alter the narrative

All I’m saying is, if there WAS a deleted kiss, just give it to us.  We don’t have to change the story or alter Jyn’s/Cassian’s narrative, we can all agree that the story works better without the resolution of their feelings towards each other, and we’ll never talk about it again. It won’t be canon.

But just fucking let us see it, for crying out loud. You killed all of them.  Throw us one fucking bone already.  

anonymous asked:

**1/2 Hello Steph! There is a thing that I haven't seen anyone mentionig, but it still hunts me. In TST, where john and mary get simultaneusly two messages from Sherlock, three bizzare things happen. One, they seem to convey different meaning, Mary's looking somewhat like a challenge, or a threat. Two, the "you go, no you go" is way to extended, and John is acting strangely, considering he is the one who should "come immediatelly" and Mary the one who should be protected? But that is not all.

**2/2 The third, and weirdest thing is that after that oh-so-dragged scene, we see Mary leaving without being told THE ADDRESS. I have watched the couch scene a lot of times and while John may have seen Mary’s message, Mary hasn’t seen John’s. SO, HOW DOES SHE KNOW WHERE TO GO? And why John does inform (Lestrade?) after his -belated- departure? Isn’t there an emergency? Why is that scene even shown, but for us to wonder the previous scene’s fuckiness? Am I wrong? Have i neglected something?

all that seems like an elaborate trap for mary to me, but i can be wrong


Hey Nonny!

I’m assuming you wanted anonymous since you turned it on for two of the three parts, LOL, and assuming that last bit is part of this ask, since it was immediately above these two parts. 

Okay, so yeah, I’ve seen discussion about this scene in the past and at how weird it is because Sherlock is cryptic with Mary, and not John. GIVEN that I believe in a John’s Alibi Theory, I think that this is a detail that they had to fit their story around – text messages ARE admissible evidence, and in an episode so heavily focusing on the texting aspect, I think that is a clue that all of the texts actually ARE real. No matter how “nice” they make Mary in their “story”, John and Mary’s texts still remain, so they have to somehow work that cryptic text into their narrative. I think it’s deliberately cryptic because the real text IS cryptic, and YES, I think it was a trap for Mary. That WHOLE aquarium scene seems – pardon the pun – FISHY to me: Lestrade, Mycroft and John just pop out of no where, Mary’s miraculous change in he physics, the peekaboo cops… nothing seems right. I do believe it’s an altered narrative, being told and possibly retold (with the repeating-but-slightly-different scenes) as an explanation to take the blame away from John for killing Mary. 

Do I think she’s dead? Maybe yes, maybe no? I don’t know right now. I’m leaning mostly to YES, but the posthumous DVD’s and the phoney-as-fuck shooting are what’s throwing me off. I’m starting to wonder if John and Sherlock somehow / some reason took the TD-12 drugs which caused John to hallucinate and Sherlock to start overdosing again. I don’t know. Regardless, YES, I do think that the aquarium is a staged and doctored event, and that the ambiguous text from Sherlock to Mary is a clue that she is still the villain that we knew her to be.

“In 2013, as the kaiju attacks grew more frequent, Newt started sharing correspondence with the son of the Jaeger program inventor: Hermann Gottlieb.

Hermann was able to engage Newt’s intellect in a way no one else could. Their letters were passionate and fascinating and the pair agreed to meet in 2017.

They instantly disliked each other.”

Sudden, intense feelings over the idea that a Dalish or City Elf HoF still had to deal with subtle and overt racism from the very people they rescued–including nobles in Amaranthine and within Anora’s own court.

Painfully intense feelings that some of those people long for the day in which they can alter the narrative to make Alistair out to be the sole/“true” hero of the Blight.

Genuine feels over Alistair being ready to fight anybody who tries to forcibly diminish or minimize the Dalish or City Elf’s role in what happened.

You cannot tell me that the first two aren’t at least some level of plausible. Perhaps even more so with the City Elf, since they grew up in an Alienage.

Also: Alistair being confronted for the first time with the kind of shit their Elven friend/lover has to deal with on a regular basis; hurting for them and confused as to how they manage not to pummel every asshole into paste. Maybe actually being unablr to stop himself from getting into a fight because someone insulted his wife or his best friend.

