this was crucial for the plot

So Club Penguin is shutting down to be replaced by Club Penguin Island, but I don’t think anyone fully understands what this means. Do you really expect me to believe that these fun-loving penguins would willingly leave their happy arctic home to live on a tropical island unfit to sustain penguin life? No. Fuck that. Remember that Disney owns Club Penguin, therefore, it is my humble hypothesis that the original world of Club Penguin has been consumed by the darkness so all the penguins and puffles had to migrate to Destiny Islands as refugees. Now, Sora must purge the darkness from their original arctic world so they may return in safety. This will be a crucial plot point in Kingdom Hearts III.

The neural network will name your next band

An important part of starting a new band is choosing an appropriate name. It is crucial that the name be unique, or you could risk at best confusion, and at worst an expensive lawsuit.

The neural network is here to help.

Prof. Mark Riedl of Georgia Tech, who recently provided the world a dataset of all the stories with plot summaries on Wikipedia, (enabling this post on neural net story names) now used his Wikipedia-extraction skills to produce a list of all the bands with listed discographies - about 84,000 in all.

I gave the list to the Char-rnn neural network framework, and it was soon producing unique band names for a variety of genres. Below are examples of its output at various temperature (i.e. creativity) settings.

Temperature 1.1

This is about as high as the creativity setting can go before most of the band names are unpronounceable jumbles. These are some fine band names, highly suitable for whatever the heck their genres are supposed to be.

Spice Green Robinson
Gloome Schronnana
Boofpas
The Freights
Nighty Daggers
The Loveburners of Internal Watch
Foxettes Ratimot Secret singer band
The Dougloco
The Theps
Choconard Leach
Rhoudemsquat
Terrerssky?
Flemz
Mighty Chipping Baker
Bop Gray (band)

Temperature 1.0

With the creativity turned down a bit, the band names are still weird, but a bit more plausible. Their genres can sometimes be identified.

For example, I think these are probably traditional Irish bands?

The Durks of Audun Green
Sherry of Shinking Feavan
The Shurping Laudst

And these might work as metal bands:

Rabidass (band)
Killerlet (musician)
Brokin’s Killer
Flish Lipe
Supervillin
Girl Dead

These are perhaps a bit less scrutable.

Dr Overhard
The Arce (band)
The Tree Misters
Reilling Ef (rapper)
Flim Brothers
Ching Mage
Nan Edwards (folk singer)
Nittle Bizzy
The Dinlakoposseps
Skins of Space
Michael Porker
The Lost singers
The Nutlet Band
The Rogue Orchestra
The Fuman.A.I.((band)
Vervoly Brown (urtist)
Boohalloid (group)
The Ballening Birds
Lice Stepley

Temperature 0.9

With the creativity turned down a notch further, the band names become even more plausible. You could probably convince me that these exist.

No Andrew Newson
Fuzion (band)
The Wurfywinders
Clay Fights
Berry Stitcher
Something Rothers
The Awl
The Thingsons
Switch’s Rich
Lug
Pond Billy
The Hums (band)
Northern Prince (Indian band)
Staff Killer

Temperature 0.6

Turn the creativity down another notch, and we start to edge toward the neural network’s idea of the most quintessential band names. Note that they’re still pretty weird.

Dub Arts
Sheet Rose
Heart Coil
Elliot Horse
Big Love
The Mothers (band)
The Time Stars
Hulls of Girls
Sucken (band)
Electric Sing Show
The Pans
Symphony No. 3 (Dinish band)
Hell Staple (band)
Peter Parker
Bad Head
The Out Cookers
Flower Shankar
The Hat Coles

Temperature 0.3

Now at a creativity setting of only 0.3, almost all the band names are variations on “The [Noun]”.

The Shines
The Deaths
The Dance (band)
The Livers (band)
The Stone Choir
The Shake Man (band)

Another strange thing happens, which is that the proportion of sharks goes way, way up. Apparently the neural network thinks that if you’re going to name a band, you can’t go wrong with sharks.

Johnny Shark
The Shark Charles
Shark Rander
The Shark (band)
Nicole Shark
Shark Gordon
Shark Taylor (musician)
The Shark Singers
Tony Shark

Temperature 0.01

And now we come to the lowest temperature setting, where the neural network’s output consists of the most-quintessential band name, repeated over and over. Throughout most of the training process, this name was “The Stars” and occasionally “The Brothers”, but there was one generation where the neural network repeatedly insisted that there was nothing… nothing more fundamental to music than the banjo-playing skills of:

Steve Martin (musician)
Steve Martin (musician)
Steve Martin (musician)
Steve Martin (musician)
Steve Martin (musician)
Steve Martin (musician)
Steve Martin (musician)
Steve Martin (musician)

You awake inside the universe of your favorite cartoon. After getting accustomed to the dimensional shift, you begin to plot exactly what to do with this opportunity. As amazing as everything feels, you are also uncertain about something…something crucial…

anonymous asked:

Any advice on how to write a heist story something like oceans Eleven?

Well, you can start by watching Ocean’s Eleven, and Ocean’s Eleven, and then Leverage, and then Burn Notice, and then The A-Team, and then Mission: Impossible, and then all the other heist stories like The Italian Job or Heat. Watch, read, uncover as many stories about criminals as you can from fiction to nonfiction to reading security analyst blogs. Read the spy memoirs, the thief memoirs, the fake ones and the real ones. Check out magicians, hypnotists, card tricks, and sleight of hand. Watch the making ofs and director’s commentaries looking for clues behind the thought process of these stories. The hows and the whys as you look into the research they did. Burn Notice, for example, is famous for using stunt props and technological rigs that work in real life. Like using cell phones to create cheap bugs on the go.

The worlds of criminal fiction and spy fiction rely on being able to present (or convincingly fake) a world which feels real. A heist is all about exploitation. So, you need a world with security structures to exploit. You’ve got to know how things work before you can craft a way to break them. Social engineering, hacking, and every other criminal skill is about breaking the systems in place. So, you’ve got to get a baseline for how law enforcement and security analysts work. What security systems are set up to look like. The ways we go about discouraging thieves. Better yet how people behave. Real, honest to god human behavior.

So, you know, pick somewhere in order to start your research. Get an idea of what you want write about stealing, then learn everything about the object, the museum, the city, the country, and its customs as you can.

If you’re setting a heist in a futuristic or fantasy setting then luck you, you get to make all of it up.

Learning the plot structure and conventions of the heist genre is the first step. This means watching lots and lots of heist movies, shows, and reading books. Over time, as you become better at critical analysis, you’ll begin to see specific story structures and character archetypes emerge.

The Heist Story is a genre. Like every other genre, it comes with its own structure, cliches, archetypes, plots, and genre conventions which necessitate the narrative. The better grasp you have of those, the better you’ll be at writing a heist.

For example, a heist story like Ocean’s Eleven relies on a collection of thieves rather than a single individual. The character types are as follows:

The Pointman - Your planner, strategist, team leader, and the Jack of All Trades. Can also be called the Mastermind. They’re the one who can take the place of anyone on the team should they fall through. They’re not as good as a specialist, but they’re very flexible. Narratively, he plans the cons and subs in where he’s needed.

The Faceman - Your experienced Grifter, here for all your social engineering needs. These guys talk their way in.

