ok so what if Harry and Neville got into like this passive-aggressive lie-off regarding what a truly great man Severus Snape was like they got drunk and Harry was like ‘Snape though’ and Neville was like ‘I know right’ and Harry was like ‘what a… what a fantastic bastard. What a guy.’ and Neville was like ‘we should fuckin’ get him like, like… let’s have a funeral. A huge fucking fuck-off sized funeral with like, lilies, and, a marble coffin, and a big statue, an’ crying women, an’ all that shit’ and Harry got whiskey up his nose laughing so hard and he falls off his stool and just wheezes 'lillies'
and then during the funeral Neville and Harry like spend the whole time trying to give a better eulogy like they keep getting back up after each other are done to try and have another go at it but then they get schooled by Hermione being like ‘for fuck’s sake boys this is how it’s done’ and she goes up to the podium and just bursts into wild banshee hysterics and throws herself across the glistening marble casket, sobbing ‘oh, it should have been me, would to god that it were me, you stallion of a professor’ and all the reporters tear up a little and then go home to pen really fervid biopics on this bleakly noble and tragically overlooked hero of the revolution
anyway like eighteen years later Harry names his kid after Severus and sends an owl off to Neville like ‘your move, mate’ and Nevill pauses in the middle of polishing the giant marble statue of Snape tenderly cuddling an armfull of adoring woodland creatures that dominates like 2/3 of his office to cuss a lot and pour himself another drink
I want a Twelfth Doctor that is fully concious of the fact that he is being written by Moffat.
And it pisses him off.
"Oh, a woman. Let me guess, you fancy me? Am I sexy? Do you want to grind against me and call me a clever boy? You come near me and I will delete you from time. How? Who the fuck knows? It won’t be explained. You won’t be explained. You’ll just be gone. Gone to a sexy dimension.’
I want a female companion who is fully conscious of the fact that she is being written by Moffat.
"Oh, I suppose this is the part where I swoon now. Where I fall in love with you regardless of my previously-indicated preference towards women, or any other love interest I may have, because you’re so sexy and mysterious and distinguished and all of my character traits are just props in a male fantasy about manic pixie dream girls. I suppose this is the part where I get put into peril and scream and you have to save me, and then something horrifying and unexplained happens to me that makes me interesting and special, because an ordinary, boring shopgirl could never, ever be worth you taking on a wild adventure."
i, as a Cisgender Heterosexual, believe that something is only queerphobic if its said while balancing a beachball on your head while dressed up in a big bird suit, hopping on your left foot while chanting “fuck the gay’s” and, incase you havent noticed, i was hopping on my RIGHT foot, so
Do you think consumers of films focus too much on plot logic and too little on the emotion a movie gives a viewer?
I think nerds do, yeah. A lot of people seem to think that picking out plot holes or logical inconsistencies, usually really small ones that have no impact on the dramatic arc of the narrative, is more fun than involving yourself in the story or the characters and makes you “smarter” than the filmmakers. Witness those “everything wrong with [insert movie]” videos that are nothing but bullshit nitpicks that have all the valuable, insightful critical analysis of a wet bag of dog poop.
Normally the stuff that gets pointed out as a “flaw” or a “mistake” is either a meaningless continuity error or some minor bit of plot convenience that’s required to get the story from point A to point B. In bad movies, these conveniences are so huge that they take you right out of the story and all you can think about is how ridiculous the leap of logic is. In good movies, even noticeable plot holes don’t matter because you’re so wrapped up in the drama/comedy/whatever and you care about the story and the characters enough to just go with it. A lot of people are very resistant to even the idea of the latter, so we wind up with a bunch of pointless, insight-free nitpicking disguised as “film criticism”.
The best film criticism isn’t about “gotcha, now I’m smarter than the screenwriters” posturing - it’s about appreciation, about understanding what the filmmakers were attempting to do and if they were successful in terms of execution. Movies are, by and large, all about how they make you feel, what they make you think about, how the characters build, how the story unfolds. Focusing on “hey, there’s no way that car could’ve made that jump!” or “that computer OS doesn’t operate that way!!” is missing the point. That stuff can be fun to point out in a movie that’s failing on most levels, but if you’re watching something that is genuinely dramatically gripping and the only thing you have to offer in analysis and discussion is a bunch of myopic nitpicking, you’re doing it wrong.
“Lily, take Harry and go! It’s him! Go! Run! I’ll hold him off!”
HE WAS WANDLESS AND TWENTY ONE YEARS OLD UP AGAINST THE BIGGEST EVIL HE AND SO MANY OTHERS HAD EVER CONCEIVED OF DON’T YOU EVER FUCKING MENTION IN FRONT OF ME HE NEVER REALLY LOVED LILY I WILL DISEMBOWEL YOU
However it originated, though, the usage of “because-noun” (and of “because-adjective” and “because-gerund”) is one of those distinctly of-the-Internet, by-the-Internet movements of language. It conveys focus (linguist Gretchen McCulloch: “It means something like ‘I’m so busy being totally absorbed by X that I don’t need to explain further, and you should know about this because it’s a completely valid incredibly important thing to be doing’”). It conveys brevity (Carey: “It has a snappy, jocular feel, with a syntactic jolt that allows long explanations to be forgone” “It has a snappy, jocular feel, with a syntactic jolt that allows long explanations to be forgone”).
But it also conveys a certain universality. When I say, for example, “The talks broke down because politics,” I’m not just describing a circumstance. I’m also describing a category. I’m making grand and yet ironized claims, announcing a situation and commenting on that situation at the same time. I’m offering an explanation and rolling my eyes — and I’m able to do it with one little word. Because variety. Because Internet. Because language.