?

Log in

▫ e n t r i e s ▫ ▫ f r i e n d s ▫ ▫ c a l e n d a r ▫ ▫ p r o f i l e ▫ previous previous
Counting Flowers on the Wall
So I was just thinking about Hellboy II the other day and how much I think it's going to differ from the first and the comics (thus sucking quite a bit) and it occurred to me just how much I loathe the Hellboy/Liz Sherman relationship. Then I started wondering how come I often hate main couples, though not the characters individually. It's clearly not a Hellboy issue. To ponder, I wrote this:

Main couples in action storytelling and why I hate 'em

It's tough to "come out" of the couple-hating closet when the pairing you dislike is the main one because, in the end, there's no plausible argument against The Author. It's their call; we have no say in the matter and, quite honestly, that's the way it should be. I've seen many writers come up with beautiful love stories that drove me to tears of joy and despair and I praise said authors very much. But it just so happens not all authors of action-packed stories are very good at romance. There's no need for a long list of examples either, just look at poor George Lucas. The man can't write pretty dialogue worth crap and probably should have refrained from trying, instead of feeding the fans such pathetic romance.

The circunstance of the "falling in love" and the "why" may vary, but the product of bad romance is the same: true, undying, magnificent, unshaken LOVE! In stories that often deal with imperfect worlds and even more imperfect characters, how is it that the LOVE finds a way to be flawless? And in a sad attempt at making it flawed, they make the characters bicker like little kids. What better example is there than good ol' Ron and Hermione a.k.a. Han Solo and Leia?

Amidst all the violence and the roughness of whatever situation characters are put it, love finds a way to be perfect and pure and, well, juvenile even when the heroine is hot as hell! I mean, the craptastic Dare Devil and Elektra: she's tough, he's tough and... they like being lovey-dovey in the rain, HOW SWEET! Also, Jean Grey and Scott Summers? People keep saying they were written for each other, but I don't think there's enough character build up anywhere to support that. Mary-Jane and Peter Parker? The one comic book couple that turned out well, especially after the wedding when they became a very realistic couple, writers went right ahead and destroyed it in the name of teenage fans who need their monthly dose of sucky ANGST.

I don't think I'm capable of stomaching any more sucky romance in good movies/books/tv shows. It's just a bad excuse to make everyone go out-of-character to please the female audience happy and, sometimes, give teenage boys stiffies.

I suppose this is where slash and femmeslash come from. One often finds more chemistry between the main character and his best friend/antagonist than his supposed True Love. I that can't be a good sign!

I say, why can't people think first of the characters as separate beings interacting before trying to link them as a couple? "Love at First Sight" and "Everlasting Love" can happen, but that doesn't mean the Guy has to look into the Girl's eyes and think "LOVELOVELOVELOVELOVE!!!11!!1" every time. That's not even remotely how it goes down in real life, why should it happen in a story unless it's targeted at 7 year olds?

That's probably why I'm fond of the storytelling of "Kingdom Hearts". The romance is there for the gamer to interpret and feel, no attempts at trying to push anything down my throat. If a kiss ever does happen between Sora and Kairi, I'm more than willing to accept it gladly even though I don't always have favorable feelings towards the couple.

Contemplative mode, off.


PS: Cuts are for fat goth guys.

mood: grumpy grumpy

▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
Oscars TV Rating At All Time Low
This year's 80th Annual Academy Awards ceremony has been snubbed by millions of viewers - with figures showing it attracted the lowest TV audience since 1974. The three-hour broadcast on ABC only pulled in an average of 32 million viewers - one million less than in 2003, which was aired just one day after the U.S. invaded Iraq. Last year's ceremony was watched by an average of 41 million people, but Sunday's viewing figures have gone down as the worst since the ratings system first began in 1974. The most-watched Oscars broadcast was in 1998 when 55 million Americans tuned in to witness box office blockbuster Titanic scoop 11 awards. ABC says in a statement that this year's ratings did not account for an increasing number of people watching the ceremony on personal video recorders.


HELLZ YEAH!!!

mood: crazy crazy

▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
Award shows are so sad. People who believe the Oscars are for real are even sadder.

Good thing I stopped watching/caring a long time ago, or it'd just be disappointment after disappointment. lol

I don't mean to sound like a bitch at all, but maybe the '07 batch would be better off without Oscars or any awards for that matter. I watched perhaps 4 "remembering-worthy" movies in '07: one is a bald-star's blockbuster, one I'm SO sick and tired of the same ol' cast members that it was no real surprise at all and the other two are witty and nice but not "jaw-dropping good".

dffewiufwifjsdjfcsdkfskjgareoiuwwroi! I'm bored. :(

ETA: I kinda wish I were a brit so I could turn around right now and say "BOLLOCKS!", cause that's how I fell.  *shrugs*

mood: bored bored

▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
After hearing about the Anon raid on Scientology I patiently waited it unfold so I could babble about it. Everyone knows I love me some babbling!

