"37 Slogans For College Majors If They Were Actually Honest"

Accounting: selling your soul for money.

Aerospace Engineering: “it actually is rocket science.”

Anthropology: it’ll get you laid, but it won’t get you paid!

Archeology: if you don’t know what it is, it’s probably ceremonial.

Art History: and you thought making art was pointless!

Astrophysics: “Eh, I’m within an order of magnitude…”

Biochemistry: spend 4 years aspiring to discover the cure for cancer, and the rest of your life manufacturing shampoo.

Chemistry: where alcohol is a solution.

Communications: “we’ll teach you everything you need to know about convincing your friends that your degree is actually meaningful.”

Computer Engineering: tons of chicks, just not very many.

Computer Science (for a straight girl): the odds are good, but the goods are odd.

Creative Writing: because job security is for pussies.

Criminal Justice: we’re here because of Law & Order reruns.

Dental Hygienist: “something to do until you get knocked up.”

Engineering: the art of figuring out which parameters you can safely ignore.

English: so you want to be a teacher.

Film: forks on the left, knives on the right.

Finance: “accounting was too hard.”

Graphic Design: no, we’re not artists.  We’re designers; there’s a difference.

History: history may repeat itself, but you definitely will.

Information Technology: let me Google that for you.

Journalism: learn how to construct an argument that no one will listen to.

Latin: because useful is overrated.

Linguistics: studied 17 languages, fluent in none of them.

Marine Biology: “I wanted to play with dolphins, but I’m looking at algae instead.”

Music Performance: if you don’t hate yourself, you’re doing it wrong.

Nursing: learning to save others’ lives while struggling not to take your own.

Philosophy: think about it.

Photography: it’s worth a shot.

Physics: “everything you learned last week was wrong.”

Political Science: your opinion is wrong

Pre-med: “I’ll probably switch majors in two years.”

Psychology: good luck doing anything until you get your Masters.

Speech Pathology: we have a way of making you talk.

Statistics: where everything’s made up, and numbers don’t matter.

Structural Engineering: because architects don’t know what physics is.

Zoology: because you can’t major in kittens.

amysantiagone  asked:

In Rogue One, Cassian Andor states that he's been fighting for the rebels since he was 6 years old. Assuming he meant literal combating, would his personality be similar to that of a child raised for combat? Would there be any differences?

This is sort of a yes and no, as all children involved in violent conflicts from an early age are affected by it. However, the children who take part in rebellions aren’t in the same category of the child soldiers discussed on this blog before, though they absolutely share similarities.

Kids involved in rebellions are rarely used as frontline combatants. They’re far too valuable for that. Instead, they function as informants, carriers, and, occasionally, saboteurs. They’re not the one who picks up the gun to shoot down enemy soldiers in a safe zone. They’re the ones who move the gun past the security perimeter or receive it from the old man or woman who did and plant it. They’re the ones hanging around befriending enemy soldiers in bars or cantinas so they can tip their friends off about where the troops are moving to next. Children, women, the elderly, those generally viewed as non-combatants, the ones that society overlooks or views as “safe” are often the backbone of any resistance movement.

They get the goods, they move the packages, they carry the messages between resistance cells, they sometimes take care of the equipment, and they do most of the footwork that allows a resistance to engage the enemy. When they do fight, it’s generally in the form of sabotage like finding and slipping poison into the enemy troop’s stew, planting bombs, or because survival necessitates it when their cover is blown.

As a child, Cassian Andor would have a background common with other children in rebellions depicted in media like ‘Phan Duc To’ from Good Morning, Vietnam! (1987) and the children involved in The Battle of Algiers (1966).

If you’ve never seen Good Morning, Vietnam! I just spoiled the movie.

The Battle of Algiers is a great movie if you’re looking for an honest overview of how rebellions function on both sides of the conflict or just a treatment on the French colonization of Algeria. Fair warning, it is not an english language film. Kiera Nerys from Star Trek: Deep Space 9 is another decent character to look at when wanting to model a background for a resistance fighter who joined as a child. G’kar from Babylon 5 and the entire Narn/Centauri conflict is also an excellent example of the enduring hatreds and issues brought by colonization.

