SNAZZLE DAZZLE

I am trin | Mostly whatever; some Yuri!!! on Ice and Carry On | Cover by slightlystalesushirolls, icon by ace-artemis-fanartist :) | Some slivers of my personality may be found in the tags | Will sometimes take unnanounced hiatuses & has difficulty responding to messages | 16 year old dumbass

[cursedbones55]

A little bi-derman for bi visibility day. Happy bi visibility day guys!

[nanowrimo]

Making NaNoWriMo a Family Affair

If you have kids, you may be struggling with balancing your creative life with your responsibilities as a parent. Today, writer and mom Dr. Jennifer Harder shares how she’s managed to make creative writing time into a family activity:

A Holy Grail for many parents is that elusive activity you can do with your kids that you all equally enjoy. All too often, we settle for fun the kids can do while we adults look on, applaud, or otherwise support from the sidelines. We find activities that challenge our miniature selves but leave us adults stagnant. At the heart of childhood memories are shared experiences, and sometimes we adults get in a bad habit of not really sharing in the experience at all!

I learned of NaNoWriMo and its Young Writers Program in November 2017 when my son’s elementary school principal proposed it as a challenge to keep our then-second grader from getting himself into some boredom-based mischief. The idea came a bit out of the blue for me: You want my 7-year-old to write a what? In how long? I remember all of the ways that he and I struggled to subdue his inner editor, to unleash his creativity, and to learn to value the process of creating something that was utterly and completely his, all the while suppressing my urge to mom it up. It was hard.  

But then, seemingly out of nowhere, it was fun.

Keep reading

[babyanimalgifs]

This is so wholesome

[anx1ous-op0ssum]

Update: he finally got the cat to the vet to see if she had a microchip

[callmebliss]

I was already on board with his sweet wholesome open-to-love-and-nurturing heart but I was fully unprepared for getting to that last tweet and seeing how off the hook HOT dude is

[deadjosey-deactivated20200613]

https://twitter.com/pariszarcilla?lang=en heres his twitter is here there is also additonal cat photos of his children. 

[ealeczander]

Me to american animation: I know your stories are great buy why does your animation suck so bad?

American animation: We have to create simplified characters to make the movement faster and more creative and interesting.

Me glancing at Japan: 

Me: k.

[pomodoko]

Hey you know what studios do in America? Due to animators unionizing, instead of paying all the animators proper wage they started sending animation to be done over seas to lower labor costs. Now most studios’ animation are shipped to Korea and China and etc., which means the designs for the characters have to be simplified for easy character animation. Not to mention the history of American animation overall and how the American cartoon style has led towards more simplified styles over the years.

Also animation in Japan, while it does have plenty sakuga stuff, are actually just budget dumps for the best fight scenes. During normal scenes, characters can be very static and has a lot of holds. There’s also the mouth-flapping thing that a lot of animators in America detest. Everything is revolved around budgets for both countries. For America, to pay animators working wages they decided to cut costs and ship labor overseas. For Japan it means terrible working hours and labor, where plenty of animators have fallen ill or even die in their own cubicles.

So watch your fucking language and learn animation history. People like you are the reason why a lot of studios are cutting costs on their workers in America.

[fairypage-deactivated20190421]

this is a straight couple. it’s straight. you’re in a heterosexual relationship. there is nothing remotely “queer” about this in the slightest whatsoever. jesus h christ

[bad-vedma]

[homobile-deactivated20190713]

this is why i hate “reclaiming” queer

[yorksilk]

Are you fucking kidding me do you hate bisexuals that much that you’re willing to go along with terfs for a dunk on the bihets? Is that it now, is that the community? Is shitting on queer people so important to you that you’ll throw away all your standards?

[rentalgoose]

We also don’t know if these people are binary but let’s judge them at a first glance and base their identity on their presentation because that’s so progressive!

[gayfeatherfiend]

I love how people are all “Bisexuals are JUST as much a part of the LGBT+ community as Gay people”…

And

“Trans 👏People 👏 Don’t 👏 Need 👏 To 👏 Pass👏 To 👏 Be 👏 Respected”

But yet are totally willing to throwout bisexuals and trans people and other sexualities.

Because it feels very good to outwardly judge people we don’t know anything about their identity or life’s experiences - because that’s not at ALL the exact thing that non-lgbt+ people do to tear down the community. No.

