8/4-8/5: Basketball // The Hanged man // Silence of the lambs
8/6-8/7: Hockey or figure skating // Death // Call of Duty
8/8-8/9: Gaming // Wild Card // Star Trek
Reminders:
-These themes are optional! Use one, multiple, or none of them.
-Your work can be in any medium
• When posting your work, Remember to tag your work under #ajinweek26 so that we can see it and share it!
• Remember, this is a fun event so do not stress to finish each day! Late submissions are also allowed!
Finally, huge thanks to @pleaseshutupaboutsatou for the event graphics and icon as well as being a mod for our social media, and to @wool-string for also helping to coordinate the themes and being a mod! Since this event account is managed by multiple people, tumblr doesn't allow direct messages, so you can also message mod @origami10 with questions.
Ignore that I messed up the days trying to combine promps. Doing these out of order now
I know they had to lay low after beaching but the picture of two thoroughly damp teens scarfing down fastfood while briefly forgetting the urge to strangle each other was too funny not to draw
literally thank god sex isnt real and was just invented by big fiction to emphasize greater social and psychological themes i was getting scared id have to do all that
You know what I find fascinating about the Backrooms movie? How having a budget forced them to do things practically.
Think about it. On his own Kane Pixels was making backrooms YouTube videos using the free software Blender. Because he was just a 16 year old kid doing this for fun in his spare time.
But now he’s got to direct a feature length movie. And if he wants actors running through those same blender environments, that’s going to be super expensive hiring visual effects companies to rotoscope and green screen composite and motion track all those shots. A handful of visual effect shots can cost thousands of dollars a day.
So what’s the solution? JUST FUCKING BUILD IT.
It’s cheaper to just build 30,000 square feet of walls and wallpaper than it is to composite 500 effects shots.
What about the monster? JUST BUILD A PUPPET. It’s cheaper to build a puppet and hire a really tall thin guy to operate it than it is to 3D model, animate, and composite it into the film. And look! Bonus! Anytime the puppet interacts with the real world it looks REAL. Because it’s a real physical object in the set!
You need your character to run through a room of couches? Just buy (or rent) a bunch of couches and put them in a room!
And even when you do use visual effects for set extensions, you still film as much practically as possible. Like my favorite example, when Mary runs out into this alleyway… JUST FILM A REAL ALLEYWAY OUTSIDE and add the walls in post!
And this is all because the movie even HAD a budget that it necessitated them doing things practically and cheaply. What a weird paradoxical situation, huh?
i made a post like this before but I can't find it now. so. I'll just redo it.
What's the first "big news story" you remember from when you were a kid?
It's something I love to ask mixed-aged groups sometimes because I think it's really interesting to see the responses. I've gotten answers from the Olympics of [whatever year] to Watergate to more recent stuff from my niblings.
My first news thing I remember is the OJ Simpson trial. I vaguely remember watching the news with my grandparents before that, but that's the first story I remember, in part because my second grade teacher had us go play so she could watch the verdict 😂
Last year, I befriended a Catholic seminarian. We've gotten to be pretty decent friends. Seeing as he was staying in town for the summer and I wasn't, I entrusted him with caring for my plant.
He did a wonderful job, but as he was returning my plant to my custody, he explained "I watered her every other day, I gave her new dirt, moved her into the sunshine, prayed the rosary-"
"What?"
He looked at me, confused. "Isn't she a plant you pray with?"
"No," I said slowly. "She's a prayer plant. That's the... colloquial name of the plant."
Upon seeing his stricken face, I realized something went wrong. Turns out, this entire time, he's been including my plant in on his prayers and leaving her near icons.
Listen, totally cool. My plant becoming Catholic is a great deal for her not dying over the summer. But now I must navigate this interfaith household. Keep me in your thoughts.
I should also add- I ran into my rabbi and explained the situation. I then asked, earnestly, if there was a remedy. A mikveh of sorts, or a beit din, or something.
He turned to me, sighed, and said in a very deadpan tone-- "Plants don't have covenants, Joy,"
So Theodora's a free agent according to rabbinic opinion. I guess I'll permit her to be Roman Catholic.