The Infiltrator - Your cat burglar or break-in artist. Basically, the conventional genre thief. Your Parker, Catwoman, Sam Fisher, or Solid Snake. The stealth bastards, they’re all about silent in, out, and playing acrobatic games with the lasers.

The Hacker - The electronics and demolitions specialist. Usually this is the guy in the van overseeing stuff remotely. Your Eye in the Sky. Their skill set can be split up and swapped around as necessary.

The Muscle - The one who is good at fighting. They’re combat focused characters, usually with mercenary and special forces backgrounds. Though, that’s optional.

The Wheelman - The one who handles the getaway. They’re your often overlooked transport specialists. It’s not just that they can drive, they’re skilled at getting lots of people around, figuring out how to move your valuables, and exiting hostile cities or countries undetected. They get the team in and they get them out.

For an example of these archetypes, I’m going to use Leverage. Nathan Ford, The Pointman (technically, he’s written like a Faceman). Sophie Devereaux , The Faceman. Parker, the Infiltrator. Hardison, the Hacker. Eliot, the Muscle. They all take turns being the Wheelman.

Other examples like Burn Notice: Michael Westen, the Pointman. Sam Axe, the Faceman. Fiona, the Muscle. They all take turns with explosives, Michael will invariably take all the roles during the course of the show.

Ocean’s Eleven has multiple variants of these archetypes, all broken down and mixed up.

You can mix and match these qualities into different individuals or break them apart like in Ocean’s Eleven, and more than one character can fill more than one role, but that’s the basic breakdown. For example, your hacker doesn’t need to be a guy in a van overlooking the whole security grid. One guy or girl with a cell phone can sit in the lobby of a building with an unsecured wireless network and crack the security. Welcome to the 21st century. The skills don’t necessarily need to take the specific expected shape.

What you do need is the basic breakdown:  You need someone to plan the con, you need someone to be your face or grifter, you need someone to break in, you need someone to watch the security/electronics, you need muscle to back you up, and someone’s got to cover the getaway.

These shift depending on your plan, but this is the expected lineup for a heist narrative. The first step of a heist narrative is not the plan because we don’t have one yet. We’ve got an idea. Pick your target. Maybe it’s a famous painting. Maybe it’s a casino. Maybe it’s a rare artifact from a private investor’s collection loaned to a museum for a short period of time. Maybe it’s art stolen by the Nazis during WWII. Whatever it is, figure it out.

The next step is simple. If you want the thing, you’ve got to find a way to get it. This is a big job, your standard thief won’t be able to pull it off alone. So, you gotta go recruiting. Get your team together. Make sure to establish the goals of the different members for joining. Who they are. Their pedigree. One might be an old flame or an old enemy. This is where we lay out some character driven subplots.

When everyone’s together, we’ve got to lay out the plan. Before we have a plan though, we need to establish where the object is and the issues in getting it. Why this has never been done before. So, what are the challenges? Invariably, an object worth a great deal of money will have a lot of security protecting it. Figure out what that security is, who the item belongs to, what sort of retribution do the thieves face beyond what they might expect. Lasers, pressure plates, cameras, security, other career criminals, mob bosses, the rich and powerful, whatever.

After that: How do you get it? Then you’ve got to plan the con, while taking everything into account.

Then, We prep the Con. There will be steps to take before the con can be put into place, your characters taking their positions in plain sight. Stealing whatever pieces you need to make it work. Casing the joint. Etc.

Then: Run the Con. This is the part with the actual stealing. Better known as the first attempt. Things go well, there may be a few mistakes, but things are going well and then we…

Encounter Resistance. While running the con, something goes wrong, pieces fall apart, the thieves come close to success but the object gets moved and they suddenly need a new plan. New information may pop up, it may be one of your artists was running a con of their own separate from the rest. If there’s a double cross in the works then this may be when and where it lands.

We’re ready now, so it’s time hit up: Steal the Thing, Round Two. Your characters put their new plan into play and get about thieving the object of their desire.

Lastly: The Get Away. This is the part where your thieves make for the hills with their stolen treasure. This can be short or long depending on the kind of story you’re telling and other double crosses may occur here. It could be the end of the story or the beginning of a new heist.

Heist stories are like mystery novels. They’re all about sleight of hand and misdirection. You’ve got to keep just enough information on the table to keep your audience on the hook, and just enough information off the table to surprise them later on the twist. Yet, when they go back to re-read the novel again, they’ll find the answer was there all along. They just didn’t see it coming.

If anything, learning how to write a well-done heist or a mystery or any kind of novel in this genre will teach you a lot about how to manage your foreshadowing and create superb plot twists. Like any good con, you need to lay out all the conflicting pieces where people can see them, let them draw their own conclusions, withhold the critical context, and then hit them with the whammy.

Like lots of audiences, new writers (and even some old ones) can get distracted by the shock and awe. They see they’re impressed by the conclusion, not the lay-up. If you want to write any kind of fiction, you need to learn to see past the curtain and pay attention to the critical pieces leading into an important moment rather than the moment itself.

Good writing isn’t modular, you can’t just strip out pieces and run with them because you’ll end up missing the crucial, sometimes innocuous pieces that ensured the scene worked. Like the Victorian Hand Touch, every moment between the two leads and most of their scenes with secondary players are working for that singular instance of eventual, gleeful catharsis.

If you’ve got a plot twist coming in your novel, every sentence from the second you start writing is working towards it. You start laying out your pieces, funneling in your tricks, and playing with misdirection. You may have multiple twists, to cover yourself, divert your audience, congratulate them for successfully guessing your ploy, and reassure their initial suspicions before catching them again on the upswing.

The clever writer is as much a con artist as their characters. The only difference is the target of their con is their audience. The tricks in their bag are narrative ones, and they work with the understanding that it doesn’t matter if someone guesses the end so long as they’re entertained by the journey. A great story stays entertaining long after the audience has figured out all the twists.

So, don’t get caught up in Red Herrings and frightened about not being able to outsmart other people. Tell a good story with conviction and heart about a bunch of crooks out to steal their heart’s desire.

That’s all there is to it.

-Michi

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.

Writing Trans Characters

DO:

1. Treat them like regular people, like actual human beings, because they are people, not just trans

2. Mention they’re trans at some point, because proper representation is important- it doesn’t have to be a huge reveal, it can just be one sentence, it can be totally offhand

3. Be confident about including trans characters in any setting- there have been trans people since there has been gender, there’s no context in which their presence makes no sense

4. Research things like binders and tucking and hormone therapy if you don’t know anything about them

DON’T:

1. Do that thing where a character’s like “I was Steve… But now call me… Stevette”

2. Include a trans character simply for the purpose of fetishisation

3. Feature unsafe practices like binding with bandages unless it’s really crucial to the plot, somehow

4. Use the phrase “trapped in the wrong body” or outdated terminology like “transsexual”- all of which can be easily researched- because like, honestly, it’s just not correct

bit of a rant

ya know what im really tired of?

fandoms demanding ships from show creators/crews

are ships.. really so important that you’re gonna just harass the people that gave you this material in the first place. make them hate fandoms in silence and worse make them hate what they create? this is especially irksome when its directed towards a)disney shows and b)shows with heavy plot. im not really directing any of this towards any show in particular mind you, theres far too many fandoms going after this trend to single any out at this point, there are some high contenders though.

more under the cut because this rant ran away from me and became way longer than intended

Keep reading

“Nothing even happened in Volume 4″

-Right from the start, we get a glimpse of how Grimm are created

-Introduction to three new bad guys, and one farm boy that Tumblr instantly gushes over.