[violyntfemme]

This is my husband and I. I am sure if you saw us on the street you would assume we were a cishet couple.

News flash: we aren’t.

I am a bisexual who has been in relationships with only women. He is a Transguy who has been on T for over a decade. We have been together for 18 years. We both identify as queer. We are out. We are active in the LGBTQ+ community.

But all of you calling that couple above straight, you just keep judging people on a photo alone and pretending you know who they are and what their stories are.

Us queers in relationships you judge will keep being happy and healthy and living our best life while you choke on your bullshit.

[baawri]

[joeldasalsa]

People might not realize how groundbreaking this is to recognize in India.

[mysharona1987]

[honeynuyt-deactivated20250308]

I don’t know who Megan Kelly is but I wanna piss her off

[hashtagloveloses]

dis bitch

[blackgirlsinlove]

“Verifiable fact” 😭😂

[bando--grand-scamyon]

I’d PISS ON HER tbh

[furbearingbrick]

btw Saint Nicholas, whom Santa Claus is based on, was a black guy

and we don’t know exactly what jesus looked like, but here’s an artistic reconstruction of an average 20-something male from his ethnic group at the time

DOES THIS LOOK FUCKING WHITE TO YOU

[vulpinehopes]

I want this post everywhere

[klimtsonian-unofficial]

jesus was represented more or less accurately as an ethnically jewish arab man up until the reign of pope alexander vi, in the late 15th century. since he was viciously persecuting roman jews during this time, alexander wanted to make them less sympathetic to the public, and did so in part by ordering that portrayals of jesus be based off of his son, cesare borgia.

the reason “jesus is white” is because someone purposefully attempted to alter the perception of history to benefit his goal of persecuting a targeted ethnic group.

[nyokoko]

Wow, more proof the Borgias were trash.

[ithelpstodream]

[geekandmisandry]

There are tears in the notes.

[tddkart]

Isabelle has a message for her enemies.

[maxofs2d]

Great thread about online moderation. Source / link in the last tweet.

[angelxhoney]

Listen, Twilight could have been completely solved if they had just chosen a college over the Grand Forks high school. Like? Y’all look 18 forever? I know college seniors who look 16, it’s cool. They don’t eat? Man we’re poor too, y’all don’t see me eat ever. Y’all glitter in the sunlight? It’s cool I went to a rave once too, that glitter shit it hard to get off. Like c’mon. Why would you wanna be in high school for a milenia anyways.

[theunseeliemperoress]

Also why would you wnt to take the same classes over and over? With college they could pick and choose. Like imagine.

“Dude are you sure you want to do History again? Last time you tried to fight the professor.”

“Screw it I’m majoring in the arts. They look like they know how to have fun.”

“Why are you majoring in maths? It’s boring.” “It’s the only thing they don’t keep changing.”

“You’re just taking a bunch of random classes. What even is your major this time?” “Partying.”

[regbian-moved-to-lezbianz]

baz is like, significantly more of a dumbass than simon i think. like simon’s just like “okay baz is my boyfriend now. i’m not gonna kill him and that’s that” meanwhile baz is like “hm…snow and i…we engaged in romantic activity…interesting…what a shame we’re still enemies…i’ll still have to kill him…i will kill him…i’m going to tell him all this…that’s a great idea” like shut the fuck up baz you melodramatic idiot. i love you but you are so fucking angsty and dumb

[allons-gab]

Twinkle twinkle little star ✨✨

[jumpingjacktrash]

when i watch old movies i’m constantly surprised by how much acting has improved. not that the acting in the classics is bad, it’s just often kind of artificial? it’s acting-y. it’s like stage acting.

it took some decades for the arts of acting and filmmaking to catch up to the potential that was in movies all along; stuff like microexpressions and silences and eyes, oh man people are SO much better at acting with their eyes than they were in the 40′s, or even the 70′s.

the performances we take for granted in adventure movies and comedies now would’ve blown the critics’ socks off in the days of ‘casablanca’.

[lostsometime]

there’s a weird period in film where you can see the transition happening.  right around the fifties, I think.  the example my prof used when i learned about it was marlon brando in “a streetcar named desire” - he was using stanislavski acting methods and this new hyper-realistic style and most or all of his costars were still using the old, highly-stylized way of acting. it makes it way more obvious how false it is.

