rainwaterspark: Moon Knight from Moon Knight (2021) title page, drawn by Alessandro Cappuccio (moon knight 2)
Yeah, I know no one's here for my To Be Hero X thoughts, but Episode 7 made me mad enough that I want to scream into the void, so...here we are.

Before I start, I just want to say that up until this episode, I've LOVED the show. Episode 1 took over my entire brain chemistry and made me so excited to see each new episode, I was barely able to sleep the night before. My only complaint was the Episode 4 ending, but even for that, I was willing to withhold judgment until I saw how the rest of the season played out.

And then Episode 7 came out and...I didn't like it. At all.

The rest under the spoiler cut.

"Condensing the pain, baptism of fire; this endless refrain, it cuts deep inside..." )
rainwaterspark: Moon Knight from Moon Knight (2021) issue #11, drawn by Alessandro Cappuccio (moon knight)
...I may regret this post title later, since I don't actually like CinemaSins on YouTube. But I wanted to compile a list of everything about the TV show that bothers me and that I'm still thinking about weeks later because IT MAKES NO SENSE.

(Okay, I said that, but I realized this post turned into a list of my general grievances with the show, so...whoops.)

Also, I want to get this out of the way: I'm criticizing the show for not providing enough information/consistency in its writing. Most fans seem eager to come up with their own explanations for a lot of what happens, but the thing is, an outsider can always make up their own explanations. Hell, I can and have come up with my own explanations as well, for fanfic purposes. That does not excuse the source material for not being written well.


Episode 1
  • Most people—including the writer, Jeremy Slater—have assumed that Jake was the one who set up the date for Steven. However, Slater also admitted that that was not part of his script and was improvised on set. That makes me a bit nervous that this was a decision made "because it would be cool" but without taking into account whether this was consistent with Jake's character (especially given the post-credits scene). Because if true, this would have to mean that Jake (1) is, or can be, a charismatic person, and (2) can mimic at least Steven's accent. But the MCU already has a spotty record with character consistency, which doesn't make me confident about how they'll handle Jake in his next appearance...
  • Many people interpreted Khonshu's dialogue when Steven wakes up in the Alps (?)—"Go back to sleep, worm. You're not supposed to be here. Surrender the body to Marc. Oh, the idiot's in control"—as indicating that Khonshu actually thinks he's talking to Jake at first. Because he doesn't seem to realize Steven, "the idiot," is in control until the end. I think this interpretation is logical. However, the problem is that Khonshu's tone suggests that he doesn't actually respect Jake—or any alter other than Marc—all that much, which then leads to the question: When did Khonshu get so chummy with Jake before the post-credits scene in episode 6?
  • When I first watched this episode, I thought the show kept Khonshu's ability to resurrect Marc because Steven clearly gets crushed by a bunch of logs before he wakes up in bed. I suppose we're meant to infer that Marc was seriously injured, maybe on the brink of death, and Khonshu healed his injuries before he was able to go home, but...come on, isn't it more likely that someone crushed by logs would straight-up die?
  • On the topic of giving Moon Knight supernatural powers—I feel like this permanently excludes him from the kind of street-level stories Moon Knight has always been associated with, because now only supernatural creatures/supervillains can pose a physical threat to him, if he has magical healing abilities and super strength. If the show had kept it at Moon Knight being unable to die (because Khonshu resurrects him), he can at least still be seriously injured and knocked out of a fight. Le sigh.

Episode 2
  • When Steven meets Layla, she says, "Is this 'Steven' the latest fake identity for you?" This seemed to be a pretty damn obvious red flag to indicate that Layla has met at least one of Marc's alters before—which, by process of elimination, would have to be Jake. However, there is nothing else in the show that supports this idea, or Layla ever bringing up to Marc the question of his "fake identities" before...?
  • Why does Marc decide to divorce Layla after Steven starts fronting more? He mentions something about disappearing at the end of this episode after he does this last job for Khonshu, except that's not how DID works... Did he become suicidal after his mother's death? It's all so unclear.
  • Marc seems to know that he has Dissociative Identity Disorder, given his dialogue with Steven. However, this leads to problems with consistency in the show that I'll discuss later.

Episode 3

Ah, episode 3, also known as THE BANE OF MY ENTIRE EXISTENCE.
  • I was convinced that Jake was the one who actually fought the three guys on the roof, for multiple reasons:
(1) Because his fighting style was completely different from Marc's style later against Anton Mogart's men and did not resemble a military fighting style. This just completely baffles me, because every time I've seen a behind the scenes video about fight choreography in movies, fight choreographers always mention that they take care when developing a fighting style for a particular character. Marc Spector was a Marine; the way he fights should reflect military training. There is no explanation I can think of for why "Marc" would have such an inconsistent and non-military fighting style in this scene.

(2) "Marc"'s attitude while fighting. In other scenes in the season, Marc is depicted as someone who will take down the bad guys by any means necessary but who doesn't appear to take any joy from fighting. He's also depicted as someone who loses emotional control during a fight, e.g. his brutality when fighting is a result of his emotions getting away from him, possibly due to anger issues that lead back to his childhood trauma. However, in this scene, "Marc" is a less refined fighter but seems to have a lot more emotional control. He never loses himself emotionally. When he and the knife-licking guy are trying to psych each other out, "Marc" even smiles, like he enjoys the back-and-forth dance of a street brawl.

(3) "Marc"'s dialogue. Based on how Marc acts in episode 2 and other scenes where it's definitely him, the way he talks in this opening scene really doesn't seem consistent. In the previous episode, Marc is shown to have a temper issue, and in the next two scenes when Marc is trying to interrogate the Harrow cultists, he sounds extremely pissed off, impatient, and determined when interrogating them about Harrow's location. However, here, he sounds super chill and almost disappointed when he's told he won't be able to find Harrow. Almost like he's ready to give up.

