Poldark, Season 2, Episode 1
“There’s a Storm Coming....”
This episode is a contrast in marriages, the characters of two men, and the love of their wives. Ross. Francis. Cousins, rivals, allies.
The Episode opens with a sweeping shot of the jagged Cornwall coastline, with harsh waves crashing along the rocky shore. Just as the waves crash, so do Ross’ answers. He bashes back at the judge at every turn. As Ross stands before him, he is as insolent as always. His absolute refusal to accept the lines of class are what makes him a hero, and a villain within the two societies in which he resides. “There’s a storm coming….” Right you are, Ross.
Demelza is faced with a husband potentially going to jail and grieving a lost child. That empty little cot broke my heart.
Elizabeth. Elizabeth, honey, I want to like you, but this display of manipulation shows me that you play the game all too well. To go to George for any kind of help is like selling your soul to the devil. And she does it knowing full well that George is in love with her. Like I said, I wanna like you honey, but I can’t trust you. Not one bit. In fact, everyone sees through you. Your husband. Your aunt.
Can we just talk about Aunt Agatha? She really has no filter, the old bird. Says it like it is. She’s my absolute favourite. And how about that piece of foreshadowing at the beginning when she tells Francis, “He’s your worst enemy” in reference to Ross. Agatha knows what’s coming….
I love how Ross tells Demelza, “There’s a storm coming…” She has no idea….. And then, in his “I decline to be distracted by matters beyond my control” we see the core of Ross Poldark. It’s an interesting comment because it highlights the inherent difference between Ross and Francis. Ross is a man of action; Francis is a man of worry. While both are stubborn, they really do look at life and its challenges in different ways. Francis dwells in blame, Ross does not. Already we see Ross with his “head in the sand”.
George, like always, wants more than his share. He wants a charge of murder for Ross even though it’s a lie. Greedy George. That’s his downfall. Also, “upstart poodle” is my new favourite insult. George craves Ross’ position, his reputation, his life. Even though Ross is financially broken, and his reputation is hanging in the balance, he still has more than George will ever have. Respect, love, loyalty of his tenants. Francis sees it and craves it as well. But at least he’s willing to respect that in Ross. George believes only by taking it from Ross will he ever have it himself.
I love the moments between Demelza and Ross where they speak freely, and equally. Ross proves he is a forward thinking man, and that his wife is a value to him. Never more evident than when George walks into the room and Ross looks immediately to Demelza. While Ross may control the conversation, he knows she stands behind him in whatever he decides.
Francis is trying. It seems Demelza’s selfless acts in the past have given Francis a new outlook. Or rather, the outlook he should have had. He’s a new lease on life. In this episode he’s showing some maturity. He’s seeing George for what he is, Family for what it should be, regretting his mistakes and trying to make amends to Elizabeth. Interesting he should be the man his father wanted after his death. Because it’s not like he could do it while the old man was alive. Facing his portrait, he sees now that he was Elizabeth’s second choice. And he finally has the balls to take on the Warleggens. When he leaves his house, Francis is, finally, a Poldark.
1) I love how Demelza has always kissed Ross with her eyes open. Almost like, if she closes her eyes he will disappear and not be there when she opens them. Like she wants to watch him and know him, his expressions, his face, in every situation. Like she doesn’t want to miss a moment. She has always wanted to please Ross. As a scullery maid, as a wife and as a lover. So she continuously watches to make sure she is pleasing him. And I love how she won’t kiss him goodbye. Because that would make the goodbye true. In her mind, if she doesn’t kiss him, he will return.
2) It is in character for the Poldark women to try to fix the situations of their husbands. They are well aware of their husbands’ weaknesses, and work, like 18th C wives do, behind the scenes to remedy them.
3) Caroline. And Dwight. Stayed tuned…..because, yeah. There’s some serious fireworks brewing.
I love how Demelza unnerves her father by her quick hug of forgiveness. And she and Verity prove that standing up for themselves is always better than returning to the life they had.
You can call a random Swedish person
and talk to them about their country. Just for fun. If you’re into that kind of thing.