-Ruby gets a new outfit in order to honor her fallen friends

-Jaune gets his weapon redesigned to honor his fallen partner

-Funny RNJR vs JNRR debate (started by the FNDM) included into the show

-Weiss stands up to her abusive father in public

-Weiss’ epic song and Weiss’ epic singing

-We learn why Blake ran from Vale, and she is justified

-Yang recovers from PTSD and depression

-Yang takes a bold step in accepting the use of a prothestetic arm

-Three new Grimm (four when including the character short) are revealed

-Three new faunus types

-New weapons

-”It’s also a gun” trope reoccurence

-”Looks human, is actually a Faunus” trope reoccurence

-We learn that Blake is essentially royalty

-Second Secondary Schnee Sibling™

-Lie Ren and Nora Valkyrie backstory

-Raven Branwen’s first appearance since Volume 2

-Branwen Backstory™

-Qrow “Birdman” Branwen

-Epic Qrow vs Tyrian fight

-Bad Luck Charm

-Qrow’s semblance is revealed and explained

-Remnant religion revealed

-Old STRQ shenanigans

-Sun and Blake team up in combat

-Klein the Butler as The Seven Dwarfs

-Posthumous Pyrrha™

-Zwei 

-Jaune comforting Ruby about her doubts to mirror Volume 1

-Sun comforting Blake

-Renora getting 99% confirmed

-Pumpkin Pete hoodie (which you can buy in the Rooster Teeth store!)

-Crocea Mors weapon upgrade

-Armed and Ready (full song)

-”We’re getting the gang back together!” hype

-Weiss being able to summon the Giant Armor

-No beloved character death

-”You BITCH!”

-Ozpin manipulating Oscar’s body 

-Qrow’s repeated nodding and smile at Oscar/Ozpin

-”For my mother.”

-”For my father.”

-”For all those that you’ve slain.”

-”For myself.”

I know a lot of this wasn’t plot crucial, but a lot of cool things still happened in Volume 4. 

Feel free to add more if you want.

i have like. a lot to say about why sherlock failed as t.v. show bc i think as a writer it’s a really crucial study in how to ruin a good premise/beginning and tbh if not to just … study how not to handle characters it’s pretty fascinating bc there are some truths which i feel it’s necessary to point out:

  • nobody likes to feel cheated at the end of the story.
  • death only matters if it’s forever and it’s rare.
  • on that note, there should be consequences for actions.
  • trust your characters to be interesting without unnecessary drama.
  • throwing plot at your characters feels less real than having their desires make them walk fully into the glass door of plot
  • if you’re going to make one of your characters “a sociopath” or disabled with ptsd or any other mental or physical illness, do extensive research into the personal experiences of those who suffer it and handle it with gravitas; don’t just vanish a character’s disability because it’s inconvenient to have them use a cane etc.
  • when there’s a good plot twist with nice foreshadowing, the audience loves it. when there’s just always plot twists, the author loves plot twists more than his own story.
  • surprise isn’t always a good thing.
  • “it was all a dream/joke/mirage/spell” is literally the weakest form of writing yourself out of a corner and is incredibly annoying to read/watch
  • queerbaiting is ugly
  • ride rollercoasters, not a broken elevator. have some stretches between plunges. your story can speed ahead and stay interesting without diving into hell again. 
  • having a Big Bad Evil doesn’t make the story interesting; in fact having “monster of the week” problems feels more authentic and enjoyable 
  • write your women like people and let them have plots that have nothing to do with men.
  • just because you’re good doesn’t mean that you are above critique or getting better. you should always be challenging yourself to outdo your previous self, not resting on the laurels of a previously effective moment
  • characters don’t have to be overpowered to be interesting 
  • if a character’s emotions all exist on a scale of 1-10, 10 being the most emotion that an emotion can be (the saddest/angriest/broodiest), do not let that character hit a 10 until you are ready to be done with them forever 
  • when you are done with them forever, be done
More Than Just A Cartoon

It’s easy for those who have never watch Avatar: The Last Airbender to pass off the show as just another product of Nickelodeon, but those who have sat down and given the show a chance quickly learn that this series stood far apart from anything Nickelodeon had produced before.

So what made Avatar so different? For starters, it was a linear story with a clear start and beginning. Viewers follow Aang, Katara and Sokka as they embark on a journey to defeat the Firelord. The story grows in complexity with each episode and little details easily brushed off at first often become crucial parts of the series (remember the cameo of Azula sitting next to Uncle Iroh at Zuko’s Agni Kai against his father?). This cartoon has such a deep plot that producers felt it necessary to include a “Previously on Avatar” segment before many of the show’ episodes. No other children’s cartoon- to my knowledge- has had a plot so detailed that a recap was deemed necessary. The very story of Avatar is so complex and beautifully woven that it needs this, and the size of this grand endeavor does not go unnoticed.

Another thing that makes Avatar so much different than an ordinary cartoon is the motives behind the “bad guys”. It’s a classic cartoon motif for the bullies to be secretly insecure and emotionally damaged themselves. There is often an episode that depicts the struggles of the main bully and why they may not be as bad as we think. This is NOT the case in Avatar. The two big baddies of the series- Azula and her father Fire Lord Ozai- are genuinely evil. They show no remorse for their actions. In Azula’s case, she has many clear characteristics of a sociopath. Even when she begins to lose her sanity, she does not see the errors of her ways or beg for forgiveness. Yes, we learn that she is emotionally wounded by her mother’s rejection of her, yet we never see her use this as an excuse. She simply shrugs this off and claims that her mother was right. She owns her evil and wears it with pride. At the final Agni Kai, she genuinely wants to take down Zuko because of the joy it will bring her. She has no remorse or emotional attachment to anything anymore, other than the pride behind her own abilities.

Her father, Firelord Ozai, is even worse. While we get to see brief moments of Azula’s humanity, Ozai never suffers a breakdown like Azula. With the fury of a real-life dictator, he confidently prepares to destroy the world to create a society fit to worship him and him alone. Even after losing to Aang, he is filled with nothing but anger at losing his bending. He isn’t even sorry that he was defeated. Fire Lord Ozai is filled with evil, and Nickelodeon allows creators DiMartino and Konietzko to create characters without any “dumbing down” for children. Ozai and Azula are genuine evil.

With the inclusion of genuine evil comes the presentation of complex and emotionally grappling themes. One of these themes presented early in the series is the theme of genocide- or the destruction of a race of people. Avatar boldly dedicates an entire episode to the discovery of the skeletal graveyard of Aang’s people. This is the first time in the series where it becomes clear that the series will address topics much more series and real-world than penguin sledding. Watching Aang realize that his people were destroyed then left to rot brings the true humanity into the series. This only continues as we see themes of child abuse, internal conflict, parental disagreements and many more.