[jumpingjacktrash]

i even noticed it in ‘the sting’, which was 1973. i actually think they used it on purpose to get the viewer fished in by the second layer of the con; the grifters at the bookie’s were acting like they were acting, and the grifters playing the feds were acting for reals. if you’re used to setting your suspension of disbelief at the first set’s level, then the second set are gonna blow right past you.

or possibly the guys playing the grifters playing the feds just happened to be using the realistic style for their own reason, and it coincidentally made the plot twist work better. but i like to think it was deliberate.

[jumpingjacktrash]

i was thinking about this again, and when you know what to look for, it’s really obvious: old movies are stage acting, not movie acting. it just didn’t really occur to anyone to make the camera bend to the actors, rather than the other way around. just image search old movie screenshots and clips and gifs, you’ll see it. the way people march up to their mark and stand there, the way they deliver their lines rather than inhabiting the character. the way they’re framed in an unmoving center-stage.

this is a charming little tableau, quirky and unexpected, but it’s a tableau. it lives in a box.

now, i usually watch action movies, and i didn’t think it was fair to compare an action movie with what appears to be an indoor sort of story, but i do watch some comedy tv. so i looked for a brooklyn 99 gif with a similar framing, intending to point out that the camera moves, and the characters aren’t stuck inside the box. but i couldn’t even find the framing. they literally never have all the characters in the same plane, facing the camera, interacting only within the staging area. even when they’re not traveling, they’re moving around, and they treat things outside the ‘stage’ as real and interact with them, even if it’s only to stare in delighted horror.

as for action, it took a while for the movies to figure out what, exactly they wanted to show us, and how to act it. here’s a comedy punch:

here, also, is a comedy punch:

the first one looks like a stage direction written on a script. the second one looks like your friends horsing around and being jerks to each other. the first one is just not believable. the physics doesn’t work. the reaction is fakey. everyone’s stiff. even the movement of the camera is kind of wooden. the second one looks real right down to the cringe of his shoulder, and the camera feels startled too.

i’m not saying this to dis old movies, i’m just fascinated and impressed by how much the art has advanced!

[honey-wine-and-time]

I’m going to bed, but I also want to say that I think, without actually bothering to explore it and make sure, that there’s been a similar shift in comics, probably related to the shift in acting/camera work. And I think you still see remnants of old “stage acting” comics in the three-panel style set ups (you might still see it in long form comics, but you’d probably call it bad composition)

[mudkippey]

Now can someone explain why people in old films talked Like That

[garrettauthor]

Y’all, THAT’S HOW PEOPLE TALKED.

Seriously, I used to work in a sound studio, and one series of projects required us to listen to LOTS of old audio recordings. Not of anything special - just people talking.

AND THEY TALKED LIKE THAT.

It was so fucking wild to hear just a couple of people being like,

“WELL HI THERE JEANINE, HOW ARE YOU TODAY?”

“OH, NOT TOO BAD, JOE, THOUGH MY HUSBAND’S BEEN AWAY ON BUSINESS FOR A FEW WEEKS AND I MISS HIM SOMETHING TERRIBLE.”

“WELL IT’S A HARD THING, JEANINE, BUT YOU’LL GET THROUGH IT.”

“WELL I SUPPOSE I’VE GOT TO, HAVEN’T I JOE?”

All in that piercing, strident, rapid-fire style we associate with the films of the era. If you’ve watched lots of old movies you can imagine the above in that speech pattern.

I don’t know if people talked like that because it was in movies but I suspect it’s the other way around.

[arcadiaego]

Same goes for the UK - When they made the TV series The Hour, set in the 1950s, they had to tell the very well spoken, privately educated Dominic West to tone down his imitation of a 1950s newsreader because being accurate would have sounded to a 2011 TV audience as if he was doing a parody. When you watch Brief Encounter they’re not speaking like that because they can’t act, they’re speaking like that because it was the norm on screen. It now sounds unnatural because it’s not the norm any more.

Obviously there were people with regional accents and who didn’t speak in a heightened manner, but they didn’t get to be on TV or in movies unless they were villains. (And usually the villains were putting it on, like Richard Attenborough in Brighton Rock. Sure, he was Richard Attenborough, but he was brought up in the Midlands, and by the on-screen standards of the time, that was common.)

