Home of RayO1 @rayo1-productions - Tumblr Blog

Enter the Cartoon Network Universe like never before.

On December 31st 2020, I finished the first 6-chapter volume in the first series of what I plan to be a long running project, these first 6 chapters beginning the first story: an adaptation of the 2009 Cartoon Network MMO FusionFall.

You can find that in the link below, and more chapters are to come in the future: www.fanfiction.net/s/11418172/…

You can find my previous wallpaper dedicated to this series here: https://rayo1-productions.tumblr.com/post/622862756407820288/ffunseen-hope-this-looks-good-for-the-ogs

The link above however is dedicated specifically to the FusionFall story, as opposed to representing the entire story I plan to tell.

I'm happy and excited to announce this project to the world. I've been building it piece by piece since I was nine years old. That makes this project about 10 years in the making, and still going strong. It's been interesting to see how ideas have evolved and adapted in my head, to watch my plans blossom into new ideas, and to finally put them to pages of notes and eventually pages online.

Admittedly, this is a "syndicated" version of the wallpaper, as the main version I keep to myself exposes a secret couple of characters that I have planned to appear. When the time comes, I'll post that version in all its glory.

Most art seen here belongs to @foomidori (and whoever did the art for that Exonaut suit behind Juniper Lee), with minor additions and changes made by me to better reflect the content in my story.

But holy hell were some of these PNGs hard to find...and crop. The Finn png was TRACED by someone else, so it's not actually the real deal!

Finn PNG: www.deviantart.com/guilarts/ar…

Mordecai PNG by FusionFallCreations

Megas Crop by rasputinto

But if you’re not happy with some of the changes I’ve implemented to the aesthetic, I do apologize in advance, and I promise that there’s a reason for each change.

All characters represented are the properties of Cartoon Network, their respective creators, the Turner Broadcasting network, and WarnerMedia.

thepaisleyelf

There’s a liquor store near my house that seems to be run exclusively by frat boys. They lovingly curate these bags, which I browsed today while “Oops I Did It Again” played through the store speakers. This is art to me, there is beauty everywhere for those with eyes to see it

thepaisleyelf

The update everyone has been waiting for….

virtualgirladvance

everytime i see this it makes me want to buy from them exclusively

positiviteazee

i dont care what anyone says to me that is RED HAIR

someoneoffthestreet

"Peter reuniting with MJ and Ned cheapens the sacrifice at the end of No Way Home" - this is where I think the context of One More Day becomes most relevant.

in the comics, One More Day's purpose is to be a change of the status quo, meant to be somewhat bittersweet but ultimately a good thing. Peter has to forget a deal was ever struck, because otherwise he'd be sitting around all day pining over MJ and being depressed about being newly single, and we can't have that, because we're supposed to be happy about the new status quo, we're supposed to like the new status quo, wait where are you going come back-

No Way Home, however, makes the crucial decision of having Peter remember what he's lost. this could be a side-effect of May being killed-off, but they didn't need to actually kill her for the plot to work: she could have been in terrible condition but ultimately pulled through, thus facilitating an ending closer to OMD's original purpose. and the writers actively chose not to do it, they chose the ending where Peter's sacrifice is a sacrifice, not just some handy-dandy reset button. and this changes the whole context of the plot beat.

now, there's another layer to this: if NWH has no sequel, if it's the final note on Tom Holland's run as the character thus resulting in a movie with totally new actor in a totally new timeline being released five years afterwards, the ending does retain its original bittersweet nature, albeit leaning more heavily on the bitter than the sweet. but in the version where NWH isn't the end, where it has a sequel that audiences are highly anticipating, this plot beat becomes the Bad Ending. it becomes a problem that Peter has to deal with and ultimately resolve, a choice with consequences he has to reckon with. and the story can't do that without Peter coming face-to-face with the people he loves most in the world and who love(d) him most as well. and yes, the audience loves to see the hero struggle and fall, but they also love to see the hero win and rise above.

don't get me wrong, I do see a timeline where Peter reunites with MJ and Ned and decides to let them go entirely. but having an entire movie dedicated to that, when the ending of NWH already did it, makes little sense to me. if Peter is meant to let them go, why drag them back into the story to this degree, if at all? if that was the purpose, that would be a huge misstep in my eyes, narratively and emotionally dissonant.

pandaluver

Something that annoys me whenever people talk about MCU Spiderman nowadays is when they say shit like "Finally, he's not relying on Iron Man anymore" or "He's no longer Iron Boy"

Last time Peter was actually dependant on Tony's tech was in fucking Homecoming (You can count Infinity War if you really want to nitpick)

Tony never even wanted Peter to be reliant on his tech, that's why he installed the training wheel protocol that nerfed the suit. The point of Spiderman Homecoming was to prove that Peter could be his own hero without Iron Man or his tech. Tony only wanted to use his tech to help guide Peter into becoming a better Spider-Man, which he does.

Peter continuing to use Stark Tech after Homecoming doesn't diminish what he went through. Using an advantage you have access to isn't the same as being dependent on it.

Far From Home wasn't about Peter becoming the "Next Iron Man" it was about him becoming a Hero that the world & MCU could rely on as a Symbol.

