#because the simpsons are still relevant

[gabe-gade]

#the simpsons #lisa simpson #polls #because the simpsons are still relevant #especially on tumblr

[seananmcguire]

Hey, I understand if you're sick of the questions and don't want to answer this, but given the recent discourse I've been ruminating the possibility of a website where people could submit prompts and by submitting relinquish their rights to the idea. The submissions could be sorted by genre etc and tagged for specific franchises like Star Trek or The Simpsons or whatever. The understanding would be that these ideas are now free to use, for anyone from fanfic authors up to the shows creators themselves and so long as an author can show they took the original prompt from this creative commons-esq website they should be protected from legal action.

I'm sure there is something I'm missing as to why a website like this wouldn't work, but I was just wondering about its potential as a person who has many ideas for how shows should go and not enough executive function to make my own version.

So ideas are not the issue. Ideas have never been the issue. Creators have ideas by the truckload, or we wouldn't have become creators. At the end of the day, we have the same excess of ideas as the most invested fans, and we don't need the help.

So why the avoidance? Contamination. That's where the issue comes in. If we execute an idea the same way someone else did, we open ourselves or the IPs we're working on to lawsuits. We create doubt. "Oh why do you have to be so careful not to steal ideas if you don't need them?" Because sometimes we won't know we've done it.

Look. I am a songwriter, in addition to prose, and I've released several CDs. I don't need anyone else's ideas. I am also not a huge Green Day fan. This is relevant because I once spent a month working on a song with a really cool hook that had just popped into my head one day. I was very pleased with the song as a whole!

And then I realized I'd stolen the hook wholesale from "Boulevard of Broken Dreams" by Green Day, and had to scrap the whole thing. Theft is not always intentional. The chance of contamination from such a site would be dangerous enough.

But what happens when you make your perfect site, and then someone takes your free-to-use ideas and writes a bestselling novel from them? And then the book gets made into a movie, and the lawyers for the movie studio go after everyone else who took that idea? I'm sure you could set up the initial site in such a way that they'd be in the clear, but lawsuits still cost time and money, and it's better to avoid them when possible.

So many stories have been born from ideas for specific IPs that then wind up nowhere near the final creations, I would hate to see you pouring that much passion into a platform that no sensible IP holder is going to touch, and most creators are going to avoid, because you only want to do the fun, easy part. Let us work uncontaminated, and hopefully we'll make you happy.

[pollyna]

If people give shit to Mav because nobody believes he's married to someone with a boring name like Tom, when they ask Iceman who he's married to and he answers Pete, everybody smiles along, and yeah, yeah, it does make sense. Pete could be a lawyer, a kindergarten teacher, a doctor or a botanist, it wouldn't be very relevant because Pete is the man Admiral Kazansky goes on trips with, to hike in Yellowstone Park and to skydive that time he was bored and without anything to do. Pete is the man who sometimes makes him lunch and always, always, leaves little silly notes in the admiral's jacket when he has long meetings and conferences outside the national border. Pete, who asked Tom to marry him back in '91 and said yes when Tom asked in '11. Pete is a calm, normal, borderline boring, and composed person who loves the Admiral and likes a peaceful and relaxed life.

Yeah, exactly that Pete.

(But then Tom introduces his husband to them, and they can be admirals or secretaries or janitors alike, and everyone thinks that they really really don't know Admiral Kazansky at all.)

((Mav's favourite story is about that time Ice introduced him to Admirals Simpson and Cain. Years later, he's still crying for how much he laughs when he tells the tale.))

#@ discord does the work #i just made it a lil more mine #tom iceman kazansky #pete maverick mitchell #icemav #sweet kind pete and then it's maverick but tom is still talking about him in the same way #kindergarten teacher isn't all wrong lol he has 12 aviators now #top gun (1986) #otp: i heard from the heavens that clouds have been grey #otp: things get old our love is gold #i'm sad bc the pre-mixed base for the pancake didn't taste like anything at all efwiufeiu i will have to them homemade :(

[souryogurt64]

sometimes i think about ashlee simpson and i get so sad. girl was a divorced mother by 26 or something. she got a nose job at like 21 which like whatever but you KNOW there were sinister energies pushing her into that. the industry will chew women up and spit them out and leave them in the dust. i hope she’s thriving rn

I mean I think her nose job was like the pressure any woman whose parents basically raise them on reality TV and make them essentially child actors faces. A lot of stuff pops up when im researching FOB lore and people were really awful to her even though she seems really sweet :(

Ashlee was slightly younger than average for pregnancy/divorce but still pretty average. I think its just something that happens to a lot of people, but her being a kind of religious child star definitely influenced things a bit.

I prefer to leave Ashlee and their personal drama out of my insane conspiracy theories as much as I can but I do bring the whole pregnancy thing in my Panic essay because the insane circumstances coinciding with the release of Pretty Odd were relevant to the lukewarm reception of Pretty Odd and the amount of press Pretty Odd got IMO

[catboyrichardkarinsky]

the Caroline in the city references in family guy truly fuck me up. buckle the fuck up because I'm going to Overanalyze

so in family guy season 1 episode 6 (YES THAT EARLY ON) there's a joke where peter griffin says he once pretended to be gay by watching Caroline in the city. it then actually cuts to him watching Caroline in the city (well like he was watching what seemed like a pretty accurate recreation of the vibes of the citc intro) and then. well that's it

but of course I'm too autistic to not think about this because i have MANY questions

1. legit where did the idea that watching citc is a gay thing come from. I'm not asking this in a "whoa joking about tv shows making you gay is problematic" way because I'm aware family guy is full of jokes like that and worse. I'm asking this legitimately. because on one hand i guess you could argue that having a female main character= unmasculine=gay but that brings me to my second question

2) out of all possible tv shows to do this joke with... why Caroline in the city. and I'll have more to say on this later but i will say if you look at the time period of this. this episode of family guy aired on may 9th, 1999. the last episode of Caroline in the city aired on April 26th, 1999. i don't know how long the production of a family guy episode is but I'm going to assume Caroline in the city was still running when they wrote this episode but it was very much towards the end. but here's the thing. i spend a lot of time analyzing the cultural impact of citc and I've come to the conclusion that it was kinda relevant during season 1 but not many people watched it by season 4 (which led to that torturous non ending from early cancellation) and i legitimately don't know why this is the show they chose. like if we're going for a gay thing, Will and Grace was already airing at this time, i think more people knew about that than Caroline in the city. and there was a Caroline in the city fandom online but from what I've seen it was veeery predominantly straight. THAT BEING SAID

3) every Caroline in the city fan i see lately including myself is queer. like he couldn't have known that unless he also has future vision but considering they say Simpsons predicted everything in the future the possibility that they got all that but family guy instead just predicted a gay Caroline in the city fandom is SO funny to me

4) but back on the topic, the only other explanation i have is that this is another one of those annoyingly tasteless digs at Malcolm Gets for allegedly not being able to play a straight character convincingly (untrue) but for it to be any of these we'd have to assume that Seth MacFarlane, the creator of family guy has actually seen enough of Caroline in the city to know these things which. surely can't be the case

or... can it?