One of the qualities you see in these children and then again as adults is pure, unadulterated hatred for their oppressors. More so than the other kinds, they hate. Often to the point of becoming a new version of the enemy their resistance was attempting to drive off.

Cassian would’ve spent a lot of time hanging around rebel fighters, doing odd jobs for them until the day came when they were short a man or needed a message run by someone who wouldn’t attract attention.

If this has started to sound like spycraft, well, you’re not far off. Resistances don’t have the luxury of major battle offensives like an army, and even guerilla warfare is actually a step up from what happens on the ground, and there is a common word you’ll find familiar for what they do: terrorism.

The actions of a resistance fighter and the actions of a terrorist are one and the same, the only difference is in who is telling the story. If you want to investigate real resistances without the judgements, study up on World War II, the French Resistance, and the Maquis.

Yes, that Maquis not the one from Star Trek.

On the ground resistances are rough and ready, they’re often split apart into distinct cells comprised of only a few agents, and almost no one knows who is higher up the food chain. This is important because it protects the other operating cells and resistance leadership in case an operative is captured by the enemy.

For the most part, whether you’re writing historical fiction or a foray into science fiction, the philosophy, goals, and strategy of a resistance will remain the same. What changes is how they go about operating within their setting because, like spies, a resistance requires the author have a solid grasp on how the enemy functions, the details in how they hold power, the technology they have access to, and how their army works.

On a literal and literary level, the Resistance is about disruption. Whether they’re sabotaging train tracks, blowing up food transports, or bombing nightclubs, their goal is to disrupt everyday life and make it as unpleasant as possible. They’re ghosts in the system, you’ll never know where or when they’ll strike, and they’re out to destroy enemy moral every way they can. A resistance drives the enemy from their homeland by making the cost of holding it no longer worthwhile. Though, historically, this is often impossible unless the majority of the population joins the cause and/or the tide of public sentiment back home within the enemy’s homeworld or nation turns against the invaders. A resistance occurring against the powerful within their own homeland is much, much more destructive.

What marks a character like Cassian, who grew up in a resistance movement, more than other children engaged in violence is first and foremost betrayal. Betrayal from without, betrayal from within, the people he’s lied to and betrayed, seeing many friends vanish overnight or die, and never quite knowing who he can trust. He probably has very few friends left alive from his early days with the Rebellion, and more than likely experienced the Imperials wiping out his cell(s) on multiple occasions. He worked his way up the ranks until he became an operative working closely within the Rebellion’s inner circle.

Star Wars is functionally much more clear cut than the real resistances that occur throughout the world.

Happy writing!


This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron. Every contribution helps keep us online, and writing. If you already are a Patron, thank you.

Disney Songs in German

Disney songs from some popular Disney films dubbed in german! Music is a brilliant way to immerse yourself in your target language, and what better way than the Disney way? Many of these songs are from our childhoods, so it’s some nice nostalgic immersion. 

*The english titles next to the german is not necessarily a translation, but rather the english title. Also the year next to the title of the film is the year that the initial english film was released, not necessarily when it was released or dubbed in german.

Some notes: I apologize if your favourite Disney film or song didn’t make the list, I definitely didn’t get all of them. Maybe a part 2 is in order? Also, I tried my best to find videos that had subtitles and a translation, but unfortunately not all of them have it. You can always do a quick google search if you want the lyrics and/or english translation. Be sure to check the descriptions as well, some of them have the lyrics in there. Some videos are better or worse quality than others, but they’re all generally listenable.

I’d also like to give a huge thanks and credit to the creators who translated and subtitled these videos! They did all the work, afterall.


Mulan (1998)

Pocahontas (1995)

Dornröschen [Sleeping Beauty] (1959)

Tarzan (1999)

Cinderella (1950) 

Note: While the german name for ‘Cinderella’ is ‘Aschenputtel’, she goes by Cinderella in the german-dubbed Disney version. Aschenputtel is also an alternative title to the film.

Aristocats (1970)

Schneewittchen und die sieben Zwerge [Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs] (1937)

Note: Disney’s Snow White has been re-dubbed a couple times in german for some reason, so the particular year a song is from may differ from another. They’re all from the same movie though.

Arielle, die Meerjungfrau [The Little Mermaid] (1989)

Note: Same situation as Snow White.