After that, "Marc" says, "Oh. What, are we dancin'? What, are we fightin'? What are we gonna do?" At no other point in the show is Marc shown to taunt his opponents before fighting. Again, Marc is generally shown to be a somewhat grim and somber person in other scenes/episodes, so this taunt appears wildly out of character for him.

(4) The way "Marc" speaks in this scene (also in the scene where he runs into Layla in the square) is different from how he talks in other scenes. He has a slight New York accent, and his voice is pitched differently from how it normally is, a bit higher.

(5) There's an odd visual detail of "Marc" initially wearing a baseball cap, only to lose it as he's running. I thought that was supposed to indicate that he was actually Jake, since Jake is well known for wearing a cap in the comics. If the baseball cap isn't important, why was Marc wearing it in the first place?

(6) When Marc wakes up in the taxi and then sees the cultists again, his dialogue always struck me as odd. This is the exchange:

MARC: Let me talk to you.
CULTIST: Just let us go, man.
MARC: (angrily) That wasn't me!

One: Does it really make sense for Marc to beat up the guys on the roof and then insist on talking calmly to them? Two: When Marc says "That wasn't me," at first blush, it seems like he's talking about Steven running away from the cultists. However, if that's what he's talking about, why does he sound so angry? Wouldn't it make more sense if he's angry because he thinks Steven/another alter was the one who beat up the cultists, and that's also why the cultists are asking for him to "let [them] go"?
  • The scene where Marc wakes up to find that two of the cultists have been stabbed, a.k.a. the first real hint of Jake's existence. I'll get into this later, but it's weird that if Marc knows he has DID, he doesn't immediately think he might have another alter in the system besides Steven. (Especially because Steven is literally the least likely candidate as the person who stabbed two guys to death.) I could have let it slide for this one scene, given that Marc and Steven are supposed to be at odds with each other and emotions are running high, but not when the show pulls this off again later. This ties into a running problem with the show, which is that they tried really hard to hide Jake's existence so they could save it for a shock factor post-credits scene, even when it leads to plot holes in how the characters act.
  • The car scene with Layla: Another scene in which I was convinced it was Jake, because the dialogue makes no sense for Marc.
(1) "Marc" is generally pretty chatty in this scene, which is not consistent with the fact that he's mostly pretty reserved and tends to be precise with his words in other scenes.

(2) The subtitles have "Marc" saying: "Ay. I really liked that jacket." "Ay" is a Spanish interjection. Since they portrayed Jake as fluent in Spanish in the post-credits scene, was this supposed to be a hint (that never got confirmed)?

(3) When Layla is asking about what Harrow said, here is the exchange:

LAYLA: What was Harrow talking about?
"MARC": What do you mean?
LAYLA: He said I had a right to know.
"MARC": I have no idea.
LAYLA: I never told anyone why I really moved. But he knew, he just saw right through me.
"MARC": I don't know, I don't know, he's just tryin' to mess wit'cha, you know? He's tryin' to get in your mind. No, don't let him do that. He's, you know, he’s got this idea that he can see the true nature of people, or some baloney like that. If that were true, I don’t think he’d have a bunch'a homicidal maniacs as his disciples, would he?

One, the word choice—"baloney," "homicidal maniacs"—is quite specific and doesn't align with the way Marc talks in other scenes.

Two, the way "Marc" flatly denies answering Layla's questions until she references the death of her father—at first glance, you could just interpret this as Marc being an asshole. However, he has no emotional reaction to Layla's questions, not really like someone who feels guilty and is trying to deflect. And we know for sure from the previous scene that Marc knew exactly what Harrow was talking about. It would make far more sense if "Marc" were actually Jake in this scene, and he genuinely does not know what Layla is talking about until she mentions her father, and then he puts two and two together. There's even a camera close-up of his face at that point, and the shift in his expression makes him look like someone who's just realized what's going on.

(4) When Layla says "it’s like I’ve not known you at all" and "Marc"'s response is "Yeah, you haven't. You don't." Except Marc is used to hiding things from Layla—his DID, his role in her father's death—so why would he answer in a way to purposefully make her suspicious of him? I've always thought this made more sense as a Jake thing to say, e.g. he's letting the truth slip that she doesn't know him because he's not Marc.