3) this is not the last time Caroline in the city was referenced in a Seth MacFarlane show. okay this is the really insane part to me. in american dad there's an episode where the characters find a "secret ending" to Caroline in the city where Caroline kills everyone and takes over the city or whatever. it's dumb, it makes me uncomfortable and stuff but there's also two very important things to note about this:

a) they got Lea Thompson to voice Caroline for like one line in this episode. i legitimately want to know what that conversation sounded like. "hey Lea could you do just one line for this episode? it's basically your character from Caroline in the city turning evil and killing everyone she loves in a secret ending to the show, are you interested?" this one isn't related to any of my conspiracy theories the thought is just funny to me

b) more importantly they like. legitimately drew them. like it was recognizably Caroline, Richard, Annie and Del. and like they showed them for like two seconds. that's a lot of attention to detail for two seconds. and again this is not the first time there was a Caroline in the city reference in a Seth MacFarlane show but SURELY this is the last one right?

WRONG!!

4) THERE'S ANOTHER REFERENCE IN AMERICAN DAD! there's a character who says something about how you should respect your elders because they lived through 4 seasons of Caroline in the city whatever that is supposed to mean! that's the THIRD TIME!

5) let's return to my second point for a second. i think i skimmed over one of the most glarring logical issue with the original family guy joke. peter claimed he pretended to be gay by watching Caroline in the city, but in the cutaway gag, he is fully alone in his own living room, watching Caroline in the city. (side note, it is a really, really good recreation of the citc intro which adds to my Seth MacFarlane has seen some Caroline in the city theory because why else would he pay attention to this detail) but.... how is that pretending? who was he pretending to? did he memorize every plot point to later recount it to pretend to be a fan? at that point he's just straight up a fan isn't he? he could've just told people he watched Caroline in the city if he wanted to pretend to be gay! why did he even pretend to be gay that's never explained and it's so specific...

now that I mentioned it it's very specific and familiar.....

6) Caroline in the city season 1 episode 3 Caroline and the gay art show, Richard pretends to be gay to sell his art AND in season 3 episode 20 Caroline and the little white lies, Del and Charlie pretend to be gay for insurance reasons. coincidence? well probably but what if it's NOT? is Seth MacFarlane trying to tell us he's secretly a Caroline in the city fan?

7) let's look at it in a meta way. Seth MacFarlane is the voice of peter griffin. in a way they're one and the same, aren't they? peter griffin wasn't really pretending to be gay, because he was at home watching citc on his own as i already mentioned it. is it just a guilty pleasure for him? is Seth MacFarlane too ashamed to admit he enjoys Caroline in the city so he has to communicate it through jokes in his tv shows?

8) or there's the other interpretation that makes me sound like the gaylor truthers but hear me out. if Seth Rudesky thinks watching Caroline in the city makes you gay but he's also signalling that he probably watched at least some of it, is he just trying to come out to us?

i once thought about turning this into a youtube video essay but I'm not sure anyone would watch it. that being said, i might still do it, why not?

#Caroline in the city #i thought about this WAYYY too much

[warrioreowynofrohan]

Jurassic Park Daily - New York

The story continues its depiction of how information fails to be understood, transmitted, and used, which feels like a central theme of the book.

Miscommunication. Dr. Guitierrez is not told that Dr. Simpson is away or that the people at the Tropical Diseases Lab have no relevant expertise to identify the lizard.

Failure to identify the miscommunication. Dr. Guitierrez regards the repetition of the infirmation he provided (which he doubted the accuracy of) as confirmation that it was indeed correct.

Disregard of minor details which could be relevant. Dr. Simpson does not mention the cross-reactivity with cobra venom - though, to someone familiar with basilisk lizards ratger than infectious disease genrrally, it might be telling. This is similar to the Costa Rica lab ceasing testing on the saliva even when they got anomalous results, because it was no longer applicable to a current patient.

As a result of this, experts conclude there is no serious problem.

And then the gruesome ending as a kicker to drive home: yes, there is still a problem.

#jurassic park daily #jurassic park

[relatablepicturesofdoofenshmirtz]

how do you feel about pnf coming back for two whole seasons?

Do NOT message me about this answer. You can reply to this post, but don’t come into my inbox or messenger about anything I’ve written.

I’ve been holding onto these for a while because I didn’t want to a respond with my knee-jerk reaction of extreme pessimism (I actually had a whole rant drafted up that I deleted). I still think this is a bad idea that could potentially undo all the development the characters have been through (like what happened with Doof in MML) and bungle continuity (I doubt there will be zero continuity errors in the new seasons given that they messed up several things in CATU). I also hope they keep to the same formula of being a parody of episodic shows. All good things must come to an end lest they become a shambling corpse of their past self that a company is beating for money (Spongebob Squarepants, The Fairly Oddparents, and The Simpsons come to mind as several cartoon series that have run--at least they put FOP out of its misery a few years ago--way beyond their prime and suffered for it).

Now that the negativity’s out of the way, here are the only ways I will be able to enjoy the new seasons of PnF:

1) If there’s a timeskip. We’ve seen the kids in elementary school and high school, but not middle school. I think it would be a great opportunity to pop in on their lives when they’re still fun (good LORD do I have issues with the A-plot of “Act Your Age”)! Even just the next summer would be fine.

2) If it’s one of the other universes, like the one where Lawrence is a polar bear/Phineas has a different number of shirt stripes (”Lost in Danville”) or the second dimension (ATSD).

3) If it’s a reboot/remake. Fresh slate, nothing to worry about.

4) If I just watch the show and never look through the show’s tags ever again. I KNOW not everyone’s watched the hundreds of episodes that the show consists of multiple times. It’s NOT reasonable for me to expect everyone to remember tiny details or patterns. Nevertheless, it IS majorly annoying to go into the tags and see people being “BUT WHAT IF” when something in the show contradicts that or even supports it/it doesn’t need to be posed as a hypothetical. Equally annoying is “BUT WHY DOES” when the answer can be found in the details/patterns. If this is going to be a continuation of the same summer, then the entirety of seasons 1-4 of PnF and what happened in them are still relevant. I am too tired to be fending off dozens of hundreds of thousands of people who love charging ahead and spreading misinformation. I also am not going to be interested in people revisiting old debates that were settled over 10 years ago. The new episodes are doubtlessly going to bring in new watchers, and who knows if those people will watch the original run.

