The unquestioned Black classics in cinema:

Boyz N Da Hood
Menace II Society
Poetic Justice
Do The Right Thing
Love & Basketball
How High
How Stella Got Her Groove Back
Coming To America
The Wiz
Players Club
Don’t Be A Menace To South Central While Drinking Your Juice In the Hood
Set It Off
Cooley High
Lean On Me
What’s Love Got To Do With It
Class Act
Lady Sings The Blues
Soul Food
Waiting To Exhale

The underrated but actually better than all the previously mentioned Black classics in cinema:

Love Jones
School Daze
Brown Sugar
South Central
Why Did I Get Married
Eve’s Bayou
The Inkwell
Higher Learning
Jason’s Lyric
The Wood
The Five Heartbeats
Above The Rim
House Party 3
Dead Presidents
Sugar Hill
In Too Deep
Sunset Park
Akeelah & The Bee
New Jersey Drive
He Got Game
Thin Line Between Love And Hate
American Gangster
Django Unchained

The hilariously overrated Black classics in cinema:

Best Man
You Got Stomped On The Drumline
Vampire In Brooklyn
Bad Boys
Tales From the Hood
Pootie Tang
The Barbershop
Hollywood Shuffle
Get Rich Or Die Tryin
Hustle & Flow
Training Day

Feel free to categorize and add any I missed…

…and I’m blocking anybody that mentions Big Mama’s House and/or Soul Plane

anonymous asked:

Hiccup certainly would not be happy for a long time. But I think he will slowly start to appreciate his title when it starts to dawn to him how much easier it is to execute his grand visonary plans in a leading position. Plus he's got a bunch of great people supporting and helping him ease into the role. And if anyone can extract happiness from this position, it is him. He will take full advantage and own the title. Oh Thor.. now I made myself excited over Chief Hiccup!

I am ALWAYS excited over Chief Hiccup. Chief Hiccup is Best. I can’t get enough of him.

I do agree with you that over time the role of chiefing will become less strenuous for him, and he will come to appreciate and accept it a lot more. He will fall into a good, honestly very impressive leader, and it will eventually be very naturally for him to man the Berkian helm. And you’re totally right. There might not be Stoick there alongside to guide him, but Gobber and Spitelout and other Viking veterans will be there supporting his transition into leadership.

I love you bringing up his visionary ideals into this discussion. Hiccup does indeed have unique opportunities to make his visions reality as chief. And talking about visions makes me think about the end of book seven, if you’ve read the books. And even if you haven’t, you should drool over this text, too. I have deleted the spoilers:

I had always known that one day I would have to take over my father’s job. I had always felt reluctant, even cross, about this. Always felt that it was something I didn’t really want to do. Now, for the first time in my life, I really wanted to be Chief. And not just a Chief but a KING.


I wanted to be a King who would found a New World, not in some misty country far across the seas, but right here, right now, at home. I would make the Barbaric Archipelago where Might was no longer Right. Where the weaker Tribes could have their say and their vote […]. Where small children would not live in daily fear of death by wolves, by dragons roaming wild, by starvation, and by war. Where the rule of Law would apply to bully boys like Snotlout and Nutjob himself. An the first thing I would do as a King would be to abolish slavery forever from the Viking Lands…


Perhaps my vision does not seem revolutionary to readers of the Future. But you have to remember the savage wildness of the world in which I grew up. It is quite extraordinary for one small boy with red hair and nothing very remarkable about him to think that he can change the world to that extent.

- How to Ride a Dragon’s Storm, pp. 249-251

When I think of Hiccup as a leader, be it in the books or in the DreamWorks franchise, I so much envision someone who fights to make his visions a reality. In the movies, as chief, he says, “We are the voice of peace, and bit by bit we will change this world.” This is the very trajectory he will place himself on as ruler. He is someone who as a leader will be able to do many good things, and while it will be a strain, it can potentially provide him great rewards and satisfaction. 

Good Thor’s thunderbolts, it’s so totally true what you said, that “He will take full advantage and own the title.” He will be amaaaaaazing.

How very much he grows from that awkward, stuttering boy we first meet in film #1!

anonymous asked:

"I love the juxtaposition here..." What do you think how Steve in AoU seemed to say that Steve Rogers died in 1945 and there is only Captain America now. That he doesn't deserve home and family (with Natasha!) and there is only war for him. I was sadden by it for Cap has always been my favorite (especially with Evens Portrayal) I believe he deserves some peace (with Natasha!).

