Julie & Julia (2009) dir. Nora Ephron, D.P. Stephen Goldblatt
If no one’s in the kitchen, who’s to see?
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Sweet Seals For You, Always

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
Game of Thrones Daily
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
No title available
will byers stan first human second
Cosmic Funnies
Monterey Bay Aquarium

shark vs the universe

祝日 / Permanent Vacation

Andulka
🪼
RMH
YOU ARE THE REASON
Stranger Things
Today's Document
DEAR READER

Origami Around
hello vonnie
seen from United States
seen from Guatemala
seen from Malaysia
seen from India

seen from Malaysia

seen from Bangladesh

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany

seen from Spain

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from Germany
seen from United States

seen from South Korea
seen from United States
seen from United States
@angelsdontexistsilly
Julie & Julia (2009) dir. Nora Ephron, D.P. Stephen Goldblatt
If no one’s in the kitchen, who’s to see?
Steve Rogers and the Long and Winding Road to Finally Getting a Life
obsessed with the guy who just won gold in windsurfing
Wasn’t there a whole thing in the comics about aang getting offended over some air nomad super fans using the arrow since you have to be a master to get your arrow tattoos? And basically the super fan group was doing a cultural appropriation by having arrow tats? I feel like that was a whole ass thing in the comics.
well i have great news that will ease your mind. air benders aren’t real
Also an Olympic gold medal windsurfer is the closest thing there is to an IRL Airbender
I think it's time we as a species realize that harry potter was never good. it was just marketable and gave impressionable kids a lot to project onto.
the reason Joanne got rejected by so many publishers isn't because they couldn't see her genius, it's because the one that picked it up was the first one to realize they could market the shit out of houses, wands, magical pets, etc, the setting was a gold mine for getting kids to project themselves into. it didn't matter that the plot and characters and writing were all terrible. they even kept adding more elements for this later on with things like patronuses. harry potter was never literature, it was always just a marketing scheme.
I think this revisionism of “HP was terrible all along” misses the point.
Yes, there were some shitty, problematic elements from the start (like the goblins), and yes they were marketable as hell, but I’d say the first few books successfully captured some elements of whimsy, and the humor in them hit the right notes for kids. The first few are not great books but they’re also not terrible. (The later ones were bloated and awful tho, imo).
And of course certain books are published because they’re marketable but that doesn’t mean they’re automatically bad books or lack any entertainment value.
The thing is she doesn’t have to have had bad books to be a bad person. Someone that wrote some decent books that kids liked can still be a shitty person and we need to learn and accept that shitty people can and do make good art or at least quality entertainment.
The reason we need to recognize bad people make good art rather than create a revisionist history that every single thing the person has done was terrible, is because we have to be comfortable with criticizing and condemning (and sometimes boycotting) creators even when things they made were beloved to us at some point, even when there was some good or some entertainment value in the things they created.
I think it’s good to look back at her work with a more critical eye but the first few books were actually decent (regardless of yes, a few shitty flaws like the goblins, and regardless of being super merchandisable). That doesn’t change that she’s still a bigoted dickhole. And we don’t have to pretend everything she created was awful to treat her like a bigoted dickhole.
And accepting the dichotomy of “shitty people can make good things but they’re still shitty” makes it easier to prevent ourselves from getting in a mindset of stanning the things we like when a creator is an awful person.
Recent Harry Potter discourse has reeked of the implicit assumption that there is some kind of moral dimension to having liked her books, with people feeling pride that they, as children, “never liked” Harry Potter or “always knew” it was bad.
It’s argued as if the people who “realized” that Harry Potter was Bad All Along were picking up on some…single big quality that includes both the bigotry of the author and the quality of the story, worldbuilding, et cetera. It’s absolutely bizarre.
But, all of that aside. Holy shit, no, no, no, Harry Potter was not a toy marketing scheme, what on earth, that’s the weirdest thing I’ve heard all day.
The category of children’s lit was on death’s door in the late 90’s. YA was straight up not a thing in the way it is today. Book series still don’t get toy lines by themselves, and the fact that the book-to-movie adaptation of Harry Potter was successful is still kind of a weird fluke. Nobody is publishing a book counting on a film adaptation that can be turned into a toy line, and they sure as hell weren’t in 1997. If that worked James Patterson or whoever the hell that guy is would be doing it.
There are a LOT of series that fit the “capitalist marketing scheme” idea a lot better than Harry Potter (read: Lorien legacies, the unwanteds, wolves of the beyond, fablehaven, wings of fire, that series a while back that was about like animal shapeshifters or something? With a different big name YA author behind every book?) and they haven’t successfully marketed anything except themselves.
Please, not every piece of media that has problems has to have a capitalist conspiracy theory at its core
If you want to dial it back to “Harry Potter was published because the publisher thought they could make money,” all books are published because the publisher thinks they will make money. Publishing is a business. This is how capitalism works.
Post canon Toph who doesn’t want to go back to her shitty parents so she just decides to stay in the Fire Nation and bum off Zuko’s hospitality.
Zuko’s like no, yeah, I totally get it, and just makes her one of his advisors. At first it’s just so she has a good excuse to stay but after the first meeting Toph storms out shouting about how EVERYONE was lying why would you even need to lie about what kind of tea you want??