Episode 5
  • I don't really have an issue with the explanation for why Marc developed DID, except...how the hell does Marc live in the middle of Chicago and yet have access to woods and a deep cave capable of flooding in his backyard??? (I suppose, if someone wants to retcon this so that it makes more sense, you'd have to change it so that the Spectors were on a camping trip or something.)
  • People more qualified than I have discussed the fact that Marc's Jewish background is mostly erased. (In the comics, Marc was raised Orthodox and his father was a rabbi, and his difficult relationship with his father and by extension, his faith, have always been a core aspect of his background.)
  • When Taweret asks if Marc and Steven are twins and Steven answers, "Yeah, sort of" - Marc has never explained to Steven that they have DID. What does Steven actually think they are, and why has he never questioned Marc more about it? I assume Steven's written that way because their DID is kind of the big reveal of this episode...even though Marc still never technically tells Steven they have Dissociative Identity Disorder...but it doesn't make sense for Steven to behave this way. Even if this is the MCU and regular people are used the idea of wacky things happening, most people would be (at least initially) alarmed at the idea that they're sharing a body with a completely different person.
  • Has Marc ever been in a psychiatric hospital and actually diagnosed with DID before? Some people have criticized the show for never explicitly stating he has Dissociative Identity Disorder, and I agree that's a failing. Marc acts as though he knows he has DID, but if that's the case, he should have been diagnosed at some point (because people experiencing the symptoms of DID don't simply assume they have DID). It also seems unlikely that Marc would mentally construct a psychiatric hospital if he's never been in one before.
  • I would call this season a half-assed attempt at a Lemire comic run adaptation, because there are clear influences from Lemire while a lot of aspects of that run are disregarded. For example, Marc's backstory in terms of how he was discharged from the Marines sort of follows what happened in the Lemire run, but the details are changed for no reason. In the Lemire run, Marc is dishonorably discharged because his erratic behavior (he's depicted as having both DID and some sort of schizophrenic disorder, FYI) leads the Marines to discover he was previously hospitalized for psychiatric problems. Yet in the show, they reduce it to "Marc went AWOL while in a fugue state and was discharged because of that." Which...is not actually realistic, because the military does not discharge people for going AWOL unless they've been AWOL for at least thirty days (a.k.a. they basically tried to desert the army). And if Marc had been in a fugue state for thirty whole days, I have to think he would think he seriously needs medical help at that point.
  • (It's possible that they changed his backstory because they were trying to avoid any references to his DID. Except...why? Why build your entire narrative around the protagonist having Dissociative Identity Disorder and then refuse to even name it?)
  • I very much dislike the idea that Khonshu forced Marc into becoming his avatar. Like...way to remove Marc's agency and his motivation for becoming Moon Knight as a way to make up for his bad actions in the past, a.k.a. becoming Moon Knight was a good thing for him. I know the idea of Khonshu being abusive comes from the comics, but the critical distinction is that comics!Marc (and, in one instance, Jake) is able to reject Khonshu while still embracing being Moon Knight. However, the show turns this into the system rejecting both Khonshu and Moon Knight, which is...awkward. And takes the "hero" out of "superhero."
  • So it seems that whenever Steven "called" his mom, he didn't actually call her, he just put the home screen of his phone to his ear. This is...very confusing. So many fans had the headcanon that Marc set up a fake number for Steven to call, and honestly that would have made so much more sense, because...are we supposed to accept that Steven is operating under such a powerful delusion that he forgets how to properly use his phone—and carries on a complete one-sided conversation without realizing it—but only when he's calling his mom? (He clearly knows how to use his phone properly, as shown when he called Dylan in episode 1.) THIS MAKES NO SENSE.
  • I do not understand, at all, how the Moon Knight system's scales can balance if Jake isn't there. Also why it balanced as soon as Steven died—that creates the very bad inference that Marc doesn't need Steven and/or Steven is an extraneous part of him. None of this is ever explained in the show.

Episode 6
  • I'm just going to say it: The writing in this show is very unclear and ambiguous regarding Marc's attitude toward Steven and his DID in general. Maybe it's because they had to cram too much into six episodes, or maybe the writing is just bad. To me, Marc's behavior in episodes 2 through 4 very strongly indicate that he has a lot of internalized ableism and complicated feelings about Steven—on one hand, he does seem to want to protect Steven from the darkness in his (Marc's) life, but on the other, he seems to view Steven as an annoyance and an obstacle. However, what Marc says in episode 6—while meant to be heartwarming—is almost a retcon of his earlier behavior, because he claims that he valued Steven all along. My guess is that they were, again, going for a half-assed Lemire adaptation, which has as its central emotional core Marc first rejecting his alters before he learns to accept his alters as his strength rather than his weakness, except the MCU show botched the writing so that Marc's character arc and his feelings about himself/Steven are vague instead. (This could have been so easily fixed by changing Marc's monologue just slightly to have him acknowledge that he didn't realize how important Steven was to him for so long, but clearly the MCU will never tackle a topic as important as internalized ableism!)
  • I can't get over the show just skipping over the climactic battle against Harrow by turning it into a Jake black-out moment. Here's where it really makes no sense that Marc still doesn't have a clue that there's another alter in the system. (We might be able to excuse Steven if we're charitable since he technically doesn't know much about DID.) If it's inconvenient to have Marc/Steven freaking out about a third alter in the middle of the season climax, you could just...not have Jake appear.
  • Look, I know people were happy about Mr. Knight finally being a badass, but I hate that Steven suddenly knows how to fight out of nowhere. Where did he learn how to fight from? From DYING???
  • I really, really hate Marc sparing Harrow's life. Like you could really feel the influence of Disney here. One: Harrow already murdered a lot of people!! It's like Marc and Steven conveniently forget that fact so they could paint Khonshu as Ammit 2.0. Two: I loathe it when protagonists are happy to murder the villain's grunts, but they can't bring themselves to murder the actual villain. What are you actually saying about morality, here?
  • The change to Moon Knight's character from the comics in calling being Moon Knight being "enslaved" by Khonshu both is problematic and causes a lot of unexplained plot holes. First of all, this leads to all sorts of problematic associations when you have a Jewish protagonist. Second of all, how can the show come back from this? How can Marc/Steven return to being Moon Knight (which they have to, because this is a comic book superhero) after they called it slavery? Hell, why is being the avatar of Khonshu slavery and being the avatar of Taweret...isn't? (How am I supposed to celebrate Layla being a superhero if I'm questioning whether or not she, too, is enslaved??)
  • On the topic of Layla, I hate how all of Marvel's social media is now calling her Scarlet Scarab when she (1) wasn't called that in the show, and (2) is given no reason to be called that in the show. There's nothing red OR scarab-themed about her Taweret avatar outfit. And why does becoming the avatar of a hippo fertility goddess grant Layla wings??? (On a broader note, I'm not against Layla becoming a superhero but I felt like the focus on her took away from the already very limited time spent on Marc, and I wish her superhero arc had been saved for another season.)
  • When Steven tells Dr. Harrow in the psychiatric hospital reality that "We'd rather go save the world"—Bro. How are you gonna save the world when you just renounced being Moon Knight???
  • The post-credits scene with Jake Lockley. Look, I've been mad about this for an entire month now. For anyone who wants to argue that the show did not want to make the audience think Jake was hyper-violent and evil: (1) Literally tons of fans, including fanfic writers and fan artists, now portray Jake as a bloodthirsty sociopath. (2) There were plenty of different choices the show could have made to not portray Jake as a sociopath. He didn't have to smile maniacally while shooting Harrow/Ammit. He could have said "This is for Marc and Steven" instead of "Today is your day to lose." He could have showed emotions other than glee over shooting a defenseless person, like anger or pain. It's unquestionable that the show made the choices it did because it wanted to go with the most "shocking" interpretation of Jake. I'm not going to argue about this. And I maintain the show could have done something so much more interesting with Jake Lockley's character.