Aladdin (1992)

Der König der Löwen [The Lion King] (1994)

Der König der Löwen 2 – Simbas Königreich [The Lion King II: Simba’s Pride] (1998)  

Küss den Frosch [The Princess and the Frog] (2009)

Rapunzel – Neu Verföhnt [Tangled] (2010)

Die Eiskönigin – Völlig Unverfroren [Frozen] (2013)

Das Dschungelbuch [The Jungle Book] (1967)

Alice im Wunderland [Alice in Wonderland] (1951)

Hercules (1997)

My other Disney compilations: French Arabic  

anonymous asked:

Why? What is wrong with Coco?

The short answer? TO ME, EVERYTHING.

So, Okay. You guys know I’m Mexican. Not Mexican-American. No, I don’t live in the states, either. I’m a Mexican who lives in México, always have, and probably always will.

So, you can trust me when I say this: Coco is a Godforsaken insult.

I can seriously go on and on and on. But I will only say this. 

They claim they studied México to make the movie. I say my ass. It’s full of stereotypes. It’s so fucking disrespectful. It’s disgusting. My blood boils in my veins everytime someone so much as say the name of that hideous movie.

I’m also mad because Disney has no shame stealing. They not only wanted to trademark my precious tradition, take it away from me. They wanted to make the name of my tradition a brand for selling toys. Mexicans wouldn’t even be able to use the name of a tradition we’ve been celebrating since centuries before the pre-Columbian era. It’s so ancient that we have no knowledge when we started. 

And you seriously want me to be happy that your little rat of a company wanted it as a fucking brand?! Seriously, I cannot begin to express my rage!

They couldn’t because “Día de Muertos” is “Patrimonio Cultural Inmaterial de la Humanidad de México”, which roughly translates to “Intangible cultural heritage of México”. So, no. You can’t have it. Asshole. 

Also, there is another studio, Metacube, a Mexican Studio who’s been doing a film about Día de Muertos since 2007, and it will be released next year so there. You can’t name your shitty movie “Día de Muertos” either. Fuck off.

Also, and nobody can tell me otherwise, you can see that visually as well as the plotline, has a lot of elements that are straight copy-pasted from “Book of Life”, which you may also know as a movie that was written and directed and produced by Mexicans. Jorge Gutierrez and Guillermo del Toro.

And Coco? Bitch, puh-lease. There were like three animators who were Mexicans and of course they weren’t telling the story. Of course, all the idiots calling the shots in this parody of a representation (representation my ass) were fat old white dudes. Of fucking course

Seriously I’ve been told just how cringe-worthy this shit is. The spanglish. Oh my God. The spanglish. 

You don’t see other nationalities speaking broken English in other films. You don’t put other people with other nationalities speak two words English, one word their language and then repeat. Let me get this straight: IT’S FUCKING DISGUSTING. I’ve been speaking full English this whole post, have I not? I haven’t called you “m’ijo”  not once, now, HAVE I??

You can’t put a white idiot and expect for him to not “represent” just a plain stereotype of another country in his movie. 

Oh, you came six months to México to learn about me?

Ha, congrats. It shows. 

I spoke about this and some other things in a post I made a whole seven months ago. If you want to look it up.

So. If you are planning to go watch Coco because you want to learn Mexican culture, or because you have respect for it… Don’t. 

just an FYI to fellow sensies:

the phrasing that a cast member “did not want to return” to sense8 is really awful wording. Their contracts lapsed and one of the number one rules of television is you don’t let that happen with your main cast!! Contracts are a HUGE deal for TV shows. The vast majority of actors live from gig to gig. Unless you’re an A-lister, there is no such thing as job security. If you’re not under contract, and it is very uncertain whether a show will continue–your average actor is not a bad person for taking on another project. Especially since some of the Sense8 cast don’t primarily work in the english language film/tv industry, which is where most of the job opportunities are. Also, in Max Riemelt’s case, he has a kid to support.

Sense8 ending is completely on Netflix. They let the contracts lapse because they wanted to cut off the show. 

I recommend that everyone go on twitter and make a lot of noise about Sense8 for Emmy nomination. Because it deserves that recognition.


