the world of Remnant, ambiguity is a force more powerful than the Light and Dark Gods combined, and one that knows no shortage of uses! But no, they literally spelled out that line’s intended meaning, with inflections and a winky face to boot!

I’m not going to try to go into detail about all of the little intricacies of this reward card, because someone already did it for me! I direct you to this AMAZING analysis by @scathing-eyes where she highlights both what this single message has to say about Clover and Fair Game at large.

3. Introductory Card on Twitter

Thank you so much to @homokinetic for linking me to this card!

If you’re trying to depict a shady character or even one who you have twisted intentions for, this is not the description you use for them. Here, we’re not given soft and vague allusions to Clover’s allegiances that could imply sinister motives. We’re told flat out that Clover acts in the best interests of Atlas and does things by the book. I mean honestly, that second point should de-trigger any alarm bells because Salem...doesn’t really have a book. I mean, she has goals, but as to how they get done? She doesn’t care! But Clover and Ironwood care about doing things by the book because they feel like those rules, for as flawed as they are, are what will keep the world from succumbing to chaos (Whether they’re right or wrong...look, I love these two, but they are flawed -- not evil, but flawed). Salem, on the other hand, worships the idea of chaos since it makes her goals that much easier to fulfill.

I think the line “tries to bring out the best in people” is also important. Salem’s forces gain strength by exploiting the worst qualities in people, and Clover stands in stark contrast to that philosophy by focusing on nurturing their best qualities. This is well communicated in the series with his actions towards Qrow and the introduction to the routines and options that the new Huntsmen now have access to. Not only that, but those means of nurturing come down to themes of unity and order (Showing Qrow the benefits of working with others and taking pride in his accomplishments, showing the new Huntsmen the positive ways they can impact Atlas, encouraging them to take a night to refresh their spirits), literally the very outlooks on life that Salem seeks to obliterate in order to ensure that humanity will be destroyed again. Just in terms of philosophies, Salem’s team and Clover are so fundamentally different in ways that just aren’t compatible. It’s not like Clover and Qrow where their differences complement each other and can mutually benefit the other. There is no way that Salem can benefit from posing a figure that inspires the endurance of the better qualities of the human spirit in a position of power.

4. The Overall Lack of Narrative Sense in Making Clover a Baddie

Clover is a character meant to foil and relate to Qrow. That’s not even an opinion. Everything from their contrasting semblances to their scenes together cement that as an absolute fact, and whether you ship it or not, their connection just can’t be ignored.

All that said, while Clover is an important part of this duo (Duh), it’s Qrow who is the focal point. Qrow is the character we’ve spent four seasons with and watched him struggle and develop through his journeys. So it’s fair to say that the impact of Clover and Fair Game on his character (Again, whether romantic or platonic) will be something that will significantly impact the direction of Qrow’s character going forward.

The next logical question, of course, is as follows: What’s the narrative point of Clover being a baddie for Qrow’s character? @skybird13 wrote a fantastic post about the overwhelming benefits of a genuine Clover as opposed to the redundancy of a Hans-esque traitor Clover storyline. You should absolutely read this post, but I’m going to quote the segment that spoke to me the most.

“I think the most surprising thing RT could do with Clover’s character at this point is to let him be exactly who he seems to be. Should he have his backstory and his secrets and his own demons to deal with? Absolutely. I would love to see that. But when it comes to Qrow’s trust in others, I think that has been pulverized enough throughout the series. Putting him through it again serves no narrative purpose except to send him right back into the tailspin that he’s currently digging himself out of which, in all honesty, isn’t great writing.“

And yeah, I have to ask: What point would another stab at Qrow’s trust do? If Qrow was meant to be a character who would face a tragic end, then why didn’t he back in Volume 6, when it would’ve been infinitely more appropriate? He literally lost faith in the person he dedicated his very life to. Why show Qrow recovering from his low point and building him up in Volume 7 just to tear him down? Unlike a character like Ruby, someone young and idealistic who watches the conventions of trust and goodness in her life crumble before her eyes over and over again and grows from it as she discovers new things about herself and others, Qrow has already had a lifetime’s worth of those ideals crashing and burning, and we’ve already seen the results of that growth, both on the high and low ends of his viewpoints on life, but especially the low points. What is the point of returning him there that couldn’t have been more naturally done but one volume earlier?

The Conclusion

...I’m bad at ending things. But I know I’ve made my case, and I’ve made it about as well as a case like this can be made.