5) If I treat them as not canon to Phineas and Ferb (2007-2015).

My final thoughts on the subject:

It is not possible for this show to be modern. They’re probably going to try and add in modern references like they did with CATU, and I’m going to hate it. 

If it’s a continuation, then the futures of “Act Your Age” and “Phineas and Ferb’s Quantum Boogaloo” are the definitive endgames for Phineas and Ferb (respectively 10 and 20 years into the future) whether the new seasons fit within them or not.

...Also, bring back Stacy Hirano in a meaningful way 2k23.

#will i be screencapping doof for the new seasons? it depends on what route they take #true continuation? probably. reboot? probably not #also only if i can get my hands on clean raws for it since i bet disney+ doesn't allow screenshots & i don't want watermarks #bugged-boy #agentmalfoy24601 #anon #asks

[ask-artsy-oncie]

Yknow, given that "filler" is so context-sensitive I don't think it should be the term used, but I do think there's a term that needs to be coined for the very brief phenomenon where story-driven shows became hits and the network decided to order way more episodes than the crew knew what to do with.

I don't think it really happens anymore, especially in the age of streaming, but the two biggest examples I could think of were the original Adventure Time (which admittedly did not start story-based, but leaned harder in that direction as the show went on) and Steven Universe (which I would argue had a first season that was similarly episodic). Both owned by Cartoon Network, both MAJORLY important players in the channel's history, but both overmilked and prolonged due to their popularity. I would also very hesitantly add Miraculous Ladybug to the list but it's VERY debatably story-based since it's still (? I haven't watched it in a long while) a monster-of-the-week superhero cartoon.

When purely episodic shows like Spongebob or the Simpsons are made to keep going on forever, it sucks, but it's not like these shows ask their audiences to stay invested from the beginning to the end. When a story-based show keeps getting episodes ordered with no confirmation when the end is coming, you are actively harming the overall story while the show is airing (though this can usually be amended by skipping episodes when watching retroactively). With Adventure Time, it seems more like they had to regroup and figure out just what they actually wanted to do with the series, and so the problem with all the episodes being produced is a little harder to define in terms of how is affected the story, but with Steven Universe, it's very clear based on what we know about the show's bible that the crew knew HOW they wanted this story to end, and what they wanted to do to get there, they were just generally kept in the dark about WHEN they were going to end it (there's probably some behind-the-scenes I'm not privy to that's already explained it, but I suspect this is why season 1 is so episodic, if they didn't get more episodes ordered to give them space to escalate the story to where they wanted it to go, then why get the ball rolling?).

And I'm not talking about episodes that don't push the story forward, I'm saying both of these shows have episodes here or there that feel kind of directionless - beyond not contributing to the plot, they don't fit comfortably into the story even as a pace setter or theme emphasizer, they exist more as "CN needed something new to air this week and you can pretty much ignore this when you rewatch the series".

I guess the term I'm looking for is "bloat" as opposed to "filler"? And I really don't think it's going to happen again because the way streaming structures story-based shows is so different, now. But these two shows in particular are massively culturally relevant and retroactive criticism, analysis, and other discussion is happening about them all the time. And I think that, because of that, we do need to acknowledge how they were treated by their network without using a term that really doesn't apply to their very specific treatment.

Idk I'm tired of people flinging around the term "filler" on original western cartoons with very little care about what the term actually means, but at the same time, I don't want to pretend these very valid criticisms just don't exist.

#Stupid shit #Please don't come into the notes trying to debate me this is really just a vent post

[fumblingmusings]

I am an absolute and utter fucking SUCKER for Scotland ×England sibling dynamics of older and younger sibling shenanigans

I love the idea of Scotland being the older brother who England can rely on. Whilst i believe the fandom mostly prefers Wales and England sibling dynamics bc the way Scotty is in the manga (he is a bit of a dick to England, which i believe stems from how the Scottish and English relationship actually is) , i believe Scotland is the one who looked after and raised England when they were wee babys, and is the one England inevitably runs to for just ab anything

(this can also be my unhealthy obsession with ScotEng but this isn't relevant to the ask so ignore it)

I loved all the moments England/Evelyn and her siblings had in SPE.

I wonder what they felt seeing their little sister slowly losing herself, constantly falling ill, if they worried she would slowly fade out of existence at one point or if conflicts between their governments made then cold towards her and anticipating the day she was gone.

What was their relationship as baby nations? You mentioned in your fic that Eva didn't remember her mother much, and what little she did, she believed her mother didn't want her at all. Does that mean Ali and Wales were in charge of raising England as a child? What was that like for them? At what point did they teach Eva what she was and what the would mean for her and them.

I hope your future fics could have more UK sibling moments, whether as nations or as humans, bc i love them deeply and i literally live for any uk sibling content.

In other words, where do i send you the monies for more England and their brothers sharing a single braincell. Bc the car scene had me dying

This answer is so long I'm sorry I completely rambled sorry sorry...

Scotland is a dick in the manga towards England partly because he deserves to be a dick towards England and partly because us Scots are the most contrarian annoying bastards on the planet where everything has to be a goddamn battle and it's genuinely exhausting because most English and Welsh people would let it go out of fear of being rude or confrontational but Scots just get a kick out of being the devil's advocate in the most inopportune times. This is partly England's fault and partly just a leftover from how stubborn the Highland-Lowland conflicts have been over the years. That Simpsons joke by grounds-keeper Willy?

They're right.

Anyway!

I love the idea of Scotland being the older brother who England can rely on. Whilst i believe the fandom mostly prefers Wales and England sibling dynamics bc the way Scotty is in the manga (he is a bit of a dick to England, which i believe stems from how the Scottish and English relationship actually is) , i believe Scotland is the one who looked after and raised England when they were wee babys, and is the one England inevitably runs to for just ab anything

I like the idea of England Scotland and Wales really only having each other for about a thousand years, with Ireland always keeping its distance where necessary. And those early memories don't go away easily, that human connection cannot be forgotten even after a hundred armies and a dozen dead Kings say they should.

A lot of the time, all they had was each other, when England was split in seven Scotland in four, and Wales in god knows how many tiny kingdoms. They were real wanderers. And no matter what they do to each other, they still can't get that first millennium out of their memories. Scotland is and was far more likely to intercede in English politics when requested by the government versus the other neighbours. Because we're nosey buggers who like burning York.

