Tumgik
#king of articulation
booksnbarricades · 1 year
Text
Listening to every vid I can find of aaron tveit singing thunder road and weeping,,,,
5 notes · View notes
yea-baiyi · 1 year
Text
ok but like imagine being hua cheng. and when you were a teenager you were trapped in a cave with your god when he got hit with sex pollen and you already felt ugly and unlovable but he stabbed himself through the gut rather than touch you and you saw him shirtless and horrifyingly that’s how you found out you were gay
and then you meet him again centuries later when you’ve grown up and become comfortable in your own skin, and you think you might be in love with him except a part of you still feels terrified that he’ll look at you and find you hideous again. but you want to trust him so you show him your real face. and. turns out he finds your adult self so hot that you make him horny for the first time in his life and he keeps doing and saying absolutely deranged things because he does not know how to cope. he panics and tries to give you, a ghost, mouth-to-mouth resuscitation and while you’re lying there trying not to freak out he is beside you acting out his one man humiliation-style comedy show because he has never wanted to kiss someone before let alone fuck. he agrees to get locked in a coffin together because he never even considered the possibility that he might pop a boner except he does pop a boner and now you are stuck under him while he squirms and you are trying very hard not to think about your own boner
i don’t know how to end this post i just think that’s so funny. and they live happily ever after and have lots of gay sex. hua cheng keeps winning. slay king
3K notes · View notes
pepperpixel · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
“Those thoughts of past lovers, they'll always haunt me
I wish I could believe you'd never wrong me
Then will you remember me in the same way,
as I remember you?”
BABY WE BUILT THIS HOUSE, ON MEMORIES!!!! ITS MORE BETTY AND MAGIC MAN ART TIME!!!! AKA PepperPixel is completely obsessed w the dynamic of two people dealing w very similar trauma finding understanding and solidarity in one another!!!!! GHGHG JUST. I LOVE IT. I LOVE THEM. SO MUCH.
373 notes · View notes
nibbelraz · 3 months
Note
do you think mbj acted super mean/cruel when sqh had to run away from the sect to make them feel bad? like, he treats him like this but at least sqh knows he'll LIVE. the bar is in the ground and yet you lot are playing limbo with the devil. he says jump, qinghua says how high. he says to get this impossible cure or object, sqh says when by. and when faced with endless pain and thankless work, he'll still chose mobei-jun because qinghua knows that he can stay alive even under his thumb.
I think Mobei Jun acted mean for a multitude of reasons. He definitely knows though that the sect is absolutely pushing Qinghua to his limits and while Mobei is as well to a degree he's trying to be more aware of it, maybe, at least definitely towards the end of the book.
104 notes · View notes
t-u-i-t-c · 9 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
"He's a good guy."
169 notes · View notes
bonefall · 2 months
Note
How many posts do you have on dotc? also, i havent seen it before if you have, but you talked about the huge battle where starclan spontaneously pops into existence in order to tell everyone to stop fighting
TONS. It's the most frequent canon material I post about here. It's usually tagged #Warrior Cats Analysis.
I am also doing a live re-read and have been for a couple months. It started on this blog as #Bonefall Reads DOTC, and continued over on my other blog @bonebabbles as #Bones Reads DOTC, so that I was spamming my followers less.
I usually tag my harshest posts with #DOTC Hate out of respect to the main tag.
53 notes · View notes
thehappiestgolucky · 10 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Midnight doodles are for rotating blorbo angst in your brain
170 notes · View notes
lemonavocado · 4 months
Text
i have many many thoughts about the portrayal of elizabeth (and henry) in adaptations of frankenstein and they need to be broadcasted immediately. feverish incoherent raving about this subject under the cut. tw for very brief mention of SA
so. elizabeth lavenza. by the time of the wedding, elizabeth is rather obviously portrayed to be just as morose and brooding as victor is, she just isn't as susceptible to episodes of mania and psychosis so it doesn't seem nearly as dramatic compared to victor's trauma. she's been through the gutter herself, being an orphan for starters, then being adopted into a family and having to assume the role of caregiver in the frankenstein family because of the coercion of her dead mother to not only take her place as the maternal figure in the family but also marry her surrogate brother (or literal cousin, depending on which version you read). then her surrogate younger brother william dies, and the within weeks she has to watch her closest heterosexual life partner justine be unjustly hung by a corrupt justice system. and she vocalizes, actively, her pessimism and hopelessness in light of these many tragedies. tldr she's fucked up and rightfully so, and while she's a little less crippled by depression than victor, she still has the distinct appearance of being rather ill, listless, and tired, especially towards the end of the novel. anyways my point is in the novel, the most important thing about elizabeth is not that she's a woman and victor's bride. yes, that's obviously the purpose she was created for, but shelley went out of her way to give elizabeth an extremely definite and unique character. she's gentle and maternal like most woman in early 19th century literature, but she's also introspective, intelligent, and perceptive. she displays agency and self-awareness repeatedly (her guilt over the locket, going to the execution of justine even when alphonse tells her not to, waxing poetic on the failures of the justice system, asking repeatedly and rather pointedly if victor actually wants to go through with the marriage, obvious anxiety and solemnity concerning the wedding) we also have to take into account that elizabeth's personality is being relayed to us BY VICTOR, and he wants to see elizabeth as docile and femininely passive, even if a lot of her actions themselves in the novel actually seem to contradict that. also, i am peppering in that many people can (and have) made a genuine and convincing argument that victor and elizabeth are not in love and were groomed to accept their union by their weirdo parents - that they care for each other, but the text includes important nuances that make it evident that victor doesn't feel anything for elizabeth like that. it is a legitimate interpretation of the book - dare i say it's the correct interpretation of the relationship between victor and elizabeth. but that's another essay for another day and it's not SUPER integral to my rant here today. it just highlights the complexity of elizabeth as a character.