Them feels, man.

wifeofbath  asked:

Hello Steph, hope you're having a lovely day. A crazy thought just occurred to me. What if, when Mary hugged Sherlock on the tarmac, she slipped him something that, together with the drugs he took, has messed with his mind and perception of reality? If she did, odds are the drug is TD-12 (because why introduce it if nothing was going to be done with it?). It would explain some of the craziness of s4, together with TFP taking place in John's mind palace.

Hi Lovely!

Actually, this is a theory that I have seen before, at least in regards to Mary sneaking drugs to Sherlock on the tarmac, and one that I kind of expanded upon before. Now that we have this Fuckery Drug in canon, I think it’s possible that Mary may have gotten a hand on some (I speculated here that Mary may have ties to Culverton; in this theory, Culverton created a drug to test on subjects, and I think now that TD-12 was that drug). So yes, I think now that Mary gave Sherlock some doses of TD-12 on the Tarmac, which is what caused Sherlock to go into his fever dream and overdose in TAB, a clue to what is to come for S4. Then, in TLD, Sherlock takes that same drug from from Culverton (I presume TD-12 is some kind of pharmaceutical in this universe, one you can get addicted to like oxy or codeine and need a Rx to get it, ergo maybe Sherlock stole prescription pads from John to acquire this drug? Dunno. Perhaps Mary is still providing it to him through Wiggins), which in turn leads to whatever we’re seeing to become the lie. Sherlock is literally a Lying Detective, because his memories are possibly and most likely falsified because of this drug. NOTHING IS REAL.

I’ve also seen theories that it’s still Tarmac!Sherlock having a dream-ception for another 3 episodes. I think it could be possible, so I won’t rule it out, especially since John doesn’t appear to go through any sort of character growth at all, really, in S4 unless we are thinking that TFP is John’s TAB. And that’s fine, but I’m mostly leaning towards the thought that everything from the start of T6T until the end of TLD is an altered narrative, and the “doctored footage” at the beginning of the first episode is our clue. The second was the titles of the episodes (T6T is originally an old case on John’s blog, and TLD references the “lies”, and then TFP because it’s the first episode title taken unchanged from a canon title, which is the story where Sherlock “dies”). The third is the general fuckiness of the season. I believe some of S4 is real, but most of it is a “mirror” of what is REALLY going on (the truth about Mary’s “death”, John’s own crisis), and then then TFP is John’s TAB, his way of working out how to stay alive and his own struggle with his own self.

I’ve also thought POSSIBLY that S4 is ALL John’s TAB; after Sherlock returns, Mary just kills John and runs off. Stupid, I know but this is my brain trying to understand S4. But mostly, I’m for John’s Alibi, Unreliable Narrator and then John’s TAB.

ANYWAY. Totally rambled on about things you don’t care about. I think S4 is all false memories and alibis and what we see on screen is not actually happening. 

Evil Ex #1 - Matthew Patel

The larger blanket thesis of this series is that each of Ramona’s Evil Ex-Boyfriends holds up a mirror to Scott.  As it is noted, he runs the risk of being an evil-ex waiting to happen.  Ramona is, for the most part, willing to admit when she has made mistakes–she grows too, you know.  This is more about how easily men can “re-write” relationships and put themselves in the role of “victim.”  O’Malley hates that “she was crazy” mentality and entitlement shit.  Quite the contrary, the works exposes the privilege that men in a heterosexual relationship have in the power they hold over how past relationships are narrated.  The artist barely lets Scott off the hook (Scott is most comparable to Gideon [that’s another post]).  To show that Ramona isn’t on trial but rather her former lovers, O’Malley designates them all as evil from the very beginning.  

Originally, I had focused these entries on how each ex is representative of the seven deadly sins.   This interpretive approach is largely lazy, trite, perpetuates certain radical rhetoric, and is frequently overly simplistic.  I do think that this fairly ubiquitous breakdown of the nature of evil is at work in both mediums that have portrayed Scott’s story, but, to the extent that this concept is employed, both the graphic novelist and director don’t use these concepts as simple allegory (not that allegorical mods are necessarily reductionist).  The sins, instead of forming the characters in the league, are meant to be mirrors for Scott’s presumptions about why he feels himself the hero who deserves Ramona.  While there are certain elements of the sins that do inform the league’s members, to see the major sins as epitomized by the exes results in simple readings instead of doing justice to the examination of the great degree of entitlement that is the core ideology behind the league..  O'Malley is more progressive: on the grandest level, he is taking apart heteronormative, white male forms of romantic a priori epistemology to show that relationships are built rather than preordained, and that there shouldn’t be one person in a romance whose subjectivity dominates the dynamic between partners.  Scott’s experience points are made more realistic because they are moments of learning how to avoid self-absorption and discover how to meet your partner’s needs.  