rainwaterspark: Moon Knight from Moon Knight (2021) title page, drawn by Alessandro Cappuccio (Default)
Hello, it's me here with a blog post on one of my favorite TV shows currently, DC Comics' Titans and some of my thoughts on how to establish character.

I was actually prompted to think about this given my recent disappointment with a book I had been anticipating because I felt like it didn't do a good job of establishing the main character(s) at the outset. I'm a reader who really needs to feel connected to the main character(s) before I feel compelled to read a book, and that sense of connection comes from either sympathy or fascination, which in turn comes from immediately knowing something about the character's personality and/or drive.

I'm not saying I need to fully understand a character before I'll follow their story, but I do need a "hook" to get me invested in their journey.

As it turns out, Titans is excellent at establishing character. Even though it's a TV show, I think there are plenty of things that can be applied to books as well.

Raven: establishing character through reaction

Raven/Rachel Roth is Titans' first character to appear, and she's immediately set up to be sympathetic through her dream of the Flying Graysons' deaths and her terrified reaction to it, even though she's unrelated to them. Her grieving reaction demonstrates that she's a deeply empathetic character who cares about people she's never met.

Kory: establishing character through challenge

Kory's character arc is interesting since she's introduced with amnesia. Although oftentimes amnesia can feel like it's being used cheaply, I think it makes sense in the context of this show because Kory (Koriand'r) is such a powerful character that Titans wanted to begin with some limits to her powers and knowledge.

In any case, Kory is introduced with amnesia and soon realizing that she's being hunted. Even though she has amnesia, she's shown to be incredibly resourceful and able to at least figure out what her goal had been before she received amnesia. Kory's resilience and resourcefulness immediately make her a likable character in addition to the mystery of who she is and why she's pursuing Rachel.

Dick: establishing character through hint

I saved Dick Grayson for last, well, because I have a tremendous soft spot for the members of the Batfamily, but also because Dick's characterization is the most subtle in Titans Episode 1 and therefore the most interesting. Putting aside the flashback to his parents' death, Dick is introduced without any dialogue at all. In his first scene, he's flipping through a folder with a picture of a bruised child, watching the man we infer to be the child's father, and casting looks at a suitcase in the back of his car. Through visuals alone, we're immediately told several things about Dick:

(1) He cares about children injured through abuse.
(2) We're not sure what the suitcase is for or what's in it, but Dick's glances at it demonstrate that he views it as something ominous.

This, on its own, is a pretty interesting "hook" for Dick, but Dick's character is also slowly unveiled over the course of the episode. When he shows up to Detroit PD, we see that he's cold and standoffish with his new partner, but as revealed through the other characters' dialogue, it's because something went wrong with his last partner (and we learn exactly what happened toward the end of the episode). When Dick finally acts on the child abuser, we see not only that Dick is Robin (and the suitcase contains his Robin suit), but also that Dick is clearly struggling with violent urges while feeling regret afterward.

Dick is, in some ways, the main character of Titans, but in some ways, he's also the most mysterious. Even though, unlike Rachel and Kory, he understands himself and where he came from, he's the most complex character in the sense that he is clearly carrying his past as baggage (in some ways literally symbolized by the Robin case he carries all over the country) and he is slowly trying to come to terms with his past and how to move on from it.
rainwaterspark: Moon Knight from Moon Knight (2021) title page, drawn by Alessandro Cappuccio (Default)
Today's post is brought to you by the appearance of Jason Todd in DC's Titans and some of the arguments I've seen regarding what Jason's "true" personality is.

So, for those who don't know, Jason Todd is the second Robin, a.k.a. the Robin who died, a.k.a. the guy who comes back from the dead as Red Hood, known for being the most violent and gun-happy among the Batfamily. However, like many comic book superhero characters, Jason's origins and personality have changed over the years. This is most obvious from the fact that Jason's death wasn't something planned from the start, but rather something done to drive sales (and possibly because the character was not terribly popular? I'm a little unclear on the exact details). So, Jason's transformation into Red Hood was, again, not something planned from the inception of the character.

I'm not a complete Jason Todd comics history expert (*sob*), but I believe Jason becoming Red Hood (see also the "Under the Red Hood" comic arc and excellent animated movie) was accompanied by a retcon of his prior origins and personality. Initially, Jason was something of a Dick Grayson clone, down to a similar origin story involving a circus (yes, really) and a cheerful personality. But with Red Hood came a ton of retconning in order to retroactively establish the "seeds" for Jason's ability to become the ultraviolet Red Hood. Jason's origins were now rooted in his being a street kid and criminal before he met Batman, and he was depicted as having always had violent tendencies even as a Robin.

This is the version represented in Titans, and while Jason Todd as Red Hood has become entrenched enough over the years that most people are fans of this interpretation of Jason Todd, you still do see some people who are bitter about the original change in Jason Todd as a result of "Under the Red Hood."

This gets to another issue, though, of how many comic superheroes do change and get new origins/personalities over time.