Swedish Tourist Association CEO Magnus Ling says, “In troubled times, many countries try and limit communication between people, but we want to do just the opposite.”
“We are making Sweden the first country in the world with its own phone number and giving our fellow Swedes the opportunity to answer the calls, express themselves, and share their views, whatever they might be.”
To be connected to a random Swede, call +46 771 793 336. That’s +46 771 SWEDEN. Awwwww.
So say you have an animated show. Spend all that time and energy rendering these awesome characters. Boy they sure look great. Hyper bright and colorful. But what’s this? They don’t seem to fit against the background well. They kind of get lost in the shuffle of colors.
Now if this were a still image this might be okay, but remember things are moving. You do not have time to absorb every detail in a shot before we’re on to the next shot. So the environment has to work with the characters. It’s not the focus, the characters are.
Some shows solve this problem by having a very painterly background. As with Lilo and Stitch (and many other Disney films)
The background contrasts with the characters by being fully rendered with soft lights. There’s no line work. no black even (but characters can have solid black). So the flatly colored characters pop against the rendered background.
Unfortunately this method can be rather pricey as it takes a lot of time to render out backgrounds to this level. TV typically doesn’t have the budget a film has.
Some shows will keep the background very abstract, lacking dark lines still. But there’s far less contrast than on the main characters.
Here’s My Life as a Teenage Robot for example
These characters have colored lines or solid shapes (like the bg), but they’re generally darker than the bg. And the background has large areas of negative space for the characters to stand against. They’re almost always the most detailed thing in the shot.
Sometimes the background has just as strong a contrast as the characters (because it’s night, or spooky, or you’re just into colors like that).
So you keep the background abstract and full of strong shapes still. But maybe you make sure the lines on the characters are bold enough to stand out no matter how much dark might be in a scene. Toss some accent lighting on there too to keep it colorful and make sure big black shapes don’t melt into the background.
Or make the character the only thing of that particular color, and the bgs generally a complimentary, split-compliment or just rarely analogous color.
Maybe they’re also generally the brightest, most saturated thing in the room too.
The original Ben 10 had a nifty trick. They wanted to keep the bg and character designs consistent to each other (with the exception of occasional, sparingly used, gradients). What do they do to keep the characters the focus of your eye always?
Put some perlin noise back there. It muddles the bgs just enough that your eye will go right to the characters. Handy trick that can keep costs low (the style is easily reproducible).
So that’s some subtle texture. But what if the bg is straight up textures?
We’re back to shape rules now, but now the bg is the most complex thing and the characters are the simplest.
What do all these shows have in common? That contrast. Something to make a character pop out. The ratio of more/less detailed, more/less saturated, darker/brighter always has to skew more one way or the other to make your characters stand out. Different scenes will have different solutions to this problem, but you can count on some style consistencies so it never looks like you suddenly jumped to a different show.
Something to keep in mind for you folks working on comics, animated projects, or “cartoon” styled illustrations. Next time you’re indulging nostalgia or enjoying your favorite animated fare, take note of how they solve issues like this. You can learn a lot and might find it applicable to your own work.
A zygote [fertilized egg] is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.
A criterion for personhood that depends on certain functions of human activity implies that individuals who perform the chosen function more excellently should have higher human value. Individuals suffering from severe Alzheimer’s disease or under general anesthesia, who may not be self-aware or able to create future expectations, could no longer be considered persons. We know, however, that the human under general anesthesia retains his personal identity despite his temporary lack of self-awareness, so his personhood must cohere in his underlying nature. Legally speaking, “persons” are guaranteed the fundamental rights of individuals, including the right to life. Historically, abuses of personhood have led to the genocide of groups deemed “non-persons” by more powerful political or social groups. For example, up until the 14th Amendment, African-American slaves were legally considered three-fifths of a person. Native Americans were exploited because they were treated as less than full persons. The racial distinctions used to label these groups as “non-persons” were conveniently invented to justify the violation of human rights.
Well, if you’re against abortion, why aren’t you against [insert other human rights injustice]?