I go with Wales being the oldest (which I think is not a popular choice but... meh), then Ireland, then Scotland, then England, and then obviously wee Northern Ireland a thousand years later. I know Hima has the Irelands in a sort of two Italies situation where they were babies together, but I think that's the biggest piece of canon where I'm like... no. I can maybe accept him popping up during the late 16th century, but not prior to the 1000s like the other four.

I think in the fic I have the kids born around the time of Rome's arrival. But they aren't Rome's kids. I don't know... haven't thought it through entirely, but Britannia was never a particularly good mother by modern standards, even more so when it hit home that the children, but particularly England, signalled her death. Evie went from being her mother's little apple to a cuckoo bird. And Eva liked Rome, he was funny and made her smile and brought her nice things. Her mother didn't, clearly, and made her and Ireland watch the destruction of Colchester and St Alban's and London. Ireland was like ooft. alrighty. Then went on with her day. But England took it... poorly.

But when they lose their mum, they are still kids themselves. None of them are a day over twelve when Britannia dies, so they know what it's like to rely on fickle humans for protection only to realise they really can't stay too long with any of them. They raise each other for a while until they all go their separate ways. I mentioned in the fic that England was a clingy, weepy little girl. Honestly, her siblings, who were just kids themselves, couldn’t cope with her, and one by one, they decided to go and live with their own people.

I headcanon that England and Scotland were the last to split because the overlap of what's now Lothian, the Borders, Cumbria, and Northumberland were grey areas in ownership for such a long time. Edinburgh was after all technically English from 680 to 970, and in the 940s, Strathclyde stretched through Cumbria and into Yorkshire, so England and Scotland have always been overlapping with their people.

I loved all the moments England/Evelyn and her siblings had in SPE. I wonder what they felt seeing their little sister slowly losing herself, constantly falling ill, if they worried she would slowly fade out of existence at one point or if conflicts between their governments made then cold towards her and anticipating the day she was gone. What was their relationship as baby nations? You mentioned in your fic that Eva didn't remember her mother much, and what little she did, she believed her mother didn't want her at all. Does that mean Ali and Wales were in charge of raising England as a child? What was that like for them? At what point did they teach Eva what she was and what the would mean for her and them.

The UK siblings for me are interesting during the 16th to 19th centuries because they all lack control one way or another, and the way they try to take it back for themselves is toxic. Scotland and Wales throw themselves into the army and navy respectively, and England completely shuts herself away with stolen children. Like they just disconnect from their own people. The whole point of Slow Paced Envy was to write about dissonance. Dissonance between the character's actions, what came out of their mouths, what they thought and what they knew to be true. Everyone in that fic runs on contradictions that are either flat out toxic and dangerous or - at best - delusional. England isn't the only one in the fic like that. I hope I portrayed it well...

So England is their baby sister at the end of the day. And she is - to be blunt - such an anomaly. She's so much weaker, she's got far less fire in her, she's way more passive. Scotland loves to travel and see the world (and do all kinds of heinous or drunken things) - it's what he lives for. Wales loves to fight. England wants to have a wee farmstead with barn cats and her witch cauldron. Her brother's flip between resenting her and pitying her.

But she's still their baby sister. I think that colours their relationship with her more than if it were Arthur, who is just another boy, albeit the youngest. Again, I think gender messes with the dynamic. Ireland deliberately extricates herself from the 'oldest sister = caretaker' role, but England falls into the 'baby' role, definitely. Not spoiled particularly, but she does receive the most attention. From everyone. Not that it ever made her happy.

There was no chance of them being on equal footing with each other. Scotland wanted it to be him. It was his royal family after all the pulled them all together. He has the better temperament for power, is more book smart, is a better tactician etc etc... And yet it's all on baby sister who by the 17th century is addicted to Opium and probably has had TB for the past three hundred years. It's laughable. It's a joke. God is mocking them. Make it make sense.

It's that conflict of "I know my sibling and they personally would never lay a hand on me but their people will and sometimes I cannot look at my sibling without thinking about what their people have done in their name and I hate them for it."

That saying that makes its round on the internet: the love was there, it didn't change anything, but it was there. That's really how I understand Scotland Wales and England's relationship. Love cannot overcome, nor should it necessarily. But it's still there. And that's something.

I hope your future fics could have more UK sibling moments, whether as nations or as humans, bc i love them deeply and i literally live for any uk sibling content. In other words, where do i send you the monies for more England and their brothers sharing a single braincell. Bc the car scene had me dying

Ha! This ask was payment enough. I'm glad you enjoyed the car scene. The one bit of levity that entire fic had...

Thank you for the ask! I'm sorry this reply is so scattered and long but ah! It made me happy. Thank you!

#q&a #fanfic ask #not entirely well composed or consistent thoughts below the cut #anglo-scottish relations pre 1300 *fascinate* me #hws england #hws scotland #headcanon #hetalia

[sunnytastic]

I’m very very new to the always sunny fandom and I stumbled across a post of yours about macdennis and your prefaced it with saying rob is a loser and people in the tags were agreeing/saying they’re a rob hater and hate to give him praise/credit. My question is, why does everyone hate rob? Is it because of the offensiveness of the show or something else? When I say new I mean like this week new so I really don’t know anything about the actors/creators. Thank you very much for any information you can give me, it’s greatly appreciated. ❤️

omg hi!!! welcome! sunnyblr is by far the best fandom i ever been a part of. i hope you have as much fun as i do.

something very unique about sunny is how integral the creators are to the lifeblood of the show. rob, charlie, and glenn (rcg) are not simply it's creators, they are the show themselves. sunny was born out of rcg's desire to give themselves the opportunities they wish they were being offered. before sunny, none of them had any major roles or been a part of a hit production. and so they a created a show, written by them, starring them with themselves being the target audience. and it has turned into the longest running live-action sitcom on television, with one of the most passionate and involved fanbases (i can not stand the sunny sub reddit but no one can deny their love for the show).

beyond rcg themselves, sunny is an important part of the lives of their closest family and friends. rob met kaitlin olson, the actress who plays dee, on the show and they are married now. charlie's wife, mary elizabeth ellis, plays the waitress, and jimmi simpson, his old roommate, plays liam mcpoyle. david hornsby, one of the funniest people alive and the actor who plays rickety cricket, was very close friends with rob, glenn, and charlie long before the show started and is also one of the head writers for the show.

also, and, this isn't quite relevant to the rest of this response, but if you do continue down the sunny rabbit hole, you will find that six names repeatedly pop up in terms of episode writers: rob mcelhenny, charlie day, glenn howerton, david hornsby, scott marder, and rob rosell. you will also notice that during seasons 13 & 14, arguably sunny's weakest seasons, glenn howerton, scott marder, and rob rosell were absent from the writer's room, which really speaks to how enmeshed sunny and it's writers are.