Probably should have put that in the preface post…

Back to Matthew…

Patel is representational of one type of reaction to change.  With almost any change, there is the possibility of anger.  Now I am not one to say that anger is only a manifestation of fear (…feel like I’m reiterating Donnie Darko a little).  One can dislike change because they believe that a current situation is the best possible place to be (just one example).  Patel’s character is one of the most vengeful (many of the others do seem to have gotten over Ramona, if only to turn their feelings of rejection and/or wounded pride into something else).  Matthew is the most by-the-books member of the league, fully believing in its mission.  He finds agency through this system, while other members have their own interests through which to establish a more independent sense of self.  For the sins reading, Patel would have definitely been wrath.  Scott fights wrath with wrath, but he does need to maintain a certain degree of anger to grow in this situation.  However, wrath and anger are not necessarily interchangeable.  Scott’s lesson, then, is knowing that a wrathful, reactionary mindset is not the only way to hold on to something you love, and he uses the lesson in the next confrontation.

Patel is also the expositional figure who establishes that the overlap between video game consciousness within the narrative.  His fight is one of the most spectacular as a result, elucidating common features found in boss fights: he is able to use a variety of powers that aren’t available to the protagonists, his aesthetic is unique enough to establish him as a character who is different from the cast of heroes (”Pirates are in this year”), he summons minions to aid him in combat, etc.  He is the most magical of the evil exes (literally has “mystical powers”).  Patel’s fully realized boss-self is fantasy focused, and this element matched with his very early appearance alters the narrative.  Until Patel, the video game references are associated with Scott’s subjectivity, particularly the brief summary boxes that appear the first time a character is introduced.  These references aren’t as obviously game-oriented as Matthew’s role in the narrative.  Patel confirms that Scott’s perspective is video game-based while also showing that the world O’Malley has created overlaps with gamer modalities.  Patel’s magic nature also sets out the theme of genre switches that will occur with each given boss fight.  Matthew’s mysticism is more of an amalgam of boss types.  He is a composite of traits rather than adhering to a particular adversary identity.  The battles to follow become decidedly more genre, and in many cases franchise, focused: Lucas Lee is a Skater battle, Todd Ingram is a musical showdown (as well as the more science fiction oriented psionic specialist [like a douchey and bratty Psycho Mantis]), Roxy is a sword battle who eventually becomes a strict samurai duelist, the Katayanagi twins are Dr. Wily-esque robot creators and are also modeled after boss battles featuring two adversaries teaming together, and Gideon is fucking Ganon and everything else (Dream sequence battler, Final Fantasy final boss, dark double of the hero, overlord, evil scientist, princess kidnapper, and master sword fighter).

It is difficult to present Matthew Patel on screen because he is the character who catalyzes the greatest shift in plot and narrative structure.  Since everything irrevocably changes when Matthew appears, O’Malley saw it fit to make this protagonist/antagonist interaction unequivocal through the use of signs that would easily show readers that this character was a video game boss.  Wright sticks VERY close to the source material…UNTIL the dance sequence.  Wright gets the added fun of playing with film tropes through the visual medium, so while he makes Patel as distinct as he is in the books, the director pushes the audience further into a surreality, that would also be somewhat reader friendly to a non-gamer-literate viewer without destroying the original vision.  Patel’s dance is a maniacal celebration of the dramatics shifts that his presence implies.  We aren’t in a real world anymore: we’re in Canada!  I phrased that poorly (apologies to Canadian readers): we’re in Scott Pilgrim’s Canada, where life and games blur together.  If game logic is now applied to life, then the stakes are all the more higher.  Mario can only guard himself against Bowser’s fireballs so much.  Plus, there is a princess in danger.  She isn’t a damsel in distress: she’s someone with agency, and you have to fight your own demons to reach her.   

galaticbread  asked:

i call, THE ALMIGHTY TRASH QUEEN TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM! please can you solve this? i love you too

TrashQueen: Worry not Trash Citizens. Your asks can still reach them, same as always. Our new friend here seems to have fiddled around with a few things, but it’s only temporary.

