moral struggles

Logan is a Western, and it Changes Everything

Logan makes every other superhero film in the past fifteen years look like a cheap parlor trick. For two hours and twenty one minutes, it locks you in and makes you watch a movie that doesn’t work the way it’s supposed to. It’s uncomfortable and messy and it doesn’t satisfy. Wolverine’s claws are uneven and his kills are ugly. People die with no last words, no proper sendoff and no closure. Logan provokes visceral reactions time and again, not because it’s violent, but because it’s painful, and everything else now looks plastic by comparison.

From the top, let me say I hope this doesn’t come across as some edgy rant arguing for more gore and profanity in superhero films. That’s not my point. I should also confess that I have no experience with the X-Men comics, or with comics at all for that matter. I’m not arguing that The Avengers would have been better with a few more fucks given. All I’m saying is that Logan changes things, and the rest of the genre needs to take notice and adapt.

I expect words like “raw” and “gritty” will be thrown around a lot in discussing Logan. I’m hesitant to use that vernacular because it’s the same language people use to describe The Dark Knight, and the two really aren’t that comparable. They both step outside the box of contemporary comic book movies, but where The Dark Knight is a thriller, Logan is a western, and therein lies the difference that makes Hugh Jackman’s final outing so important.

In the modern Hollywood superhero archetype, the greater message to the audience is apparent to the characters. Superman is a symbol of justice and goodness, and he understands that just as well as we do. In The Dark Knight, Batman represents the basic human struggle between morality and chaos that thematically pervades throughout the whole film. Both forces are at work in Bruce Wayne, and The Joker and Two Face bring that inner conflict into the spotlight. And Batman gets this. He understands he’s a symbol in some broader thematic picture.

In a western, Batman doesn’t get it. We get it, and therefore we have certain expectations about how Batman is supposed to act and how the plot is supposed to go. Batman doesn’t see the deeper significance of his circumstances, so his actions don’t match our expectations. He doesn’t stop to consider what he’s supposed to do in a narrative sense.

The Dark Knight is clean. Maybe that’s controversial, but it shouldn’t be. Yes, Rachel dies. Yes, Harvey Dent succumbs to The Joker’s twisted social experiment, and yes, Batman takes the fall when he shouldn’t have to. But that all makes sense. It fulfills the thematic ends we anticipated when we bought our tickets. We understand what Batman and Joker represent, and we’d be shocked if the movie ended happy. In the end, we get what we paid for. It’s clean. It satisfies.

Logan does not satisfy. It isn’t clean because no part of it understands the rules it’s supposed to follow. Professor X insists on being crass, pathetic and generally wrong about everything, despite our presumption that he’s meant to be kind, strong and wise. Characters die in the middle of fights, dazed and confused with no forewarning, no tidy arc or epiphany and no greater thematic significance. And when they’re buried, Logan offers no words to explain why. It doesn’t resolve the major plot points revealed in the film’s third act. It refuses to give us the explanations we demand. Hell, the whole crux of the plot is that Wolverine’s powers have stopped functioning properly. He doesn’t work the way he’s supposed to.

I also expect Logan will see a lot of comparisons to last year’s Deadpool. After all, the two films mark the first two consecutive steps in Fox’s ongoing experiment in R-rated superhero movies. The difference is that Deadpool puts a filter on the established tropes of the genre, while Logan takes a filter off.

At no point while watching Ryan Reynolds bloodily slice up extras and spout crude one-liners did I see Deadpool as some new norm. It doesn’t feel natural, it feels off. In a good way mind you, but off nonetheless.  Logan, on the other hand, makes everything else feel off. Suddenly, every prior film Fox, DC and Disney have ever put out in the genre looks fake. Where’s the ugliness? Where’s the pain? I’m not asking Chris Hemsworth to start decapitating people in Thor: Ragnarok, but looking back now I can’t help notice all the lines, all the actions, all the moments that felt stiff and unnatural. The Marvel Cinematic Universe has always been primed and focus-tested, there’s no revelation there. The Hollywood blood was visibly coursing right beneath the skin, and everyone accepted it. But now Logan has cut an adamantium gash and the Hollywood is spilling out, impossible to ignore anymore.

Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine holds a pedigree as old as the contemporary superhero film. Tobey Maguire’s masked debut in Spiderman made such a huge splash upon release in 2002 that lots of people forget it was preceded two years by the original X-Men. Long before Robert Downey Jr. became an idol for American children, Hugh Jackman and Wolverine laid the early groundwork that would become modern comic book blockbusters as we know them. The X-Men franchise built the foundation for the genre’s multibillion-dollar card tower, and in one breath James Mangold blew the whole thing down and showed us all what a façade it was.

Up until now, superhero flicks have been Hollywood’s Top 40 pop hits. Sure Batman might switch into a minor key and Deadpool slapped a parental advisory label on the cover, but they still played on the same stations. Logan composes in a whole different time signature. It’s new and different and feels unnatural, and it can’t be ignored.

anonymous asked:

What did you think of the final confrontation between Zuko and Azula? I think Azula embodies the dark path Zuko could have easily taken in the face of his personal and moral struggles if it weren't for his uncle, his mother and obviously himself in the end. It'd have been powerful to have him defeat her, thematically speaking. Why did they have Katara defeat her? What did that accomplish? Many criticize the Aang/Ozai's deus ex machina solution, but this one was even more disappointing to me.

The showrunners made that decision because defeating Ozai and Azula is a dramatic formality - what matters to character development is that Zuko defeats what is worst in himself. (The other protagonists, too.) And I love it.

The key to the character development decisions in the finale is found in the season two episode “Bitter Work.” That episode shows Aang struggling with the philosophy of earthbending, having difficulty standing his ground against a falling boulder. It also shows us Zuko, motivated by his rivalry with Azula, say “screw basics, I want lightning!” In the end of that episode, Aang gets enough of a grip on earthbending to at least use it, while Zuko learns how to redirect lightning.

In the finale, Aang shows his mastery of earthbending philosophy as he stands his ground against Ozai (so much worse than a rock), and Zuko decides to use his lightning redirection to save Katara, at the cost of a chance to definitively beat Azula into the ground.

But the other thing is, by the time Azula takes that cheap shot at Katara, it’s clear Zuko’s already won everything that matters.

In terms of firebending, Zuko was having that fight all his own way. Go back to Zuko’s first fight against Zhao and listen to what Iroh tells him - then look at Zuko’s footwork in the finale. His feet aren’t going anywhere but where he wants them to go. Also his breathing, the source of firebending. Zuko’s breathing is controlled; Azula’s chest is heaving. Even with the massive power boost the comet’s giving both of them, it’s more than possible to tell that Zuko’s firebending is neat and precise, and his defence is now solid as a rock. This is a trend that’s manifestly apparent through the last quarter of season three. The gap in the fight occurs because Azula’s worked out that Zuko’s winning, and she needs to change her tactics.

Then there’s the fact that Zuko has someone to jump in front of at all. In Katara, he has a friend so steadfast she’s come along to the middle of enemy territory on the day firebenders are most powerful to back him up in his fight. Meanwhile, though Azula tried to compel that sort of loyalty from Mai and Ty Lee, she couldn’t. Mai chose Zuko over Azula, and Ty Lee chose Mai over Azula. She’s alone, but Zuko has friends and family. She’s devastated by Ozai turning his back on her, but Zuko’s past it.

Zuko’s never been better off, and Azula never lower. He’s got nothing more to prove - not to himself, not to Ozai, and not to Azula. It’s not relevant which of Zuko or Katara strikes that final blow, and boy does that go to the heart of Azula’s own insecurities.

