✫Dilly's Daydreams✫

Don't mind me, just shouting into the Void for enrichment... she/her, UK, 19

[mysticmayhem1337]

Salutations!

I'm Dilly, the owner of this house. Thanks for stopping by, please take your shoes off before coming further in. Why yes! I do think I'm funny, how could you tell?

A Little About Me

I'm an English lass with a keyboard and a dream. I'm extremely passionate about storytelling, in all its many forms. I've finally put use to this Tumblr account: info-dumping to internet strangers about stuff that inspires me and/or makes me happy.

I'm sort of qualified to talk about these things. I studied A-Levels in both English Language and Film Studies. So, I've got some technical knowledge to go along with the passion.

Some day, I hope to write books and direct films of my own. Constantly, I find myself inspired by the creativity of others and come up with new ideas that I never see to their completion. I'd like to post little snippets of writing at some point, but I haven't gotten the guts to do it yet.

On Inquires...

Feel free to ask or tell me about things! I don't usually bite, but this is digital space and there are no teeth in sight. You've nothing to fear!

I'd love to hear about a film you saw, a book you read or a game you played. Hearing people talk about things they love always cheers me up. Recommend something for me to look into, if you want. Go wild!

P.S. My blog is intended to be a safe place for those who feel out of place. I'm always trying to learn about and understand others. If I say something a little insensitive in any post, please know it was not my intention to harm and swiftly correct me. I only ask that you be polite.

[mysticmayhem1337]

RIP Eddie Munson, you would've loved second breakfast.

[mysticmayhem1337]

Literally just watched War of the Worlds (2005) and I have a few things to say about it, but not many I don't think (this is a big fatt lie, actually, I've been very long winded). Spoilers ahead by the way!

This is one of those films that, in a vaccum, is solid. I really liked Dakota Fanning's character, but didn't connect much with anyone else. The brother's motivations were very unclear to me, how he even survived, I don't know. It's also a very American film from the 00s. Considering that a significant location in the novel is Woking, it felt more inspired by than based on, if that makes sense? Especially considering I've read this book (and love it very much) and am from England.

So, decent enough film but terrible adaptation. I don't like the designs of the Tripods or the Martians (they aren't from Mars, which I can understand choosing to change, but I'm still calling them Martians). In fact, they look a lot like the aliens in Independence Day (a film that I love, and would happily talk more about). It's very 00s, and I'm so fond of Henrique Alvim Correa's artwork for the novel.

(I've no idea how to adust the sizes of these images but here's what I'm talking about).

The Fighting Machine may seem rather cartoonish to you and I, a modern audience over 100 years down the line, but allow me to set the scene of the context. These illustrations come from 1906, 8 years after the book was first published. In 1902, A Trip to the Moon is made and The Great Train Robbery comes after in 1903. Film is still very young, and the sci-fi genre is still finding its footing. The big sci-fi book I can think of before this was Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and while that was ground-breaking, and still is, it was very much rooted on Earth. These are things that have never before been imagined in society. I mean, just look at how huge the Tripod is in that first image, with it's giant, all-seeing, unblinking eyes.

Which sort of leads me onto another reason I'm a bit iffy on the 2005 film adaptation. To me, this book is a sci-fi horror and while there are some disturbing elements in the film that I think work, it's far heavier in its action than horror. Tom Cruise was not the right man for this role, but at the same time, he wasn't written to be the Narrator of the original novel, he's some other guy. The Narrator of The War of the Worlds ends up a very disturbed and traumatised man. He witnesses so much death and that death is all quite violent. The heat rays in the book don't vaporise people as they do in the film, they leave behind black, charred corpses and you can't see the ray as it travels. So imagine standing next to someone and they suddenly bust into flames with such vigor that it's as if they have become fire entirely. It's far more visceral in the book; the film almost feels censored.

Then of course, the other really obvious stuff is the setting and time period being very different, as well as the kid characters being present in the film where they have no counterparts in the book. Dakota Fanning's character I liked, but there were times she felt more like a prop than a person, especially after her brother leaves. I liked her relationship with her older brother, he seemed to understand her and care about her in a way that I wish we could see siblings do more often. That's part of what made the brother's motivations so odd, he very quickly chooses to abandon his sister, who very clearly expresses how much she needs him. I would have rather they were the focus of the film rather than their father, who felt like a standard cool action man most of the time.