André Aciman’s novel Call Me by Your Name tells the story of Elio, a musically inclined Italian-American/French teenager, and Oliver, a rakish graduate student visiting Elio’s family’s home. Elio’s initial annoyance with his houseguest gives way to curiosity, then cryptic flirtation, and eventually a furtive, passionate affair. The book has been considered a modern classic of queer literature since its publication in 2007, but for Timothée Chalamet, the actor who plays Elio in the new film adaptation, it was also quite an investment. “I got a copy through the library at Columbia,” says the half-French New York City native over coffee in the East Village. “But I forgot to give it back for a year, so it was a $100 read. I still have that copy.”

The atmospheric intensity of the novel was a natural subject for Luca Guadagnino, the I Am Love director and longtime Tilda Swinton collaborator. He cast Armie Hammer opposite Chalamet, enlisted Sufjan Stevens to contribute to the sound track of the film, and relocated the setting to Lombardy. He also allowed Chalamet to integrate some French into the Italian and English script, giving the film a seductive, borderless feel. As Chalamet puts it, “The lingual freedom fed the intellectual foreplay.” (Chalamet looks even younger than his 21 years, but he’s sharper than actors twice his age. “He is exactly what I imagined,” Aciman says of the casting choice. “Lankish, a bit brooding, bookish—the whole thing.”)

Other directors are equally keen to capture “the whole thing”: Chalamet, whose first break was as the bad-news boyfriend on the second season of Homeland, has also landed roles in Greta Gerwig’s solo directorial debut, Lady Bird; Christian Bale’s latest film, Hostiles; and an upcoming Woody Allen project. As we pay the bill, I ask what he’s planning to wear to the Toronto International Film Festival, and he shows me a caramel double-breasted Berluti. I mention he looks like Gianni Agnelli in his 20s. “Who?” Chalamet asks. It’s safe to say he’s still more French than Italian.

Maurice at 30: the gay period drama the world wasn't ready for
The elegant Merchant Ivory love story, starring a young Hugh Grant, was largely ignored on release but it’s now receiving a 4K restoration and might finally reach the audience it deserves
By Guy Lodge

Last year, Merchant Ivory’s Howards End, now a quarter of a century old, got a 4K digital restoration that didn’t seem obviously required. Until, that is, you saw the result. Those ornate Edwardian interiors, the sea of rain-spattered umbrellas, that field of bluebells, all made newly sharp and iridescent – it seemed appropriate treatment for what stands as the quintessential work from a film-making team now synonymous with elegantly reserved costume drama. With US distributor Cohen Media Group having bought up the Merchant Ivory library, one might have assumed A Room With a View would be next in line for this pristine treatment. The Remains of the Day, perhaps.                    

Instead, we’ve been thrown a curveball. Maurice, undervalued in 1987 and underseen today, is getting the digital makeover, hitting cinema screens in time for its 30th anniversary. It’s a surprise, but a welcome one. Adapted from a posthumously published EM Forster novel that is likewise overshadowed in reputation by other works in his canon – like, well, Howards End and A Room With a View – Merchant Ivory’s film opened hot on the heels of their broadly beloved, Oscar-garlanded adaptation of the latter. Almost immediately, it was filed away as, if not a disappointment, a lesser diversion. The Venice film festival jury was highly taken with it, handing prizes to James Ivory and then-fresh-faced stars Hugh Grant and James Wilby, but despite admiring reviews, few followed their lead. Box office was barely a 10th of A Room With a View’s; where that film had been nominated for eight Oscars, winning three, Maurice scraped a solitary bid for its costumes.

The film wasn’t at fault. A tender, graceful love story, performed with quiet emotional conviction and crafted with Merchant Ivory’s signature visual serenity and meticulous period detail, it was an exemplary distillation of its literary source – and a heartily realised passion project for Ivory himself, who adapted Forster’s novel in place of the team’s usual screenwriter Ruth Prawer Jhabvala. What was different? Those even glancingly acquainted with the film or novel can probably work it out: Maurice was, put bluntly, too gay.

Ivory and producer Ismail Merchant were romantic partners as well as professional ones, though their films rarely reflected their sexuality in anything more than an oblique sense. Many of their greatest films evoke a sense of unspoken desire, of any persuasion, simmering beneath a placid surface of decorum – a repression with which many a gay person, unable always to freely articulate their romantic self, has been able to empathise. Maurice, in a sense, was the duo’s cinematic coming-out: the story of a young man growing into his homosexuality in politely hostile English society, it’s a film that exquisitely queers the stiff-upper-lip emotions so central to the Merchant Ivory oeuvre.

