main slate

anonymous asked:

Are you sure that the spaceman is from the Garrison ? I like to believe that but couldnt he be a rebel too ?

This guy? This guy is blatantly Garrison. That said, it seems to be a Garrison uniform we haven’t seen before. First, it has the Garrison’s gray and white with orange color scheme. (and I just noticed, it’s asymmetrical- on one side, the striped material goes all the way up the arm, while on the other, it has a gray section on the upper arm, it also seems to have a belt across the right thigh)

Keep reading

“The 55th #NYFF Main Slate features films by Noah Baumbach, Luca Guadagnino, Lucrecia Martel, Agnès Varda, and more. (…) Luca Guadagnino’s acclaimed Call Me by Your Name will be his NYFF debut. Tickets for the 55th New York Film Festival will go on sale September 10.”  

IndieWire’s Telluride Festival rank shows Lady Bird and Saoirse Ronan in number one

IndieWire’s annual Telluride poll often points toward potential Oscar frontrunners.

Guillermo del Toro’s fairy tale noir “The Shape of Water” tied with Greta Gerwig’s coming-of-age directorial debut “Lady Bird” for best film of the festival. Del Toro and Gerwig also tied for best director.

A Telluride world premiere (even if the festival refuses to use that term), “Lady Bird” received one of the festival’s most rapturous responses, where “Moonlight” director Barry Jenkins introduced the film and it received a string of positive reviews. It will also play at TIFF this month, in addition to a prime spot in the New York Film Festival’s main slate, before A24 releases it November 10.

The performance category, however, was a no-brainer: “Lady Bird” star Saoirse Ronan took the top prize by a long shot. The young actress received many raves at the festival proclaiming that her energetic, smarmy turn as her best performance to date.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE

desertskie  asked:

I couldn't agree more with the "blank-slate main character" point you made. It reminded me of a point I heard someone made awhile back; that its far better in the long run to try to write empathetic main characters rather than relatable main characters. I'm curious about what you're take on this is.

Absolutely.

Human beings have the ability to relate to others–that’s one of our defining and best qualities. Someone doesn’t have to be exactly like us, or even going through the exact same things, for us to empathize with them.

I’ve never discovered that I have special powers due to being a demigod, but I can still empathize with Percy Jackson’s feelings and internal struggles, and by doing so I can relate to him.

Likewise in my own works, I’m sure most of my readers have never been amnesiacs lost in an enchanted forest, but they don’t have to be to understand Ann’s feelings on the matter.

Human beings have the wonderful gift of imagination, meaning that we can imagine what it would feel like to be going through these things, or sometimes to have wonderful things happen to us, and then realize those emotions through a character. Relating to others doesn’t have to be spoon-fed to us, and I feel like that’s what the blank-slate model tries to do.

Last night, I worked the New York’s LGBT Film Festival’s announcement of their main slate at Twitter HQ. 

This year’s festival boasts over 100 titles; 20% more than last season. Susanne Bartsch: On Top (Anthony Caronna and Alexander Smith) is the opening night feature, Vincent Gagliostro’s After Louie is the centerpiece, the Sundance awardee God’s Own Country (Francis Lee) is the international centerpiece, and Becks (Daniel Powell and Elizabeth Rohrbaugh) will enjoy its New York premiere as the closing film. 

I’m also very excited that they’re showing Kate Millett’s Three Lives as part of their retrospective: Millett, who passed away last week, made the doc with an entirely female team in 1971; her now-estranged sister, Mallory, is one of its subjects. Three Lives premiered on Bleecker Street Cinema, a stone’s throw away from its 2017 redux. Excellent timing on NewFest’s part to be showing this movie here and now. 

Raw Notes: My Bunked “Overthinking It” Video

Last year in September, back when the Trespasser DLC was fresh in our minds, I was fueled with crazy theories. In the back of my mind, I could not sort my brain out what I thought about Dragon Age, but I basically typed down everything I could to possibly make sense of it. Well…to no avail. That’s why I’m posting all of it.

For fun, let’s embarrass myself a bit and show how much chaotic thought goes through my head when I think of Dragon Age. Or used to. Good times.