CanonKeeper: Yes. Eventually this person will conform to the laws of this universe. In the mean time he seems to have only altered 4th wall narrative. As for what his role in the story will be? Hmm. We’ll have to see now won’t we?

abilymarozsans  asked:

Frankly speaking, your move to suddenly apologize for your actions - after outright defending them the night of, and afterwards (there is tweet evidence) as the consequence of an atavistic world comes as nothing other a disingenuous ploy to retain the trust of LGB fans who will watch Xena. Had you been actually sensitive to LGBT feelings prior, you would not have defended your work in such a way. I, and many others, won't watch Xena until it ends, lest another stray bullet chooses to crop up.

i absolutely own everything i said before, during, and after the airing of the episode. i have not gone back and deleted the “tweet evidence” or done anything to alter the narrative. as the episode aired, i livetweeted it with all the brio and humor i did all the previous episodes of the show – and i got slapped down, hard, and i had it coming.

i admit to feeling pride in my involvement in “the 100,” and i admit to hiding behind the absolutely unrealistic hope that we would somehow – through craft, good intentions, and good will – get a reprieve on the response to this episode. 

i also admit to having had a defensive response to the backlash when it began… and i admit that it took some time – unconscionably long for many – for me to realize both the extent of the damage, and the degree to which it was necessary to make amends.

so it’s all out there – a real-time record of a world-class mistake by an otherwise well-meaning individual who should have known better, and truthfully did – and you get to see it as it happened, because that’s what happened.  

you also get to judge me in any way you deem necessary: you get to be as dubious as you need to be about my future work, and you get to not watch anything i am involved with in the future.  

something i said early on when this all began was “i stand by the work” - and not long thereafter i realized that “standing by the work” also means that when “the work” makes people unhappy, and causes them pain, you still have to stand by it and take the hits, and own the responsibility to learn from them. 

if to you that reads as the mercenary move of a commercially minded opportunist, then so be it.  

i plead no contest.

Ways To Explain a Punchdrunk Show

Although I use some specific references to The Drowned Man for this, the list below could just as well apply to Sleep No More. From all the thoughtful responses (here and elsewhere) I received from last week’s post about Badlands Jack, I’ve come to realize the extent to which we are all approaching the show a little differently. Maybe it’s time we took a moment to step back and look at what it is we are doing when we talk about a Punchdrunk show.
[Enhanced still from trailer for The Drowned Man]

For those of you in a full-blown existential crisis, and especially for those of you who feel a little too comfortable with themselves, I’ve made the following List of Ways To Explain a Punchdrunk Show. It’s one thing to declare what you are not, but at some point you need to stand up for what you are. Odds are, you are one of these below, and more likely some combination of two or more. Let me know if you think of others.

And remember: We are all on our own path and that’s a good thing. I have been many of these myself at one time or another.

The Lover
The sets are beautiful, the music is beautiful, the performers are beautiful, especially X who is the most beautiful and Y who is also the most beautiful. They dance so beautifully. My experience was beautiful except for when white mask X stepped on my foot and Y shot me a look that I’m pretty sure was hostile. I hope I did not humiliate myself to Performer X in the 1:1, must find them in bar and apologize.

The Experientialist
I first ran upstairs to the desert and waited for a long while because it was empty. Initially I thought that Dust Witch lady is evil, but then I saw her do something nice and then Miguel looked into my eyes and I felt for a moment I understood everything. If only I got his 1:1. Next time I go I’ll follow Lila because I’m sure that will tie everything together, but first maybe I should get an exec pass and check out the files in the drawing room. I’ll be doing a double next Friday.

The Grand Theorist
There is Grand Unifying Theory of Everything–an ultimate meaning to which all details can be connected. All acquisition of facts, no matter who or where they come from, are in service of the one true meaning. Punchdrunk has a plan and a meaning in mind and it is up to us to find it even if we have to make half of it up. Let’s drink whiskey and pour over a spreadsheet.

The Agnostic
Who knows what Punchdrunk wants us to think? The author is dead…probably. The show has all kinds of potential meanings and there are a number of different ways to think about it. So just calm down and listen to my own theory. And then another completely unrelated theory. And then a brilliant idea that undermines everything else I’ve said. Thank God (if there is a God) that nobody on the internet ever compares one blog post to another.