ok so here is the thing about rob... i've written about this before but rob is both overwhelmingly confident and deeply insecure, which are two sides of the same coin. funny enough, i think rob would be the first person to agree with me on this statement. he's said many times that he knows he walks around with a chip on his shoulder and something to prove. most times, this attitude works in his favor. he is passionate, determined, and persistent, and every person in his life will speak to how great of a leader and friend he is.

but sometimes, I find it very easy to get frustrated with rob because he will say something and I will be hit with how much he has become the hollywood he was originally very critical about. with charlie and glenn, there is less of the feeling that hollywood "got" them. he is also the most defensive about sunny's use of blackface (& other racial caricatures), a decision I already vehemently dislike made worse by rob's attitude of "whoops, just a little mistake we made."

but then again, he has given one of the most nuanced and heartbreakingly real portrayals of a gay man in television, while also still being very funny in the process. in another of his shows, mythic quest, the only romantic pairing in the entire show is a lesbian couple, who get together very early on and avoid the stereotypical catty behavior seen in most tv lesbian couples.

so my feelings on rob are very mixed. on one hand, i am in awe of his creative talent & artistic direction and grateful for his fight for better queer representation. on the other, he can be so irritating i find myself wanting to bang my head against the table.

i hope this answer is helpful! if you have any more questions, any sunny blog and I would be happy to answer them. if you are looking to learn more about the show, i highly recommend listening to the always sunny podcast. rob, charlie, and glenn talk about the show episode by episode, often bringing in other cast members to join them. while they don't always stay on topic, you will definitely see how much this show means to them and how much of their personalities are reflected in the characters.

#another day another overly long response to an ask #i hope this doesn't sound patronizing because that is not my intention at all #isa x sunny #isa x asks #rob mcelhenney #charlie day #glenn howerton #its always sunny in philadelphia

[mx-piggy]

I’ve read some mixed opinions on the new Futurama episode (something that feels weird to say after all this time), and I definitely have slightly mixed thoughts on it, but overall it's positive.

I'd love to discuss the episode with people so feel free to comment or DM me!

It feels a lot like the Comedy Central seasons, which aren’t my favourites by any means but I like them well-enough. The episode felt like I was watching an episode of Futurama, which is a low bar, but still. I'm not a modern-Simpsons hater by any means, but the show feels so different to what it used to be even in the early 2000s, and I think it's an achievement that this Futurama revival manages to feel like at least like it did in the Comedy Central years. But, I do feel like the comedy was a lot stronger in this one than in the CC years.

I found it funny that Fry’s goal was to watch every TV show ever made, because it’s very Fry, and I think it was a decent set up to the plot of the episode.

The plot itself felt a bit weak compared to some of the Comedy Central episodes, which I think found strength in their plots and sci-fi concepts despite their flaws. I feel like the episode was trying to establish the world as being more relevant to 2023, which is surprisingly different to when Futurama was on the air, so I think it makes sense to adapt the show to current year. That said, I personally find it a little irritating when media that is made a year before it is aired tries to make episodes that focus entirely on a vaguely contemporary topic, because more often than not they have nothing new to say, and it often feels irrelevant and out of touch despite the intention of relevancy. That's more personal to me, though, and it doesn't bother me too much, and I can mostly look past it.

I think that the concept of Fry bingeing All My Circuits in that suit thing (I’m too lazy to look up what it was called lol) was a little weak, when Futurama has so many much more interesting sci-fi concepts, such as in the episode’s predecessor Meanwhile. For me, it just felt a little uninteresting as a central part of the episode, but I am glad that we got some other stuff in the episode that was far more entertaining (I'll get to that).

They didn’t explore binge culture in a particularly interesting or thoughtful way, in my opinion anyway. They just sort of vaguely said 'shows on streaming services are bad' and ‘bingeing makes you lose touch with reality’, the latter of which they kind of undermined at the end of the episode. I'll get onto the ending in a second.

I feel like there's so much more you can say about bingeing/streaming culture, such as how it makes the viewing experience feel less communal and the hype dies down after a week because the episodes are released in one go compared to on a weekly basis. With Netflix shows, the hype is gone within a couple of weeks of the show's release. But, with shows like the Last of Us, which was released on a weekly basis, there's a longevity to the hype. There was something really exciting about waiting for the next episode of TLOU and being able to focus on the show one episode at a time. I'm not saying that's what the plot should have been about, but I personally think that it's a far more interesting and more 'relevant' critique than anything Futurama had to say about shows on streaming services. Like, everyone knows a lot of streaming service originals are dogshit. I love Futurama, but it was very late to the party on this one.

Okay, onto the ending. I feel like the ending was anticlimactic in a way that wasn’t all that comical, and it undermined the Bender/Leela All My Circuits storyline of the episode. The fact that Fry could just get out of the suit and be fine makes the rest of the plot redundant. I guess Fry spending months of his life bingeing a shitty TV show after expressing his dismay at having wasted years of his life doing nothing sort of fits the 'it makes you lose touch with reality' critique (and is very in-character for Fry), but at the same time it wasn't really explored in a meaningful way. We don't get to view Fry's gradual decline, as a better Futurama episode may have shown. The episode just says that shows on streaming services are lazily and hurriedly cobbled together and shit.

I liked Bender and Leela having to make more All My Circuits, mostly because I love the Bender/Leela dynamic, and All My Circuits is often a highlight of the show anyway. I think this aspect of the episode felt a bit like I'd seen it before because it was another 'Bender works on All My Circuits and makes it not very good' episode, and one that wasn't quite as good as Bender Should Not Be Allowed on TV, but I enjoyed it nonetheless, and this was definitely the strongest part of the episode for me.

I think it’s neat that they resurrected Calculon (loved seeing the Robot Devil again, too). I thought some of the All My Circuits stuff was funny, such as the bi Calculon moment, and Bender saying to leave in the director's heart attack because it was funny. Maybe the most (unintentionally) relevant part of the episode was seeing a team of overworked writers whose job is overtaken by Bender, a robot.

I think they did a decent job at continuing on from Meanwhile, considering that they managed to make it feel a follow-up to Meanwhile whilst also making a basically unrelated episode. I definitely wish they had made more of a reference to Meanwhile past, like, the five minute mark. That said, the trailer showed some Fry and Leela stuff, so I'm guessing that they'll likely explore Fry and Leela's relationship, which changed during Meanwhile. I'm also hoping to see more focus on characters like Amy and Zoidberg in the upcoming episodes, but I get why they functioned more as side-characters in this episode. I'm happy with the episode's sense of continuity with the rest of the series, though. I'm glad they didn't forget things like the fact Calculon was in Robot Hell, so I'm excited to see how else this season connects to previous plotpoints in the series.