For the curious, after the jump are my absolutely jumbled, incoherent thoughts for an “Overthinking It” video that never came to life, that would have been called “The Soul’s Blank Slate”.

Main Points that I would have addressed in this video

  • Souls never die unless they are joined by blood. Then, they’re subject to flesh.
  • Souls are memory wiped every time they died, and restored into borrowed bodies.
  • Souls follow the Conservation of Energy, where energy cannot be neither created nor destroyed, and a soul will simply transition from one form to another. However, the Void is the only thing that can disrupt and…void…that.
  • The magic of the Fade and beyond is boundless. Blood magic is finite. Once you depend on blood, it’s literally “magical castration”. However, while you’re alive, the power of blood is limitless and malleable. (Think Black Holes)
  • Time compression? (I never really said yes or no to this idea, but Shaper Valta and her situation is a stubborn thing to wrap your head around.)

(Note: This is a VERY LONG POST underneath. Also don’t do raw lyrium, folks. Tis bad for you.)


Keep reading

slate.com
J.K. Rowling Is Wrong. Harry Potter Should Not Have Ended Up With Hermione.

Not every Harry Potter fan wanted to see Harry get together with Hermione. And, no matter what she’s saying now, Rowling did not get it wrong by pairing Hermione and Ron. To this fan, and many others, Hermione and Ron’s slow burning romance is the best part of the series.

From Slate:

“The main reason Hermione is obviously destined to end up with Ron is that Hermione’s and Ron’s personalities complement each other. Where Hermione is high-strung and domineering, Ron is easy-going and relaxed. When Hermione takes things too seriously, Ron makes dumb jokes. Hermione has logical-mathematical intelligence; Ron has interpersonal intelligence. Ron is the yin to Hermione’s yang, the Oscar to her Felix. He smooths out her rough edges, and she brings out his self-confidence. Together, they are a classically well-matched couple.

”Apart from the fact that Ron and Hermione were made for each other, there are other galling things about Rowling’s disavowal of her narrative choices. She claims now that Ron and Hermione’s relationship lacks ‘credibility.’ Why should this be? Is it so difficult to believe that an intelligent, type-A woman would want to be with a kind, charismatic, supportive, but penniless guy? Does Rowling really think her wildly popular children’s books would have been better if they suggested that smart women are only well matched with traditionally successful men? (Harry, for all his personality flaws, is certainly traditionally successful—athletic, rich, famous.) The way that Ron and Hermione’s relationship defied traditional gender roles is part of what made it so charming.“

No but seriously if the real Azor Ahai reborn turns out to have been killed before the series even began because he was working towards fulfilling the prophecy it would be so great. Either that or Azor Ahai reborn really is just a thing of myth and the prophecy will never be fulfilled. Because then the main characters that are slated for the role of Ultimate Hero would’ve been seen in that deterministic lens. The narrative has made the readers believe that they’re Azor Ahai because of characteristics, coincidences that can be chalked up to other circumstances, not fulfillment of prerequisites to a be-all end-all equation to a definite end. It means we won’t get the happy ending we thought we would get. It means these so-called heroes have been acting on their own after all, and their “heroism” only became thus because they stepped up to the challenge of their time. It’s like that old saying, you know? Heroes aren’t born, they’re made. And in thinking they were born, in thinking they exist and are geared towards this trajectory, myth will have become reality. In Westeros, the Age of Heroes are over. Dragons have died. Now that Great Adversity (Great Other) has come again, in what appears to be a theme of cyclic conflict, how awesome would it be if it turns out that they don’t walk among gods after all and the savior will not have risen. They’ve been fending for themselves this entire time. It would fit well with the ~deconstructionist mode of the series imo. A great divorce from the glorification of legend and mythology. I mean Dany has had to make a great sacrifice for the dragons to come again, while in the past the dragons have always existed, a legacy of the Glory That Was Old Valyria. The Great Other is risen and Westeros at the time of the series is without heroes to save it by default. The heroes are dead. The characters have been living in their shadow until they rise to the occasion and make heroes of themselves. In the end it might not even matter if these prophecies are fulfilled, they will have influenced the same outcome anyway.