We are against all forms of aggressive violence. That includes, but is not limited to: unjust war, abortion, euthanasia, slavery, torture, rape, embryonic stem cell research, human trafficking, abuse, sexism, racism, police brutality, suicide, etc.
That being said, not every pro-life organization is against all of the above. Dismissing their arguments against abortion because they happen to not be against some other form of injustice is an ad hominem fallacy.
When you realize why the political pro-life/pro-choice divide truly exists, the whole “bodily autonomy” argument falls apart.At its core, it’s not merely about protecting fetuses or not. It’s about whether abortion should be a legally sanctioned medical procedure.And the right to bodily autonomy doesn’t guarantee any sort of medical procedure no matter what.In most jurisdictions, no practitioner will legally give breast implants to an underage girl. Surgeons refuse to amputate the limbs of BIID sufferers. Are those infringements upon bodily autonomy? Of course not. Nobody is fundamentally entitled to procedures that may be irresponsible or unethical.
Yes, Furiosa exists in a lineage (see above), and, yes, plenty of other action films have featured female leads. But what’s notable here is how Furiosa being a woman both is and isn’t integral to her character. (In the same way that her missing arm both is and isn’t integral to her character.) In Alien, the character of Ripley was written as a man, then cast as a woman, which was a breakthrough at the time — but also a kind of cinematic drag act. Why can’t a woman play a man’s role? Well, sure — but the better question, only now being asked, is, Why can’t a woman’s role take the place of the man’s role? Furiosa could never be played by a man — the character would make no sense — and not, as with many other female action heroes, because of the kind of costume she wears. She is not simply Indiana Jones in hot pants or Lolita with armor-piercing rounds. Furiosa is a woman, and she is a hero, and she’s cool as hell, and she’s simultaneously recognizable and revelatory as all three. If you’re an action fan and you can’t admit that you’d eagerly watch ten more Furiosa films in the next ten years, then I’d have to ask again if you’re an action fan.
Boyz N Da Hood
Menace II Society
Do The Right Thing
Love & Basketball
How Stella Got Her Groove Back
Coming To America
Don’t Be A Menace To South Central While Drinking Your Juice In the Hood
Set It Off
Lean On Me
What’s Love Got To Do With It
Lady Sings The Blues
Waiting To Exhale
The underrated but actually better than all the previously mentioned Black classics in cinema:
Why Did I Get Married
The Five Heartbeats
Above The Rim
House Party 3
In Too Deep
Akeelah & The Bee
New Jersey Drive
He Got Game
Thin Line Between Love And Hate
The hilariously overrated Black classics in cinema:
EVERY OTHER TYLER PERRY MOVIE
You Got Stomped On The Drumline
Vampire In Brooklyn
Tales From the Hood
Get Rich Or Die Tryin
Hustle & Flow
Feel free to categorize and add any I missed…
…and I’m blocking anybody that mentions Big Mama’s House and/or Soul Plane
It was easier than I thought to get back into the groove of things… Chemistry vocab and diagrams of the noggin…
Question for you (in relation to an English project): how do you think time and memory impact us as individuals and what does our viewpoints on time suggest about humanity in general?
So far I think that time is only an idea and our forced perception of being able to control/manage time shows a fear of the unknown; a fear of what could happen, of being forgotten, and forgetting ourselves and our memories, the essence of who we are.
I’d love to hear your ideas or any quotes/thoughts related to the topic, it would be super helpful!
- abusing anyone who disagrees with your interpretation of the story;
- actively seeking out people who disagree with your interpretation specifically to abuse them;
- demanding creators maintain a 100% perfect public persona (by your definition) and savaging them the second they slip up, regardless of context or history;
- behaving as though creators, actors and anyone else involved in the production of a narrative owe you, specifically, their time and attention, just because you’ve paid for it/read it/watched it.
fan entitlement is not:
- being critical of creative decisions;
- being critical of fandom;
- sharing your own interpretation of the story;
- debating with others about various theories and interpretations of the story;
- holding creators accountable for their content and public behaviour;
- advocating for fan theories, diverse narratives, headcanons and the discussion of toxic tropes, or engaging in any other form of criticism.