So, in summary, I've got many mixed feelings. I can see that the film takes some clear and subtle inspiration from the book but it also feels like an Americanised action film that lacks a lot of the horror and psychological torment of the source material. It's certainly better than at least one adaptation of The War of the Worlds.

[mysticmayhem1337]

I have to make a post dedicated to Elizabeth. Guillermo del Toro knows how to write women and somehow he keeps basing them on me and giving me this cheeky look and I think it's driving me mad.

Elizabeth is WEIRD. She's so weird and she's opinionated and she is going to make it your problem because she refuses to stifle herself. She's sees the beauty in the deformed and mishapen because it was there the whole time. She's wise and will tell you when she thinks you're wrong. She's full of love but also a quiet rage that simmers underneath everything and she tries not to raise her hand because she knows that the only way forwards is to be kind.

And what has stuck with me is how the Creature carries her out of the house. I KNOW what you did there, Guillermo, I can see it, I have eyes. The most jaw-dropping scene in the 1931 Frankenstein is when the father carries his daughter through the town after she has drowned. The way he holds her and the way the crowd looks upon this with horror as the festivities grind to a halt. The Creature becomes the grieving father, and Elizabeth becomes the little girl.

I'm honestly struggling to put this into words, it's such a powerful homage and symbolic moment for Elizabeth and the Creature. In both it is a scene that means "look at what you have done to me." The blame for this is on Victor, in the 1931 film it's supposed to be on the Creature but neither myself nor Del Toro read it this way. Victor should have been gentle and kind to the Creature, just as Elizabeth had told him. He was short-sighted and an idiot, I don't say that to be nasty but it's the truth.

I don't know how true Elizabeth Harlander is to Elizabeth Lavenza in terms of her personality and beliefs. But I do know that I will love this portrayal of the woman forever.

[mysticmayhem1337]

I've been taken by a fever, so please endure my insane ramblings about Frankenstein as someone who fully intends to read the book and worships Mary Shelley but hasn't yet and also worships Guillermo del Toro.

I will always be on the side of the Creature, always and forever, pry him from my cold dead hands or whatever. Normally, I consider Victor to be something of an enemy I want to vanquish.

That being said. The point of Del Toro's film is that there was no monster. NEITHER Victor NOR the Creature was actually a monster, they were both horribly traumatised and never got any help. They both did shitty things that they don't know how to live with. They're almost the same person in many ways, they're so similar that they are doomed to hate each other because they hate themselves.

The greatest wisdom I think I've learnt from Del Toro so far is that monsters aren't the bad guys we should be fighting. Monsters aren't bad guys, they're weird looking average joes and there's no use in fearing them. The bad guys don't look scary. They are normal men, human as anyone else. And it is being so unsuspecting that is the reason that these evil people get away with so much destrustion. We expect them to look like the Creature, Hellboy, the restless ghost or the fish man, so when real evil steps up to greet us, we do not recognise him.

Frankenstein isn't about this, not in the same way at least. It's about people who feel so othered by the world and not knowing how to cope with the lonliness of that kind of existence. So you cling to what is at least somewhat recognisable to you until you can no longer ingore that this isn't what you wanted or it is ripped from your hands with no warning when it finally is. The world is violent and cruel but somehow in this madness, you must learn to not be and to forgive yourself for the pain you caused before this occured to you.

There are lots of ways to read a book, and I'm well aware that there's a lot about this film that's different to Shelley's novel. But this was how Guillermo (not the director, but the man and the boy) read it, what he took away and how it's made him feel over the years. He's wanted to share it with us for a long time and now he finally has and it's really beautiful. Adaptation is one of the most difficult forms of writing, especially when going from book to film, you will have to cut something. There's also no right or wrong way to understand a book, only my way, and your way.

Regardless of how you feel about whether the film was a good or bad adaptation, I hope you can see how much Del Toro loves the book, the 1931 film and the people who brought them into existence.

[mysticmayhem1337]

Guillermo del Toro ripped my heart and soul out of my broken and bloody chest. He laid them together on the table before us and with a kind smile he said, "itsn't that lovely?" I will never be the person I was before he did this ever again, now I must find a way to live with myself despite how hideous I have come to understand myself to be.