I really appreciate that they're not indecisive about Fry and Leela's relationship anymore. I'm so happy that they've unambiguously settled on the fact that Fry and Leela are a couple that love and care about one another, instead of that weird thing they did in the Comedy Central years where their relationship was ambiguous in a way that wasn't deliberate and interesting but purposely unclear so the writers could just define their relationship based on the plot of the episode and what would be more convenient for it. The Fry fake-out deaths never have any emotional impact on me, but it was genuinely sweet to see that Leela was devastated by Fry's 'death'. A lot of the time, I feel like these Fry fake-out deaths were undermined in the CC run because it was often preceded by Leela not liking Fry whatsoever. In general it's much more pleasant to watch them, because I had an issue in the CC run where it seemed like Leela wasn't interested in Fry and Fry was one of those 'won't take no' guys. It was sweet to see Leela being supportive of Fry, and their relationship as a clearly defined/established romantic relationship feels incredibly fresh, even though it was central to the original series. I'm hoping this will be a strength of the revival moving forward, because we have a chance to see Fry and Leela together in a way that we haven't really before.

All in all, I don't think this is the worst or best Futurama episode to have ever been made. Typically, I subscribe to the opinion 'don't beat a dead horse' when it comes to reviving TV shows that had a perfectly satisfactory conclusion. So, while I'd be perfectly happy if Futurama had just stayed dead, I must admit that I was actually really happy to watch a new episode of Futurama after so many years. I understand why people disliked this episode. And, I can also understand why people loved this episode. Despite my issues with the episode, I really did enjoy it. Maybe I'm doing just what these executives want by watching the revival and enjoying it just because I get to see my special little guys again in brand new adventures, which will hopefully improve after this episode. It wasn't the best thing I've ever seen, but it brought a smile to my face.

The non-binary robot joke was genuinely incredible 10/10 episode just for that.

#episode: the impossible stream #futurama #hulurama #futurama season 11 #Futurama spoilers #long post

[adultswim2021]

Robot Chicken #69: “Love, Maurice” | January 18, 2009 - 11:30PM | S04E07

Another collection of Robot Chicken style comedy sketches found–where else?--Robot Chicken. Which ones will I struggle to say anything about? Read on, dear read-onner: 

This one has one where David Faustino is a troop, and that is the joke. I disliked this one because the joke was supposed to be that it’s good that he’s a troop. There’s another one where Roger Rabbit and O.J. Simpson do Strangers on a Train with each other. This one was weirdly senseless to the point that I couldn’t really get behind it, but from this icy distance I still acknowledged the joy of coming up with something this brainless and laughing about it with your friends, and couldn't fault the writers for indulging in a thing like this. I just don’t think I like it here. It is simply too random. Same sorta goes for the one where it's Terminator but Arnold's head is on a baby's body for some reason.

The two sketches I had the most positive reaction to were: Kid Venison, in which Peter Parker is bitten by a radioactive deer instead of a radioactive spider. I liked some of the jokes in this. Mocking deer for being skittish is one of the few full-throated bigotries I freely indulge in. They are the bastards of the woods and I hope I live to see them go extinct. 

The best sketch is the one where the tentacle monster is nervously calling an anime girl to try and set up a second date. Fairly clever idea, and the performance of the monster makes this one fairly funny. I like when the music briefly kicks in, I literally laughed out loud at this. And that’ll do it for this one.

EPHEMERA CORNER

Black Dynamite (the Movie) (January 18, 2009)

Noting this here, because it’ll be relevant later: Black Dynamite Colon Movie Film For Theaters had it’s debut at Sundance, probably. Fine. I’ll look it up. Okay, yes, it was Sundance. The movie had a wider (but still limited) release on October 16, 2009. 

One movie-goer was overheard saying "This is flawless spoof comedy - go see it, brilliant". Another was heard to say "The best piece of cinematic satire since the Naked Gun". "Very, very, very, very, very funny" said another. "Hilarious - Black Dynamite Kicks [SWEAR WORD REMOVED]", said one disgusting movie-goer, who probably committed a violent crime after saying that. The point is, this movie is well-regarded as a funny lampoon of Blaxploitation movies.

Okay I need to jam this in somewhere; one of my favorite video stores to ever exist was Le Video in San Francisco. One time I was feeling nostalgic for it, so I went to instagram to see if any one had taken pictures of it during it's final days in existence. There was only one; a zoomer who was trying to shame them for having a "Blaxploitation" section. It was clear that they never encountered the term "Blaxploitation" before, and just thought the store was positively IDing movies that somehow exploit black people? Not what I wanted to see! At all!

Adult Swim adapted the movie into an animated series, which debuted as a pilot special in 2011. Two proper seasons came after that. I remember liking it, but I don’t really remember much about it. Same could be said for the movie, which I also remember seeing and liking. I WILL revisit the movie, but not for this post. I’ll probably do a write-up for it around shortly before I cover the pilot episode.

#adult swim #adultswim2021 #robot chicken

[beemovieerotica]

As a big fan of Universal Studios, it’s a shame it only became big and popular because of Harry Potter and the fact people hugely loved and supported that series and she who must not be named. Reallllllyyyy wish they decided to go for a different IP instead that is still popular and timeless and not racist, fatphobic, antisemitic, transphobic, y’know. But yeah… it’s a shame because when you put the Harry Potter theme of it aside, the Hagrid’s coaster is great as an individual roller coaster. I would like for Universal to take Harry Potter out of their parks and retheme the Wizarding World areas to different IPs, but since it’s their biggest moneymaker I doubt it, and if they did, I feel like they’d get lots of hate. It would be very epic though to see them ditch their big cash cow for the rights of human beings…

Yess exactly, Universal was good but most people were like "Oh, well, we're in LA for Disney so we may as well go to the other park too" and then the Harry Potter section just sent it skyrocketing in popularity and drew in a lot of people who wouldn't have gone otherwise.

I think the issue is that a lot of Universal's attractions/themes are somewhat dated and unpopular with younger crowds (like I grew up with the Simpsons but I don't think Gen Z or younger people care about it, none of my students did) and they've still got a big Jurassic Park area, but forgetting the (forgettable) Chris Pratt movies it's IP that's around 20 years old. And I know that Disney attractions are based around incredibly old IP too BUT they're a marketing behemoth and are constantly flooding the markets with merchandise and new media to keep their 50+ year old movies relevant to modern toddlers. You can package Snow White with Moana and call it a princess collection -- Universal is too loose of conglomeration of very different IPs to market in that kind of efficiently cohesive way.