Avatar may be a cartoon, but it is a cartoon that stands far above the rest of American productions. The series is deep and insightful, with a complexity of characters and true evil and pain.  

nytimes.com
Margaret Atwood on What ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ Means in the Age of Trump
Atwood on whether her dystopian classic is meant as a “feminist” novel, as antireligion or as a prediction.
By Margaret Atwood

TW for sexual assault, gender violence

“Which brings me to three questions I am often asked.

First, is “The Handmaid’s Tale” a “feminist” novel? If you mean an ideological tract in which all women are angels and/or so victimized they are incapable of moral choice, no. If you mean a novel in which women are human beings - with all the variety of character and behavior that implies - and are also interesting and important, and what happens to them is crucial to the theme, structure and plot of the book, then yes. In that sense, many books are “feminist.”

Why interesting and important? Because women are interesting and important in real life. They are not an afterthought of nature, they are not secondary players in human destiny, and every society has always known that. Without women capable of giving birth, human populations would die out. That is why the mass rape and murder of women, girls and children has long been a feature of genocidal wars, and of other campaigns meant to subdue and exploit a population. Kill their babies and replace their babies with yours, as cats do; make women have babies they can’t afford to raise, or babies you will then remove from them for your own purposes, steal babies - it’s been a widespread, age-old motif. The control of women and babies has been a feature of every repressive regime on the planet. Napoleon and his “cannon fodder,” slavery and its ever-renewed human merchandise — they both fit in here. Of those promoting enforced childbirth, it should be asked: Cui bono? Who profits by it? Sometimes this sector, sometimes that. Never no one.”

Read the full essay by Margaret Atwood here

The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood

Tbh I lowkey feel like black sails has now ruined every other period drama for me lmao. Like oh nice authentic costumes? Good good. Great writing and acting? Cool cool. Beautiful scenery and excellent action scenes? That’s great buddy. But does it have well written and important gay characters that get amazing development and are crucial to the plot and don’t get sidelined or killed off for shock value? No? Then what is the fucking point??

Keep faith Jonsa fam <3

With S07E06 it’s easy to lose faith in the ship and so many people are reasonably upset but fret not! We still have plenty of points that are still as valid as they were prior to this episode.

Let’s go through them and calm down, alright? (For Jonerys shippers, people are allowed to ship whoever they want. Please don’t take this as an attack to your ship.)


Here are some summarised points just to refresh yourself on why this ship makes so much sense!

1) Sansa being the first Stark to reunite with Jon, forming a bond between the two. Think of all how refreshing it was to see Jon and Sansa smile on screen for the first time in forever, and how crucial it is for developing the plot!

2) The marriage symbolisms in the scenes they share. Sansa is cloaked in(what I assume to be) Jon’s cloak when she first arrives at Castle Black. She then cloaks him in the Stark fur she makes him(and he’s worn it ever since - even on the cliff at Dragonstone). They both have also shared a drink together, which just paints more wedding imagery. Not to mention, Jon has promised to protect her(sounds like something you’d vow to your partner).

3) How their scenes are shot in a particular way that may suggest a foreshadowing of them being endgame. Candle lit rooms, gentle snow falling and panned close ups of anytime Sansa’s grabbed Jon’s hand/arm.

4) Bickering like an old married couple while still empowering each other and Sansa reassuring the Jon that he’s good at ruling thus giving him the confidence he needs and reminding him that he’s a Stark to her. Wow I love a supportive dynamic. Nothing but mutual respect from my two children.

5) How well they work together and how they balance each other out. Jon of course being the military man, and Sansa being more politically savvy. Wow, Westeros is shook at this power couple.

6) The Ned and Cat parallels. I don’t even need to get into this one because there are plenty of sources out there that have pointed this out!

7) Littlefinger’s panned close up of him looking at Jon, then looking at Sansa as if he’s putting two and two together. This is incredibly significant considering the event that led up towards it could be seen as Littlefinger trying to see what would make Jon tick.

8) Angry Kitten Jon i.e. the strange way in which we see him react to different people bringing up Sansa. Choking Littlefinger, glaring and not being interested in discussing her with Tyrion, Sansa being the only reason he chooses to spare Theon. Davos’ close up right after his interaction with Theon. Very suspicious.

9) Them mentioning each other even when they’re miles apart. It’s an odd thing to note that Sansa keeps saying she wishes Jon were with her and that she hopes he comes back soon, meanwhile we also have Jon not being able to escape the mention of Sansa.

10) Jon taking notice of her new silk dress. Remember when he said he’d want to see Ygritte in a silk dress… so he could tear it off of her?

11) The forehead kiss and lingering gaze. They could have reshot this if it wasn’t meant to give off any other vibe that wasn’t perceived as brotherly. 10mill for that last episode, just saying.

12) The deleted scene. In which Jon tells Ghost to stay behind and protect Sansa.

13) Name parallels in both the Stark and Targaryen family tree. There was a Jaeherys Targaryen(some people think this may be Jon’s true name) who married an Alyssane(which is remarkably similar sounding to Alayne - Sansa’s adoptive name while she was in the Vale. But even if it turns out his true name isn’t Jaeherys, there’s still the Jonnel Stark that married a Sansa Stark. Now that’s on the nose.

14) Sansa giving his new life purpose. When we see Jon after he’s resurrected, he was ready to abandon his post as Lord Commander. Sansa walks in just in time, and she gives him a reason to fight for - the reclamation of Winterfell. Jon is truly reborn when he resurfaces from the crowd and we see in him something that’s been missing throughout the season - purpose. Then he goes and knocks the sh*t out of Ramsay.

15) The Prince Aemon/Joffrey bit. Ned had promised her someone brave, gentle and strong like Prince Aemon, noting that the match with Joffrey was a mistake. This happens in Season 1 and in the 1st installation of the ASOIAF books. In the 3rd installation of the books, Jon recalls a time where he and Robb would be training as kids, referring to himself as Prince Aemon the Dragonknight.While in the show in Season 7, we see Jon get insulted at the thought that Sansa might think of him to be like Joffrey - to which she says he’s as far as Joffrey as anyone she’s ever met.

16) Sansa’s hair. This is often overlooked but I remember reading that when Sophie Turner got her role, she asked the producers why she had to dye her hair. They told her that it’s actually important and crucial to the plot in some symbolic way. Let me just point out to you how most if not all the women in Jon’s life that he’s been involved with in some way or another has had red hair. While this seems like merely a coincidence that’s not worth bringing up, it could be tied to the validation he never received while growing up - of Catelyn’s(who had more of an auburn shade), and Sansa who took after her mother in never accepting Jon fully.

17) Janos Slynt. Sansa had wished for a hero to behead Janos Slynt(in the books). Jon ends up beheading Janos Slynt(in the books and the show). This has a romantic connotation since the hero always falls for the princess in the songs.

18) How their arcs almost reflect and mirror each other throughout the story. Both Jon and Sansa had romantic ideas of the world that are debunked by reality. Jon believing the Night’s Watch is a place of honour, and Sansa having her whole reality flipped. (My poor bbs </3)

19) How their arcs are at one point reversed. Sansa finds herself born into a position of power in the beginning, while Jon was a bastard. She then at finds herself being the bastard, while Jon is raised up as Lord Commander. This is good to take note of as they now have a better understanding of each other respectfully.