(x). Oh man, Anon. I feel like Steve’s PTSD was one of the few things Age of Ultron did right. (Although before I start, I should mention I don’t ship Natasha and Steve as anything but friends). There were so many lines in AOU that gave insight into Steve’s depression, listlessness, and feelings of disconnect. It’s woven into every Steve scene, and it’s amazing.

Right at the start of the movie, Sam encourages Steve to look for a place in Brooklyn, but Steve keeps resisting. He jokes that it’s too expensive, but he doesn’t reply when Sam says “But home is home, y’know?”. In fact, he looks forlorn, staring out at the party below – not joining in, separated from it all. It’s a thousand yard stare, typical of PTSD and the battle-worn soldier.

It’s questionable whether Brooklyn is Steve’s home anymore. Can Brooklyn still be home, if all the buildings are gone, the old neighbourhoods have vanished, friends and family are dead? What is home to Steve? 1945? Because if that’s true… he can never go home. The concept of ‘home’ definitely plagues Steve throughout the film.

In the same scene, he tells Bruce in a self-deprecating tone that he’s the “world’s leading authority on waiting too long”. It implies that he hasn’t moved on from Peggy and still feels regret. It’s important to note that this is all said and done at a party that’s happening because the Avengers have ‘put an end’ to HYDRA and the Chitauri. Steve should be thrilled, but instead you see how lonely and out of place he feels. He spends more time wandering than interacting with the other Avengers – with one exception. He spends significant time with Thor, who really IS the Outsider. It says a lot.

…And then Wanda’s vision scene. Where the dancing turns to brawling and the wine stains become blood. That moment gave the best insight into Steve’s PTSD. His perception is forever tainted: war is all he sees, and he can’t escape its horrible aftermath. Worse, when Peggy asks him to imagine going home, the dance hall empties. Steve literally can’t imagine it. 

He’s always on the outside, looking in: people celebrate the war being over as he walks through their scene, but his own dance hall is empty. There’s this horrible melancholia to the entire scene.

Then the farm. Again, it’s Thor and Steve – the outsiders – who are most uncomfortable with Clint’s family. Steve basically clings to Thor until Thor leaves, and then Steve can’t cross the threshold to go back inside the house. It’s a home he’ll never have, that slipped from his grasp when he crashed the plane. I think it hurts Steve to see the farm – it’s the American Dream he builds for others, but can’t have for himself. The American flag in contrast to Steve’s uniform is a nice touch.

When Tony mentions that Steve walked away from Wanda’s vision seemingly undisturbed, it’s just another tell. The vision didn’t shake Steve because it was nothing new, the same PTSD he lives with daily. And when Tony remarks “Isn’t why we fight so we can end the fight? So we can go home?”, Steve rips a log in half. Because again, what is home to Steve? He has no home. His fight doesn’t end, as his vision showed him. Steve’s lost sight – he doesn’t even know why he fights, anymore. There’s a line later on where he mentions they may be monsters, which is such an unusual line for Steve.

The only thing Steve feels like he has anymore is Captain America: it’s his only place, purpose, and sense of belonging. It sounds like it’s the only reason he leaves the house (”I have no plans tomorrow night”). In fact, the only time Steve has friends is when he’s Cap, when he’s fighting some battle. As he says, Steve Rogers was buried 75 years ago, and someone else came out of the ice – a different Captain America than the one he built. And Steve has no control over this Captain America. The idea became something beyond Steve while he was on ice, so even his superhero persona isn’t his own. Steve Rogers is fading fast, and this idealized Cap is taking over (”Language!”). There’s practically NOTHING that Steve can say is his: no home, no personality, and no persona. That’s jarring, and scary as hell. Because then you have to ask… who is Steve?

Of course, there’s hope. In CATWS, Natasha gets a glimpse of Steve Rogers, and she sees him as something more than Captain America – not the other way around. His friendship with Sam is a good way to bring stability to Steve’s life, although now Sam is an Avenger, so maybe not. But I think Bucky’s presence will help Steve most of all. Whether you ship them or not, you can’t deny that Bucky is Steve’s connection to who he once was.

Steve’s friendship with Bucky was huge part of his personality, back when he was skinny Steve Rogers. Bucky was with him through everything (”best friends since childhood…”) and helped shape who Steve became. They practically defined themselves through each other. What happened to Bucky is a reason for Steve to keep fighting, and watching Bucky find himself again may be the push Steve needs to find himself, too. I don’t think Steve Rogers is dead and gone – I think Steve’s completely lost himself. And I’m hoping in Civil War, his reunion with Bucky will bring him back to who he once was. Just like Steve carried with him who Bucky was, and helped Bucky remember – Bucky will help Steve remember himself, too. Because Bucky is home.

