Quietly and Clearly

@secondlina : "Do you need wizard references? Google orchestra conductors."

See THREAD for many more great examples.

Unknown, illustrations from the late 1800s of Japanese fireworks bursting into life. Taken from catalogues published by the British company CR Brock and Co

Photograph: courtesy of Yokohama City Central library

Henry Cavill about Outlander 

But he famously wrote 2 drafts for Superman movies that almost got made (for real–there is even footage of a 21 year old Henry Cavill wearing the suit testing for this film) and I’ve just stumbled on the second draft of this infamous script and it is….both wonderful, horrifying, weird, wonderful and strange.

The premise of this film was basically that Kal-El was secretly a prophecized Kryptonian Prince. A legit Prince. And the theme of him being a lost Prince is carried over thematically to the point that Abrams envisioned Lois as this commoner becoming a Princess when she was with Superman. Yes, this happened.

Also, Clark meets Lois at a frat party (I can’t make this up) and spends the duration of the movie so consumed and lustful over her that it’s both well written romance in some parts and “Jesus keep it in your pants” in other parts. It’s both….“ok this could have worked had this been a movie” and “why is this script literally telling us Clark Kent has an erection when he’s around Lois. This is so freaking weird, Abrams.”

Tony doesn’t meet Pepper, decide she’s hot, date her for a bit, and then they don’t work out. She works for him for ten years, he promotes her to run his entire g-d company because she’s the only one he trusts to do that when he’s dying. They save each other’s life. Pepper stops a freaking supervillain. Like, I’m not making a judgement on whether they’d last as a couple of w/e , but the universe sets them up as Epic Central Couple and then, like… writes Pepper out off screen in a short scene???

And the same with Jane. She’s not some woman Thor runs into and fancies. She’s set up as someone he risked his life for, who he became a better person because of, who he pined for for two goddamn years, who then saved the universe with SCIENCE. It’s not a small, casual, understated relationship and if they wanted that they should have written her differently. And if they wanted to end Thor and Jane, they had a perfectly good opportunity in Thor 2 but instead they reinforced the relationship. So instead we’re probably going to get a random offscreen breakup for a character that should by rights be a huge part of the universe???

(And tbh I’ve only seen the Hulk once and it was a long time ago but Betty was still an epic central character and the closest we get to a mention is her dad existing in civil war. lol what.)

Either way, I guess this comes down to money. We are firmly in the era of the [[superhero]] franchise movie. Even brushing aside your usual suspects like ingrained industry misogyny, these movies are being made in the way they’re are being made because of an economic model- not because of some kind of desire to produce a coherent, well-planned, well-written body of work. I do see that it may be too much to expect consistency in characterization, motivation, storyline or even, like, logic, when the lifespan of a set of movies is across decades, not just years and directors/producers/leads/studios even, leave projects or become unavailable. I see that my own demographic- a fully growed-up fangirl, is not always what is being targeted. I see all of this. But it remains a shame and a missed opportunity to me. That in all of it, quality-control and the superhero movie as an entity become increasingly estranged concepts. Or maybe they don’t? Maybe it’s a post-Michael Bay world and I’m just living in it and a succession of 3D CGI explosions, car chases and fight scenes is what passes for narratively compelling? And I’m not being snide- maybe the paradigm has shifted and streaming services and/or piracy mean an emphasis is placed on visual spectacle? 

But I mean, real talk, I’m still not over the most egregious example of recent times of throwing the love interest under the bus that is Peggy Carter. I just… FA was done so well, and then WS was ...ok, but then Civil War, and Sharon, and it wasn’t even just about the message that sends about the interchangeability of a female lead- which, if you include the tease of Nat, is appalling and gross in and of itself… it was more the realization that I have no clue who this movie!Steve person is anymore.

Superman and Lois Lane are really the only couple that has consistently been able to survive media not pulling them apart but not for DC Comics’s lack for trying. Bc they tried HARD

(Warning: Spoilers and Long Read)

This past Wednesday, DC Comics released Superwoman, written and drawn by Phil Jimenez, and while some are singing its praises, others are not. I am one of the latter. Despite its dense and rich narrative and beautiful artwork, Superwoman fails to soar, and the fault lies primarily with its approach to its main characters: Lois Lane and Lana Lang. A poor understanding of the characters’ histories, imbalanced development, sexism, and deceptive marketing all combined to undermine what could have been a fantastic first issue.

Nowhere in this very well written original long essay did the writer say she didn’t like Lana, didn’t want to read a friendship between them or anything of the sort. She also says point blank that she assumes the ending is a fake out. So either you didn’t truly read her post or you did and you are now creating strawman arguments about it. Either way, uncool.

I do not hate Lana but I do have a problem with sexism and the way men weaponize women against other women and then turn around and blame women for being impacted and upset by it. But, as a friend of mine put very well recently, Lana was weaponized against Lois decades ago by a male dominant comics culture that prefers their women a little more “gentle” and a little “nicer.” In a culture where it’s been popular for years to treat Lois as both a “bitch” and a “whore” and to change Lana’s characterization to wherever was popular at the time to make men more comfortable. There’s a REASON Lana tends to be more popular with guys then she tends to be with women. This doesn’t mean I don’t find value in her or flat out love Kreuk’s version of her. Because I do. And she does have value.

Women did not create this toxic comics culture where Lois Lane was painted as a bitch for 75 years bc she liked her job. Men did that. Women did not use Lana Lang as a weapon to put Lois down for decades. Men did that. Women did not marginalize Lois in the new 52 and cast her out of her own god damn comic book, treat her like garbage then try to replace her with a “new improved” Lana and hope that people just wouldn’t notice their sexist fuckery. The ALL MALE Superman office where not one woman was employed did that. Women are not to blame for any of this sexist shit.

You cannot set up a situation where you batter a female character with sexism for years, as DC Comics has done with Lois Lane, and then turn around and accuse women of being “mean girls” when they don’t just accept the pile of slop handed to them. There are some great comics where Lois and Lana team up–BQM’s Smallville comic is one of them. It would be great to read a book where they are truly a team. But this book was done poorly based even on the new 52 canon and the author of the essay, who is female and extremely smart and thoughtful, took a lot of time to outline why she felt it was done poorly and why the bait and switch was offensive based on ::these:: circumstances. She’s in no way being some kind of mean girl. She’s sharing why she is hurt. And it has jackshit to do with “shipping” (another derailment) because Clark is not in this book nor is his marriage with Lois in question or remotely a part of this.