so. for some fucking reason, writers do not understand this when they are adapting the novel, and do not want to apply more than eight seconds of critical thinking and the absolute shallowest 3rd grader levels of reading comprehension to this character, so they simplify her from what she was in the original novel, freshly complex, opinionated, and introspective to boring useless incest lady. victor is never portrayed with the same amount of nuance he deserves in any adaptation (also another essay for another day), because adaptations also have a very surface level reading of him as "guy who was ambitious and played god which immediately cements him as an irredeemable self-aggrandizing asshole and/or a raging insufferable narcissist who's a dick to everyone around him EXCEPT for elizabeth" but at least SOME adaptations are able to kiiinnnddaaaa capture the sympathy meant to be felt for the character in the novel. not so for elizabeth. her character in basically every adaptation can be boiled down to this: "omg victor my brother let me hammer in that you are my brother. im just going to stand here and look clueless and annoyingly naive for the entire time im on screen/stage. im just a little girl and idk what's going on victor but im gonna stay blindly devoted to you and ask numerous but completely useless questions 🥺 let me stare at you with tender worry in my eyes and treat you like a child even though we have absolutely no romantic chemistry and you're an objectifying dick towards me and we have nothing in common and the audience is actively dry heaving as we sensually make out for no other reason than to have characters in this movie sensually make out. im basically a carbon copy of original-novel-henry expect super boring and super useless because im a woman which means the doylist explanation for why im here HAS TO BE ONLY for the main character to fuck me and to hold the attention of the male viewership. now time for me to get SA'd by the creechur for basically no reason" we can observe something approximating this in basically every frankenstein adaptation i've ever seen: kenneth branagh's (my enemy) 1994 film, the 2004 hallmark miniseries, the musical, and the ballet. also in the 1931 film, but that one isn't really trying to be book-accurate so it doesn't really count for this rant.
with this understanding of elizabeth, writers then attempt to artificially generate more romance between these characters, mostly by, yes, replacing a lot of henry's role in the novel with elizabeth, hence why we see so many adaptations (1994, 2004, ballet) make elizabeth nurse victor back to health in ingolstadt instead of henry, which generates... so many problems. one problem with this is that it just sorta ruins henry's original role in the novel in one go. writers recognize that henry is supposed to be victor's character foil, but now they don't have much for him to do so he can demonstrate that role in the story since they gave all of the romantic tension moments to elizabeth. meaning that in adaptations you can tell the writers didn't really know what to do with henry because he's reduced to a comic relief bumbling idiot (1994, ballet, 2004 to an extent) with his only personality traits being "random xd" and "morals good playing god wrong!!!! 😠" (2004, musical, several independent stage adaptations). they keep him as a character foil, but just replace all of his compassion, tenderness, and devotion with elizabeth, while effectively draining henry of all of his original appeal and charm and stamping those traits onto their already stripped-of-all-nuance elizabeth. so now both henry and elizabeth are not only extremely different from their original roles in the novel but extremely, woefully less charming and complex. this especially pisses me off because it's explicitly stated in the book that henry was victor's only friend precisely because he was victor's intellectual equal, so seeing henry reduced to a smiley idiot and/or stupid generic male side character with Morals fills me with a visceral rage. writers will also sometimes make victor and henry meet in college (ballet, 1994) and try to strengthen the bond between victor and elizabeth by making it appear as though she was victor's ONLY childhood friend and companion. other times, victor and henry will be friends pre-ingolstadt (2004, musical) but most of the relationship development will be between elizabeth and victor. those two have all of the tender bonding moments while henry is just kinda inexplicably there sometimes. but i digress. this post is supposed to be about elizabeth. but IF YOU NEED A CHARACTER TO BE A SUNSHINE SOFT OPTIMISTIC LOVER FOR VICTOR IN A FRANKENSTEIN ADAPTATION, HENRY IS ABLE AND WILLING ARE YOU STEPPING ON MY BALLS
clervalstein is true. anyway
elizabeth is somehow more complex and powerful as a female character than the literal adaptations produced almost 200 years later. in adaptations, the most important thing about her is somebody else. the development of all of her character traits (which usually never go beyond standing around and looking helpless) are solely dependant on victor. she feels more like an appendage of the protagonist than an individual with thoughts and experiences separate from victor, and her character is loosely defined and flimsy so the writers can have her conform to her actions in the book whenever it's convenient and then change things up entirely that completely contradict her characterization in the book whenever it's convenient. i have no idea why the fuck this keeps happening with frankenstein adaptations (it's misogyny) and because it isn't looking like guillermo del toro's film (from what ive heard) is going to be super book accurate, i dont foresee too much of a shift in frankenstein adaptations.