What’s Cultural Appropriation?

Just curious, can we get a show of hands how many people are Chinese-American or Chinese-Chinese? The admins have been discussing cultural appropriation and it seems like the term’s pretty much unheard of in China. The consensus seems to be that CN ppl respond to foreigners wearing CN elements with 挺好的,外国人在接受我国文化, while CN-Americans respond that foreigners are just culturally appropriating another culture.

What’s your opinion on this issue? For example, Met ball?


All of this Pilot discussion on my dash and it reminded me that I’ve had this set sitting in my drafts for ages because I really wanted to talk about this scene in particular. Pilot discussion time.

For the second time in the past few days, Henry has run away, been found and brought home by someone other than her, and that someone has been the birth mother she was never suppose to have to worry about being a part of her sons life. I don’t think we’re really meant to see how much this hurts Regina at the time (At this point we’re still suppose to be guessing whether she even loves Henry) but then you see this. Regina opening the door, blood-shot eyes, stuffing tissues in her jacket. She’s clearly been crying since she last saw Emma (after letting her help find Henry again, simply because it was best for Henry. Like how she let Emma pull Henry from the mines and asked David to get him from her vault, it’s just another testament to how Regina really would put her own feelings aside for Henry’s best interest. His safety has always come before her pride). Emotional exhaustion is etched into her face and stance, he won’t even glance at her, and she doesn’t try to say a word to him as he runs past her. It’s just a really emotionally tense moment. This and the scene later with Henry laying in bed really give off just how broken and strained their relationship is at this time, and how it’s a constant struggle and weight on both of them.

What I love about this moment is that it’s seconds long and yet shows so much about Regina and her relationship with Henry at the time. It was one of those humanizing moments that Lana added that deepened Regina and Regal Believer super early on. I didn’t notice it the first time I watched the pilot but there were many other moments in the first season similar to this (some subtle and some more blatant) that show Regina’s true colors. There were discussions the other day about why people seemed to love Regina so early on despite being led to believe how dark and evil she was. This is one of those reasons. The subtle bits of humanity that seeped through.

I think the writers had a lot of fun in S1 leading the audience on with Regina. Making us guess who she was and why she was the way she was. Was she pure evil? What were her intentions with the curse? Was she herself cursed? What happened to make her this way? Did she really love Henry? All questions we were suppose to be asking to make their reveals that much more poignant. I believe our initial impression was suppose to be Regina the big, bad and evil. That’s why they waited on revealing her backstory until the backhalf of the season rather than the second episode like they initially planned, and why they asked Lana to downplay Regina’s love for Henry for ambiguity purposes. It was all because those things humanized Regina and made her hard to villainize. For the most part they seemed successful, but I think Lana really found ways of humanizing Regina early on and in the end it worked to the shows benefit. It really helped consistency of her character and storyline. It’s nice being able to go back to the Pilot and still see real Regina, rather than a fake first viewing version meant to throw us off course of who she really is.

How easily one dimensional Regina could have ended up being back in S1 due to the producers intent and Lana’s lack of knowledge of the character. But going back, you really notice how much layer Lana added to Regina in S1 just by performance. Despite how little they told her, she still somehow added in all the layers the writers meant to reveal Regina having later, and more! This is just one of the many.

On of my favorite blogs, eternallyphan has had some recent discussion about TABINOF, and they comments I am seeing are not the first of their kind. I feel like people are taking three sides to the upcoming release of TABINOF: 1. they come out in the book (or around the book) and talk about their relationship openly in the book.  2. they aren’t together and the book is the nail in our shipping coffin or 3. they are together and the book is one big lie. I don’t think it is any of these things. I think people need to differ their expectations for the book. Yes, it will be amazing. But it isn’t Dan Howell and Phil Lester. It is “Danisnotonfire” and “Amazing Phil”.

You should not expect to see deep intellectual conversation and reflection. You should, however, expect to see witty banter and sarcasm and silliness. There are going to be pictures, telling of stories from vacations (like Japan) and funny anecdotes. Quizzes and games. As much as we would all love to hear their personal opinions and life stories, don’t expect it to go that deep. They have specified multiple times that they want to keep their private lives private, and I expect that the book will keep the same theme.