Rooster Teeth, through both its primary and secondary means of storytelling, have made a strong case for a Clover who will remain loyal to the betterment of Remnant, regardless of the path he personally chooses to get there (Joining Robyn vs. Staying with Ironwood). For them to change gears after all this setup and make Clover an ally of Salem would be frankly nonsensical after all of this careful buildup.

Could it turn out that I’m wrong? Of course, but despite the suspense in my heart, I can’t help but trust RT here. Maybe that’t the result of that bop of an intro. Maybe it’s the prospect of my new ship becoming canon. But I don’t think that trust -- while based in emotion -- is baseless, and if RWBY has a theme, isn’t it to have a perspective like that?

So here’s hoping the Clover is just another instance of the payoff of trusting love!

#clover ebi #rwby #fair game #qrow branwen #fair game hcs

103 notes · View notes

thebeautyofdisorder · 4 years

Text

The Undone & The Divine (BBC Dracula) - Chapter 8

A/N: Okay, sorry it’s been like two weeks since I posted the last chapter. I am such a mess. This is a bit shorter, more of a set up than anything, but informative? I have so many ideas for this, that it took me a minute to figure out in sequence what’s going to happen when.

Pairing: Dracula & Agatha/Zoe, off and on Dracula/OFC

Rating: M, for blood, language, and mercenaries with guns.

Chapters 1-2 Here - Chapter 3 Here - Chapter 4 Here - Chapter 5 Here - Chapter 6 Here - Chapter 7 Here

Can be found on AO3 - Right HERE - or enjoy below the cut

Chapter 8

By all accounts he appears as a human man, at varying states of age depending upon how regularly and well he is fed, lingering even at his most satiated at around 45-50 years – presumably the age of his death. His hair is thick and inky black, kept shorter and slicked back when in public view; his nose aquiline and aristocratic; his eyes appear black at a distance but in close quarters and lighting seem to have a dark mossy-brown hue; admirable bone structure, and a mouth that is at times both harsh and jovial depending upon what impression he wishes to put across at the time. His accent is tainted by those of his victims, but always holds a slight thickness and gravel, reminiscent of his native tongue. His teeth, even when not in the state of blood frenzy, still seem longer and sharper than normal, particularly the canines. His fingernails also are long and honed to a point, and seem to be of inhuman durability and sharpness. He is excessively tall and somewhat broad, though of a generally slim build regardless of his bestial strength. No physical deformities upon the rest of his body when in his humanoid state, though his eyes can seem to gleam in the darkness like those of other nocturnal beasts.

When in the presence of human blood, those eyes dilate and become ringed in crimson, and all blunt edges of his teeth sharpen to slight but lethal points. Animalistic tendencies manifest – hissing, snarling, growling, the hunched stance of a predator, etc. Interestingly, he also seems to bare all the normative signs of the common morphine addict – tension, restless movements, irritability, the inability to control his emotions and behavior. He possesses speed the likes of which the human eye can barely detect, but only in small bursts in the midst of attack, by my witness. He was able to manifest a continual fog, as stated earlier in my narrative, and could very well be at fault for the storm swirling in the seas now, as I write. He can deform himself to fit into any small space, one could assume, though I have only seen him do this by defiling the physical forms of other living beings – notably a wolf at the convent, and the late Jonathan Harker, who was also undead at the time. Whether that’s relevant to this ability, I don’t particularly know. He can call wolves and bats to his service, and possibly flies – whether this works with all creatures and he’s merely chosen these for theatrical purposes, or if he’s limited to creatures of darkness and decay, I have yet to discover.

The ‘kiss of the vampire’ is a strong opiate, meaning most victims are often unaware of his bite or the danger they are in until it is too late. He can create and control the dream state in which they enter, often choosing scenarios of an erotic nature. Whether this is for his own amusement or because of the effect it has on the blood, I can only deduce. This method seems to be equally employed through both sexes though I have yet to see any direct indications of intercourse, willing or unwilling. If he possesses a sex drive at all, it is seemingly outranked by his desire to feed.

He is highly intelligent and possesses a biting wit, which in another context might even be endearing, and his charm is carefully honed to attract potential victims. Though his mental weaknesses are notable, including his arrogance, lack of self-awareness, and dependence on his victims to take in and retain key skills and information. As opposed to learning the language of a new land through study, he merely drains one of its countrymen and absorbs their inherent knowledge. This leads to a flurry of unpredictable behavior and reckless death, and also speaks of his impatience and lack of discipline, which has undoubtedly lessened with age. He was, in life, an excellent ruler and even better general with a skill for strategy currently wasted on petty mind games. If he could ever reach a point of managing his appetite for blood and destruction, he could be an invaluable resource - a first-hand witness to the last four hundred years of European history.