It sounds far more likely that she’s simply become used to being prayed with in general. Thankfully, prayer plants are famously responsive. You could set up a video to record a timelapse to see how much she moves in the morning and evening, with exposure to recordings of different prayers from various faith traditions, to see which ones move (ha) her the most
overall the structure felt so messy (and boringly drawn out, but that might just be bc i know the story and knew how long i had to sit through before i could leave). i understand ofc the use of a narrator as a framing device and indeed it's a large part of the odyssey itself and the oral tradition it comes from, HOWEVER imo it could have been much better utilized by odysseus recounting the tale to the phaecians rather than to calypso.
the extended sequences of flashbacks to the trojan horse gambit were so excessive and unnecessary- sure a lil cutback would be expected bc its one of the most famous scenes in literature and i know no director could ever resist taking a turn of showing it, and of course the odyssey is haunted by the events of the iliad, but it would have been a much more impactful delivery to see the impact of the war rather than just the actual war itself. we don't need to see it to understand the toll it's taken. they have about three full sequences devoted to it (that i can recall) and none of them are really Adding much to the narrative outside of a few scant moments.
speaking of the trojan horse, i found the entire sequence around it stupid asf. again, I KNOW they wanted a big cinematic thing and they wanted a feat of filmmaking and they got that, but why in fuck was the horse half submerged? why were they in there for what is implied to be days? why did the trojans take the gift and say 'the war is over'? why did the common folk of troy shout and mob and say that the horse should be burned, as if it wasnt a ceremonial gift for a goddess? it was all so nothingburger and made me resent the scene bc it was purely just for visuals and did such a disservice to, again, one of the most famous and lasting battle stories ever.
this also runs into the. well. total sanding down of odysseus' character. the film has most of the encounters the crew have on the journey home be fights, despite the fact that odysseus' WHOLE THING is cunning, smarts, and lying. he barely speaks to anyone and none of those interactions show his personality and wiles. they completely omit the (iconic) nobody exchange, and in fact have him make a rash decision to shoot an arrow at the blinded cyclops when they are running away, provoking him to chase them down to the shore. again this is done to inject unnecessary tension in the form of yet another action scene.
i know many reviews praise damon's performance for the deep yearning for home he displays, but i sadly didnt feel that at all. i dont think it was bc of a lack of acting skill, i just didnt feel the story supported such an urgent emotion. imo the film absolutely twists and grinds away his core motivation, and leaves the character empty. multiple instances of magical characters in the film ask odysseus why he doesn't want to go home or is not ready to go home, implying he is subconsciously delaying his own return. this rings so deeply untrue to odysseus and the odyssey that it's almost laughable.
the reasoning is later given that he felt immense guilt at the destruction and violation of troy he enacted by masterminding the trojan horse, and so he does not feel worthy to return home, or does not feel that the home he left is still there for him bc he has been so utterly changed as a man by this war. this is such a modern western take on war and the lone soldier trope that its difficult to take seriously even as an adaptation or interpretation, bc it is so removed from the tale of the odyssey. of course the men were all changed and haunted by their experience in war, but this specific motivation being ascribed to odysseus makes no sense.
what WOULD make sense and still get the point that's trying to be made re: war across would be to have odysseus' ferocious determination to get home be a result of the guilt and trauma of the war, a self-delusion that if he can make it home, then everything will go back to as it was, and he can return to the version of himself who never left. he is chasing the mirage of a dream that can never be true, no matter how much he wants it. this keeps his central motivation as in the text, but allows the film to explore newer or more relevant themes.
tangentially, reviews have consistently said tom holland's performance as telemachus was lacklustre, and to me some part of that Was due to the writing. telemachus is a young man, unsure and unable, but he grows during the course of the story, and by the end he has the wherewithal to escape bandits by his own merit and return home. changing these events in the film to have odysseus intercept and save his son was...again, kind of nothing. what was the purpose of this, but to once more show odysseus as a fighter. i simply dont understand why nolan made this film when he apparently wanted to just explore some minor themes of war-weariness and show a lottttt of shiny fights. make the iliad then.