Oh? Yes, I did see Frankenstein last night. How could you tell?

[mysticmayhem1337]

I have literally just gotten around to watching Thunderbolts* and for me its quite a difficult film to place. The strengths are really strong yet the weaknesses are hard to ignore.

To start on a positive note, it was thematically really great. It had a clear and fairly uplifting moral about not isolating yourself from the people who care about you when you're struggling. The scenes with Yelena and Alexei were heartfelt and felt like they aligned with the characters we met in Black Widow. Yelena, to me, really felt like Natasha's sister and her continued grief is refreshingly realistic.

Another big highlight for me was Bob. My impression of him was that it felt like a man with bipolar, borderline personality disorder and a lot of trauma was given a super serum. I know that's basically what they tell you, but just calling him "mentally unstable" feels lacking in empathy and nuance. Someone in that writers room had first hand experience with these conditions, because Bob felt like a fairly accurate depiction of someone with poor mental health/unmanaged disabilities. A lot of his mannerisms came across as uncomfortable or unsure despite what he was saying. He overshares quite a bit with people he barely knows. He actually feels quite grounded when you strip away the super powers.

I liked that they didn't make Yelena and Bob and romantic pairing. It's so exhausting to me when they do that in films, so I'm always pleased when it looks like it could go that way, but doesn't. Neither of them are well enough to be in a committed relationship, ESPECIALLY Bob. They've only just found themselves a support system, and that's plenty worthwhile.

Okay, I'm going to move onto the negatives of this film, but I'm going to try to find a way to end this post on a light-hearted note. Stay with me now.

Why was Taskmaster in the promotional material only to be killed off in the first like 10 minutes of the film? What a waste of a character. I heard that it was to establish that this was going to be a darker film than what we're used to but that just screams poor writing to me. Yelena's opening monologue does that job. The rest of the film too. I think I feel especially peeved on behalf of the actress.

Why was Ghost here? We haven't seen her since like, 2016 in an Antman film. How did she end up here? I thought she was cured of her horrifically painful shifting powers, and even if she was only stablised rather than cured, what spurred her to keep ripping herself apart over and over again? I don't want to guess, I want to get to know her on a deeper level now that she's a more significant character in the franchise.

WHAT HAPPENED BETWEEN BOB GETTING HIS SERUM AND HIM ENDING UP IN THE VAULT!? HOW DID HE FLY UNDER THE RADAR FOR SO LONG? HOW LONG EVEN WAS THE TIME BETWEEN THESE EVENTS?

These questions may have been answered within the film and I may sound silly right now. However, I think the answers, if present, were very poorly delivered for me to be this confused.

John Walker is here. Okay. Um, I don't know what to say, I give zero shits about this guy. I'm not being passive agressive, I just don't find him very interesting.

Why is Bucky a politician? That's the least charasmatic man I've ever seen. He's too old for this. He seemed to be doing so much better while he was hanging out with Sam and fixing the boat. Doing non-assassin stuff and building more of a life for himself outside the cycle of violence. Only, according to the end credits scene, he's not on great terms with Sam anymore because of copyright disputes? What? They were such a positive influence on each other! Sam helped give Bucky focus beyond his shadowy past and Bucky was the catalyst that finally got Sam to pick up The Shield.

Also, this is probably just me but in the end credits scene Bucky looked so much like Matt Berry I genuinely find it hard to take seriously. He looks SO ridiculous and that's because of my associations with Matt Berry, not because the style looks bad or anything. I guess he just resembles a well-known British comedian now.

So, in summary then... (Even though I think I still have more in the tank but this post is very long). Thematically, this film is pretty excellent and I really enjoyed those aspects. Narratively, this film is a mess and doesn't balance its screen time with each character. I just have so many questions about Ghost and that bizarre choice with Taskmaster. I'd like to see the team develop further, they've not had enough time to marinade for me to consider them a found family dynamic or anything yet. This film evens out to sit in the middle ground and considering where Marvel has been recently, I'll take it.

[mysticmayhem1337]

Just got back from the cinema after seeing Back to the Future for its 40th anniversary!