20) How them getting together would literally give them both what they wanted as children. Sansa’s always wanted her prince(and since Rhaegar annulled his marriage, Jon is a Targaryen Prince), and Jon’s always wanted a family and to live in Winterfell(+ deep down I’m sure he’s always craved the validation he was denied as a child growing up in Winterfell - he had hoped Ned would have the King legitimise him).

21) Poetic justice. How fitting would it be to have a situation that started out from a Targaryen/Stark wedding to end with a Targaryen/Stark wedding(this time done right)? Too perfect.

Those are some of the points I could think of straight off the top of my head, without taking into account the points that stand against D*enerys. I wanted to make sure this post was as positive without having to be perceived as me taking a go at D*ny. But, for the purpose of making this complete, let’s see some points against that ship(you can stop reading at this point if you only want positivity, but I’ll try to be as rational!)


1) The argument that J*nerys together makes the Song of Ice and Fire. This is a questionable point since there could be many interpretations of what’s truly Ice and Fire so I’ve never found this to be persuasive. You could argue that Jon is the Song of Ice and Fire himself, since it’s been revealed that he is both Stark and Targaryen.

2) D*enerys’ story arc serves as a foil to Jon’s. The reason why these characters seem alike is because they seem to mirror their positions throughout the story. However, if you take a closer look - D*ny has risen to power on account of her birthright and dragons, and she has actively sought out her power. Meanwhile, Jon finds himself in a position of power not because he wants it or has a birthright, but because people want him to assume that position(like being elected Lord Commander and then crowned King in the North).

3) The highlighted differences between these characters. In Mereen in Season 5, we see D*enerys sentence a man to death but have Daario Naharis carry out the sentence in front of her people as a deterrent. This has always been interesting to me because she cannot bring herself to look at him as he is being beheaded. It reminds me of the saying that he who passes the sentence should swing the sword. In the same season, we see Jon behead Janos Slynt himself.

4) The direction the show seems to have taken in relation to D*ny’s methods of ruling. Yes, I do agree that you’ve got to be more and more ruthless as you hold more and more power but it’s interesting to me how they’ve decided to shoot her scenes lately. There’s her insisting that she is Queen(Tywin: “Any man who must say “I am the King” is no true King.”). Then we are asked to empathise with the Lannister army for the first time in the series - with Ed Sheeran’s cameo meant to humanise the soldiers, and the Field of Fire 2.0 battle being shot from the Lannister army’s point of view - of devastation when going against a weapon of mass destruction(Drogon). To top it all off, she displays ignorant hypocrisy - saying she wants to break the wheel but only when she’s already on top, deflecting and ignoring any attempts Tyrion makes to talk some sense into her(we’ve seen Tyrion trying to deny that she’s being irrational while with Varys, and mentioning that she’s known to lose her temper), telling the army she’s not there to murder them and then giving them an ultimatum of bending the knee or dying, and burning the Tarlys alive. That last point is interestingly enough never brought up with Jon the same way the maesters don’t inform Samwell - which makes me feel like it’s been left out for now, for a reason. It’ll come back and change Jon’s perspective of her further.

5) Contrasting D*ny’s ruling methods with Sansa’s. While D*enerys’ loot train attack destroyed the food that would have fed the people, in the same episode we see Sansa trying to ensure that her people are fed. It’s there for a reason. For us to be able to extract and juxtaposition these two together and start questioning who would make a better Queen - a ‘foreign invader’ and conquerer who uses her weapons of mass destruction to pave a way for her on the Iron Throne, or the key to the North who has learnt how to play the Game of Thrones from arguably a few of the best players(Cersei, Margaery, and Littlefinger).

6) Cersei’s Prophecy of the Younger, more beautiful Queen. People seem to overlook this when it’s actually quite indicative of endgame. People are also quick to assume that D*ny is the Younger Queen that would talk all that [Cersei] holds dear. But how could she be? D*enerys had nothing to do with the deaths of Joffrey, Myrcella, and Tommen. Sansa did. Although unknowingly. Sansa was the one who informed Olenna Tyrell of how much of a monster Joffrey was - this set the chain of events that led to all three of Cersei’s children’s deaths. While Margaery could be perceived as the Younger Queen as well - she had no clue of Olenna’s involvement, and furthermore - Cersei still has Jaime while Margaery has already been reduced to ashes. So, if Jaime were to sometime in the future join forces under Sansa, she would fulfil the prophecy. I highly doubt that Jaime would be keen on joining D*enerys after what he’s seen her do with fire - I’m sure he was getting war flashbacks, poor guy.

**I’d like to mention and give fair warning that past this point, I’ve hinted at some things that happen in E06 so if you want to be absolutely spoiler free, please stop yourself from reading further. Or, you could go ahead and read only the bolded first line of each point!**


7) A marriage between D*enerys and Jon serves no greater purpose. We are reminded that D*ny is barren(please don’t make it seem like I’m picking at this being her fault and hating her for it, I’m trying to be rational), she cannot give Jon an heir(children he’s always wanted though I don’t doubt that if he truly loves someone he wouldn’t mind giving that dream up, so don’t see this as me trying to pit two women against each other for the sole reason of one not being able to have children). So the Targaryen lineage would truly die with D*enerys if this marriage is realised. Furthermore, the North will not accept a Southern ruler, and will always follow the Stark name. If Jon bends the knee, not only will he be giving up what his family fought for, but he would be betraying the wants of his people. If it is revealed that he is Targaryen and it’s made public knowledge, the marriage that makes the most sense to maintain peace is if he marries Sansa - a Stark, since Jon would be abdicating his position as King in the North by bending the knee and Sansa would still be Lady of Winterfell as she has the Stark name. On the topic of children though, for some reason in E06 we keep getting hints of possibly foreshadowings of Jon having his own children - specifically when Jorah doesn’t accept Longclaw, saying it would serve [Jon]’s children well - and then the scene cuts to Sansa and Arya.

8) Jon possibly playing D*enerys is not completely OOC. Take into account what he did with Ygritte, then take into account the number of reminders he’s had this season alone. Sansa reminds him to be smarter than Robb and Ned, and one of the other Northern Lords reminds him that Robb rode South once, married a foreigner and lost the North. What’s the one thing Kit Harrington says about Jon this season? That he’s beginning to listen to Sansa. You may argue that it’s character assassination to have Jon, who’s so pure, resort to manipulation but he could be putting his family and duty first - he needs to do what he can to secure her alliance. In fact I think it’s more insulting to his character if we were to assume that he would deliberately give up the North without first consulting his people, let alone Sansa. It’s way past time Jon plays a little bit of the game, it does his character justice to develop and learn from past mistakes at least that much. Of course, there’s also guilt following the events of E06 during the wight hunt. Let’s not forget D*ny’s prophecy that states that she will be betrayed thrice - once for blood, once for gold and once for love(this last one has yet to happen).

9) The Odysseus/Penelope/Calypso parallel. I saw this going around at some point and it’s been quite popular ever since! Unfortunately I’m not too sure who the original source is, but please feel free to tag them below! They made a link between the three greek characters with Jon, Sansa and D*ny respectfully. Calypso had detained Odysseus on her island for some time, while Penelope stayed behind and ruled on behalf of him in his absence. Odysseus and Calypso end up sleeping together but in the end, he comes back to his Penelope. It’s not to say that I like the idea of Sansa being ‘second’, but I’m choosing to interpret this in a way that guarantees Jon coming back to Sansa despite the boatbang.