He lost his title of "Iron Man Junior" long before No Way Home but people were apparently watching these movies covering their eyes and ears or something so they could have something to complain about. It took him losing everything and everyone around him for people to switch up on him. It's like how those Deku Haters switched up when Deku was in his Vigilante phase and he was barely different from how he usually was.

To quote a YouTuber I like "Y'all dogged on him until he became edgy, that's crazy"

wobubling

The Little Match Girl, a New Teen Titans fancomic.

Concept & script by the lovely @disco-troy, all art by me.

weloveshortvideos

Vijay Singh with the most outrageous golf shot the masters has ever seen. Ever.

regularlesbian

G O L F W I T H O U T L I M I T S

thebuttkingpost-deactivated2021

I can only assume this is from some amazingly realistic looking sports anime because there ain’t no goddamn way that happened in real life.

kirbyfanneox

blorpimorpi-deactivated20240919

I’ve definitely reblogged this before, but I just think it’s super cute because there are like “golf manners” where you’re not supposed to make a huge ruckus but like EVERYONE felt it warranted cheering because HOLY SHIT THAT WAS A GREAT SHOT.

mogatrat

how do you not hold your club above your head and hoot like a tusken raider after a shot like that

crazymuffin1

how id survive horror movies:

iron lung: im vaccinated against polio so i dont need one

it: my pronouns are she/they

sinners: im an atheist

the backrooms: my house doesnt have that many rooms

Resident evil: id evict them

Midsommar: im swedish.

Get out: ok i'll leave

x: im still calling it twitter

american psycho: i live in sweden

mistercrowbar

to artists I recommend:

watermark any and all fanart you post

watermark your original stuff too

make your watermark your @ handle or a URL. slap it on clearly and legibly. don't make it cutesy or tiny or hidden. make it so people can find you.

knucklecurve

filthy, filthy read

nogaynolife

smuganimebitch

1. Does Ebert make a moral judgment on the fannish obsessions he describes here?

Yes. Obviously. He characterizes these fans as self-absorbed, socially deficient, intellectually incurious, emotionally dependent on formula, and “excruciatingly boring.” That is not neutral description. It is a negative judgment about their character and the way they live.

2. Does Ebert imply that a depth of knowledge about a fannish subject is inherently bad on its own?

Not quite. His stated objection is to people using expertise as a display of devotion, a source of status, or a substitute for broader interests and spontaneous social interaction.

I would argue that the rest of the review makes his position a little more clear, though.

3. Does Ebert state that this pattern of behavior is a quality of all fans?

No. He says “a lot of fans,” “extreme fandom,” and “such people.” He is identifying a type of fan, not making a literal universal claim.

4. Did the reader see a mildly critical opinion containing the word ‘fandom’ and immediately succumb to an emotional reaction rather than fully read and engage with the passage?

Calling people socially inept, intellectually empty, self-absorbed, and excruciatingly boring is not “mildly critical.” It is openly contemptuous.

A person can understand the passage perfectly well and still object to it. Disagreement is not evidence of failed reading comprehension, no matter how many condescending bullet points one wraps around the accusation.

5. Did the reader see the words ‘socially inept’ and immediately assume this refers solely to autistic people? Why or why not?

“Socially inept” does not mean “autistic,” and Ebert does not explicitly mention autism.

But the behaviors he associates with social deficiency overlap heavily with stereotypes about autistic people: intense specialist interests, encyclopedic knowledge, reliance on predictable conversational scripts, and difficulty improvising socially.

The word “solely” is doing dishonest work here. The relevant question is not whether the description refers exclusively to autistic people. It is whether Ebert treats traits commonly associated with autistic people as evidence that someone is socially or intellectually defective.

6. Is the job of a cultural critic to ‘let people enjoy things?’

No. Critics are allowed to criticize fandom, fan culture, consumer identity, nostalgia, and the social uses people make of art.

Readers are equally allowed to criticize the critic’s assumptions, generalizations, and contempt. “A critic’s job is not to let people enjoy things” does not mean every hostile remark made by a critic is therefore insightful.

There is also a rather important contextual omission here. Ebert did not write this as a general essay about fandom in the age of twitter, harassment campaigns, shipping discourse, or whatever present-day fandom behavior the quotation is now being aimed at.

He wrote it in his February 4, 2009 review of Fanboys, a road comedy set in 1998. So this is a late-2000s review discussing a particular stereotype of 1990s fandom. The film follows a group of friends who plan to break into Skywalker Ranch so that their terminally ill friend can see The Phantom Menace before he dies. Ebert’s argument is that the movie identifies too closely with its heroes and should have mocked them more. The rest of the review makes his position much less ambiguous. He calls their fandom “an idiotic lifestyle,” describes them as “tragically hurtling into a cultural dead end,” dismisses their knowledge as having “no purpose other than being mastered,” and ends with a joke about their mothers cleaning up after them.

atomic-chronoscaph

Buck Rogers in the 25th Century card game (1936)

10bendog

We called the alien impostors 'Fusions'. They aren't individuals like those they copy, they're a hive mind set to spread an infection. They've overrun the city now, but we won't back down so easily. NOT without a fight! "The time is now, the hero is you!"