So, buying up the Harry Potter park rights was easily the single best financial decision Universal ever made to draw in young families, and they are not going to let it go. Like even in the midst of all the controversy around JKR, the average parent of 5-10 year olds doesn't know/doesn't care about the issue, they just know that their kid is going to have more fun looking at wands and being told they're special than going on the Simpsons rollercoaster.

Even though the Fantastic Beasts movies are scrapped for the foreseeable future, they could easily ride the nostalgia train for decades without a single new Harry Potter-universe movie or book. It's unfortunately the way I see it playing out, barring like, if the roller coaster started killing people because that's the only way incredibly popular attractions ever get shut down.

#ask #anti harry potter #rambling

[kylesvariouslistsandstuff]

I've been on a slight classic Disney TV Animation kick.

I'm talking mid-1980s to early 1990s era DTVA... The era of DUCKTALES, CHIP N' DALE RESCUE RANGERS, TALESPIN, DARKWING DUCK, etc. I loved these shows as a kid, as I caught the many re-runs of them on Toon Disney in the late '90s when staying over my grandparents' house during the summer days before my mum got home from work.

And the funny thing is, when reading up on these shows and their histories... If a ton of these shows were being made today? I think they'd be met with a lot of doubt and skepticism on the Internet...

Like... "TALESPIN? Wtf is this? JUNGLE BOOK characters as cargo pilots in an INDIANA JONES-esque adventure setting? Chip and Dale lookin' like Indiana Jones and Magnum P.I.? Trying too hard to be relevant and cool. So dated! A Disney cartoon about Gummi Bears??? A candy??? Disney is totally out of ideas, man-"

And yet, the fledgling division - a brainchild of the newly-arrived CEO Michael Eisner, who saw that Disney had long barely contributed to the world of episodic television animation - went through with these shows circa 1985-1993... They came out, kids and audiences watched them, they all did very well, are fondly-remembered favorites of American animation's 2nd Golden Age. The early batch of shows arguably changed the game for TV animation in the states, which was by then soaked in toy commercials and cliche kidvid stuff.

And I almost get the feeling that once the Golden Age went full-throttle with the advent of THE SIMPSONS, Nickelodeon's "Nicktoons", Warner Animation's offerings (many of which involving Steven Spielberg!), MTV's groundbreaking adult cartoons, and many more, Disney TV Animation did have some re-routing. The early '90s was a kind of weird era for them, when they put out shows like BONKERS, RAW TOONAGE, and THE SCHNOOKUMS AND MEAT FUNNY CARTOON SHOW. The game was changing fast, and soon they were wowing once more with the likes of GARGOYLES, and venturing into other territory with shows like PEPPER ANN. They'd get creators of shows that were hits on other networks, such as Paul Germain from RUGRATS, who co-created RECESS with Joe Ansolabehere, who had previously worked on another iconic Nick show, HEY ARNOLD!

Kinda makes me think of where Disney Animation has been for a bit these past few years, in an era where the mainstream feature animation game is changing fast. And how! And it's not that what they do is bad or - as largely insufferable people say - "mid". Release something like ENCANTO or RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON or even STRANGE WORLD in 2015, it'd be praised, most people would be in agreement, "Yeah, another strong entry from the revitalized WDAS." Of course, RAYA and ENCANTO enjoyed solid reviews and excellent streaming results, and STRANGE WORLD even got pretty passing grade reviews (whereas something like the MARIO movie... Didn't. Funny how that works), but large chunks of weird animation fans on the internet seem to think they're all just "mid" or whatever... It's some console wars-caliber nonsense, I think, that's reductionist. If I didn't like something, I still acknowledge the hard work put in by the filmmakers/crew (especially crucial amidst the writer and actors' strike), and go about my day. I'm not pitting STRANGE WORLD against PUSS IN BOOTS 2, for sure. There's no reason for me to do so.

I thought about how in ANIMANIACS, they took potshots at BONKERS. The same era as "SEGA does what NintenDON'T." Those extreeeeeeme aaaaattitude '90s!

I know, because I lived most of that decade.

BONKERS is a show that fascinates me (I recently wrote a little thing about it on my main tumblr), and I thought while watching it... Release this show in 1988, and *not* 1993, it's likely hailed as groundbreaking. A cartoon trying to be zany and fun like 1940s Tex Avery cartoons, visually satisfying and nicely realized, and much more original than - say - the umpteenth CARE BEARS cartoon or the new Hanna-Barbera ersatz Scooby-Doo stuff. But, post-TINY TOONS, post-REN & STIMPY, and sitting next to ANIMANIACS, it seemingly just could not compare. It also didn't help that it was heavily inspired by the amazing film that is WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, its characters and premise ostensibly being a replacement for a property Disney could no longer do stuff with because of their feud with co-owner Spielberg. (Which puts TINY TOONS and ANIMANIACS' potshots at Disney and BONKERS, respectively, into perspective.)

Similarly, Hanna-Barbera - long one of the studio names synonymous with TV animation in America - were in an odd place themselves, until they - under the stewardship of one Fred Seibert - began bringing in some incredible talent like Genndy Tartakovsky, Paul Rudish, Rob Renzetti, to name a few... We had moved away from the likes of YO YOGI!, TOM AND JERRY KIDS, and SIMPSONS-chasing "adult" cartoons like CAPITOL CRITTERS and FISH POLICE... 2 STUPID DOGS, which had been dismissed as a REN & STIMPY wannabe by some folks back in the day, was really a launchpad for those talents. And soon, Hanna-Barbera Productions was rockin' the mid-to-late '90s with all the iconic Cartoon Network shows we all know and love... Kinda makes me think of how Illumination gets looked at, they've been around for some time and they "churn out" stuff that's just "mid" or "bland" or whatever, but I think post-SING 2, post-MINIONS 2, there's a sort-of newfound appreciation for them in some circles. Somewhat. SUPER MARIO BROS. MOVIE got a pass from a lot of people engaging in these weird console wars, despite its middling critical reception and a lot of folks saying it actually wasn't good. (I liked it fine, but I felt it was more a "Mario's Greatest Hits" showcase than an actual movie.) But, Illumination has an adult animation division (Moonlight) firing up, some pretty dynamic side projects and shorts, too. They even got talent like Benjamin Renner, who directed the upcoming MIGRATION. They're doin' something right if they got him.