If it seems like a lot of these points are similar, it’s because they are, and by the same token, I’m not going to pretend that there’s never a YMMV element to determining which thing is actually happening. The key distinction, rather, is one of conduct: the difference between talking about and talking to.
For instance: there are some ships I think of as not only gross, but representative in their popularity of wider social and cultural issues both within fandom and more generally. Discussing those problems and those ships in particular, in my own space, on my own initiative, or by joining an existing conversation? That is talking about, the backbone of meta and criticism. But leaving hate on every fic that features those ships or sending abusive messages to the people who write them? That is talking to, and if you’re addressing someone directly, on a personal level, the golden rule is this: Don’t Be A Dick.
Note, please, that the golden rule also extends to addressing creators, and that there is an actual salient difference between criticism and abuse. Criticism is a response to something a person has done: a comment directly addressing their works or actions. Abuse is simply attacking them, and while I’m not going to pretend a creator’s actions are never directly responsible for eliciting fan pushback, I guarantee you that the issue itself, whatever it might be, is pretty much never served by responding with abuse. By all means, talk trash and vent online about the shitty things that happen, but talking about in the general sense (posting on your blog, in comment threads, in private chat) is still very, very different to talking to (@ing a creator’s Twitter, emailing them, sending then private messages). Even though both forms of discourse can be equally visible, I promise you that the distinction is an important and relevant one.
Here’s the thing about fandom trends: we’re all influenced by the cultures in which we live, just as fandom, in turn, is influenced by us. Having opinions about fandom doesn’t mean neglecting to be courteous to fans and creators; it means refraining from ad hominem attacks. The problem on tumblr is that the reblogging mechanism makes this something of a liminal space, discussion-wise, such that it’s difficult to make hard and fast rules for interaction in this medium. By virtue of posting a thing that can be, not just commented upon, but reblogged into a multi-essay thread, and where it’s essentially held that “successful” posts invite this sort of discussion, the personal and the general - which is to say, the contextual distinction between talking to and talking about - tend to blur.
This is why tag wars happen, why we end up in regular, cyclical arguments about the exact nature of the boundaries we’d each like to impose on what is still, ultimately, a public space. It’s a fundamental basic of discourse that engaging in criticism opens you up to having your position criticised in turn, and yet a lot of people are shocked and outraged when it happens to them, as though they imagined they were speaking from some unassailable, automatic high ground. And at the same time, you’ve got people who never learned the difference between abuse and criticism; whose culturally-trained biases are so ingrained, they honestly don’t recognise that attacking the person is not the same as attacking the person’s argument.
I’ve been a dumbass online before. I doubtless will be again. But lately, I’m just exhausted by the number of people who cannot manage the simple fucking distinction between talking about and talking to, and who think it’s okay to engage in abuse in any case, so long as they really and truly believe they’re right.
Here’s a simple rule of thumb: if you can imagine Jared Leto doing or saying it to prepare for his role as the Joker, it’s not actually edgy; it’s just a dick move. Don’t be Jared Leto. Don’t be a dick.
(Which is, by the way, an example of talking about instead of talkingto. See how easy it is?)
What is the trinity of Star Wars: The Force Awakens?
I’ve seen rather heated debate in some sectors of the The Force Awakens fandom of late over what the ‘big three’ of the film is. The ‘big three’ is, of course, a thing because of the ‘big three’ of the original trilogy - Luke Skywalker, Han Solo and Princess Leia.
In pre-release publicity materials, the idea of Rey, Finn and Poe as the new ‘big three’ was pushed heavily - the actors were incessantly photographed and interviewed together, and the characters shared magazine covers and were very much treated as a collective in articles and publicity materials in the run up to the film’s release.