Third thing. Zuko saves Katara with a firebending move drawn from the principles of waterbending. Katara finally defeats Azula by freezing them both in a big block of ice and then breathing out water to free herself. Which bending discipline is based on the breath, again? Firebending. Katara defeated Azula with a waterbending move drawn from the principles of firebending.

Instead of Zuko giving it all to definitely absolutely positively defeat Azula personally and win a fight that, as I say, he’s already won, the writers preferred to show Zuko prioritising Katara’s life over his own family drama, and how both he and Katara have learned from each other.

Chloe Hollings (Widowmaker’s va) posted on twitter recently that she was back in the studio to record new lines.

We know Widowmaker still feels “something” over the death of Gerárd, and some of her voicelines imply that she regrets killing him.

Blizzard releases info about Efi, a genius 11yo robotics inventor, traveling for the first time.

Calling it now: Widowmaker is sent on a mission to kill Efi, but fails due to an emotional and moral internal struggle.

Edit: “when I was a little girl…I had a fear of spiders. I was told that they had no emotions… That their hearts never beat…” “But today, I know the truth. Spiders can feel fear. …and still feel love.”

many an edgelord has observed that morality is purely a human creation, and has thus concluded that it must be fake, and lame, etc.

this, of course, misses the whole point- morality is social technology.

imagine a prehistoric community of hunter-gatherers. they’re doing decently for themselves but they have a problem- conflicts in the community keep escalating to violence, even killing. so a moral edict is created- “do not spill blood”- and people following this edict helps to keep conflicts from spiraling out of control, increasing the overall welfare of the community. decades go by, and with the help of the social technology of morality, the hunter-gather community has settled down, developed agriculture, and formed a small early city.

then someone in the community figures out how to drain poison from snakebites, or some other early form of surgery- and a problem emerges, because according to the moral edict, this practice is banned, since it spills blood.

so an underground develops, of people using these banned practices. and the society struggles to stamp this out, and the underground surgeons struggle against this repression- until as a result of the struggle, it is realized that the moral edict is flawed, and is preventing well-being, rather than encouraging it. so the moral edict is revised to “do not spill blood involuntarily,” legalizing surgery, and further improving the well-being of the community.

through this process- a dialectic between hegemony and counter-hegemony, an alchemical process of the conjunction of opposites- the social technology of morality is refined and improved.

both moral realism and moral nihilism stymie this process. we must not fall into the trap of thinking morality is One Definite Unchanging Thing. and we also must not fall into the trap of thinking morality is Fake And Lame And Nothing Matters.

we must remember that morality is social technology, which must be continually revised and rectified, through a repeating process of revolutionary struggle.

I love rambling about villain progression

Like I think it’s more important than the heroes

If a hero doesn’t get proper progression and set up, it’s lame
If the villain didn’t than the nature of the story is thrown out of balance

The morals, the struggle, and the entire freaking point of the hero existing

A strong and solid hero is important
A strong and solid villain is vital

The X-Men are great, but without Magneto you lose half the point of them existing. You lose the side of the coin that decided to not be the bigger person

Luke Skywalker is great, but without Darth Vader you lose the entire concept of duality and balance and struggle with the Force

Batman is great, but without the Joker you can’t understand his personal limits and self control and psyche

A great villain can show off all of the good and bad in a hero

So treat your villains with respect
Give them reason and purpose
Make them intimidating and terrible and unredeemable
You should love to hate them
You should want to see them lose and have the hero reign victorious
You should feel almost bad for them, realize what they’ve done, and decide maybe they don’t deserve your sympathy

A great villain shapes the hero, the narrative, and demonstrates the lessons and morals you want to teach your audience

(Request) Dirty Desires

Title: Dirty Desires

Characters: Negan x You/Reader

Requested by: @hardelvencock

Hey I’ve been wondering if you can do a smut one shot(?) Where it’s s7 episode 1 and where the reader is in the line up and is being degraded by negan and (also maybe humiliation in front of the group) you’re loving every second of it.