I’m sure you will, dear brother, quickly dismiss this as folly, but however much you would like to categorize him as yet another mindless demon from the pit, I assure you he is anything but. He may fear the cross, but don’t think there is a heavenly power that instilled that fear. It reeks of an entirely human weakness. You would do well to remember that, should you run across him or any of his kind in the future. While his existence seems to have been very luck of the draw, it’s nowhere near as anomalous as Dracula himself would like us to believe. Others could have survived and done what he has done. In fact, I could almost guarantee it.

Zoe read through Agatha’s words again, this particular afterward for maybe the twentieth time since she’d found it. Not for any particular information, more over just marveling at the clarity, simplicity, and dare-she-say fondness with which it was written, in comparison to the information she’d been brought up with. Shockingly, the nun was able to more realistically sum up the vampire than any other Van Helsing before or after her (granted, she had the firsthand experience), and with so much less fire and brimstone, religious nonsense. It was half of why she’d spent so long away from ‘the family business’ as it were, until she’d had to take over the institute. Science had always been the only god she would acknowledge.

Whatever logic Agatha had administered from across the pond however, while well used, had been entirely riddled with her elder brother’s showmanship and particularly Catholic brand of fending off the forces of darkness. Agatha may have seen him as the devil incarnate, but that didn’t stop her from acknowledging his humanity – and in that, Zoe couldn’t help but agree. Dracula was very much still a man, no matter how immortal or powerful, and he still had all of man’s other weaknesses, sans physical vulnerabilities. Minor detail.

She supposed it had made it easier for both the zealot and the scientist to see their subject of animosity as no better than a rabid dog that needed to be analyzed and destroyed. But that had never been the case at all. A self-serving lesson to learn, she had to admit, but an important one. So long as he had retained some of his humanity, there was certainly hope for her.

It was the only thing keeping her sane through the mock trial this experiment had turned into. Every turn she was being questioned and analyzed harder than she had since grad school, and yet still regarded as the antagonistic and dangerous party. It was a contradiction that made her genuinely question the mental capacity of her colleagues.

Yes, let's aggravate the person we're terrified of. Honestly.

Their latest critique, however she loathed to admit it, was actually sound. They needed a control. A 'direct contact' feed to compare to her bottled one, and they all knew there was only one vampire to compare to. Clearly they didn't actually expect him to participate, they only wanted to de-legitimize her process.

But it would make an impact, wouldn't it?

-----

It was just before sunset, traces of red just beginning to seep onto the surface of the sun, and for the first time in a great while, Count Dracula was unenthused. He was beginning to be rather fond of daylight, even if it came with certain disadvantages, as he was beginning to discover. Perhaps vampires were better off as creatures of the night after all.

Most if not all of his preternatural abilities were greatly weakened by the sun, though why he wasn't sure. It made him feel languid and slow, which was perfectly fine for an afternoon on the beach, but highly inconvenient when he got hungry and none of his more willing resources were available. Physical conditioning or a lesser reality of the lore he'd always accepted, who was to say?

Who indeed.

He had given Zoe plenty of space to run her little experiments without interference, aside from keeping an 'eye' out to ensure she wasn't in any immediate danger. But there was only so long that would last, and despite having ample opportunity to create more brides...he felt like he needed more answers before that inevitability occurred.

Agatha had been right, annoyingly, as usual. Lab rats were not something he needed, especially ones who could question him on topics even he didn't fully understand anymore.

If the Van Helsing women were good for anything, aside from healthy competition, it was certainly bluntness and clarity. Being the only thing close to another vampire of any mental capacity to be in his proximity for over 300 years certainly didn't hurt.

Zoe Van Helsing was someone he needed, a concept he could scarcely understand and wasn't entirely fond of, but if he wasn't mistaken, she needed him as well - and hated it even more.

----

"Dr. Helsing, is this really necessary?"

Zoe found herself staring at the younger but far more egotistical doctor through the glass that separated them with an expression not unlike one would give a particularly frustrating insect who refused to die as fast as she wished it would.

"Is what necessary?"

The man, Dr. Connors, pushed his glasses up the bridge of his nose, punctuating his next words with unnecessary flare.

"Well, our sponsor doesn't understand the necessity of this trial, when it cannot possibly prove anything. All of our intel on the 'vampiric condition' states simply that they require blood to sustain life, but also that it's nearly impossible to kill them. Surely your continued … existence without blood doesn't fully prove or disprove anything. And without anything to compare it to…"

"For now," she interrupted stubbornly, attempting to ignore his tendency to discuss her as though she were a theoretical construct.