However, I’d say that this advance promotion is almost completely irrelevant to the fact that the trio of Rey, Finn and Poe does not really exist in the film itself - it is a media construct willed into existence by the Lucasfilm marketing team. That’s the truth, and it’s the truth because Poe and Rey share approximately three seconds of screentime (they’re both in shot as the map to Luke is revealed) and exchange nary a glance. You cannot consider three characters a ‘trio’ when two of them never interact.
To say this is not to dismiss Poe’s importance or say he isn’t a good character. He’s great - very lovable, charismatic and appealing. Having watched The Force Awakens and Ex Machina back to back, I can confidently say that Oscar Isaac is one of the most talented and versatile actors I can think of - he has extraordinary range and can pull off unsettling cyber mogul and heroic Resistance pilot with consummate skill. That being said, Poe is clearly not a lead as Rey and Finn are - he’s a supporting character, and while he’s an important supporting character he’s not crucial (he was originally meant to die when the fighter crashed on Jakku, and that shows in his long subsequent absence from the plot). Along the same lines, we do not get a glimpse into Poe’s interior life as we do Rey’s and Finn’s - Poe is perpetually brash and confident, undiminished even as he lies strapped to a torture chair.
Instead of the Rey, Finn and Poe trinity, then, I think people are absolutely right to propose that the true trinity of The Force Awakens is Rey, Finn and Kylo.
To be clear, this is not about elevating a whiny emo white boy to a place of undue importance because Adam Driver is attractive (which is a tedious argument I’ve read far too often on this site). Whether people like it or not, the film is endlessly stressing the links between the characters, suggesting that their destinies and paths are intertwined. For example:
1. All three characters are introduced wearing masks, their faces obscured.
2. All three characters had traumatic childhoods that involved forced separation from their families/loved ones.
3. All three characters have to deal with the sense of abandonment arising from this.
4. All three characters are positioned together in the climactic duel at the end of the film, with this representing the culmination of repeated interactions between paired characters (Finn and Kylo lock eyes in the first scene on Jakku, Finn and Rey team up for much of the film, Kylo kidnaps Rey on Takodana).
Those are the main connecting themes and parallels between the characters - there are more links and parallels, but since I hate to make people infinite scroll on tumblr I won’t elaborate on them here. Suffice to say that the trinity of Rey, Finn and Kylo is almost irrefutable - while it’s absolutely not a heroic trinity as the original ‘big three’ was in A New Hope, it’s a trinity nonetheless in that the characters and their journeys are intertwined.
So i wanted to say something since i read many comments of people who complained about the game abuse ban + that the max speed option and the save slot load feature will end soon:
From what i know they WON’T REMOVE the save and load option, it’s just going to change , means that you have to spend 5 hourglasses to load a save slot. That’s how the game should have been originally be but Cheritz gave us a trial since of all those bugs in the past.
I know that many think that it is a bit unfair that we have to spend an addtional amount of hourglasses for loading save slots, considering that some already have to use hourglasses to load missed chats or calls but i don’t think that’s a reason to say that you will stop playing the game and stop supporting it. Of course not everyone said stuff like that but you also have to think about this:
Cheritz of course wants to earn money since the game itself is free and since the game became more popular, people demand more content right ? I mean everyone of course wants a route for V or a route for Unknown or maybe events like special chats for special occasions like Valentinsday etc.I don’t know if they would consider adding these things but if they are planning to implement something new to the game, they will need money to give us new content.
Also think about this: Every hourglass you spend is not forced or in other words you can choose if you want to spend your hourglasses or not. And don’t you think it’s unfair that we demand and demand but pay nothing for what we get ?
which leads us to the next issue. Game abuse. So some of you probably know that it was possible to rewind your time on your phone to play missed chats without using hourglasses. Or hack your account to cheat hourglasses whatsoever. Due to those things Cheritz didn’t get any money from those people who should have purchased Hourglasses. It’s obviously not fair to cheat and abuse the game. The Cheritz Team put a lot of effort into creating this game, so seeing them banning accounts and making us spend hourglasses on loading save slots is understandable. If i would be one of the developers and see that people would abuse the game i worked hard for months, honestly i would be super sad and mad *coughs* smad.