Warnings: SUPER NSFW, rough sex, humiliation, degradation

Note: This is a long one and very, very NSFW. If any of the aforementioned warnings might trigger you, please do not read. Also, Negan doesn’t have any redeeming quality in this so yeah. But I enjoyed writing this so much (even if it’s my first time writing this kind of smut) so thank you hardelvencock for the request! I hope you like it! xoxo

“Oh my goodness! Look at this!”

You were supposed to feel scared, to fear for your life and most of all, be angry. Abraham had just been killed by Negan and he wasn’t just killed. He was bludgeoned to death, his head bashed in by a baseball bat countless of times as if the first blow wasn’t enough. And being a good friend of the soldier, you were supposed to despise Negan. And you did, not because he killed one of your own.

But because he turned you on.

Keep reading

[M] We Are the Universe // BTS’ J-Hope

[A/N] Get your lint rollers ready because this is some fluffity fluffy smut right here… well, as fluffy as I can manage, anyway. Inspired by heungtanbts with her Namjoon oneshot because we’re all just shooting stars.


Soft footsteps padded to where you were sitting at the kitchen table, cheek resting on the flat of your palm and gaze directed at the night scene beyond the window. A voice cleared its throat. You hummed in acknowledgement, wordlessly inviting your visitor to join you, but it wasn’t until arms draped around your shoulders and a chin rested on top of your head that he spoke.

“Couldn’t sleep?”

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

I feel like at cons people ask bob more questions about his acting and stuff when compared to Eliza. Is this just me? Why would it be like that?

It’s not just you. They absolutely do. They ask bob about character development and acting and leadership and all sorts of things. I really can’t help but think it’s internalized misogyny that reduces the main character down a love interest. Like the way they ask women at awards ceremonies about their dress and shoes and ask men about their goals and career. Would they do the same to ADC if she were there? Probably, honestly. Men get to have motivations outside of love interests and being attractive to love interests.

They ask Eliza about CL and all things related, and are afraid to ask about BC so they talk around it, while still trying to talk about it. It all focuses on Clarke’s relationships, her sexuality,  who is Eliza’s favorite to shoot with, who would she bring back, what’s the hardest death scene, what’s her favorite line, what character has the biggest effect on Clarke. Which is all, basically, saying that Clarke is only important for the relationships she has… and not even relationships with her mother or friends or mentors, but only romantic entanglements. It’s very disappointing. The point of women and female characters, is, apparently, to fall in love and be in a romance. 

These ship wars are essentially about who gets to keep Clarke as a reward, Bellamy or L– or the BC or CL fandom. She’s an object. The only time I saw Eliza say much about her own character outside of shipping was that Portuguese article. It’s not that there’s nothing to say about Clarke and her leadership, her character development, her friends, her life on the Ark, her moral struggles, her long term narrative. There is. Granted, Bob might be more eloquent in the way he speaks about his analysis of Bellamy and the narrative, but that doesn’t mean that Eliza has nothing to say. Clearly, people aren’t even paying attention to Eliza as an actress. No one compliments her on her acting? All this stan and ship culture and no one thinks of Eliza as anything but an accessory to their ship? What. Is. That?

That con clip made me angry. That Eliza could get choked up because a fan complimented her on her acting (even though she actually did it in a shipping question, precisely geared to make CL the focus ONCE AGAIN) makes me furious, because it just goes to show how little people care about the show and characters and actors– but just about their version of events and how it affects them. This is being self centered. How can you be a Clarke or Eliza fan if you only care about her in relation to Lxa or Bellamy? 

The fandom erases Clarke as the hero of her own story, and gives all the importance to the romantic characters and relationship, forcing her into a love interest role. And the fandom erases Eliza, because she doesn’t feed your ship enough, or because you think YOUR identity comes before her as a person. She’s nothing but a weapon in this ongoing stupid shipwar. 