Even the Queen’s very posh accent has changed over the last 50 years and become “more common" - check out newsreel footage etc for proof - and recordings of her father are almost like someone from a foreign country (well, it is the past).

[tzikeh]

There is, for many film historians/critics, an actual turning point from mannered, theatrical, or “overplayed” acting on screen to naturalistic/American Method realism on screen. It happens in the 1954 movie On the Waterfront, during a traveling shot in which Marlon Brando’s character and Eva Marie Saint’s character are walking together. Eva Marie Saint accidentally drops her glove in the middle of the scene. Marlon Brando instinctively picks it up as his character, and continues the dialog, all the while playing with the glove–turning it about, trying it on, etc. Eva Marie Saint stuck with him, never broke, and the director didn’t call “cut.” 

Before that scene in that movie, if an actor dropped a prop by accident, they would have re-shot the scene–because Brando mostly disappeared out of frame as he bent down to pick up the glove, and (as is explained above) movies were framed to keep the people in the scene in the frame. I

t’s a pretty famous scene in movies because Brando’s character doesn’t give the glove back, but instead uses it to amplify what the two characters are experiencing, naturally and without artifice. It is, for all intents and purposes, the exact moment that screen acting changed.

[niqaeli]

Okay, but here’s the thing about television specifically: given the size of TV screens when they first came out? Stage acting was the only thing that could be READ. Watch Star Trek: TOS on a modern screen and it looks absurdly overacted. Film of the same era is not, and yet the TV is.

And that’s not a fault of the actors; they were all very capable of naturalistic film acting (yes, even Shatner) – as the later movies would bear out. It’s because they were acting for the small screen, not the big one.

Stage acting and stage makeup is what it is because people are far enough away from the stage that you have to cake on the makeup garishly and exaggerate the hell out of your for it to be VISIBLE. And in early television? Yeah, those constraints actually very much applied. You could move the camera, sure, but the quantity of visual information you could send was just damned limited.

[jenniferrpovey]

Here’s another example of that.

Watch some Classic Dr Who. You may or may not notice it without watching for it, but every shot of the TARDIS is taken from the same angle.

The TARDIS was, at that time, a stage set. The camera was behind the fourth (Sixth?) wall. It was fixed. And most TV sets were built like this. They had a specific fourth wall and everything was filmed from that angle.

Fast forward to the new series, and you’ll see that the TARDIS is being filmed from different angles all the time, including following the actor around.

Three things have changed:

1. Cameras have become much smaller.

2. Set building for TV has developed as an art. Those early sets were built by people who were trained to build stage sets.

3. Overall technological improvement resulting in things being cheaper.

The TARDIS set that was just retired? Each of its walls was designed to slide out. So you could put the camera anywhere you wanted. Presumably this is the case with the new one too. They couldn’t imagine doing that back in the day. Nor could they afford the complexities of a set like that.

It’s actually my opinion that TV has very much matured as an art form…this century. This decade. We are doing and seeing things that couldn’t be done ten years ago, twenty. Heck, even five.

[finnglas]

Going back to speech patterns for a moment – I was a young child in the 80s, so my memories of the norms of the time period are limited (especially because I was incredibly sheltered), but the books I read at the time and the popular movies of the time all have this kind of – whimsical, sardonic speech pattern going on. Think John Waters dialogue. 

I always thought it was kind of stylized. But then I ended up in a weird part of YouTube one night and found someone’s home video of just walking aroud a 7-11 convenience store at midnight talking to people in Orlando, Florida. Just trying out their new camcorder for shits and giggles, talking to other customers, talking to the cashier, etc. And you know what? They all talked like a goddamn John Waters movie. It was the weirdest thing, like I was watching outtakes from The Breakfast Club or Say Anything. I expected one of the Cusacks to walk into frame any second.

Anyway, so I think it’s super cool how human speech and interaction shifts over time, and if you’re living through the shift, you don’t really notice it as it happens.

[sporesong]

i ! love ! simon ! snow !

[noonesseducingavampire]

The Mage: thank you for agreeing to meet with me today

Simon: I didn’t, you just walked into my room and started talking

[fabelyn]

I’m a sucker for characters who see troubled kids in dangerous situations and basically go “they need parents, guess that’s me now”