Btw, the The raids? Utter fail, Anon. :(

Anonymous, Scientology and me: A love story

I couldn't be more sympathetic towards these protests. The self entitled "Church" of Scientology has, for as far back as I can remember, been a source of distress and delusion to many people. The cult -- because that's what it actually is, a cult --  originated from the mind of a power, fame and money hungry mediocre science-fiction writer. It started as L. Ron Hubbard and his wife's attempt at grabbing a few thousand bucks from unsuspecting people of shaken faith. Not only did they get what they wanted, but proceeded to establish a multi-million dollar machine of pitiful lies and hate.

The Cult of Scientology demonstrates more hate and prejudice than a hundred Popes or a horde of extremist Muslims, as it stands against psychiatrists, a gigantic list of pharmaceuticals (not to mention medical treatments) and countries. Their conspirational theories regarding the Germans is the funniest, most pathetic thing ever; if you're having a bad day, goggle interviews with Scientologists and prepare to be amused beyond your senses! It's really no wonder Germany is one of the many countries who has put their foot down and refused to grant $cientology the status of religion.

Scientology is no religion. It bases its truths on a set of mishmashy stories with no actual scientific proof, all but Hubbard's claims that he had found reality in science-- what "science" he spoke of is beyond me! Members are brainwashed to believe that, not unlike more traditional faiths such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam, one should feel it in their hearts that Scientology is true. It ends in a loop: if Scientology is the one truth based on scientific experimentation, then shouldn't it be based on experimentation and therefore proof of reliance?

L. Ron Hubbard was a clever little cookie when it came to scams. He solved the inconsistency of his "religion" by making members pay money to advance levels of revelation the "church". By the time one got to the core of Hubbard's make-believe, they were already too misguided to see. Not to mention all the money they had poured into the cult! How does someone back away after paying a fortune and reaching the highest level of learning? They feel accomplished and finally "enlighted" after years of expectation.

A clever scheme, not a religion. The Cult of Scientology doesn't preach love or understanding, it preaches putting yourself before and above others. The Cult of Scientology doesn't aim to make its followers' lives better, it wants to have their money and status. It's a greedy cult for greedy and delusional people who don't feel like they can be bothered with the sacrifices true faith requires.

It's easier to buy your way into a belief than struggle your whole life trying live by the patience requiring presets of something you will never be 100% sure whether it's true.

And that's when Anonymous comes in. The concept of "Anonymous" is at least inspiring: a group of people from the internet capable of telling you some of the harsh truths about humans; all those thoughts that rush through our minds that we are fevorous to deny. A true small army of people, if gathered in the same place. Just look at the numbers: most cities where the protests took place, 100 to 500 people turned up with banners, masks and suits. This was all put together, mind you, in a less than 2 weeks. There are protests that take months to fix up and that usually don't even come to pass due to pure and simple lack of commitment.

Anonymous has commitment because we are all Anonymous, our inner selves who would want nothing else but to squash those Scientologists, with their hate speech and propaganda. Most of us wouldn't think twice before erasing their lawyers off the face of the Earth, the dirty bastards!

Thing is, Anonymous is anonymous. It doesn't work in real life and it's no wonder the protests were looked upon childishly. Our exterior selves can't conceive that in anonymity we are our rawest, most uncomplicated selves and that the rules society has imposed through the years means pretty much... nothing. A stand in the exterior requires psychological and political weapons of the exterior, not memes.

If Anonymous wants to make a difference and expose once and for all the evils of Scientology, it has to stop being anonymous and become Someone. Anonymous can be the way to spread the word and motivate the troops, but Someone has to take charge.

I don't think Anonymous cares enough to go that far. The cry against Scientology might have rang true to many Anons, but when it comes down to actually achieving results "for great justice", the laziness of today's youth (myself included!) provokes a quest for "lulz" and nothing else.

.
.
.

If tl;dr, watch THIS AWESOME ANIMATION.

PS:  CUTS ARE FOR JERKS!

mood: bouncy lulz

4▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
Oh no, Heath Ledger! :(

He will always be my favorite fictional gay cowboy... and a really promising actor.

mood: sad sad

1▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
Yesterday I decided to surrender to my inner, darkest urges and watch "Alvin and the Chipmunks". WHAT!? I used to love that show when I was a kid! I was such a Simon fangirl, following my trend of always falling for either the brooding or the nerdy ones. *sigh* Despite my undying devotion for Jason Lee, I was honestly expecting the worst from this out-of-the-blue blockbuster. I'm glad to say I was totally wrong, though! I was all by myself, since no one at home is a weakling but me, and I had a great time. I giggled my way through the whole thing and I will stand up to this version as "Alvin and the Chipmunks" whenever necessary! It's not just a "feel good" movie, but a good one at that. Its light-hearted humor, though not quite as original as one could hope, keeps you awake through the whole thing.

I love the concept of Dave as the boys' dad and the way it came true was adorable!