Erase the hero and turn her into an objectified reward for whoever you think is hot/romantic. It’s HER story. I mean, part of the story is also Bellamy’s, but that doesn’t mean that Clarke is only there to be his love. But a year and a half after L has gone, and fandom is STILL making Clarke’s story about L. Knock it off. It is not and never has been L’s story. It was ALWAYS Clarke’s story. I’ll write 1k words on Clarke’s character, and I’ll get comments about the ONE line I wrote about Bellamy in relation to her, even if they are telling me NO IT’S NOT ABOUT BELLAMY, they just ignored the 990 words I wrote about it not being about Bellamy, to further their own shipwar. 

Yes. I find this to be misogyny. That the female hero, a complex and morally gray character, can essentially be written out of her own story, to give it away to fandom’s romantic fantasies.  I mean, why can’t Clarke be the center of these romances, even? But she’s not. She’s the spoils in the shipwar. Kidnap a girlfriend. It’s okay. What she wants or needs has never been important.

Some days my mind frightens me
my resolutions and morality
my integrity
a thin line marked in the sand
when once they were a brick wall

I can’t tell if this is growing up
and evolving my ideas
of what I thought
acceptable
and not disrespectful to my own body
or just being desperate
and willing to sacrifice
ideals I once held so highly esteemed
to create the world I want around me

I’m simply trying to create my own
little piece of life
a place to call my own
and have the things I need to breathe

So what’s a little sacrifice?

  • Rogue: (morally struggling)
  • Sting: You're not just going to let him die like that, are you?
  • Rogue's Shadow: Don't listen to that guy. He's trying to lead you down the path of righteousness. I'm gonna lead you down the path that ROCKS.
  • Sting: Oh you come off it!
  • Rogue's Shadow: You come off it!
  • Sting: You!
  • Rogue's Shadow: You!
  • Sting: You!
  • Rogue's Shadow: You infinity.
  • Sting: Grr...!
  • Rogue's Shadow: Listen up, big guy, I got 3 good reasons why you should just walk away.
  • Rogue's Shadow: Number one: (point to Sting) Look at that guy! He's got that sissy... fur thing. Reason number 2. Look what I can do (starts doing handstand pushups)
  • Rogue: But... what does that have to do with anything?
  • Sting: No, no, he's got a point.
  • Rogue: Listen guys, you're sort of confusing me, so uhh... begone?

“Did a voice whisper in his ear that he had just passed the solemn hour of his destiny; that there no longer remained a middle course for him; that if he were not henceforth the best of men, he would be the worst; that it behooved him now, so to speak, to mount higher than the Bishop, or fall lower than the convict; that if he wished to become good be must become an angel; that if he wished to remain evil, he must become a monster?

…Or he could just get fantastically baked. Utterly smoked. 420, 24/7.  That was a possibility too.” 

June 5

Watchmen depicts an alternate history where superheroes emerged in the 1940s and 1960s and their presence changed history so that the United States won the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal was never exposed. In 1985, the country is edging toward World War III with the Soviet Union, freelance costumed vigilantes have been outlawed and most former superheroes are in retirement or working for the government. The story focuses on the personal development and moral struggles of the protagonists as an investigation into the murder of a government-sponsored superhero pulls them out of retirement. In 1985, DC Comics acquired a line of characters from Charlton Comics. During that period, writer Alan Moore contemplated writing a story that featured an unused line of superheroes that he could revamp, as he had done in his Miracleman series in the early 1980s. Moore reasoned that MLJ Comics’ Mighty Crusaders might be available for such a project, so he devised a murder mystery plot which would begin with the discovery of the body of the Shield in a harbour. The writer felt it did not matter which set of characters he ultimately used, as long as readers recognized them “so it would have the shock and surprise value when you saw what the reality of these characters was”. The story begins with New York City police investigating the murder of Edward Blake in Watchmen #1 (June 5, 1986). With the police having no leads, costumed vigilante Rorschach decides to probe further. Discovering Blake to be the face behind The Comedian, a costumed hero employed by the United States government, Rorschach believes he has discovered a plot to terminate costumed adventurers and sets about warning four of his retired comrades: Dan Dreiberg (formerly the second Nite Owl), the superpowered and emotionally detached Doctor Manhattan and his lover Laurie Juspeczyk (the second Silk Spectre), and Adrian Veidt (once the hero Ozymandias, and now a successful businessman).