Yes, I do get how it sucks when you're a fan of one version of a character and then the character ends up permanently changed due to the whims of various writers. But I also think that changes of this sort are extremely hard to backtrack from. So many people weren't a fan of Wonder Woman's origin being changed from the "made of clay" story to being a daughter of Zeus—and yet, thanks to the movie, it's the origin story that most average non-comics readers are now familiar with.

Whether you're happy about it or not, Red Hood is a character who is here to stay. And the retroactive refitting of Jason Todd's background to better "suit" his transformation into Red Hood is also probably permanent as a result.
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
I try not to talk about politics too much, since it's beyond depressing right now, but today I was thinking about the current political climate and the Amazon TV show, The Man in the High Castle. Which seems particularly relevant now that we're seeing a resurgence of neo-Nazism, racism, and xenophobia.

The Man in the High Castle (TMITHC) is about an alternate history in which the Allies lost World War II and Nazi Germany and Japan conquered the US and divided it between them. (Let's ignore, for the moment, the practical impossibility of such a thing ever happening even if the Allies had lost.)

The show has also been very well-received—so well-received, it's been renewed for 3 seasons so far.

I tried watching the first episode, since I'm a history geek, but I had to stop halfway through because I was about to have an aneurysm out of rage.

Here's the problem: If you think about Nazi Germany and Japan occupying the US, you'd think there are going to be some groups who will be persecuted more than others. Black people, Jewish people, Slavic people, disabled people, and LGBTQ+ people on the Nazi side, and any-Asians-who-aren't-Japanese on the Japanese side. (I'll apologize upfront for the fact that I know less about Japan's concept of racial hierarchy than Nazi Germany's, but I know they did, in fact, have a racial hierarchy.) You'd think these groups would be the focus of this story and the core of the resistance movement(s), right?

Wrong.

Instead, The Man in the High Castle is all about The Poor, Super Oppressed White People (seemingly of Western/Northern European descent). There was one Jewish character in the main cast, at least as far as I remember from the 1st episode, and that's it.

It just boggles the mind, how much TMITHC completely misses the point of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.* How entire regimes centered on racism somehow get boiled down to Oh No, The White People Are So Oppressed Under These Regimes.** Spoiler alert: If Nazi Germany had conquered the US, you can get your bank savings that white Americans of Western/Northern European descent would have been the least oppressed.

And I've been thinking about the premise of TMITHC and why it's been critically well-received. I wonder whether white American viewers who are divorced from history are fascinated by a premise that they are the ones who would be So Oppressed by the baddest of historical Bad Guys, the Nazis and WWII Japanese, instead of a more historically accurate story in which straight, able-bodied & neurotypical white Americans would be safe and privileged and Americans of color, disabled Americans, LGBTQ+ Americans are persecuted.

Because when you juxtapose the white rebel fantasy of TMITHC with what's currently going on, it's...disturbing.



*Yes, I'm aware TMITHC is based on a novel. But not every novel should be adapted into a movie or TV show. Like, I find it very hard to believe Uncle Tom's Cabin would be seriously considered by anyone for a screen adaptation today, even though it was wildly influential in its time.

**At least from the first episode, I found the depiction of White People's "oppression" in the Japanese-controlled West Coast also very poorly done. They were allowed to speak English and follow their own customs, that white woman (forgot her name, sorry) even out-Japanese-ed the Japanese in aikido (which, by the way, was a pretty gross example of the pretty racist trope of White Person Who Out-Asians Actual Asian People).
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
From the moment I saw the trailer for the show, I was excited. A fantasy TV show—a dark and gritty retelling of The Wizard of Oz, with visual flair, starring a woman of color? Color me intrigued!

Then I saw negative critic reviews and I got worried. Though I didn't quite understand the critique of Emerald City being too much like Game of Thrones, because GoT is wildly popular and successful, so being influenced by it can't be a surprising thing. I'm actually not a fan of GoT, but the point is, if you're going to criticize Emerald City for being dark and violent, then I hope you're also criticizing GoT for those same qualities, otherwise your critique is hypocritical.

But I finally watched the pilot yesterday, and...drumroll...I liked it.

It is dark and gritty, and very violent. But it succeeded in drawing me into the world of Oz and all its mysteries. What was up with Dorothy's mom? Who is Lucas? Is Glinda good or bad? How is Eamonn going to join up with Dorothy and Lucas (as the "Cowardly Lion")? How did the Wizard make giant stone people? Where's the Tin Man???

I also think the show is a clever and thoughtful adaptation of The Wizard of Oz so far. For example, I love the fact that the "Scarecrow" is a dude with amnesia, and the "Cowardly Lion" is a knight (defector?) with a lion motif. And the Munchkins were reimagined as the "Munja'kin Tribe." Also, I love the fact that the show's including Tip/Ozma, a.k.a. it's adapting more from the Oz series than just The Wizard of Oz, which is very exciting.

Oh, and of course, there are quite a few actors of color. There's Dorothy herself (and I was surprised that she wasn't just coded as white, the character was actually coded as Latina), Eamonn the "Cowardly Lion," and actors of color as secondary characters. (There's also Florence Kasumba as the Witch of the East; sadly she dies, because canon, but she was pretty stunning in her short scene.)