look i get it. it's a movie/play/ballet which lasts like 2 hours and you have a lot to do and not a lot of time to do it. i understand you have to make sacrifices for brevity and these characters are, frankly, a lot less interesting and exciting than victor and creechur. people didn't come to see john hughes levels of charm and complexity in the side characters, they came to watch the creechur do scary shit and for victor to say IT'S ALIVE 😱 and be an evil mad scientist you love to hate. they came for their values of "it's wrong to play god!!!" and "too much ambition bad!!!" to be re-cemented even though that's not even the original point of the novel. which is why imo if you're going to adapt frankenstein in a manner that does justice to the beautiful and sublime subtlety of the original novel, it needs to be either a miniseries or a REALLY LONG film. it's a short book, but it's very eventful, and imo for an adaptation to work you have to let the audience sit with it. which is why you all need to donate to my gofundme so i can produce an honest to god frankenstein adaptation. in fact, im running for president in this year's primaries :3
just a disclaimer: im not an academic or a scholar or anything. i just like the book. i probably have no idea what the fuck im talking about. but im a very very passionate little guy and this has been my rant
55 notes · View notes
chernobog13 · 2 months
Text
Tumblr media
The two articulated puppets of King Kong used in the original eponymous 1933 film.
Proof positive that you weren't tripping out: Kong did have two different faces (three if you count the large, "life-sized" head) in the film.
My understanding is that the two puppets were used so that two crews could work at the same time animating different scenes, thus shortening the amount of time needed to finish production.
And now I want 12' or 18" articulated action figures, with real fur, of both these guys.
48 notes · View notes
deadlyeyez · 7 months
Text
this post perfectly articulated my thoughts on the ultrakill OST in a way i couldn’t express before, so.
Tumblr media Tumblr media
i got a little too autistic about it.
by a really messy sketch that took me an hour because i couldn’t figure out v1’s leg anatomy for a sec
85 notes · View notes
followerofmercy · 6 days
Text
I've had the joy /s (/j the /s I love discussion lol) of talking with a ton of different people about Arlecchino as a parent, what level of abusive she is or isn't, how much she actually cares about her kids, etc, and I think I realized the big issue underlying the whole discussion.
I think there's enough textual evidence to say that Arlecchino will use her children to achieve her goals, but we don't actually know what those goals are.
The reason I think she is a *good parent, and the reason I give her a lot of leeway with her methods and the obvious harm she's caused her children, is that I think her children ARE her goal! I believe her goal is to build up a Kingdom of Children that will surpass her. That at last, finally, someone in her family can feel safe. Much like how I think Childe wants to conquer the world so he won't have to be afraid anymore, I think Arlecchino is trying to sharpen and harden her children to be the meanest, most dangerous bastards around so nobody else can hurt them. It's a very base hierarchy of needs thing. Tending to your children's feelings won't do them much good if they're dead, and the world they live in is full of danger. REAL danger, like human traffickers and sick rich fucks, not just monsters.
I mean, we've never heard her discuss anything else? I do not get the vibe that she gives more shits about the Fatui than absolutely necessary. Everything about her revolves around the Hearth. I just, I don't know what else her goal could be.