Android AU: Lunafreya - Ardyn

HELLO YES THANK YOU FOR THE REQUEST I’M ITCHING TO WRITE MORE
(rest of Lunafreya, and Ardyn under cut because it’s long)

Mental Health Assistant Series: Oracle
Model: Lunafreya (ST11a N0X 2.0)

  • you see her every time you go to the veterinarian but never talked to her in person
  • you thought she was just a basic receptionist android, put there to look nice and cover for the human receptionist whenever they leave the front desk
  • until the day you have to put your beloved pet to sleep after a long battle with sickness
  • the doctor allows you to stay with your pet as long as you need, and sends Lunafreya to sit with you
  • she smiles softly and asks permission to stay with you, you’re all alone and have nobody to support you through the ordeal, so you let her
  • she answers all your questions, medical and not, with an understanding smile and glossy eyes

Keep reading

Jupiter conjunct Saturn: The battle of giants.

I had this question asked to me twice this morning; so I will clear the air with how I have come to see it.  I think it has come up because Saturn and Jupiter retrograde really makes us look at what both planets can do together.

When Jupiter and Saturn are conjunct in a birth chart it tends to create the “Devil and Angel” on someone’s shoulders affect famous in cartoons. Usually you have a mix of two natures in a person slugging it out.  One shoulder the “Jupiter angel” expects the best and uses faith to expect the most of situations.  The other shoulder has the “Devil” where most things are checked with practicality and realism; which may in turn often depress Jupiter’s freedom seeking nature.

Often there is a seesaw effect present where the person can go through highs and lows in low following the meshed nature of these planets.  As maturity after 30 Saturn comes often a karmic gift is given to these individuals resulting from Jupiter’s expansive side being tested to the max.  The person often realizes the practical and realistic nature of what is worth pursuing and has a more focus set of ambitions that exist within the real world.  

It may not be to uncommon to see someone with this aspect struggle with majors in college and change paths often.  A tendency to find the right career path later in life comes through hardship early.  I advise sometimes, if possible, to weigh all options on practicality of seeking higher education early and really review if there is enough work in the coming years for the chosen field.  A person with these titans battling in the chart often may struggle morally and form very down to earth belief systems as they get older.

amanda-da-derp  asked:

Best vampire movies? In asking for a friend...

Oh. Well, this is just my opinion and recommendations (and I know Cora made a list too) so…