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

I actually think the sorting hat shouldn't let the children have a choice. I mean, how many eleven year olds know what's really best for them? Also, how many people are the same age 11 and 18? Conclusion Sorting Hat = Ill-conceived macguffin

Why do people keep saying that you get to choose your house? Theres so many messages in here about how Bellatrix CHOSE Slytherin or it put her there because she wanted it. 

Which, let me be clear here first, I wasn’t saying slytherin MADE her evil because slytherins ARE evil. I MEANT that Hufflepuff would’ve changed her and Slytherin was conducive to the way she was. Her family and all the other pureblood families and their ideas and ways of thinking have permeated that house for eons. So, no, not all slytherins are evil and the house doesn’t MAKE you evil but they wouldn’t have bothered to make Bella nice. I believe Hufflepuff would have. Sorry if that got misconstrued.

Anyway, this choosing houses thing. Is it because of Harry and his choice of Slytherin/Gryffindor? Because how does that even count? While Harry did have some traits that would fit into slytherin (but lets be honest, who DOESNT have traits that could fit into any of the houses) the only reason it pushed him towards slytherin so hard was because it was reading Voldemorts soul in his head.

“I always imagine that the Sorting Hat detected the presence of that piece of soul when Harry first tried it on, because it strongly tempted to put him in Slytherin.” JK Pottercast, December 2007  (same interview she said that Harry wasn’t ACTUALLY a horcrux, that dumbledore just called him that for convenience, if any of you want to read it. I know thats a popular debate topic.

And we know now that Neville ASKED to be put into Hufflepuff and the hat refused. So everytime this comes up I get really confused, what am I missing?

edit: Hermione didn’t CHOOSE gryffindor either. The hat “seriously considered” putting her in Ravenclaw, enough that she became a hatstall. But she didn’t PICK her house.

anonymous asked:

In your rape culture video, you mentioned that virginity ignores sexuality for queer transgender folks. Could you explain that just a little deeper please? I don't seem to understand entirely what you meant.

Sure! So I talked about how virginity was a social construct, and originally virginity was used as a marker of a woman’s value as a wife. Fathers were “gatekeepers” for their daughters’ virginities so they would be more valuable to potential husbands. This is where the concept of virginity came from–a time when women’s bodies were property. Men would actually do “hymen checks” on girls to make sure they were virgins (which is a super flawed system because there are several different types of hymens, hymens can be broken or stretched doing non-sexual activity, and some people are born without hymens at all). 

Anyway, the idea was that any cis woman (although not that they would even recognize the existence of trans people back in the day) who had intercourse (penis in vagina–this system did not recognize any other type of sex) would have a “broken” hymen and thus would not be considered a virgin. 

This system is very flawed, however, because it invalidates any other type of sex (anal, oral, manual, etc.). And since this is still widely the way we determine whether or not someone is a virgin today, many queer people and other sexual minorities find themselves unsure if the type of sex they have “counts”. 

For example, a gay man might wonder if he is still a virgin if he has anal intercourse with another man because a vagina isn’t involved. Or a lesbian woman might wonder if sex that doesn’t involve being penetrated by a penis “counts”. 

It also can be considered transphobic because it heavily centers around genitalia. It limits people and sex to body parts. What if a trans man who opts not to have gender affirming surgery (such as sex reassignment surgery) has sex with a cis woman in a relationship they define as heterosexual? Does that mean he is a virgin because the genitalia he was born with doesn’t fit the societal expectation of “maleness”? 

Basically, the concept of virginity is an archaic social construct that confines sex to p-in-v intercourse and equates people with their genitalia based on hetero-and-cissexist (as well as misogynistic) assumptions about sexuality.

anonymous asked:

As someone who has been sexually abused, and gone to court for it, I can't see why anyone would want to relive that kind of experience everyday like the girl with the mattress. I don't know what really happened, but from what I've seen I lean towards her lying. I'm an art student too, and have made art expressing my past, but she's living it. Everyday, reminding herself of what happened to her. That doesn't make sense to me, at least.

Inuyasha’s Eyes

So not too long ago around here I saw some discussions on Inuyasha’s “slit pupils”, which really confused me at first because I never thought Inuyasha had slit pupils. I mean, yeah, his irises/pupils were drawn pretty long/cylindrical, but I’d always attributed that to stylistic choices than to his biology, since other characters seemed to have cylindrical irises too.

But when looking back at the art in the manga, I can definitely see why so many people were saying that Inuyasha has slit pupils.

Because even though all the other characters, such as Kagome, are drawn with relatively elongated irises:

…you can still clearly see that the pupils are much more rounded than Inuyasha’s, whose just look like tapered lines.