The Postmodern Postcolonial Psychoanalytical Queer Theory New Historian Deconstructionist
Maybe there are many ways to understand the show, but here is my way and I’m sticking to it. My theories are open to all challengers so long as you know I will respond in jargon that you will not likely understand let alone relate to. You will then disengage and I will win.

The Situationist
It’s just theater and all decisions are just showbiz. It is what it is. They had to do X that way because that’s how the lights work, or a performer just decided to do it that way, or that’s just Maxine’s style, or because I happen to know that Felix likes Tarot cards. Emursive made them do it. I talked to X in the bar and they told me Y. End of story.

The Minutiae Treasure Hunter
In the middle of the secret desert tunnel I took a right turn and it led to a hallway and at the end was a pile of loose debris with a small crumpled piece of paper under it. I won’t tell you what the paper said because spoilers, but it has changed everything I have ever thought about the show. Have you found it? You must find it!

The Complainer / Denier
It’s not really worth thinking about whatever it is you’re saying. I tried to move some things around on the set and the performer just ignored me. I don’t know why we can’t alter the narrative. You shouldn’t have to go so many times to “get it.” There is no resolution, it’s basically meaningless. I couldn’t see, it’s too dark, and the sound gave me a headache. I’ll probably go again, but I know I won’t like it.

The Secretist
I am full of secret knowledge that would rock your world. I would tell you but then I would have to kill you. Okay, I’ll tell you, but if you tell anyone else I will kill you and then find them and kill them. If you notice next week that audience attendance is low it is because I have killed them all.

UPDATES: Bonus suggestions from alert readers:

The Single-Character Obsessive
Listen to me: It’s all about the Barman. Why doesn’t anyone else understand!? It’s so obvious. I spent three loops with him and it was like the entire show was happening right there. Why is the floor moving?

The Total Goofball / Anarchist
My theory is that you should stop making me think about the show! Let’s play Turkey vs. Manatee instead.

The Eternal and Somewhat Jaded Fan
All current readings are invalid because they fail to incorporate a scene that five of us saw in early rehearsals when all the action took place in Felix’s basement.

anonymous asked:

do you think vogue knew it was a coming out story when kaylor did the photo shoot or did they buy the best friend bit?

If it wasn’t their coming out, it was definitely meant to hint at something more. After kissgate, I’m almost positive the article was changed to something a little bit more generic, but the pictures speak for them self. Like the fact that there’s a bed in some of the pictures……. Vogue definitely knew, people in the industry have talked about knowing the difference between friends and couples, and they said it looked like a couple shoot. But again, after kissgate some things were altered because by then the narrative was no longer in Taylor’s control anymore.

anonymous asked:

thoughts on the shipping ending ?? the finale itself was really great but i think my biggest problem is that i feel the writing has been altered by the fans - i think bryke has let shipping wars alter the narrative - i cannot stand any form of homophobia and im really happy there is more representation but i just don't think that korra and asami would function as a couple - idk am i being crazy ??

actually now that i think about it, bryke seem to favor couples that have zero issues whatsoever. no fighting. like i know maiko happened but it’s technically not happening in the comics and we don’t know for sure who izumi’s mother is. but kataang (they had issues but that was promptly ignored come finale), sukka (no the warriors of kyoshi doesn’t count bc they have no conflicts afterwards), pemzin, and now korrasami……just don’t fight. they don’t have conflicts we see. korra and asami have literally fought like once. (zhu li/varrick might be the exception? but those two are literally in complete sync so.)

makorra? well, makorra was all about that fighting, that back and forth between the two. there was discord between them but that’s what made it so interesting for me. there was discord and a lot of genuine affection too. and it all seemed to build to–nothing? 

so maybe what i’m trying to say is that for a person that has shipped makorra, that lack of conflict (well the lack of dynamic really, considering how underwhelming asami as a character is) is interpreted as you’re doing so? i personally think it’ll “work out.” i think that it has no reason not to work out, just like the ships i listed above.

if bryke wanted to change the show for the fans–and this is kind of an unpopular opinion–it’s their show they can do whatever they want….i just wish there’d been more to….asami, more to this relationship, more transparency, more of what we got with makorra if they wanted to make this happen and be emotionally resonant.

idk i’m talking about myself now really. but you, anon, if you don’t think they’ll work out as a couple that’s cool. ship what you want to ship. :)