I hadn't seen this film in years, and never remembered being a huge fan. For some reason, kid-me was blind to this film's brilliance.

The opening scene alone is a masterclass in setup, the way it builds from the black screen with ticking clocks, the tv with the news report, the dog food dispenser and to the Plutonuim under the bed until it reaches its ultimate cresendo when Marty plays the guitar. It tells you so much about these characters (Marty and the still-unseen Doc Brown) in such a simple but fun way that leaves you excited for more.

I can't think of anything else to say, it's pretty late for me and its been out for 40 years. At least now I can say that I know exactly why it's a classic!

[mysticmayhem1337]

I'm not exactly sure how to phrase any of this, but it's just one of those things that you need to off-load every so often.

There's a bit of a trend I'm seeing in some fandom spaces on Tumblr that has been bothering me a little bit. I don't intend this as something to start drama, but to provoke thought maybe? It's a topic that I think could be quite interesting if you delve into it a bit further.

I'm talking about the way I've seen certain male characters grouped together as attractive because of "his autistic behaviours" or someone saying they like their men "on the spectrum." This gets under my skin for two particular reasons.

The first one is that most of those characters aren't really coded as being autistic. Some I can say certainly are, but the majority of them are slightly awkward, nerdy white men. Trouble with socialising is a very common trait but you have to have more than just that to be autistic. Where this gets murky for me as a bad thing is that usually, autistic people are seen as quite... Undesireable, let's say. So actually being attractive for some of our inherent traits is quite nice to see, even if it's overtly romantisized.

The other reason is that they. Are. All. Men. Sometimes men of colour, but still men. I have not seen a single female character talked about in the same way male characters are. This is what makes me think it's either not genuine or that a lot of people still have a very bizarre idea of what an autistic person can look like. Which is, for the sake of clarity, absolutely anyone.

It feels concerningly like fetishisation to me. I do not want to shame or blame anyone, this isn't meant to be an attack. But when I've felt very cut off from my peers for traits that these fictional men get put on pedestals for, it feels a bit like a punch in the face. I honestly question if people who make those posts have ever actually met an autsitic person before because of how similar these characters seem to be. We can be so drastically different from one another and our behaviours can differ because we have other disabilities like ADHD or Dyslexia that can overlap with or contradict our autistic traits.

I've been very nervous to explicitly talk about being neurodivergent on my blog (and frankly nervous to talk at all) because of my experiences growing up undiagnosed for so long. The way I've heard some people talk about austistic people or use my disibility as a synonym for stupid and gross leads me to be very fearful.

I don't want to tell people not to find autistic coded characters attractive, it does feel like it might be a step in the right direction, all things considered. I'd just appreciate it if those characters had a bit more variety or to know if anyone else has felt similarly about it all.

[mysticmayhem1337]

I've been a fan of Supernatural for a while, and though I've never seen all 15 seasons of the show, I often go back to rewatch seasons 4 and 5. I'm a big fan of Castiel and Misha Collins.

However, it's not an episode that features Cas at all that always seems to linger after I watch it. It's season 4, episode 5 Monster Movie. The one that comes before the fan favourite Yellow Fever (which is a great episode), so I imagine it gets overshadowed.

The Shapeshifter in that episode really tugs at my heartstrings. I know loneliness, and I've always felt very at home with monsters, so maybe it's just that. But after he scares Jamie and drops the Dracula accent, he becomes a totally different character to me. I'm always really sad when he does get killed, it's an episode I find really tragic because I see a monster that can be redeemed.

Maybe it's just me and I'm better suited to del Toro films, lol. Did anyone else ever feel the same about this episode? I think it's one of the show's more poetic ones.

[bethanydelleman]

Honestly, the thing that bothers me the VERY MOST in the Jane Austen or any classic lit fandom is when someone says, "I'm really struggling reading these novels, it seems like a different type of English, any tips?" And there are always a few comments like:

Austen is modern English

I read these books in high school

It's not that hard

Which I hate because

This is the internet. They may not be a native English speaker. They may be one of the dozens of people who don't live in the US!