There’s a slight aloofness to Maurice that is part of its beauty. Shooting with glacial reserve, a minty chill present even in scenes of the great English summer, Ivory languidly explores the stuffy Cambridge social circuit, with its cricket matches and country-pile parties, that the title character is expected to inhabit; Wilby’s painstaking performance, too, initially comes over as glazed, absent, a man in search of something to want. The film only breathes when he finally does, first via a frustrating romantic affair with fellow student and social climber Clive Durham (Grant, perfectly his floppy charm years before Four Weddings and a Funeral) – but it’s heartbreak that gives the film its red-blooded feeling.          

From there, as a second romantic chapter with gamekeeper Alec Scudder (Rupert Graves, completing perhaps the prettiest posh-boy triangle in screen history) begins, Maurice gains both in emotional sweep and intimate psychological detail: a tame entry it may be in the LGBT canon, but few films have expressed quite so sweetly and nakedly the challenges of simply being a gay man, partnered or otherwise – how difficult it can be to run with human nature.

This is not emotionally universal terrain, and was a rare subject for prestige heritage cinema to take on: the film’s respectful but dispassionate reception in 1987, not an era rich with queer art in the mainstream, is no surprise in retrospect. Had Forster, for whom the novel also represented a cathartic release of his own sexuality, published it in his lifetime, he might have encountered similar resistance. In 1971, Maurice was received by the literary fraternity as minor by his standards – a verdict that all too often plagues depictions of desire that, while far from minor, is shared only by a minority.

Fast-forward to 2017, in the midst of a thriving LGBT cinema scene and in afterglow of Moonlight’s barrier-busting Oscar triumph, and perhaps audiences will be a little warmer, a little kinder to Maurice. Coincidentally, it hits screens again in the same year that Ivory is basking in the glory of a very different LGBT triumph: now 88, he’s a co-writer on Luca Guadagnino’s queer coming-of-age rhapsody Call Me By Your Name, a Sundance sensation that realises the first rush of gay love with all the woozy sensual excess that Maurice, true to its period, eschews. (They’d make for a remarkable, mutually flattering double bill.) Far from dated, Merchant Ivory’s Maurice looks positively ahead of its time: an honestly strait-laced depiction of alternative sexuality that dared to play by the same rules as any other respectable costume drama.

(Source: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/may/19/maurice-film-period-drama-merchant-ivory)

anonymous asked:

Do you feel even a tiny bit of pity for maven?

Do I feel pity for Maven? Maybe. I suppose I pity the fact that he did not get to live the life he wanted to live, and that his life was technically stolen from him before he even knew what it was. The sad thing, at least in my opinion, is that the minute Elara was pregnant, she had already sealed Maven’s fate. Maven was going to take the crown with her, whether he wanted to or not. He’s almost a representation of what happens when a parent literally forces their child to be something. It’s not so much a pitying thing, as it is tragic. Maven is, in a way, a tragedy, and that is amazing. I feel as if I’ve seen very few villains in my time  that are so very tragic. Sure you have the odds or end one that appears once every blue moon, but Maven is almost a work of art, a story inside of a story. He’s the last act of a Shakespearean tragedy. He’s Hamlet begging Horatio to remain alive and tell the story of what happened in Denmark, he’s Juliet running the knife through her chest because she woke up just a little bit too late, he’s Othello realizing his mistake too late, he’s the guard arriving a second after Cordelia was hung to announce that she was innocent. He’s a tragedy that we only see the ending of and the never beginning. In a way, I don’t pity that, I marvel at it. It’s so beautifully crafted, and you don’t pity a beautiful work of art. You admire it, and praise it. I’ve never praised Maven’s actions, but I do praise his character and what it represents. In my eyes, Maven is a flawless villain, and I love him to death for it. He’s exactly what Red Queen needed for a villain. You have heroes who are not always a heroes, and a villain who you care about because he is so fantastically created. I would not say that I pity Maven, I’ve never really pitied a character, but I will say that I adore him as a villain and admire him as character.