The world is rich and vibrant and the cinematography is pretty stunning (I've never watched Tarsem Singh's other work, though I've heard he's known for his visual style). All in all, I would definitely recommend this show to anyone hankering for a high-production-value fantasy TV show, for anyone who likes Game of Thrones-style dark and gritty shows, for anyone who likes The Wizard of Oz and doesn't mind the darker take, and for anyone looking for a show with a fair number of people of color.
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
- Elementary
- Lucifer
- The Flash
- Supergirl [was not impressed by the first 2 episodes, but hopefully they'll win me back over with Miss Martian]
- Blindspot
- Eyewitness
- Conviction

I have a problem with the fundamental premise of Eyewitness—if the two boys are keeping their witness of the murder a secret because they don't want to explain that they're in a relationship...why can't they just say they witnessed the murder but leave out the relationship part? ??? It's not THAT weird for two guy friends to be like "Yeah, we were just hanging out in the woods, as bros do, and we were tired so we went to this cabin and crashed, as bros do, and then the murder happened." (Or is the point supposed to be that they're being overly paranoid?) Other than that, though, the show feels pretty well done so far, so I can't stop watching. The aesthetic reminds me of American Crime, though slightly less depressingly grimdark (but still pretty dark).

Conviction is, well, very white feminist, and I'm not a huge fan of Hayley Atwell. Also, I'm pretty sure 5 days is nowhere near enough time to investigate an old case and produce exonerating evidence (it can take more than 5 days just to schedule a meeting with people). I dunno, guess they felt like they had to add tension with a tight deadline or something. And the show doesn't seem to shy away from controversial topics, though I'm not sure it handles them well (more to say about that after tonight's episode about a mother murdering her autistic child, I suppose). Still, I can't help watching this show for some base entertainment value. Sigh.
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
** SPOILER ALERT **

Read more... )

Blindspot

Sep. 10th, 2016 02:06 pm
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
I think I'd meant to post about this show at some point, but totally forgot.

First of all, the premise really objectifies Jane Doe. A woman with amnesia who's found totally naked and is valued because of her whole-body tattoos? Yeah, that's not objectification at all. Moreover, if you really wanted the premise of an amnesiac with important tattoos all over their body...logically, why wouldn't you have John Doe instead of Jane Doe? You can show more of a John Doe's tattoos than you can with a Jane Doe. (Seriously, Blindspot would've been 100x better with John Doe and with female Agent Weller.)

Secondly, Jane Doe is almost always shown as vulnerable and emotional because of her amnesia, which is not how a male character in the same situation is typically treated (see Jason Bourne as a counterpoint). I'm not saying Jane Doe's reactions are unrealistic or overly emotional, but I am wary (and have been, for a long time) of the fact that there is a clear gendered dimension to how Jane's reactions are portrayed, which reinforces the idea that women = emotional, men = stoic.

Finally, a trailer that I saw for season 2 really made me feel uneasy. I wasn't sure whether the shots were from season 2 or the season 1 finale, but there were a lot of shots of Jane Doe being tortured, and ugh, the violence against a female character felt so gratuitously brutal.

Basically, Blindspot is extremely iffy in its treatment of its female lead.
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
I've occasionally seen people praise CBS's Supergirl at the expense of Man of Steel by pointing out how in Supergirl, Kara explicitly has a no-kill rule, as opposed to "neck-snapping" Clark Kent in Man of Steel.

But let's unpack that for a second.

Supergirl does have killing. It's not Supergirl herself who does the killing, but members of the DEO, including Alex Danvers. I have yet to go through each episode and compile a total kill count, but the DEO is responsible for at least the deaths of Dr. Morrow (the creator of Red Tornado) and a number of Fort Ross prisoners, and no one sheds a tear for any of those deaths.

So it's hard not to feel like criticizing Man of Steel for killing a criminal, while ignoring the fact that criminals can and do die in Supergirl, is hypocritical.

Is the difference supposed to be simply that Superman and Supergirl should stand for something larger, and therefore "shouldn't" kill others, therefore Supergirl is superior to Man of Steel? In that case, why is it okay for humans to kill each other in Supergirl (at least in certain cases), if the overall message is that we should be inspired not to use violence and that every life is precious? (Also, Superman kills a fellow Kryptonian in Man of Steel and not a human.)

It's also important to note that the same rationale is used for killing in both Supergirl and Man of Steel. In, for example, the cases of Dr. Morrow and Jemm in Supergirl, both criminals ended up dead after they caused massive havoc and destruction and the protagonists needed to resort to extreme measures to stop them. Same in Man of Steel. What many who don't like the ending don't address is: what exactly would humanity have done with Zod if Superman merely subdued instead of killed him? At the time, no one knew about kryptonite. There would have been no way to imprison Zod effectively. Zod repeatedly told Clark that he would commit genocide if Clark didn't stop him, and he certainly had the power to do so. The phantom drives were all used up to send the other Kryptonians back to the Phantom Zone, so it's not like anyone could have sent Zod anywhere so that he couldn't come back to Earth.

I'm not trying to bash Supergirl. I love both Supergirl AND Man of Steel. But I feel like we should at least be honest when looking at the fact that characters do die in Supergirl and it isn't quite the pacifistic utopia some people make it out to be. Plus, Clark kills a criminal who threatened (and also attempted) to commit genocide and cries about it afterward. More people should remember that.
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
(Spoilers below for the season finale. Also, TW for discussions of rape—which is not news to anyone who's been following the season.)

Cut for spoilers )
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
I don't follow Arrow these days (except for when it crosses over with The Flash, and I'll grudgingly watch the episode in which they introduce Vixen, because Vixen), but I did see this latest interview with the EP about the stuff that's been going on lately (warning: spoilers for the latest episode(s) in the interview).

One thing that caught my eye was how the EP described Thea Queen as a "sociopath." Or, to be more precise:

"The interesting thing about Thea is that ultimately she's the by-product of Moira Queen and Malcolm Merlyn. For her not to be a bonafide sociopath would be a sheer miracle of genetics. There's something very dark in her and it does resonate with her. . . . I think, despite her best intentions, it is part of her."

There have been articles written about how using the word "sociopath" to describe characters (usually villains) is inherently harmful, from an ableism/mental illness stigma standpoint (which I'll put links to if I can dig them up). Aside from that, I hate seeing the word "sociopath" to describe characters, particularly villains, these days just because of the simple fact that it's lazy.