This woman has never felt safe a day in her life. The reality of her world is that she Is Not Safe. Being an orphan in Fontaine is dangerous. Being part of the Fatui is dangerous. I think she'll do anything to equip her children to survive and, more importantly, surpass her. I think she knows her time is limited and she will do anything to toughen them up to survive without her.
Including hurt them.
* 'good' here is a gross oversimplification of very complicated feelings. If she and her children were in literally any other situation, I would think she's a monster. But, they ARE in life or death situations. They DO need to be hard. It's better the hardening come by her hand than an enemy's, if not for their mental health, then for their physical.
21 notes · View notes
ah0yh0y · 4 months
Text
insane over the fact that Odysseus sings "IM THE SAME YES IM THE SAME" during the dream sequence in Keep Your Friends Close bc he fears without being the same Penelope and Telemachus wont embrace him, but infact it is Penelope's voice is the one to urge him to wake up. wake up becuase to get back home Your HAVE to change and immedietly right after this song we have Ruthlessness which conveys how Ody has to become the monster , fate has set in the ripple has become the tidal wave . Odysseus has to forge a new self.
21 notes · View notes
thecrenellations · 8 months
Text
Tumblr media
The Master dropped neatly to the ground, and resting his back against the tree, looked up into the dark branches. "And yet you do object, my sullen one. In that fine, unreasoning, Pharos-like brain which works so hard at reflecting other people's emotions, some minor luminary is sitting intoning disticha: it's damned unchivalrous to employ women agents; and infamous to employ them without their knowledge; and indecent to employ them when they are physically defective. And such an offender will never enter the Kingdom of Hawick. So here you are, complaining thus in black and white and grey, and armed with a moral code like an ogee."
This scene in The Game of Kings was the first to make me go OOOH in a pained way and have many thoughts. Its bittersweetness was soon outdone many times, in this book alone, but I still love it.
Lymond, at the end of a long day of fruitless child-interrogation and sheep hijinks and whipping the Lang Cleg, picking a fight with Will Scott (who's wrong about many things, including Christian Stewart), telling him how his brain works before banning him from making assumptions about Lymond's own thoughts, and shoving George Douglas's letter in his shocked face. Choreography with leaves and letters and blankets and dry sprigs. Francis Crawford's laughter showing his fatigue...
Whatever color scheme happened here doesn't really capture the mood, but Will looks fed up and Lymond looks smug, so I think we're good. Plus, gold gel pen for golden hair. ;)
42 notes · View notes
idiotsonlyevent · 2 months
Text
i think there's something beautiful about togata - who wanted So Badly to live an 'idealized manhood' that he made agni the protagonist of his movie so that he could live that manhood Through him - being the driving force behind fire punch's narrative.
9 notes · View notes
lukakeepsspeaking · 7 months
Text
Not here to justify WK's actions or whatever, just wanted to say all that. Honestly, I don't think Winter King is devoid of sadness over his actions. It's the fact that he is so reactive and adamant about not trying to help Candy Queen. It's like he convinced himself that it can't be helped. Or that he doesn't want to think about it for more than two seconds. The whole situation is tragic anyway - only being able to escape your madness by inflicting it on somebody else.
17 notes · View notes
simpingforthisonedeer · 10 months
Note
Bestie I'm ngl I did not care for the movie. It felt like a sloppy redo of the elf arc, and the characters were mostly just cameos instead of receiving development.
You’re right it didn’t bring any new plots or ideas. I just really liked it because I saw my favorite anime being animated again and really cool fight scenes.
But I personally really liked it bc it finally made me understand why Asta’s character is the way that it is.
I’ve always been confused and off-put by the way Asta would say I’m going to be Wizard King I’m going to be Wizard King when it’s not even relevant to the conversation at hand. I never understood why villains and side characters alike would stare at him in awe. Until I watched the movie that is.
Asta is noticeably not traumatized even though he should be. He faces a lot of verbal abuse for the circumstances of his birth but he doesn’t take shit from anyone and just says “idc I’m gonna be WK and prove you wrong.” He faces trauma but doesn’t get traumatized.
In a world where everyone feels comfortable be misguided and reacting negatively to their trauma, Asta actively chooses to rise above it. He wants to do good despite it.
The Wizard Kings in the movie are those who are desperate for control because they felt powerless in their lives. Asta is quite literally powerless but he wants to put his best foot forward anyways and succeeds.
People around him know that despite him having nothing and being nothing, he shines through the cynicism of their world and inspires them to lift him up.
Whether he changes the world or not is another thing, but his selflessness and courage is inspiring to those who desperately want it but don’t see anyone to show them that it could be done.
Anyways that’s my 2 cents on why I liked the movie.
TLDR; I liked the movie bc I finally understand Asta
48 notes · View notes