this leads me to another poor characterisation: penelope, my love. penelope is an intelligent, layered, strong character, equal to odysseus in all ways. in the film, she is shown well enough, and anne hathaway for the most part portrays her grief, frustration, and hope quite well. setting aside the absolutely wild girlboss mini-rant she has about how the only reason she isnt allowed to rule ithaca is bc shes a woman, there were flattenings of her character too which really did her a disservice and tried to fit her into a modern mould. she asks odysseus, before he leaves, if they cant just run away to avoid him going to war. penelope would never. there's no two ways about it she just would never. she spends her time weaving behind a screen as the suitors feast in her hall, distant and untouchable, clearly still hung up on her husband. i can see how this is a clear way to show her love, but again it does her character such a disservice! it lacks depth and an understanding of the politics, and the real danger she and telemachus are in.
showing penelope entertaining the suitors (making an appearance at the feasts, allowing them to see her and speak with her) and outwardly projecting the appearance of a woman who is truly intending to make a choice from amongst them would not only display her own intelligence and political knowledge, but be a much better way to do the exposition which is so clumsily done in the start of the film.
a brash, angry telemachus asking his mother why she treats with the suitors, why she has given up on his father, and her explaining with anger, with grief, that she is doing what she must, and that telemachus needs to grow up now and be the man they both need him to be, would introduce the audience to the precarious situation and help them understand both the context of the time and the customs that must be followed. it would give both characters (especially telemachus) more complexity and make us feel for them more.
and of course. speaking of context and custom. xenia. zeus' law. i almost gasped at how fucking tacky it was to say zeus' law, and then almost every single character in the film says it out loud as if its a serious and normal thing to say. penelope saying 'treat others as you want to be treated' is baffling, as it's not a phrase that makes sense for the time or culture, and it's literally not what xenia even is.
xenia (guest-friendship) is the ancient concept of hospitality, a moral and political imperative in this culture. it is the custom/ritual of inviting guests into one's home, treating them with food, shelter, safety, and good will. it also works the other way, with guests being expected to show their hosts respect, and not burden them by overstaying or acting uncourteously. a part of this being so entrenched was the idea that any guest or newcomer could be a god in disguise, and mistreating anyone could earn you the wrath of a hidden god.
this concept is hugely ingrained in the odyssey, a story of a man travelling far, from port to port, trading on this xenia for safe passage, while in his own home, guests have been blatantly abusing the practice against his own family.
the way the film shorthands this into 'zeus' law' and has characters continually use the term is so tacky and heavy handed, while also misunderstanding the concept. there's some other dialogue which is so jarring and bad it made me laugh. the constant talk of the sea people prompting penelope to say 'our civilisation is falling' and odysseus to say. verbatim. 'our age of bronze is collapsing' were just incredible. how am i supposed to take this seriously.
and then of course in the end, odysseus gets home, reunites with his family. there is NO MENTION of the bed. the bed odysseus carved himself out of a tree which sits in their room and cannot be moved. the bed which penelope uses to test him in turn, to see if he is true. bc they are equal. they are partners, they are worthy of each other. no mention of this. the next scene, the final scene, is of odysseus and penelope leaving. they leave ithaca, their home, the thing they each fought so hard for for so long. they leave it and they leave their son and they head into the sunset.
in conclusion, look how they massacred my boy. fuck.
It's important to note that Chekhov's Gun was not originally about foreshadowing, but a piece of advice to playwrights about how every element in a play should have narrative relevance. The corollary to Chekhov's Gun is that if a gun mounted on the wall in act 1 is never used at all in the entirety of the play, then it should be omitted from the play entirely.
another thing that chade did that pisses me off: when he told fitz he has no ambition and too much caution! it's almost as if he was kept as a stablehand for years, was dressed beneath his station, was reminded repeatedly that he's a bastard and that his uncle can try and kill him all he wants and get away with it, lived with his head down so no one will pay too much attention to chivalry's bastard, was made into a literal tool so it wouldn't cross his mind for a second that he could be the next king, and the few times he did act according to his own will he was accused of usurpring the throne and got tortured to death. gee, chade, how dare your child assassin have too much caution!