The popular culture view of "sociopathy" is the same flat "pure evil"/"pure crazy" characterization that has plagued unconvincing villain characterization forever, almost always with the implication that the villain is this way "because of their genes" or "because they inherited it from family." Calling a villain (or, in Thea's case, a hero/antihero) a "sociopath" is a convenient way to avoid having to explain the complex interplay of character motivations, background, and personality that determines how comfortable a character is with extreme measures.

Hell, I'd have much less of a problem if a story creator just said something along the lines of, "This villain is the villain because they're selfish and don't give a damn about screwing people over." Simple explanation? Yes, and yet it's still more thought-out than "This character is this way because they're a 'sociopath,' full stop, end of story." There were ways they could've explained Thea's comfort with violence that are more thoughtful than "she's the daughter of Malcolm Merlyn so it runs in her genes." But no, they decided to go the lazy and honestly somewhat insulting route.

(PS: I also laughed when the EP talked about Oliver dealing with PTSD after his return from the island. The show's depiction of Oliver's PTSD was so bad it wasn't even funny—to the point where I regularly got confused as to whether the show even knew whether Oliver had PTSD or not—and now they're claiming they've showed it all along? Yeah, sure.)
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
I always meant to write up a list, but kept forgetting, so here it is!

Spoilers for The Flash Season 1 )
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
So...I was really disappointed to learn that a live-action Blue Beetle TV show had been announced in 2010, but I guess it's been stuck in limbo since then. :(

I mean, a TV show about Jaime Reyes is like, my dream. It'd fit right in with the superheroics + daily life shenanigans genre seen in The Flash and Supergirl (and Arrow too, I suppose). And it could revitalize his character after the New52 mucked things up *cough*. But I guess we can't have nice things. :(((

(Also, I'm dying for news about the TNT Titans (Blackbirds?) show. C'mon!)
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
General feelings: ...Meh.

Not "meh, that was mediocre," but rather "meh, I don't know what to think of this."

Now, Daredevil does have a lot going for it. The actors are great. I really loved Matt Murdock and Matt's relationship with Foggy in particular.

That said, I really, really did not care for how much the narrative focused on Kingpin, especially his relationship with Vanessa (whoop de doo, I really can't care less about his romantic life). The series might as well be called "Daredevil and Kingpin." Okay, I get that plenty of people love horrible people, but the entire time I really wanted to grab Vanessa by the shoulders, shake her, and ask her, "First, why do you love Fisk again? I still don't get it. And second, do you really not care about the fact that he's murdered lots of people in his quest to improve Hell's Kitchen??!"

I really disliked Fisk's character. I know the audience is supposed to hate him, which made the attempts to humanize him all the more infuriating (you had an abusive childhood and you love your mother? Okay. Nope, you're not excused for decapitating a man). But what I really hated was his hair-trigger temper. I just...even if it's a result of his childhood abuse or whatever, it made it hard for me to take him seriously as a crime lord at certain points. Killing all your henchmen makes you terrifying, but it also makes you seem animalistic rather than human and also not that intelligent. (And it's kind of a masculine violent stereotype taken way to the extreme.)

I had some issues with the final episode. For a series that's so grimdark (which I'll get back to in a second), the final episode almost seemed...too neat and triumphant. Like after an entire season of things going badly for the protagonists, suddenly everyone wins (well, everyone who's still alive, I guess).

But I wanted to get to the grimdark issue.

I don't like grimdark stories. I do like stories with darkness, and I strongly believe it's possible to write a dark story without straying into grimdark (Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight is my archetypal example). Daredevil felt to me like really dark Batman (Hell's Kitchen is on par with, if not slightly worse than, Gotham, and that's saying a lot) crossed with Game of Thrones, and that's not a combination that makes me happy.

I don't like grimdark stories because, as someone who has dealt with and continues to deal with depression and other personal issues/hardships, I don't find stories about violence, hopelessness, and the worst sides of human nature appealing. I don't find it "deep" at all (anyone can write a grimdark story; most don't not because they're not smart or brave enough, but because they don't see the point), and sometimes the nihilism seems downright childish to me, an attempt to overcorrect for "happily ever after." If I want to feel depressed, I'll go back to contemplating real life, thanks. The point of consuming fiction, for me, is not to see a verbatim repeat of reality.

Daredevil isn't the worst example of grimdark that I've seen. The writing was overall pretty good, and Matt's relationships with his friends were emotional and compelling. But I'm tired of grimdark being praised as exceptional or "mature" or what have you. It's not any more "realistic" than a "happily ever after" story.
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
Before I start, full disclaimer: I have not watched all of the Torchwood episodes (or basically any of the Doctor Who episodes with Jack Harkness in them), so if I'm totally wrong in my evaluations, someone please point me to the relevant episodes.

The thing that disappoints me about Jack Harkness as he appears in Torchwood (again, from the episodes I've seen) is that in certain ways, he lacks depth. And I mean this as a writing problem, not as an acting problem, because John Barrowman is fantastic and he does show emotional depth in situations involving his brother, for example, and the 1940s Captain Jack Harkness who died.

It's just...other than those situations (and apparently Children of Earth/Season 3, which I didn't watch), Jack Harkness is so...not angsty. And I mean, it's not like I want his character to be a brooding emo loner. But think about it.

Jack has been alive for centuries. His immortality is of the sort that he literally does die, he just spontaneously revives after dying, but he experiences the full pain of death each time. So, he's been killed countless times (not to mention the horror show that was him being buried alive for almost two millenia (?)). He's been stranded from his home time for centuries. He's had to watch many of the people he loved and cared about die time and time again. He was even tortured for an indeterminate amount of time in the 1920s (specifically, he was killed over and over again by people who were trying to understand his immortality).