That concludes this little list/semi-meta(?) I’ve never taken a go at these, in fact I’m pretty sure this is my second time making my own textpost. Again, the point of this was not to put one character against the other just so we can be satisfied with our ship. You are allowed to ship whoever you want to! I simply felt the need to bring these points up again because the night is dark and full of red-herrings.

Please try to leave this post as hate-free as possible. If it appears on the wrong tag, I apologise. But if you were secure with your ship then you wouldn’t feel the need to come at me. Although if you do still feel the need to defend a certain character, no one’s stopping you - just be respectful! x

Last but not least… can we just… appreciate these two. (I saw this gif online but I’m not sure where, apologies if it’s yours - all credit to you and please don’t hesitate to let me know.)

Doc Scratch and Joey: In Cahoots!

Seriously, this girl is chindeep in cahoots with our favorite cueball head, even more than Vriska or Rose ever was.

I know I posted a lot about this, but here is everything that I’ve found in one long theory post. I hope you guys can read this long post instead of my spur-of-the-moment incoherent scattered blubs. I’m keeping most of this under the cut, though, because spoilers.

TL;DR: Joey is an agent for Doc Scratch to overthrow Trizza and pave the way for Homestuck.

Keep reading

8

a Blade Runner 2049 prequel short film “in-world” piece that explains what happened in the world of Blade Runner between the first movie, set in 2019, and this sequel, set in 2049. The short film “Nexus: 2036” takes place in the year 2036 and revolves around Jared Leto’s character, Niander Wallace. In this short, directed by Luke Scott (Morgan), Wallace introduces a new line of “perfected” replicants called the Nexus 9, seeking to get the prohibition on replicants repealed. This no doubt has serious ramifications that will be crucial to the plot of Blade Runner 2049.

"why don't you like frozen?"
  • what i mean: It's a film that, essentially suffers from an existential crisis throughout the entire two hours it runs. There's no world building whatsoever, leaving too many unanswered questions the audience in regards to the magic and lore of the land. It's inferred the trolls know everything there is to know about magic, but it does not explain how Elsa recieved her powers in the first place, leaving a pretty big unanswered question. Also, the decision to take a fantasy race usually isolated from magicks as the main sage magicians was an ...interesting choice, and would have worked out a bit better if the world was built up more. The plot is all over the place, with there being no clear antagonist until the final arc of the movie. Is the Duke of Weaselton supposed to be the antagonist? No, and he honestly doesn't even belong in the movie: in what way does this character move forward the plot? He doesn't, so why is he given such emphasis? Is Elsa supposed to be the antagonist? Through the film the audience is constantly being given conflicting views as to whether or not we are supposed to sympathsize with her or hate her, and we're never given our answer until the final arc of the movie, which is, ironically, when the real antagonist show his face: Hans. Since he is introduced as he antagonist in the final arc, it makes Hans' development as a villain feel rushed and unnatural. Such a sudden heel-face turn from charming benevolent prince to cold-blooded killer feels wrong, and considering there was no foreshadowing or dramatic irony leading up the reveal, it comes as a shock to even the most watchful moviegoers. Beyond the shock response, there is no reason for the audience to hate Hans, making him an ineffective villain all in all. The audience only hates him because he betrayed the trust that was willingly given in the first half of the film. Yes, he wants to usurp the throne and kill everyone off, but wouldn't that incentive be more effective if it were presented as such from the beginning of the movie? Give the viewers hints and clues that he is not what he seems, making the reveal of his plan much more suspenseful. Additionally, if it were addressed from the beginning, a large amount of the aimless plotless wandering that plagued most of the first three-quarters of the movie would be practically non-existant. In addition, the shock factor response wears off eventually; the impact of his betrayal means less and less to the audience each time they watch it. Part of the reason of the weakness and confusion in the beginning also stems from the fact that the movie is trying to juggle too many characters. Many named characters are completely unneeded and did not need to steal screentime (and by extension, valuble character development) from the main characters (Anna, Elsa, Kristoff, and I guess Hans). And the lack of character development is bad. Really bad. Anna doesn't feel like a real person, even by Disney standards. Elsa is a bit more believable, but her "development" is rushed and inferred instead of shown to the audience as it should be. Why was there such an emphasis on the parents in the beginning if they were only going to be killed off for plot fuel? And as an audience member, I did not feel any sadness for their death or for how Anna and Elsa were grieving. Having Elsa locked in her room for upmost of ten years was just...weird. There was absolutely nothing that justified it, making the isolation feel like a cheap way out for the writers to transition from childhood to adulthood. And beyond that, Arendelle is shown to be a peaceful kingdom, so it makes no sense that Anna would not be allowed to leave the castle and walk amongst the city. If magic exists in this world, why was Elsa locked away? Why was it a secret? All of these questions stem from weak worldbuilding that justifies very little of the events of the movie. There are so many unanswered questions that rise up from what happens inbetween childhood and adulthood. Is there a puppet monarch? Was magic seen as something negative or unknown? Why the trolls. Why the trolls. I'm sorry I just do not understand the trolls. The romantic subplot again ties into making the trolls feel even more forced and unneeded and the Hans reveal stale, I don't need to go into this. From a technically standpoint, the animation is subpar compared to its contempararies. Rise of the Guardians, a movie made a year before Frozen, had better ice effects. The particle effects and textures were nothing to write home about and the numerous clipping issues are clear evidence that the final product was rushed. The character design is the biggest complaint everyone has heard the most, but, Jesus Christ, oh my god it's bad. There's virtually no variation in character design. The facial structure of all the women are practically identical. Elsa, Anna, their mother, even Rapunzel all look 100% identical. Perhaps that wouldn't be such a problem if their body types were the same as well. There's no power of silouette in the film, something that is absolutely crucial to animated film, making Anna and Elsa blend together not only in the film, but in the industry itself. They do not stand out. They are blank and bland. The music is the only good thing, and that's only considering some songs. "Let it Go" and "First Time in Forever" are strong, powerhouse showtunes that actually move the plot forward, as songs in a musical should, but "Fixer-Upper" and "Love is an Open Door," while good, solid songs, do relatively nothing for the plot can could be omitted without sacrificing anything. "In Summer" is a total joke song that literally fades into nothing--I could not recall the tune if I tried, and "Do You Wanna Build a Snowman?" has a lot of potential but is, esentially, the same chorus repeated with little to no transition three times. It doesn't help that the song is also the most awkward contrived timeskip in the history of awkward contrived timeskips, again because it is never explained why Elsa is locked in her room at all. And the trolls and the--oh god. Please, all artists and writers, do NOT overlook the importance of worldbuilding. Even the dialogue is mediocre and does nothing to immerse the characters into the world around them. The resulting product is nothing but two hours of mediocrity masquerading as the best film of the decade in commercialization and ticket sales, but ultimately does nothing but leave a bad taste in the audience's mouth and will encourage Disney to continue making mediocre movies because they know they will sell and sell well.
  • what i say: because it's a bad movie
A Series of Unfortunate Events : the recipe to a good adaptation

This is a short analysis of the recent adaptation A Series of Unfortunate Events by Netflix. I will not mention everything here, it would require much more time and analysis but here is a general appreciation. Careful for spoilers !

Adaptations are quite tricky to accomplish because being true to the original work while bringing novelty to the piece is not so easy. The best adaptations are often the ones that manage to channel the spirit of the original work. A Series of Unfortunate Events is a very successful example of this. It was already visible in the first trailer where Lemony Snicket actually walks on the set of the filming to tell us not to watch this series. Right here, you have three core elements of the original series : our narrator-character, the breaking of the fourth-wall and the plea not to look into this horrific story. That last element actually is a known way to catch the reader/viewer’s attention and make him want to know more.

When it comes to A Series of Unfortunate Events, the character of Lemony Snicket is crucial. Therefore the adaptation needs to be perfectly true to his features. As a child, I really believed Lemony Snicket was this mysterious author hidding from malevolent authorities. The fact that Lemony is actually out of the story ,since he is the author/narrator, and a full part of it builds the whole myth around this series.
When I saw the movie, I did not get that feeling of mystery around Lemony mainly because it is not cleary explicited that he is part of all this : the viewer doesn’t see on-screen any important hint that Lemony is a central character of the story, he is presented above all as the writer.
In the Netflix series, Lemony is the first person the viewer visually encounters, just like in the books. The fact that you can see him entirely makes him a reassuring presence throughout the show : he is your guide. The show stages this aspect very cleverly by blending Lemony in the situations the Baudelaires find themselves in, usually through his costume.

Thanks to this process, the narrator’s role is fully depicted. A narrator that addresses directly to the reader/viewer is usually out of the story and Lemony is indeed “out” since he is telling the events. But Lemony is also “in” as an important character. The show drops hints along the way which keep getting bigger gradually : his investigation, the letters to Beatrice, the fact that he is being chased, among other things, and of course the reveal of the picture with Olaf in the last episode.

All these proofs show that Lemony really is involved in this story. It is very fortunate that they kept the dedications to Beatrice at the beginning of each segment of the story because she is the one who ties Lemony to the story. She actually acts as his muse, she is the main reason why he writes, the name Beatrice being a reference to Dante’s own muse.
Since he is an « in-between » character, literally the bridge between you and the story, Lemony is the one who constantly breaks the fourth-wall. This aspect is so crucial in A Series of Unfortunate Events. It allows Lemony to act as the antic chorus or Prologue : “If you are interested in stories with happy endings, you would be better off reading some other book. In this book, not only is there no happy ending, there is no happy beginning and very few happy things in the middle.” (The Bad Beginning).
With those few lines, the essence of the plot is completely laid before your eyes, just like the ancient tragedies. In the series, apart from those lines, the opening song has the exact same role : “Every single episode is nothing be dismay.”
The breaking of the fourth-wall is also at the core of both series because story-telling mecanisms are explained through it. In the Reptile Room, Lemony explains the dramatic irony which is then again an aspect of the antic tragedies. As I remember it, the book series crossed the fourth-wall to teach something to the reader : a word, writing techniques and less straightforwardly, literary references. All these elements were fortunately brought into the show as well.

Now Lemony is mainly the one to break the wall, as allowed by his narrator status. What is unsettling for the viewer is when Count Olaf breaks it, usually to advertise the TV show and stare at the camera for a couple of seconds. This leads to the other important aspect of an adaptation : the creativity. The writers did not only represent Olaf, they actually add depths according to the new medium : what would Olaf do if he was in a TV series ? Break the fourth-wall and sing its opening sequence !

A short word on the amazing cast, especially Neil Patrick Harris who pulled out a very good Count Olaf. This character is very complex to play, he needs the right amount of villainy, humor and the talent of an actor who can play a character playing other characters. Jim Carrey brought too much of his own eccentricity to the character and you saw more of the actor than of the character. Neil Patrick Harris really understood and nailed all of Olaf’s facets.

Hence adaptations would be rather dull without creativity and novelty.
Sure a lot of dialogues are actually taken word by word from the books because they are good as they are but an adaptation needs to adapt precisely even more when the media is different.

A book and a  TV show are of course very different mainly because of the images. In a book, a description can only be completed by the reader’s imagination. In a show, what you see allows very little space for imagination. This is why a successful adaptation is one that can get the spirit, the ambiance of the world, conveyed by the original words, and transcripts it on screen. From the language of worded images to the language of filming.

The unsettling ambiance, the faded colours and surreal pastel imagery are very fitting for the Baudelaires’ story. The main aspect of the series is its dark humor and stories that you find rarely in children’s book : one death if not more per book, usually a gruesome one. The TV show manages to render the baudelairian world : this very specific atmosphere, the feeling of being oppressed by all the places in which the Baudelaires find themselves.

Finally the most important aspect of an adaptation is that it must appeal to all audiences.What is complicated about making adaptations is that they are received by two different audiences : the one who knows the original material and the one who doesn’t and their first interaction with the original universe is through the adaptation.
That’s why getting the atmosphere right is so important, it shows the specificities of the work in another way which should not “betray” the original story.
An adaptation is full of references that will be immediately recognized only by the ones familiar with the original piece. These references show the adaptors love for the original work and also creates a complicity between them and the well-aware viewer. Which book lover did not scream at the sugar bowl in episode 2 or at those four simple words : the world is quiet here ?The beauty of references is that they are hidden, they could be seen as completely normal by an unaware viewer : the scene of the sugar bowl seems very innocent.

It allows the adaptors to play on what the reader already knows. Take the first appearance of the Quagmire mother and father: most of the book readers thought them to be the Baudelaire mother and father even though they know very well it is impossible. This builds up until the revelation in the first part of the Miserable Mill. Not only this plays with the well-aware reader but also stages already the Quagmire trio and most of their backstory. Being already intertwined since the first episode with the main story, they meet naturally at the end of the season and do not appear previously unmentionned like in the books.

As thrilling as this is, if the adaptation is only met for the experts, it won’t be a total success. An adaptation also needs to speak to new viewers who have no knowledge of the original work. This is why there is a need for balance of references so the newcomer will not spent his time on Wikipedia trying to figure out what happens. How the series introduced right away the Quagmires is actually rather clever : it allows the newcomer not to be lost in all the key characters.

Lastly, this show really catches the core humor of the original work by playing on the fact that it is an adaptation and therefore needs to depart sometimes from the original sequences. At the beginning of the Miserable Mill (episode 8), Mr. Poe freaks out because the Baudelaires are gone and in the middle of his panicked speech, he says : “It’s off-book !’. And indeed it is, because in the books the Baudelaires don’t go to Lucky Smells Lumbermill by themselves but are brought there by Mr Poe. An adaptation makes choices and the show plays on that aspect.

Of course, this show would need a 300 pages-long essay because of all the references and allusions not only to literature but also foreshadowing the main story. This show completely smashes the movie adaptation which did not manage to really transcript well neither the atmosphere nor the characters.

Remember, an adaptation is not a search of perfection because it will never be exactly like the original material. The change of medium requires changes in the story and the story-telling. The intelligence with which the choices are made makes all the difference between a good and a bad adaptation.

About the controversy regarding Atlus’ spoiler warning on P5...

The thing is, Atlus has been doing this on the Japanese side of things ever since Persona 4 was first released on the PS2.

You see these things? Those are all spoiler warnings. Yes, all of them. 

Atlus made a tradition out of posting a spoiler warning like this whenever they release a new game; basically, a character from the game tells the audience to please not spoil crucial plot details to people, to not randomly tweet your progress of the game where people not as far as you yet might see, etc. They have been doing this for years, but always kept it directed to the Japanese Fandom only, since they didn’t really the western fans into account all that much until recently. These Spoiler warnings are actually sort of beloved by the Japanese fans, they are a popular in-gag, that is seen as lovable in a way, even if they can be annoying with their restrictions.

Even before Atlus had an online presence, they tried to make sure their games wouldn’t be spoiled for anyone; Persona 4 actually had an IN-GAME spoiler warning, which was meant to appear right after starting a new game programmed into the code, however, that one was dummied out at last minute for reasons unknown (it’s still in the code, if you’re curious. The English version is even translated). 

In fact, during my time in Japan, I actually ran into a crane game with P4U merch, which ALSO had one of these spoiler warnings on it. It’s actually pretty funny to have Elizabeth threaten to obliterate you with Megidolaon if you spoil yourself by getting a figurine of her-

HOWEVER; Now to the problem with Atlus USA’s version of this.

As you can see, the Japanese notices were always sort of like a “roleplay” of sorts: They were written in a very joking tone, making it clear that they’re not actually trying to threaten anyone, but just asking common curtsy of you when sharing your progress in the game. In fact, most of the original spoiler warnings for P4 were regarding spoiling the identity of the killer, since having to figure the cabbage-man out on your own is, admittedly, the most tense moment of the game.  (Even though I myself was actually spoiled on that when I got to that point, cough, cough…)

Now, Atlus HAS always been doing video takedowns of gameplay videos in a misguided attempt to hide spoilers, however, those always stopped 1-2 months after a game’s release, without fail, and they never took down non-spoiler-y videos, hence why story videos of P4D were taken down on random back when that released, while full recordings of the dances stayed without fail.It was always about the Spoilers to them; never about copyright or control. 

So really, as I see it, the biggest problem here is how Atlus of USA decided to write their version of the customary warning: 

No in-universe character narration. Threatening, without the joke of someone using Megidolaon on you if you spoil the game. 

Atlus USA, instead of making a lighthearted joke about exploding kill-joys on twitter with demon magic, instead decided to threaten streamers directly. That’s the REAL reason why this blew up like it did.

anonymous asked:

In a parallel universe if you were left in charge to write a SasuSaku movie about how Sasuke and Sakura's travels and how they got together, how would it go? What type of scenes and sequences would you include? How would the movie began? How would it end? What would be the general plot?

Hmm, I suppose I would make the general plot revolve around how Sasuke would be slowly getting over his demons, would be slowly opening up to Sakura more and more about his past with his family, his relationship with brother, his emotions and feelings during the massacre, and how he’d recount to Sakura the relevant events between himself and Team 7 that occurred within the main manga. These conversations would be the crucial parts of the movie, and would take place at regular intervals. For instance, during anytime they’re able to have some time to themselves, whether it be during a break in one of their missions, while travelling to the next location, or at night during one of the inns they stayed at.

I’d have the movie begin from where Sasuke Shinden ended; with Sasuke choosing to return home to Konoha:

From there, I’d direct a quick summary of his time there and when he left again, up to when Sakura decides to catch up to him. This is because it’d be important to provide the context of how they came to be at that point, but I wouldn’t want to dwell on it because in the grand scheme of things, that’s a relatively unimportant matter.

I’d involve some action here and there, like during the scenes when the two of them are helping out the local residents with some thugs or other things of the sort. However, I’d make the movie be very dialogue heavy, kinda like the Monogatari series, because I’d want the focus to remain on the conversations that Sasuke and Sakura have, in order to really emphasise how Sasuke slowly comes to terms with the world, with himself, and with his feelings for Sakura that had been developing for some time.

One pivotal moment I’d include would be when Sasuke tries to explain what happened in the Land of Iron from his perspective. He’d be hesitant in his elaboration, because he didn’t know Sakura would respond to being reminded of those events. However, Sakura would then recall why she couldn’t bring herself to end his life when given the opportunity; she knew that despite how far he’d fallen, he was still in there somewhere - she’d then tell Sasuke that it was what she was trying to get through to him when she confessed her love for him the 2nd time. Sasuke would remain stubborn about whether he could fully be redeemed, as he’d then bring up his immediate response to her 2nd confession. However, it would be at this point where Sakura would reach her wit’s end. She’d tell Sasuke that there isn’t much more she can do for him, if he himself isn’t willing to accept the fact that he’s not the same person he was. She’d then go to bed, and leave him to ponder on her words.

This conversation wouldn’t be mentioned again until towards the end of the movie, where after they had helped a particularly influential family who coincidentally happened to echo Sakura’s earlier words to Sasuke, he’d admit to her that maybe she was right; maybe he would be able to fully make up for his sins against the world and towards his friends, and perhaps even one day become a ninja who was highly respected in the world. Sakura would feel her heart swell at this, that Sasuke was finally coming to terms with who he was and the fact that it wasn’t too late for him, it was never too late for him.

Following this, Sasuke would want to thank Sakura for never giving up on him, never losing faith in him, because as he’d tell her, if it wasn’t for her and Naruto’s continued faith in him, he’d never have been able to find the faith in himself. So he’d thank her, but he’d feel as though that wasn’t enough. Sasuke would notice that just prior to their travels, he had begun to think of Sakura more and he couldn’t explain why; he just wanted to see her and spend more time with her. So after this realisation, he’d try desperately hard to try and convey this to Sakura, and tell her just how much she meant to him. However, Sasuke isn’t the most articulate person when trying to convey his feelings, especially when they were affectionate, so he’d be really struggling. Thus, for a while, all Sasuke would be able to get out is:

However, Sakura knew what Sasuke was trying to say, so her face lights up in anticipation, as she anxiously waited for Sasuke to finish, as so:

Yet, Sasuke just didn’t know how to finish the sentence; he couldn’t find the right words to accurately portray how he felt, whilst simultaneously trying to not seem as though he didn’t expect anything in return. So Sasuke would be visibly disappointed at his inability to finish his sentence. It is then that Sakura would come forward to plant a soft and brief kiss on his lips, because she was appreciative of what he was trying to do. She knew what he was trying to say, so she’d then say “Thank you, you mean a lot to me as well”.

Sasuke would then say “Yeah…”, and in an attempt to prevent an awkward silence, he’d come up with an excuse to briefly leave. But as he went on his way, he’d be displaying a familiar smirk on his face, happy that she understood his intentions, and excited at the prospect of what the future may bring:

I’d have the movie end with a quick scene of the future, where it shows Sasuke and Sakura together on the hospital rooftop, with Sasuke’s photo with the Kages collocated into the picture:

Just in order to signify that the wish that Sasuke had voiced towards the end of the movie did indeed come true - he become hailed as a village hero, highly revered and respected by everyone, and the master of his best friend’s son, all while having his beloved wife and daughter by his side ^_^