#minor ranting

[skulkingintheemporium]

Call me behind the curve if ye so wish, but I, a relatively sheltered, at least when it came to the idea of sex and intimacy beyond friendship, person have recently realized I can draw my ocs being as horny as they want to be drawn and no one can stop me.

[skulkingintheemporium]

Rrrr, I want breastfeeding forms. Not hyper realistic ones or anything, just enough to give myself a slight chest. And not all the time either, that would be too easy, no no no, I obviously must only want them when it would be too inconvenient to either get or equip. Because of course my gender can't get a hint of "you're in a guys focused space, let's stick with that for now.

This has de-evolved, whoops

[skulkingintheemporium]

I sure do love being the one person of the house with a phobia of peelers and being asked to peel 5 carrots. I understand that the only other person who is avalible is younger than I, but I made it expressly clear that I don't like those things.

[cassi0pei4]

I have four unfinished mob au chapters, 1.5k words of a new modern au, a holiday gift exchange fic due by the end of December with only like 400 words done, and only 4.4k of the next chapter of my post S3 fic written and does my brain want to work properly on any of it?

Of course not.

[cheesieblr]

Terminator (spoilers for a 40 year old movie)

That movie, the first one, I watched it, only that one. Great movie 8/10; loved the practical effects! The music was hilarious (80s horror music do be like that I hear). Didn't know there was a sex scene; felt like no one ever told Sarah they loved her before or maybe she was horny and wanted a lay before her probable death at the servos of mechanical doom personified. My friend 100% predicted the ending/ who John's father was. Love my wacky time loops.

Anyway, imagine letting a child watch an R rated movie and censoring only the sex scene. Death, gore, and gun violence? Yeah that's alright for my grade-schooler, but SEX?! Nah sorry, my conservative ideologies make sexual topics taboo -- we can't expose children to that.

[galakaz]

"A few bad apples spoil a bunch" is always something I feel people still use for community's and it sucks cause you can go online and see one small part being loud and annoying and they seem to make everyone believe they are just that bad which No the whole stadium isn't terrible because one guy is shirtless yelling profanities. Sucks more cause it can be used to drag the piece of media that's good down going "oh the community is just a bunch of [insert random insult here]".

[gwarden123]

I like the way Dark City uses its sets as well. Everything has this closed in feeling, where everything feels labyrinthine, you never see the sky, and there are often not that many people* around. Feels like you could get lost really easily. And I feel like it was using the limitations of physical sets to its advantage in a way that I don't think I've seen anyone use the limitations of, say, The Volume to create a storytelling effect.

Like, I'm not complaining about CGI, but I feel even movies that don't use fully digital sets still would digitally extend a physical set. Because you can and because you want to show off your cool space city. Because it's "more realistic". Which, again, is fine. It can be very useful to give a scene more scope than you can actually achieve in real life. But it also means you miss out on the opportunity to underscore your story by visuals and set design alone, because nobody is going to build more than the tiny portion of set that your actor is going to interact with any more. In Dark City, you *know* what's up just by feel way before the characters even begin to express it in exposition.

And it just makes everything look the same, you know? Even though everyone is using the same physical materials when making a set, they still have to design it to make it look like what they want. A certain amount of theatricality is needed to get you to believe that a bit of plywood is actually a spaceship. Now everyone wants to act like they're a documentary, because the computer can make everything look "real". But there's only one way reality looks, so these brilliant science fiction vistas all look like something else you've seen before. And it doesn't have to! You just have to be willing to accept that something might not look exactly how it might theoretically look in real life.

Because we already know how to respond to this. After the invention of the camera, visual artists in the Western world were suddenly faced with competition in recording real life. So, rather than trying to be more realistic than a literal snapshot could be, artists tried to recreate the *feeling* of real life (example: Renoir's Le Moulin de la Galette). With Impressionism, the brushstrokes start becoming more visible, but it feels more like standing at a dance on a sunny day than something that looked exactly like real life ever could.

And I feel like more movies (and tv shows) could do that. Yes, there's Barbie, but there was also that TMNT movie from last year that has that brushstroke and digital marker pen look. And I feel you could use the artificiality of The Volume to create a dreamlike or an agoraphobic feel for your story. But I know nobody wants to do that, because the people in the suits with the money won't let them get weird with it.

*The only time this *is* a problem is right near the end where everything's getting smashed to bits, and there are suspiciously no people around. Right when *the other people of the city* are actually relevant to the plot. Anyway.

[paxveraque]

After spending all evening trying to fix the way a light hit the elbow of someone in my latest painting, only to scrap the progress entirely to begin again tomorrow, I have developed a newfound appreciation and envy for people who can speed paint, or even produce more than one picture every month.