I am still sorry tho for those who lost all of ther game data but please be careful this time, cheating is always bad so if you find a new way to get something free than think twice and don’t do it ! Please respect the rules of the game!
I have two suggestions for the game tho which could maybe help some:
Maybe turn the perma ban into a temporarily ban?: I know abusing the game is very bad and not right to do , but I’ve seen some people spending money to buy hourglasses and rewinding time once so now everything is gone. Maybe a ban for a temporarily time would be better ?
daily hourglass rewards:
i think giving out like 1-3 ( edit bcs i agree that 5-10 hourglasses could be too much) hourglasses daily wouldn’t hurt the game too much. The pros would be that users would check out the game daily for rewards and be able to save hourglasses if they don’t want to spend money! What i know is that most of the MM users are students so there might be some who can’t afford to buy hourglasses so this could be a fair solution ?
Also i hope the autosaving is more stable now , that way people won’t have to rely on the saving slots too much and spend hourglasses when the game crashes.
So idk if it will help but maybe they will add this in the game if we all suggest it !
I hope no one is in any way offended by this, i just think it would be pretty sad if many of you guys would stop playing this game bcs of these things ! I like the fandom it’s super fun >o<I hope you continue to support Mystic Messenger ! ♥
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?
okay so one time back in grade 7 my class had an assignment where we had to design and create an invention for helping other people then present it to the class. At that time my next door neighbor had multiple sclerosis and was almost always in his wheel chair. My mother was his carer and one afternoon i was telling him about my day and watched as he struggled to balance his food on a stable table. At that moment i knew exactly what I was going to make. It took hours of searching the most common types of wheel chairs, heaps of money (which we didn’t have much of) to get the materials and a fair bit of tricky wood work but i was absolutely determined to make my project the best i could. Finally when it was done I took it over and tested it on his wheel chair and my god did he love it. It was a wooden tray table that clipped onto the arm of the wheel chair and had a cup holder and non slip material. He used it everyday until I had to take it in for presentation.
Now i was sure that i would get the best mark in class for my project. it met all the requirements and i had worked extremely hard on it. But when i got my mark back i had only just passed with a C. I went up to the teacher thinking there had to be a mistake of some kind. Even now I still remember exactly what she told me, word for word, “Sorry Cassie but that’s not exactly a useful tool for everyone now is it. There aren’t that many people in wheel chairs, it isn’t worth it to us in the same way the other children inventions are.” But the boy who taped a stick of deodorant to a fucking piece of wood got a fucking A!! As if that wasn’t an idea already thought up. For fucks sake he did it that day, literally drew up the plan that morning!
Look I know this is a big long post but I am saying this to point out Ableism is a big, important issue. I gave that tray to my neighbor, despite the school saying they had to keep it because it was technically “school work” and he used it until the day he died. And after that he gave it to a friend to use it. I made three others for more of his friends when he had to move into a home and they loved them because even in a place that was supposed to cater to their needs a stable tray that would not fall off their knees was apparently not something they had thought to provide, especially to people with inhibited dexterity. And yeah this probably had been made before at the time when I was making mine but looking now the cheapest I can find is at least 50 bucks! Hardly assessable for people with little money.
Years later and my blood still boils when I remember that the kid with stick deodorant got a better mark then I did, that his “invention” was considered useful while mine was not. I am still so angry that a school teacher would tell a child that what they had built to help someone they cared for was not useful or important or wanted or needed and that those people were so few and far between that they didn’t matter. That the only thing that did matter was US, the able bodied people. I didn’t quite understand the way I do now at the time but I was still upset, my mother was pissed as hell and my neighbor, well when I told him it looked as though he had expected it.
These issues need to be addressed, and they need to be fixed. Teachers at schools separating the able bodied from those who aren’t and putting the able bodied above them only continues the discrimination and the attitude that there aren’t enough disabled people to really make it an issue worth their worry.
tldr: Albeism is taught from a young age to not only be the norm but to also be taught to the point where making everyday simple things for disable bodied people isn’t worth their time, effort or focus