#that would be devastating

[t0bib0bi]

james ortiz you are so special to me. the way he talks about his craft and the way he's so clearly in love with and passionate about what he does is so beautiful.

he was also a theatre technician and that immediately makes him one of my most favoritest people

james ortiz you have my eternal love and respect

sincerely,

a theatre technician who specializes in lighting design

[lesbiandotorg]

i know a lot of people were yearning for this season of dimension 20 to be a second go in the starstruck universe and admittedly had they done that i would have been ecstatic, but now that we’re here i’m so happy we got cloudward ho instead (esp bc maybe we will still get aso s2 at some point!!) because i feel like it’s given me so much of what i wanted out of another season of starstruck AND we get to explore this incredibly vast new world and meet new PCs with such rich backstories and depth of character, and we get to appreciate what brennan and the intrepid heroes and the rest of the d20 team can create with all they’ve learned in the years of work they’ve done together since a starstruck odyssey originally aired, and while they’d still get to leverage and show off a lot of that growth the show and its creators have had, they’d ultimately still be contained to a certain degree by everything that had been established in aso were they to do a continuation

[sluttyseacadet]

they're so cutie pie

[glandularfever]

Actually one (of several) more thing(s). Can I ask if other Brits thought that the humour post (and even occasionally during) season 1 of good omens fell completely flat? I‘m just thinking of the scene in s3 where the gambler‘s daughter marches in to talk to A and C and is then interrupted several times by both Muriel and the demon with the spiky hair. The reason I’m asking is because, on the surface, it’s actually vaguely Prachett-esque. A Normal Situation is interrupted by two very not-normal things, but at least half of the characters in the scene still treat it like it’s nothing out of the ordinary (to an extent). Not sure what the actual term is for it, but that kind of “polite absurdism,” where everyone goes along with the scene, which is again both very Prachett and very British. “Going along” doesn’t need to mean they don’t react negatively, but that it’s still treated as an everyday intrusion as opposed to a supernatural one. But I found it so lame. I mean I think it’s partly because her being in the scene doesn’t serve much purpose, but I can’t describe it, it just feels empty compared to the way other sitcoms and satirical shows (not to mention the book) seem to do it. Maybe because the humans, supposedly the ones who are expected by the audience to react do, in fact, react - by being baffled and then sort of disappearing from the scene, so no expectations are really subverted. Might have been funnier if they’d tried to join in on what was happening apropos of nothing and/or continued to be baffled but were talked around while they made more of a scene.

I’ve been consuming loads of American media recently though so maybe I’ve just been Americanised away from that kind of humour.

[marshmellowtea]

fuck the discourse post i was gonna write i'm fuckin. devastated by this dying seven year old boy asking his parents to hug him before he dies oh my god :((

[ghost-proofbaby]

Ok well if we're sharing intrusive thoughts, is the jist of it that he gets back in touch to ask for the ring back because he's found someone else to give it too?? 😭 😭

oh holy shit bat 😭 this is so much sadder than the actual premise are you kidding me

[dancingchopines]

Why Must Jane Rochford Boleyn Always Be Villainized?

Having watched Wolf Hall recently(which I overall enjoyed as a drama but not  some of the history) it reminded me how many different books and shows villainize Jane Boleyn for no reason. The person who gave the most damning and vindictive evidence against Anne Boleyn isn’t named in sources but is unlikely to be Jane Boleyn. Her testimony that she had to give seems to indicate that she, Anne, and her husband were close. Furthermore, there is no real evidence that she and George Boleyn had an unhappy marriage, nor is there anything indicating that she and Anne had an acrimonious relationship. 

Jane Boleyn’s baseless villainy being repeated over and over again is tiresome especially when I feel like her being a sympathetic character who was close with George and Anne is even more compelling narrative choice. Imagine the horror and tragedy of your husband that you care about and your sister in law that you’re close friends with, being accused of heinous crimes that you know are untrue!!!! And then being forced to give some evidence and watch them be executed!

Here are some quick sources:

https://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/jane-boleyn-historys-scapegoat/?v=7516fd43adaa

https://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/jane-boleyn-the-infamous-lady-rochford-guest-post/?v=7516fd43adaa

https://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/10-facts-jane-boleyn-adrienne-dillard/?v=7516fd43adaa

https://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/correcting-the-myths/?v=7516fd43adaa

https://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/the-marriage-of-george-and-jane-boleyn-by-clare-cherry/?v=7516fd43adaa

[swiftzeldas]

wild how everybody in 2008-2010 heard the lyric “abigail gave everything she had to a boy who changed his mind” and decided fifteen was about, like, purity and virginity and how the only important things are boys, when the same song contains the lyrics “in life you’ll do greater things than dating the boy on the football team, i didn’t know it at fifteen” and “back then i swore i was gonna marry him someday but i realized some bigger dreams of mine”