There was this one thing that got me intrigued  and it doesn't have much to do with the production, but how successful "Alvin and the Chipmunks" turned out. I confess that when I watched the trailer the first time I was a little weirded out at Jason Lee and two actors that rank way up there in my Like-O-Meter joining in on a project that seemed to be bound to take a wrong turn somewhere and crash. I was ready for horrible reviews, which did came after all. But... the Chipmunks have grossed over $154 million and turned out more profitable than "National Tresure" and "I am Legend".

"Alvin and the Chipmunks" is one of many family oriented movies this Christmas season, and people opted to watch singing chipmunks to, say, a lake creature or bear is armors. I mean... Chipmunks. Armored Bears. THIS SHOULDN'T BE A DIFFICULT CHOICE!!!... thinking from a kid's perspective, that is.

And still, Chipmunks beat to a pulp all bears and lake creatures and bees and pwetty pwincesses and big name, super hot stars!

I don't think I understand, no matter how much I enjoyed this movie. It's no cinematic masterpiece, but I've seen true cinematic-bullshit out there and this movie does not fall in that category.

I've got the feeling that somewhere right now a bunch of overweight Fox executives are dancing to "Funkytown".

mood: bouncy bouncy

▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
To come back in style, I wrote fic! After a year of writing nothing but original shorties, I think it's a nice breath of fresh air.

Title: Hell is Overrated
Rating: R
Summary: Lila gets to know someone close to Dexter. She might wish she hadn't, though.
Warnings: Swearing, gruesomeness, dark humor

Hell is Overrated - SPOILERS for season 2Collapse )

mood: hot hot

7▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
Wow. It's been such a long time!!!!!

I completely disappeared and I've but one excuse: early January a lot of things happened and I was given my mission destination. I don't think I ever told anyone online, but I'm a member of the LDS church.

I served a (nearly) 12 month mission in Brazil and now I'm having the pleasure of spending a warm holiday season with my family, who came down to Brazil. :) We'll be going home together in January and things will go back to normal.

Well, kinda. This mission was a fantastic experience and I have learned much about myself, from the silliest, most embarrassing things to serious matters. I'm coming home with a lot to ponder and a lot of things to rearrange.

Now that's enough about me! WHAT HAVE YOU GUYS BEEN UP TO?!?! No fandoms have exploded, surely?

mood: content content

5▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
{ SPOILERY-LIKE INFORMATION FOR 'HANNIBAL RISING' BELOW }

The second I heard of bad reviews for this book I decided to rush and read it. I've always been a fan of the Hannibal series for all the wrong reasons, so I figured if the critics were calling it garbage then I was prone to like it in my own twisted ways. I read it and I must say I didn't think it was half bad, it was actually an OK book I'd recommend to anyone who likes the other ones.

The most common critique is that it drags on and rushes in all the wrong moments. Well, whoever didn't see that flaw coming clearly has never read any of Thomas Harris's previous books. That's his infamous style, which just happens to be very suitable for movie adaptations. That is why I have such faith in the upcoming movie and allow myself to look at the book with more sympathetic eyes, to the point of defending it.

'Hannibal Rising' is, to me, a very realistic portrait of Dr. Lecter. If he was ever to become Hannibal the Cannibal, then there had to be some strong motives to propel his behavior somewhere deep in Hannibal's mind. People are fooled by his intellectual demeanor and think there's no instability behind his actions. The instability is there in the form of a traumatic childhood (wouldn't Freud be pleased?), but Hannibal also happens to be a genius, thus mostly in control of how he executes things. His judgment isn't clouded either, though those traumas are what drive Hannibal into doing all the things he does.

Thomas Harris succeeded in making that work. He also succeeded in leading Hannibal down the path of murder convincingly, an element that could have ruined the book.

It has also been pointed that, based on what Harris gives us, Hannibal would have stopped after killing the traitors. That isn't correct. Hannibal is simply protective of the people that treat him well. The beheading of Paul the butcher originated, after all, from him insulting Lady Murasaki. That's why he kills the flautist many years later and then punishes the inmate who insults Clarice Starling.

I liked also Lady Murasaki and believe she had a lot to offer to the development of the plot as well Inspector Popil, who was a very welcomed addition. They're a good new set of supporting characters that don't even have to follow the Graham/Starling model to work. The "villains" were great and realistic; I particularly liked Kolnas, his restaurant (because Hannibal freed the ortolans) and the way Hannibal puts the dog tag in Kolnas's daughter's pocket. Priceless. :) My favorite part of the book was the "'M' for Mischa!" and the slashing. But that's just because I'm slightly sadistic.

'Hannibal Rising' is as much a flawed novel as the other ones and I liked it just as much aswell. Now I'm eagerly waiting for a next one to tell us what happens in the US!! :D Oh, Mr. Harris, you spoil me so. I nearly hate myself for wanting to defend your clearly commercial books!

mood: hungry hungry

1▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫
Ok, I love doing these. Useless but awesome! Stolen from demyx, btw.

Fandoms mentioned: Kingdom Hearts, Harry Potter, Hannibal Lecter, Sonic the Hedgehog, Prison Break, Loveless, Death Note, Digimon, Naruto, Bleach.

On with the funCollapse )

mood: silly silly

▫▫▫ Comment ▫▫▫