I think, more than anything, things change so fast in entertainment. Tastes change, things trend, animated movies take a while to come out and are largely determined at a stage long before a print (or digital file) of the finished film projects onto a screen somewhere. How does one know what the world looks like, culturally, five years after they have started their film? Let alone 2 years? It's why I don't pile on films like ELEMENTAL, STRANGE WORLD, LIGHTYEAR, RUBY GILLMAN, et al losing money. They seemed surefire when they signed off on them, and like William Goldman said... No one knows anything!

I dunno, I thought I'd just relate some current feature animation things to what was happening in TV animation some 30 years ago... all because I was watching TALESPIN and BONKERS and such-

[forgiveness-in-the-misery]

I want to make a more coherent criticism of South Park’s heavily boomer coded Pandering special.

For starters I don’t think Matt or Trey understand what AI is since the b plot somehow was about how dumb people are thinking AI is stealing our jobs when it is only a computer. They either don’t know what AI is or something else entirely I am missing as a 31 year old who hasn’t enjoyed the show since I was like 12 and stopped watching after their aged poorly even when it came out trans episode.

They could have used the weird sexist/racist Disney plot to actually point out that Disney notoriously is trying to use AI to replace writers and animators and actors. AI being used to replicate a persons voice and their physical identity is the problem. Not a handyman.

The main plot annoys me because it feels dated. Insanely dated. They’re bitching about the Star Wars trilogy. The one that ended years ago. The one with a female protagonist yet it still all mostly came down to people only focusing on Adam Driver and the movies ending with them being second cousins who are dating each other. I assume South Park is old man yelling at clouds about the nonwhite secondary characters in those movies? The ones who were stalked and constantly harassed for “ruining” Star Wars by just barely being there?

It’s confusing. Also there is something unintentionally hilarious to me about how I actually enjoyed the scenes in the “pandering” verse. The women were funny and I loved seeing diverse designs but what I really hate is they made diverse background and lead characters as a joke. You’re supposed to roll your eyes seeing a woman with vitiligo and a plus sized women, you’re supposed to laugh because a cop is now a trans woman who isn’t “passing”.

Having the “make her a gay woman” comment be a jab at disney is mind boggling to me. Disney notoriously is terrified of homosexuality to the point they buried a movie because one of the characters was a gay teen who ask a boy on a date. Disney would never make Bambi gay or Ariel or any leading character gay. Also most Disney films have female protags since Disney has always aimed for a little girl audience so I don’t understand why Trey and Matt are throwing a tantrum.

I think one thing about South Park that stands out more and more to me is their weird specific form of hate towards women. They have a history of mocking celebrities which in itself is fine….but women they go after differently. If a woman is jewish they go hard on that aspect of her, if she is average weight they draw her to be 600 pounds, if she’s black she’s loud and obnoxious, if she is comfortable in her sexuality she’s dumb and a whore.

Where men are concerned they tend to go after being gay. Which is wild to me. R Kelly? He’s totes gay. Kanye West? Totes gay. Which is wild because with male celebrities they hate they can attack anything else especially yknow something relevant. Michael Jackson the show never made up its mind on what they thought of him and mocking him soon after his death felt like Matt and Trey just immediately began writing that episode as the death was reported on cnn.

The show and its relationship to being gay or being trans is still icky. Seeing the show in 2023 vs back in the 90s it feels both parts the same but also strictly hateful but in a confused grandpa way.

I think South Park and Family Guy and The Simpsons are great examples on why nobody in animation should strive to just make a show go on forever.

#south park

[doom-nerdo-666]

Something people heard is "all wads are canon" and i wonder if this line from the 2016 Slayer's testaments is why:

(Source is this video by howaboutbecause686, i just wanted some quick reference)

It's something that is either rarely sourced or just carried over from someone's interpretation of a lore bit that could mean something else.

Because the idea of Doom wads being canon reminded me of some points:

The new lore/direction is more likely to be made with new fans in mind

2016 technically being a reboot with its own direction/stuff seems clear, specially since the original games still have a long lasting modding scene.

Even if the Doomslayer as a concept does have some interesting fanservice-y origin and there's some easter eggs, these games also attracted a lot of new fans.

One can also say that a "more faithfull/closer to classic" Doom universe already exists in some mods, which leads me to the second point:

How people view Doom mods/wads to begin with

To some, Doom modding is like a main pillar of the community, from not just the quality stuff but also with how important and beneficial it is to the series.

But then there's always some sort of "line" that divides those "deeper into the rabbit hole/iceberg/whatever" and those that approach things in a more basic way.

As in, Brutal Doom, HDoom, MyHouse and typical meme/pop culture based wads.

It's why some people think "all wads are canon" think of goofy stuff like Homer Simpsons and anime girls, since goofy wads are more likely to be thought out than the "genuine" stuff like well made maps, creative gameplay mods or assets that could "expand the original setting".

Or even stuff like original characters and fanservice based mods.

One can see this as "you just want me to worship/idolize some random guy, don't you" or as an attempt to make the community revolve around a specific group.

And i can see why, as someone who thinks the Cacowards aren't enough to showcase the best works in the community.

Because you want the community to look diverse and huge, which is part of why people didn't like BD being too popular: It casted a shadow on the other stuff that shows how far Doom modding went and still goes.

Another thing is id themselves, since we do have stuff like the Unity addons and some other collaborations.

How wads can (If ever) affect the series

Remember when people thought Brutal Doom inspired D2016?

I still occasionally wonder if the Baron's design in Eternal was inspired by the fire Baron idea that is present in some mods/wads.

(Even made a post about concepts for demons that exist in both mods and the series)

Because one can probably wonder if "all wads are canon" can lead to "id can do what they want with fan projects".

Because one thing is referencing memes or inside jokes or even how the Doomslayer can be traced to the "rip and tear" comic and maybe Death Battle or some copypastas.

But another is a concept from a fanmade playable work made for the original Doom games being used somewhat in an official Doom title.

It'd be like "canonizing someone's interactive fanfiction" but also have some negative side effects/meanings in regards to creativity, ethics, how it can affect a fanbase etc.

It's also worth noting that "canon" in media is usually more relevant if it's from something that is published and owned by the company.

It's an issue with "lore" that only exists in interviews or streams but also means that Final Doom is "more canon" than Romero's Sigil because id technically owns one but not the other.

At the same time, one can see Doom having a lot of "HIRE THIS MAN" projects, so if id were to collaborate with some people to make something cool (And be fair with fans over it), it could be cool.

After all, D64's official new port can be traced to its fan port history and there's the contribution of a dev who worked on D64 EX.

#doom #id software #lore #doom 2016 #classic doom #doom modding #modding #opinions #fandom