Zuko: I mean they’re politicians.....but also who, and when, and in what way
They make a subtle Morse code system so Toph can warn him when someone is lying to him without tipping anyone off that she can sense lies.
Zuko gets a reputation for somehow being both extremely socially inept and yet somehow disgustingly perceptive?? You can’t get ANYTHING by him???
#my lord what EXACTLY is ms Beifongs role in these meetings #a nervous nobleman asks after the third time she interrupts them with stupid commentary #zuko with perfect deadpan: she’s my scribe
You CAN’T leave that in the tags
I love how for most of The Boiling Rock Part 1 Zuko’s just going around like ‘you know who’s great? Uncle. I miss him a lot. He’s my favorite person and I will fight you for him” completely unprompted
what a soft kid, I love him so much
Robot and kid ladies by Jihwan cha
Something I think is neat and really cute about fanfic is that there’s a personal version of each character in it? Like, each writer focuses on different traits and qualities and even though there can be a hundred fics with the same character, they’re really not exactly the same.
So even if you and I are writing a fic with the same characters, they can still be uniquely different despite having the same core and they’re each dear to us personally as our take on the person.
I don’t know, I just think it’s cute that each writer cherishes these characters in personal and unique ways.
This is the heart of the Two Cakes rule
It really is.
What’s more, every reader who’s read more than one version of a character has their internal perception of that character enriched by the versions of that character written by those authors.
And those are the result of every version of the character in every fic the authors have read.
It’s a massive progression towards complexity and realism for the character in the minds of the storytellers.
In a way, it’s Infinite Cakes.
Hey friends, I know it’s been a minute but... I’m re-reading some things from my Stucky angst faves and I just wanted to remind you that Bucky being traumatized is accurate and good.
How are the seagull and the beagle friends?
They rhyme
Positive emotion trumps negative emotion every time. We all yearn for reconciliation, for catharsis.
Inception (2010) dir. Christopher Nolan
hayley atwell:
me, remembering that peggy carter’s character arc was about moving ON from steve rogers, that she found strength in her independence, met someone and fell in love and got married and had kids, and that she died peacefully :
see, the thing is that you can be edgy and dramatic and an absolutely dark macabre-loving bones-hoarding bastard and not be an asshole
nothing’s stopping you from being all that and a caring person overflowing with love
people who think that you have to apathetic and cynical and downward fucking mean to fit the aesthetic are just boring
Be the Addams family
Ok but the subplot where Aragorn becomes the protagonist of a Horse Girl Movie™ is one of my FAVORITE things to come out of the Two Towers.
In the stables of Rohan, there is an unruly horse named Brego. This horse is so wild that even the horse-masters of Rohan can’t tame him. He’s just a lost cause, they say. “There’s nothing you can do– leave him,” they say.
BUT THEN ARAGORN COMES IN. And like the heroine of a Horse Movie™ he’s all: “You just don’t UNDERSTAND the horse! The horse is wild and rebellious and free– like me!”
Aragorn begins gently talking to the horse, first in Rohirric, then in Elvish. He calms him down and asks him what’s wrong.
You could easily draw a parallel between Aragorn and Brego’s “rebelliousness.” To Theoden, Aragorn was acting overly unruly and difficult. “When last I looked, Theoden, not Aragorn, was King of Rohan.” Then Brego acts unruly and difficult – and Aragorn’s like “the people of Rohan just don’t understand you!!!!!!”
And then Eowyn explains that Brego used to belong to Theodred.
Suddenly Brego’s unruliness IS completely understandable— his master was killed in battle. He’s a horse with a Tragic Backstory.
“Your name is kingly,” Aragorn tells the horse. Aragorn is also a king. Aragorn is projecting.
Now that she’s explained the horse’s tragic backstory, Eowyn tries to get Aragorn to open up about his own Tragic Backstory™. (”I have heard of the magic of elves, but I did not look for it in a Ranger from the north….?”) She fails. Aragorn is briefly like “yup I was raised by elves,” does not elaborate, and then peaces out.
But as he leaves Aragorn dramatically says: “turn this fellow free; he has seen enough of war.”
And Eowyn is forced to wonder whether Aragorn is talking about the horse….or about himself….
Then Aragorn has a Near-Death-Experience, but Arwen’s elven-magic (just roll with it) saves him. And the horse who comes to carry him to safety is none other than Brego.
It’s Brego, repaying the kindness and understanding Aragorn showed him earlier in the film!
Aragorn set Brego free, and in return Brego saves Aragorn’s life!
Because they UNDERSTAND each other, as fellow free spirits who “have seen too much of war.” Both of them are KINGLY but also WILD, they’ve lived through too much and lost people they cared about, and their strong wills cannot be tamed by anyone in Rohan!
It’s beautiful. Aragorn canonically has Disney-Princess-level animal friendship powers.
When they arrive at Helm’s Deep, Aragorn smiles and earnestly says in Elvish: “thank you Brego, my friend.” And we know that Brego understands….
Literally every time I watch this subplot I think of that one tumblr post on the plot of Every Horse Movie
it must be really weird for anyone who was taught by dumbledore and mcgonagall and the rest to become teachers and have to, like, treat them as colleagues
like, snape and lupin have one (1) thing in common and it’s a pathological inability to call dumbledore by his first name
Correct me if i’m wrong, but wasn’t McGonagall more or less in the same year as Tom Riddle?
Does that mean that Dumbledore was also her teacher?
Minerva McGonagall has called him Albus since she was eleven because she is a queen who bows to no one
The image of an 11yo Minerva McGonagall looking her new professor dead in the eye and saying “Will there be homework tonight, Albus?” is too powerful for words