okay, so I came up with a theory that’s kind of far fetched and kind of stupid bUT here it is.
Okay so do you guys remember this guy here?
Most people write (ha) him off as Darkiplier but he’s actually not.
He’s a whole different character.
He’s what’s know as “The Author”. He was never given a real name (not that I remember. Forgive me if he did) but what ever he wrote would come true.
Well, haven’t you noticed that he kind of disappeared? You’d think that someone who can write what ever they want wouldn’t be so easy to get rid of right? What if he never went away? What if he’s been the one behind Dark/Wilf/Google/etc. this whole time? Just sitting there, writing stuff.
What if Dark/Wilf/Google/etc never existed? What if he made them to torment Mark? What if they’re brothers or something like that and The Author is jealous that Mark can live a normal life while hes stuck with this curse? He’s stuck in this place where he can’t escape and he hates that Mark can. He hates that Mark gets to be normal so he sent Mark some… friends. He’s been manipulating and controlling Mark’s other “characters”.
Everyone seems to think that Wilf has as much power as Dark but what if neither of them really have power? You see in A Date With Warkiplier that Wilf is the only one to give you a real way to escape. But where did he get that power? Where did Dark get his power?
The Author wanted to ruin Mark’s life. So he made Mark have all these “characters” as a way to punish him. He wrote these character into existence as a way to torment Mark. That’s why they’re so powerful because The Author made them that way.
Tagged by one of my favourite blogs of all time @monbeboo to post my lock screen, home screen, last song listened to and latest selfie! Lol my last song is so random but honestly I love the Broadway recording of this musical….
While I respect everyone’s views on this issue and this is not a negative response to anyone’s, especially since I’ve seen a lot of well thought-out counterpoints to mine, I wanted to add some of my thoughts to the discussion.
I don’t necessarily agree in full with all the harsher critiques about Matsuri’s death scene. I think it was important that he died this arc rather than last to emphasize the transition of power between the main Washuu family line and Furuta/V. Other than the Marude revenge narrative and the toxic love narrative that could have formed between him and Urie, Matsuri had wrapped up his major roles in the story. Would I have liked to see him have more screentime in terms of him coming to grips with losing power? Absolutely. Was Matsuri a well-written character that had great potential that wasn’t fulfilled? You fucking bet.
I think that Ishida generally has the issue of caring too much about his characters and maybe overdeveloping them for what he intends for their role in the major plot, though. To me, the problem is less that Ishida is being lazy with the plot and is mindlessly killing off characters, and more that Ishida got really into developing these characters’ backstories despite the fact that the development wasn’t necessary for their planned arcs. Which leads me to keep asking the question: how much is it poor writing on Ishida’s part, and how much is it that we as an audience get too attached to these minor characters who are going to die?
I think it’s a mix of both. Ishida has so many characters within this story that it’s difficult to manage their plots effectively. :re has a cast twice the size of the original series’, and Ishida’s trying to complete all of their narratives within the same timeframe. Because of that, sometimes his well-developed characters have seemed flatter than usual in recent arcs. At the same time, though, I think that we’ve spent so much time as a fandom hyping all of these characters up that we all are disappointed when they don’t meet the level of potential that we want them to. For instance, the Houji vs. Tatara scene didn’t seem like a trainwreck to me; I thought it was a fitting ending for two characters who were more than one-dimensional, had backstories, but didn’t play overwhelming roles/have character arcs within the series. I saw the anticlimactic aspects of the fight as actually better for the story’s themes than if we had a more satisfying/drawn-out fight for either of them. However, we had been thinking about this tension between these two characters since the end of TG. While we anticipated the fight, we would go over in our heads all the amazing and mind-blowing ways their encounter could have gone.
And I see myself get like this all the time with the series. I weirdly feel salty on occasion with Akira’s recent story arc, since it was her taking the stereotypical hit and serving as the damsel-in-distress plot point the past arc and a half. However, when I think more about it, it’s not an inherently bad (although generic) situation that weakens her as a character. In any case, I think Akira needs to be shown in more vulnerable situations to further her character development at this stage, and after she recovers this may be the right gateway to that. Characters need to be able to move the plot forward, and Ishida honestly doesn’t put plot over characters often enough in :re.
I think Matsuri’s a much more difficult situation, because he did have some unresolved feelings before his death, and we didn’t get to see them contemplated. He was built as a bigger minor character that should have gotten that one page or panel of reflection. That is undoubtedly a poor writing decision (although I can’t say that I don’t partially enjoy the dark humor route he took with Matsuri’s death scene).
I think there should also be another frame of mind when examining Matsuri’s death and missed potential outside of this lack of reflection, though. Not all more serious and unresolved aspects of characters essentially need to have entire arcs of development. It’s not essentially bad writing to have character traits introduced that don’t ultimately affect the story. Based on how the story has progressed so far, I can imagine that Matsuri first began as a plot device rather than as a developed character inserted into the plot. The Washuu/CCG plot line is so essential to the series that he was most likely always planned to serve his role as the proper CCG heir and die here. If that is the case, Matsuri could have been a more one-dimensional fodder character, and I’m happy that he is not. Even if it was executed in a flawed manner, I would prefer Ishida’s characterization of Matsuri before this anticlimactic death scene over a flatter Matsuri.
forgot I was working on this during a winter call the midwife rewatch and just found it in my drafts, so here, just a friendly reminder how c l e a r l y set up the good ship patrick x shelegh aka #a cigarette is literally never just a cigarette was
- here, their first appearances, respectively
- their first scene together is after Sister Monica Joan wanders off in the middle of the night and Dr. Turner offers “if she’s brought back, by a policeman, in her nighty, she has it” as a measure for dementia
- AND THEN THERE IS THIS, the first scene they have together feat. Dr. Turner is smoking, in which they talk about Timothy and the legendary resilience of children