So HUH, I thought. Looks like Inuyasha really DOES have slit pupils. Which is a bit of an odd choice for one of his youkai characteristics, since he’s supposed to be part dog-youkai and dogs don’t have slit pupils…but then again, I’ve already gone out of my way a few times to show that inu-youkai and regular dogs are not the same species, so…perhaps we’ve just identified another interesting tidbit of inu-youkai biology/anatomy?

BUT THEN…I noticed something else interesting about Inuyasha’s eyes.

His pupils are still drawn as those slitted lines in his human form. In this image you see his two forms right next to each other for good comparison.

…which ultimately leads me to two possible conclusions:

1.) despite loosing all of his youki, he keeps this singular youkai trait because reasons, or

2.) it really is just a stylistic choice and he actually has “regular” pupils.

Which is it? I suppose that’s up to interpretation. Personally I think I’m gonna stick with that second one, because the first doesn’t really make a ton of sense to me (why would he randomly keep that one youkai trait in his HUMAN form?), but hey. Who knows.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Ep 95! First of all I would like to apologize in advance - I considered not posting this podcast because I’m kinda (alotta) drunk, but it is what it is: take me as I am*!! This week we’re discussing Mad Max and our white bae Tom Hardy, Ava Duvernay possibly signing on for a Marvel film, the TV upfronts, and answering a listener question. Enjoy!  Breakdown:

3:25 - TV TALK: Upfronts, What We’re Watching, Why We Don’t Care About Mad Men Ending

20:00 - Tom Hardy and Mad Max’s ‘Feminism’ 

30:00 - Unpacking the Cult of White Male Actors 

35:00 Ava Duvernay to Helm “~*Diverse*~” Marvel Film? 

41:00 - Listener question: making it as a writer?

Like, Reblog, and Enjoy!

Ask Box





* (trigger warning for burping - sorry)

Place the blame where it’s due

Why is everyone hating on CBS? The ratings for POI have quite drastically declined and CBS had to respond accordingly. It’s how they operate. It’s how they have to operate. It’s how any business has to operate. They have to go where the money takes them. They don’t have much of a choice on the matter. It doesn’t mean someone in CBS is out to get the POI fans. It’s hardly their fault the ratings have dropped. 

If you’re going to blame someone blame the POI writers. They radically changed the original foundations of the show. You can’t do that and expect to hold on to your audience very well. The whole first two seasons were about Reese & Finch and the number of the week, which means POI’s original fanbase was geared toward that. Then the writers suddenly make the two main characters less important and move away from the core concept of saving the numbers. That’s not likely to go down well with that original audience. Sure, a small percentage of people might like the change, might like the addition of Root & Shaw and resulting diminished screen time of the original two, but a large portion of people will not because they were the type of people who liked the original formula; that’s why they were watching it in the first place. 

I’m not hating on the people who like Root & Shaw and/or the AI sci-fi shift. To each their own. I wish I could enjoy the new direction and new characters but it just doesn’t work for me.

The problem is that when you make such a drastic shift like that you are hitting two very different types of audience which don’t overlap much. End all result is you lose a huge chunk of your original audience and while one might think you can make up for it by bringing in a new audience, this doesn’t work that well either because that new type of audience isn’t interested in the original formula; they will either miss watching it entirely or are unwilling to watch the original stuff to get to what they want (I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen people make posts about wanting to skip the first seasons to the Root & Shaw parts). Again, diminished audience. I also personally think it’s quite unfair of the writers to draw in one type of audience and then drop them later when they were the ones that made the show a success in the first place. It’s quite funny to me when I see this from Nolan: “The show has a very loyal core audience, and it’s a very big, very loyal core audience…” Um, You do realize that you just threw away a huge portion of that loyal core audience?

Not only did they radically shift the show’s foundations but they also continuously threatened to kill off the star of the show. And then they wonder why the ratings on the finale were so low?? 

Regardless of which side of the fence you are on, the numbers don’t lie. POI lost a huge chunk of their audience when they shifted from the Reese & Finch/number of the week procedural focus and this is the fault of the writers not CBS. Honestly, we should be thanking CBS for allowing us a Season 5 at all after those ratings. 

So I’ve seen AoU twice now.

Once at midnight, then again with friends at an Avengers + Avengers 2 IMAX 3D double feature, which is five hours plus of Avenging, friends.

And I’m still not sure what’s going on in the cave pool of lightning and naked prophesy…

Keep reading