"Even so," he continued blandly, "There are surely better uses of our time, in the face of an increasing number of...undead. Preventative measures, protection for the innocent. Unless you can get some sort of control data…"

Their 'sponsor' had sent this idiot to report back on how his precious money was being spent, and it had become an increasingly infuriating thorn in her side. Or stake in her heart, she was sure he hoped. Zoe had just begun to second guess her tendencies toward homicide, when she felt the tell-tale hairs begin to rise on the back of her neck.

"Oh fuck me," she cursed aloud, completely indifferent to the confused looks of those observing her. They wouldn't be confused for long.

"Careful what you wish for Doctor."

Everyone but Zoe took a startled glance around. She turned around, eyes directly finding the dark ones on the outside of the glass, quirking a stern brow despite the relative chaos of everyone else receding into the corners in panic.

Count Dracula merely flashed her a shit-eating grin in response, relishing her disapproval in equal measure to the human fear beginning to fill the room. Pungent and yet satisfying, she noted, rather unhappily.

"Oh Zoe how the tables have turned," he couldn't resist prodding at her through the encasement, ignoring the guns pointed at his back in favor of taunting her, hands in his pockets. The picture of malicious nonchalance.

She wasn't trapped, as he had been. They'd learned their lesson in that regard at least, but it was a barrier she'd permitted for her own sanity. Watching everyone walk on eggshells around her was grating, and it ruined her focus. Plus, it helped with the sensory overload until she got more accustomed to it.

"And yet you're still the one at gunpoint," Zoe shot back with a hint of a blithe smile.

He turned and directed his overly fond smile towards the tattooed gentleman with the over-sized assault weapon, greeting him like an old friend. The man that Zoe had never seen with a single facial expression looked so dumbstruck that she had to fight down a laugh. This was apparently the last straw for their visiting dictator.

"Count Dracula," came more of a squeak than a shout from the bespectacled doctor's mouth, with such a forced amount of distaste that Zoe was now certain he had lost his mind entirely. "You will not be permitted to attack anyone here."

Shooting Zoe an incredulous look, mostly as she could read translating to ‘Is he serious?’, the vampire watched her answering eye roll very obviously telling him ‘He's an idiot, but reports to the money’.

Dracula finally looked away from their silent exchange, and took out a small pocket flask, not unlike the one he'd left her before, and shook it in the other man's general direction as he passed by him with total indifference.

"Not to worry, I brought my own," he stated, opening it and taking a long swig. It cleared a direct pathway for him easily, bee-lining for Dr. Bloxham who sat at the control panel. She naturally flinched on his approach, despite trying to hide it. He noticed and flashed her a charming smile, to his credit only showing the slightest hint of fang.

"Terribly sorry about the finger," the Count apologized humbly, almost convincingly sincere as he draped a long arm over the back of her chair. "...But would you mind letting me in?"

Bloxham looked somewhat confused. "You want to go in there?" Her eyes shot up to the ceiling. The sun had not completely set. He gave her an encouraging smile with a faint trace of pity.

"I would love to go in there."

Zoe merely rolled her eyes and tapped on the table with relative impatience, as he paced through the parted seas of scientists and interns alike to join her in the completely ineffective glass prison.

"You evil little thing, you didn't tell them," he accused with quiet glee as he approached her from the opposite side of the table.

"If their superstitions help them feel safe, then all the better for me," she excused in a murmur, hoping he hadn't just given the game away completely.

His grin was one of near pride, as he bent his tall form forward to rest his hands on the table. "I can go slit his throat if you want me to. Heaven knows you won't."

She sighed, not trusting herself to answer. "Why are you here?" she asked instead.

"You needed me, didn't you?"

------

Okay, so this could go really amusingly or very terribly - we’ll see what I come up with, eh? Shouldn’t be as long of a wait this time, fingers crossed.

Tag List: @break-free-killer-queen @mephdcosplay @charlesdances @punk-courtesan @crowley-needs-a-hug @hoefordarkness @bellamortislife @malkaviangirl @imagineandimagine @chelsfic @dracula-s-bride @my-fanfic-library @hyacinth-meadow @mymagicsuitcase @littlemessyjessi @desperatefrenchwriter @ss9slb @crazytxgradstudent @claesbang @mr-kisskiss-bangbang @gettingcrazyforlife @carydorse @dreamerkim @gatissed @alhoyin @girlonfireice @festering-queen @jangleprojet @guardianbelle @vampiregirl1797

Share with your friends, if anyone else wants tagged let me know!

#bbc dracula #dracula 2020 #claes bang #dracula #dragatha #zoe van helsing #my writing #the undone & the divine

28 notes · View notes