Yes, Jane Austen uses modern English, but she has a massive vocabulary, some words she uses have meaning drift or are out of fashion, and having a knowledge of British history can really help in understanding her texts

This is not the time to brag about your reading level in high school, you pretentious, precocious, know-it-all, prick! If you actually want people to read the classics maybe try helping them instead of making them feel like idiots

Helpful things to say would be:

It is hard, though it tends to get better once you get used to her writing style

Try watching an adaptation first or using an audio book, which can help you follow the story

Feel free to ask for help if you have difficulty with a particular passage (and then don't be a dick about it)

Try Northanger Abbey first, the language there is a bit easier

Once I watched Reddit assist a reader all the way through Emma as they struggled with passages and it was beautiful! Please do not shame people for asking for help or struggling! The community will only get smaller. This is not the place to brag about your freaking reading level in your youth

[mysticmayhem1337]

Hi! I hope OP doesn't mind me jumping at this opportunity, but I can't resist. This isn't something that'll come up in everyday conversation. Also, I am not a member of the classic lit fandom and haven't read anything by Austen yet, but it's nice to know there's one out there!

I recently finished my A-Level in English Language (for context, I'm from the UK), and we had a component on the history of language. I hate to be the person who says, "um, actually", but I'm hoping to reinforce the previous post. Jane Austen does technically write in Modern English, but this isn't very accurate. She was born in 1775, which was only 20 years after the first dictionary by Samuel Johnson was published. Before 1755, there was no standard way of spelling words. English, as a language, was much like Frankenstein's creation; so many people were borrowing French, German and even Latin spellings and phonics. If you're interested in this nebulous state of English, have a look into the Great Vowel Shift. I will be the first to stand up and say that we should bring back the singular second-person pronoun "thou". Anyway, it was the introduction of a dictionary that started to smooth things out for the first time.

Austen's works are written in what's closer to Early Modern English. As a new reader of the classics, you are more likely to struggle with grammar, punctuation and phrasing than with the words themselves. This is genuinely a different type of English, and you will not be used to it. People were using semicolons instead of connectives! Their sentences took up entire paragraphs! Written fiction was still quite young, so things weren't as streamlined as they are now.

As previously mentioned, I can't speak on Jane Austen's writing. All of OP's advice seems spot on to me. However, if you still need something a little younger to ease yourself into her style, I'd like to recommend Treasure Island by Robert Louis Stevenson and The War of the Worlds by H. G. Wells. I devoured Treasure Island and am partway through devouring The War of the Worlds (as of writing this). These books are pioneers of their respective genres, so there's a lot you'll be familiar with to help you through the old-fashioned writing. Austen will be waiting for you when you get back.

Please, do not let dickheads discourage you! Do not beat yourself up either! This isn't easy stuff. Please give yourself time to process. What helps me is to slow down and digest the words. It might feel silly, but try reading aloud if you need to. I'm relatively new to reading the classics in full, that's the sort of thing you do in literature rather than language. It's reignited my old love for reading, and I'd hate for someone else to lose theirs simply because someone on the internet shamed them for being in unfamiliar territory.

Props to OP for inspiring me. I hope I haven't overstepped. My mother adores the classics, and I get my passion from her. Sorry about the infodump, but I am a massive nerd. I got that from my mother, too, believe it or not. (I only realised after posting that I slightly misremembered what centuries were considered EME, typical. It's nearly 2am for me, and I got a C. I'm not perfect, but my point still stands! Edited my phrasing slightly, that's all. Have a good day!)

[mysticmayhem1337]

I have just finished watching The Residence on Netflix. I cannot quite describe how I feel about this series, but I can say it is not entirely because I share my first name with the main character.

I actually fancy getting into bird watching now. If Uzo Aduba doesn't win the Emmy she's been nominated for, I will take some kind of action. I really hope that another series is made about a totally different mystery that features her as the lead detective because I adore Cordelia Cupp. She was a big part of what endeared me to the series. Do I know if this is a safe space to discuss my reading of her as autistic within the first 10 seconds she was on-screen? No, I don't, but I do think this is a strength of the show. It's not every day that black autistic women get to be portrayed at all, let alone positively and as the main character. Was this done purposefully? That remains to be seen. Also, note that I myself am not a black woman, but would love to hear from someone who is about what she thinks of the character.