You'd think going through these things would make someone at least a little upset.

But Torchwood barely (if at all) touches upon what these kinds of experiences would do to a person.
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
So this is a weird position for me to be in. I've never considered myself a huge fan of Caitlin Snow; I liked her character, as a brilliant STEM lady, but I've always been more of a fan of Iris West. Still, I've seen a lot of unjustified criticism hurled at her character, particularly from otherwise progressive Tumblrs, and I'm really tired because I frankly find the criticism hurtful.

1. "Caitlin Snow is acted poorly."

So many people seem to be hating on Danielle Panabaker, Caitlin's actress, for her acting abilities. I'll admit I'm biased, not because I'm a huge Panabaker fan, but because I thought she was really charming in Sky High. Still, I find nothing wrong with her portrayal of Caitlin. There are women in the real world who aren't very expressive or who aren't "good" at expressing their emotions. To suggest that all women need to meet a standard of how to be expressive (which, by the way, is a standard men are almost never held to) is really hurtful and stigmatizing towards those women who don't meet that standard, but are still women and are still real human beings worthy of sympathy.

2. "Caitlin Snow's enthusiasm for Ronnie only when he can be separated from Martin Stein is ableist."

???

It's...not ableist to feel weird around the love of your life when he's literally merged into another person. I think this criticism is really unfair. Unless the idea is that Caitlin Snow should also fall in love with Martin Stein. Which is a nonargument.

3. Caitlin's infamous "I wish [Ronnie] were dead" line.

Do I wish this line hadn't been written? Yeah, but I blame the writers for that, not the character.

I don't think it was "obvious" that when Caitlin first met Firestorm!Ronnie, she instantly knew he was mentally ill. If you notice someone you love acting strangely, your first instinct is not going to be "They must have a mental illness, they need help!" It's going to be "Why is he acting weird?"

I take huge issue with the idea that people are obligated to feel comfortable around people with mental illnesses. I say this as someone who lives with depression (which has been intensifying recently) and someone who has grown up with a family member who had a mental illness and never sought treatment. Of course I'd like for people to be sympathetic towards people with mental illnesses, to understand it's not their fault and it's not laziness or some inherent personal failing. That's a given. But that's different from being "comfortable" with mental illness.

Mental illness is inherently uncomfortable and discomfitting. And for someone who may be otherwise emotionally compromised—like Caitlin, who had been grieving Ronnie's death for over a year—it's really unfair to expect them to shoulder that kind of burden. The number one rule for trying to take care of a loved one with a mental illness is to make sure to take care of yourself first. Otherwise you'd get burned out and everybody ends up suffering. And that's a very real danger. Caring for someone with a mental illness who isn't being treated is emotionally draining and can be very upsetting.

It is not a sin to be emotionally unprepared/unequipped to deal with someone who has a severe mental illness. And honestly it's healthier to express when you feel overwhelmed and out of your depth than to keep pretending that nothing's wrong and everything's under control.

I would've preferred for that line to be written differently, but I don't believe it's supposed to be understood as saying "People with mental illnesses are better off dead."

Oz

Jan. 9th, 2015 06:05 pm
rainwaterspark: Image of Link at the Earth Temple in Skyward Sword (legend of zelda skyward sword earth temp)
I was going to say this was the show I most regret watching, but I can't stop watching, so I guess this is only "the show that I kind of sort of regret watching but can't stop watching."

Even for an HBO show, it's incredibly cynical and depressing. Probably because it's really hard to see Tobias Beecher, the closest thing to a protagonist in the show, as unsympathetic in any real way. Even though he does end up committing/being involved in multiple murders by the end of the show, (a) he only does bad things when other people do bad things to him first, and (b) whatever karmic punishment he may have deserved, I'm sure it was more than balanced out by the fact that he spent most of the first season being horribly tortured, tormented, abused, assaulted, and humiliated, and also by the end of the show his wife, father, and son are dead, his brother seriously injured, and his daughter traumatized, and he's facing either the rest of his life in prison or death row.

I noticed a lot of Youtube comments on the Beecher/Keller relationship, talking about how romantic it was, which was kind of weird because it's actually rather messed up, and Beecher (and other characters) acknowledge as much on several occasions. Seriously, their relationship starts with Keller purposely trying to bait Beecher into falling in love with him so he could break Beecher's arms and legs later, and sometimes they have gone from romancing each other to punching each other in the face in minutes.

Still, I have to admit that I have mixed feelings about it. The actors are both incredibly talented, and there are a number of really compelling scenes the characters have, including their last conversation together. I guess the central question is—knowing that Keller is possessive and psychopathic, knowing that he would (and did) ruin Beecher's life so they could be together again, is it still romantic that he'd do anything for Beecher? I'd say no. But I guess I can see why some people would say yes.

TV Shows

Nov. 11th, 2014 05:54 pm
rainwaterspark: Image of Jim Hawkins solar surfing from Disney's Treasure Planet (treasure planet jim hawkins solar surfin)
Currently following:

- Elementary S3
- The Flash

Waiting for:

- Perception S3
- State of Affairs

I'm only following How To Get Away With Murder via Wikipedia, or watching it if people invite me to.

I'm horribly behind on Scorpion. I wish I was more enthusiastic about that show than I am, but there's something about it that's a little...meh to me. (Maybe because I feel like Leverage took a similar premise and did it better.)

Selfie was apparently canceled, which is sad. I suppose I should sit down some weekend to watch the episodes.

Not sure if I want to follow Constantine or not. The straight-washing and some other things I've heard about the show have been a bit off-putting.

Profile

rainwaterspark: Moon Knight from Moon Knight (2021) title page, drawn by Alessandro Cappuccio (Default)
rainwaterspark

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 11th, 2025 01:05 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios