wanna roadtrip in america? don’t forget to budget for TOLLS!!
ever heard of the troll under a bridge? well in the modern day they’re ghosts and they WILL HAUNT YOU
no cause fr tolls will triple or add $100 or other bullshit if you don’t pay them immediately so don’t wait for the pay by mail letter. once you go through a state, look up your license plate and get on that shit. don’t forget about things like e-zpass but also remember that not all states use that, because obviously the states have to be unique. just. budget for tolls. budget for EXPENSIVE fucking tolls and pay them as quickly as possible
23 notes
·
View notes
Lagoon triggerfish (Rhinecanthus aculeatus), Reef triggerfish (Humuhumunukunukuapuaʻa) (Rhinecanthus rectangulus), Grey triggerfish (Balistes capriscus), Queen triggerfish (Balistes vetula), Boomerang triggerfish (Sufflamen bursa), Orange-lined triggerfish (Balistapus undulatus), Clown triggerfish (Balistoides conspicillum)
Fishes of the World. Written by Hans Hvass. Illustrated by Wilhelm Eigener. Originally published in 1964.
Internet Archive
296 notes
·
View notes
Local man laughed at beat up superhero, now in danger bc of his evil version
Went for a broken mirror look, kinda fucked it tho </3 also my abilty to sketch flash died for a few days, das why he looking even worse than normally :'D
32 notes
·
View notes
if Izzy had to die, like it was inevitable for the plot then I wish he died when he shot himself. then the only person who sees him is ed, and izzy literally turns into the symbol of blackebeard. Ed struggles to leave everything he was behind because backtracking after he caused izzy to kill himself makes him feel like he could have saved him. during the season izzy follows ed in every scene except the ones ed's with stede (so it's the perfect metaphor for ed to be at peace) and after a while finally when ed is alone. and ed mourns and then at the end we find out izzy was a ghost all along, and when ed lets go of izzy's ghost then he's ready to leave blackbeard behind.
it would still hurt and izzy's purpose in the story would still be about ed's arc, but at least izzy's death has consequences.
and in the meanwhile if you want to headcanon him as alive in the background bc ed's not very in touch with reality and in some scenes izzy interacts with people then there's the plot twist at the end that ed's guilt materialized as izzy (and you can put so many implications about their relationship here) but when ed finally lets go of his past then izzy can be his own person, have his own arc.
because we didn't even need so much izzy screen time this season (i loved it) but we didn't need izzy to have so many interactions with the crew and stede and everyone and have him grow. he could have stayed in the background slowly fitting in. and if they got renewd for a third season they could've explored his character more. and this season could've been really about ed/stede relationship instead of having them getting together -> breaking up -> getting together -> breaking up -> getting together... s2 focused on the main characters' realtionship and if they got renewd for s3 then background characters is fine. but like this, they tried to have everything and instead we got half-completed story-lines that feel hollow
23 notes
·
View notes
I'm not very active because I'm packing my luggage for my little trip. I'll try to post something this evening, but I can't promise anything. Also, I twisted my left hand, but I'm lucky because I'm right-handed. But it slows me down considerably...
I wish Boomer could help me... or maybe not, that's not a good idea. He's the type that would break all the eggs by accident...😅 So it's better not!
9 notes
·
View notes
Hi! I understand if you don't feel like sharing it ,but i really would like to read your meta about that Henry/Anne scene in BSR ''Isn't that enough?''. I hope you have a nice day.
"is it enough for you?" , but yes, i actually elaborated on this a little more elsewhere in other tags because i used that shot of that scene again for another edit.
so, expanding where i left off:
the images chosen are more the vibe for the quotes but the one from BSR is very specific
it's a great scene and it's so well-acted bcus she feels BAD for him here.
she pities him. she feels bad for him because he's losing her bcs she's not going to settle for these terms
because she knows she's amazing
and she's so self-posessed in the scene
and he cannot handle this and so it manifests in the reaction(you're making a big mistake; except that is his own big projection)
she's willful and knows her worth and won't diminish herself for anyone
...and i chose the reaction from the scene bcus it's not necessarily at odds with these descriptions (of her 'prudence')
bcs it takes a lot of dignity and self-worth and inward grace to stand one's ground enough (to withstand the 'tide of their prince')
...to give that rejection that by all social and cultural norms and graces she was simply not supposed to give. or was at least supposed to couch in more self-effacing terms.
but yeah anyway i know people thought BSR was 'trashy' but i actually thought the acting and chemistry between them was really great and maybe even lifted the writing from its weaker points.
because just the way he reels back at the line 'is it enough for you?' in all its pity-wrought glory...firstly, because it seems like it's a question no one has ever thought to ask him before, and secondly, so it gives way into that transformation from the shock into anger (how a 'lesser' person is daring to pity him, how he doesn't want her pity, he wants her love) which is just...chef's kiss. she absolutely obliterates his dignity here, not only in her rejection but in this eloquent explanation as to why this is her answer, and in the finality of her conviction. it is delicious. they could have this scene anywhere, in this darkened staircase for its the tudors copycat setting in this lithuanian palace, or on a fucking greenscreen, and it would still be just as powerful if these were its actors.
(im realizing that if anyone who is reading this hasn't watched they're going to think i'm an insane person based on this description... so hopefully the actual beats of the scene below will reveal what i mean, lol:
there's also a compelling subversion of (modern) expectation here, because...the only different thing in this equation is the status of the man asking to love her, asking why love is 'not enough'. for most 16c women of anne's status, no, 'love' wasn't enough. security was preferred. and, actually, it's very anachronistic how much this opinion is villianized (see, tobg:
...when it's like...yeah, a man's love was considered worthless. if it wasn't, they wouldn't have considered betrothal contracts to be a necessary evil!). it's very easy for him to say that she would 'want for nothing' (households, jewels, etc, one assumes), and she isn't allowing his ease: she's contradicting him, and pointing out that there is little security in the position of royal mistress.
herein lies the constant counterfactual moralistic tutting: anne 'should've just become a mistress,' always paired with 'this would, in the end, have made her 'safer.'' and it would have, as we know (not anne), but it would also, as she points out here, likely lead into her being a nonentity (a voice on the pillow, a woman hiding underneath the sheets and behind the bed curtains, an ornament for dancing), and she didn't want to be one: she wanted to be partner and collaborator of her future husband, not the diversion and darling of someone else's.
tl;dr the scene is powerful because she feels bad for him (she feels bad for herself, too, but she only allows him to see the former:
7 notes
·
View notes