  1. Interview With the Vampire (1994) - Honestly a classic. Who doesn’t love Louis and brat prince Lestat and their love-hate relationship and attempts to keep their family with Claudia together over the passage of time? 100% recommend the books too to anyone who hasn’t read Anne Rice’s work. 
  2. Dracula Untold (2014) - A take on Vlad Teppes becoming Dracula. Looks amazing, has incredible acting and I assure you, you’ll cry. Give me a sequel already. 
  3. Fright Night (2011) -  Oooh controversial opinion time! Yes, I picked this over the original. It’s definitely less scary than the original but the comedic elements/general aesthetic of the movie more than make up for it. Also Collin Farrell as a vampire. 
  4. From Dusk Till Dawn (1996) -  Bank robbers and the family they’ve kidnapped end up in a club full of vampires and have to try to survive until day comes. Wasn’t a box office hit but has a cult following. There’s also now a tv series inspired by it that develops the characters and background witch I recommend too! 
  5. Blade Trilogy (1998-2004) - Based on the Marvel comics. It follows the titular Blade - a ‘daywalker’ - on his endless battle against vampires. The third film does have a lot of controversy surrounding it and it’s not as good as the other two but give it a watch if you like. 
  6. Only Lovers Left Alive (2014) - Probably the most human vampire film in existence. It’s emotionally powerful and deals with depression after centuries of existence. It’s a slow-burning movie and a beautiful tale. 
  7. Dracula (1931) - Honestly the movie we have to thank for vampires becoming such a pop culture staple. Bela Lugosi’s Dracula still continues to define the character and is responsible or the persistent ‘vampire accent’.
  8. Let the Right One In (2008) - Follows a young boy and a vampiric little girl. Another one that’ll make you emotional. Watch the Swedish version over the American remake. Check the book out too!
  9. What We Do in the Shadows (2014) - Mockumentary following vampire flatmates and various other supernatural beings. It’s basically about mundane life but… with vampires and it’s comedy gold. 
  10. Byzantium (2012) - Follows a mother/daughter vampire duo. No high class vampires here, our girls are portrayed by as the lowest rung by society’s standards. The movie is gorgeous and again, a more emotional take on vampires and the problems vampirism can bring. 
  11. The Addiction (1995) - This movie uses vampires to make social commentary. It deals with some heavy issues: AIDS for one, drug abuse for another. But it also explores new age religion and a generation rebelling from what they’ve known. It’s a pretty philosophical movie dealing with peoples’ fluctuating and shifting mindsets. 
  12. Dracula’s Daughter (1936) - Follows - you guessed it - Dracula’s daughter (The Dracula from the 1931 movie). This movie is astounding for its time because it’s a big ol’ lesbian fest and Marya’s quest to rid herself of her vampirism is symbolic of ‘curing’ gay/lesbian individuals.
  13.  Kiss of the Damned (2013) - A screenwriter falls in love with a woman who turns out to be a vampire and is turned by her. They survive by feeding on animals, and everything is going well until our leading lady’s vampiric sister shows up to cause chaos. 
  14. Hotel Transylvania (2012) - An animated movie in which Dracula owns a hotel where the monsters of the world stay, and is about to celebrate his daughter’s - Mavis  - birthday. Things go awry when human Jonathan shows up. Honestly, people dismiss animated movies far too much. This one is high-energy, funny and definitely enjoyable for adults as well as children. 
  15. Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992)  - Another take on the iconic novel. The movie is, honestly, hit-or-miss and at times over the top, but Gary Oldman as Dracula, Winona Ryder as Mina and Anthony Hopkins as Van Helsing are delights you can’t pass up on. Even if it’s kind of a wild ride with how OTT it is, it’s a fun one. 
  16. Thirst (2009) - A South Korean movie that follows a young priest. He tries to help with aid work during an epidemic but ends up infected himself. A blood transfusion saves his life but that blood was vampiric and thus he himself is now a vampire. You can imagine the deep moral and spiritual struggle this causes the devout man as he tries to keep a hold of his humanity.

anonymous asked:

Does it ever upset you that while Anakin himself was a slave, he brushed past the fact that the clones were slaves? And even in the instance with Slick, who basically spoke the truth, Anakin didn't seem bothered. Sorry if this is like an unwanted ask, but it's something that's always irked me.

A part of me feels that Anakin was actually very bothered by this fact – the comment perhaps haunted him long after Slick was taken away. I never saw him as brushing off Slick’s comment in that exchange, as him being taken aback and not knowing what to say in response.

I feel that Anakin is constantly going through an internal struggle of morality and obligation to the Jedi Order. Also, his time as a slave is probably one of the few things he does not like opening up about. I imagine that up there with the subject of his mother, in that Anakin avoids it because he fears that if he does talk about it, he’ll lose himself to his emotions.

It’s always been about him being a “Good Jedi” and putting on a front of being a strong leader.