I loved the way this series felt, too. The cinematography and composition of shots were, at times, a little Wes Anderson-like, which matched the overall tone very well. The way all of the interview scenes were edited lent itself to the comedy in a similar way to Edgar Wright's editing style. That was a bonus for me, since I am a fan of a good portion of his work.

You should watch this limited series. It is fabulous and funny and genuinely gripping by the end as everything finally falls into place.

[mysticmayhem1337]

I was dead set on wearing my Superman shirt to go see the new film (I inherited it from my Dad). It was so nice to see that other people had the same idea.

I love you, nerds and geeks.

[mysticmayhem1337]

I have seen James Gunn's Superman.

I shall spare you spoilers.

I loved it so much, this is who I think Superman is meant to be. It was so beautiful. I already have a really cracking theory about a specific element of the film, and I'm sure others will have come to a similar conclusion.

I thought Henry Cavill was a brilliant casting choice, but the scripts and overall aesthetics of his run let him down. I believe David Corenswet is worthy of holding the torch as his successor. Christopher Reeve would be proud.

Because it is still release day in my time zone, I won't go into any more depth. Just know I have so much to say, and may very well end up saying it later on.

I am looking forward to what James Gunn has in store for us next. As much as I love Marvel, I hope Kevin Feige is quaking in his boots...

[mysticmayhem1337]

I have risen from the grave to share with you, unwitting stranger, this random idea I had less than a minute or so before writing this.

Forgive me for any inaccuracies, I've never really enjoyed reality TV but I am a fan of The Office (US), which is a parody of the genre, I believe.

I am a huge X-Men fan, half of that is because of the individual characters and their dynamics outside the battlefield. They pretty much all live together at the "Academy" (not always a school, since it's often just a cover story to hide headquarters), and I think that leaves promise for a reality TV spoof.

I mean, the X-Men are known for having Keeping Up With the Kardashians levels of inter-personal drama. I would expect zoom-ins, awkward silences, eye contact with the camera and especially confessionals. They talk about big fights and world-ending scenarios within the show, but we, as the audience, never see these big fights because that would defeat the point.

I think I've seen a lot of discourse about how there's no "filler" in TV anymore, and I agree with the general sentiment. We've lost 20+ episode seasons of shows, and we've been given 8 episode action-packed and exposition-heavy shows as a replacement. While filler used to be the butt of many jokes as being out-of-place or irrelevant to the main plot, I do think that they do a great deal to endear us to the characters. By putting them in a more mundane and low-stakes situation, we see them more as average Joes than powerful giants. Their idiosyncrasies are put on display, and the world-building of that show is broadened, which grounds us in its reality.

If any of you out there remember the 2012-ish era of Avengers content that emerged within the fandom after the first team-up film, then you'll know the sort of vibe I mean. I wasn't active in the fandom back then, but the aftershocks I've heard about Clint being in the vents and Thor discovering Midgardian Pop Tarts sound silly. We need a bit more silly.

I fear I've spiralled into something far more thought-provoking than I first intended, but I still think it's worth saying. It's a turbulent time to be alive right now, and it is important to not avoid big world problems. However, you need to balance the horrors of the outside world with stuff that's silly. Bring back frolicking in fields of wheat and/or barley, bring back passing funny notes to your mates in class and bring back terrible dad jokes! The dumb stuff that takes you off guard with laughter is what makes tough times bearable.

Comic books were never all that serious, tonally. They're objectively absurd. That is what makes them so great. They were full of vibrant colour and really creative character design. I've really enjoyed seeing more comic-accurate looks for characters in more recent films, but I'd also like to see a more comic-accurate spirit too. The art of adaptation lies mainly in capturing the essence of the original media, not in one-to-one recreations.

[mysticmayhem1337]

"I'm a woman written by a man." "I'm a man written by a woman." "I'm an adult written by a child."

Boring.

I'm a misfit female protagonist written by Guillermo del Toro.

[mysticmayhem1337]

I just wanted to say that, no, I have not abandoned this blog. I've been a little preoccupied with uhm, life, so I've not been able to post much. I'm working on little things here and there, though.

However, my greatest horror at the moment is that I have missed Pacific Rim Day. The clock stopped over a month ago and I had absolutely no idea!

I am ashamed of myself.

Happy belated Cancelling of the Apocalypse, 12th Jan, 2025.