Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
“We don’t need feminism anymore.”
“Feminism’s gone too far.”
Women in Afghanistan cannot step outside of their houses without a male relative. They can’t go to parks or gyms or salons. They’re basically not allowed to be heard in public. They can barely get medical care because they can’t be treated by male doctors. They virtually can’t stay unmarried because they need to have a male relative accompany them everywhere and give them permission for the most basic tasks and support their living, because they’re not allowed to get jobs. Men have the power to divorce their wives anytime they want without needing to give any formal reason or evidence, and don’t need to give them any money, and because they’re not even allowed to work, thousands of innocent women end up on the streets begging, which, by the way—is illegal! So they end up being arrested!
Girls over the age of 12 aren’t allowed to go to school, let alone university, or get any secondary education of any kind. Child marriage is legal. Marital rape is legal. Statutory rape is legal. A man is allowed to beat his wife as long as he doesn’t break any bones or give any visible injuries. A woman can be publicly beaten and lashed for removing her burqa.
Don’t you fucking dare tell me we’ve had enough of feminism until it’s reached them.
Just because you’re privileged enough to be in a position where you can look at the world through your rose tinted glasses and think we don’t need feminism anymore doesn’t mean it’s true.
Fnaf2 is such a weird movie to judge. The first movie was unironically fantastic. It was earnest and genuine and I was emotionally invested but also cheering constantly. This one proved Scott Cawthorne Is A Terrible Fucking Writer. As terrible as he is a person. Oh my god it's cringe. Objectively, this is a terrible movie. I spent the entire time complaining. Subjectively, it was also a really fun movie. I spent the entire time complaining, but I was smiling and giggling and kicking my feet while I was doing it. The thing that always makes video game movies bad is their contempt for the source material. They so badly want to prove the movie is an upgrade more than supplemental material. Both fnaf movies are so INDULGENT. They know what people want to see. They fill it with moments to make you cheer at reveals or specific shots. The realization Mike was PLAYING fnaf2 had me giggling hysterically. Withered bonnie waking up had me hooting and hollering. Chica with a missing beak made me squeal.
At the same time. Terrible fucking movie. I expected it would go full goofy, it had to. The first movie was serious and great for it. But fnaf2 introduces so much insane overcomplicated lore that there is absolutely no way to adapt the fucking toy animatronics without going goofy. And ESPECIALLY with Scott writing it. Curious to see how much of fnaf3 and even 5 was present here. Curious indeed.
My only huge absolutely serious complaint- the only time I thought something was both objectively and subjectively bad- one was people possessed by the puppet, Jesus the makeup looks bad and cringe, and like. Come on. The puppet should be crawling inside of them. We are making fnaf 5 references here. MICHAEL AFTON IS HERE. Set it up properly. It was so cringe. Two, Michael afton. Holy shit. What the fuck did they do to my boy? Michael does not want to help his dad. Michael wants to kill him. William afton hated Michael after what happened to Evan and abused and neglected him. Then he becomes estranged and when he finds out his dad is a serial killer he sets out to kill him. That's game lore. Why would movie Michael be so loyal? That's not the Michael I want to see. The Michael I want to see got I dunno shipped off to military school or something and Vanessa hasn't seen him in ten years but when he heard about all this shit he showed up to take William/springtrap or the other animatronics down at any cost, even if other people got hurt along the way. Bad Michael is cringe. Booooo
Otherwise objectively terrible movie I really enjoyed
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I have many thoughts about the styling of Ahsoka Tano in the Mandalorian (for now, we will be ignoring the Ahsoka trailer's & show's existence, just to make it easier to focus on one thing and because the Ahsoka show isn't out yet either), so I will be going through these thoughts here.
DISCLAIMER: I have no issue with the casting, I think Rosario does a good job at portraying Ahsoka as an adult in a live action show! I think she fits the character so well, acting wise, feature wise and voice wise etc.! This is solely about the styling, mainly about the make-up and the headtails and stuff like that, and not the clothes.
Picture 1: Ahsoka is 14 (s1-2 of Clone Wars + the movie)
Picture 2: Ahsoka is 15-16 (s3-5 of Clone Wars)
Picture 3: Ahsoka is 17-18 (s7 of Clone Wars)
Picture 4: Ahsoka is 33 (Rebels)
Picture 5: Ahsoka is 45 (Mandalorian)
As you can see, throughout the different seasons and shows, Ahsoka ages and grows. Her clothes change, she gets taller, her face grows more mature, but something else that changes are her lekku & montrals (+ the markings on those) and her facial markings. Let's ignore the live-action Ahsoka from Mandalorian for a second, and focus on her evolution in animation.
Ahsoka's lekku go from being just past her shoulders, to down to her stomach / past her ribs. Her montrals go from barely visible to tall and pointy. The markings on her lekku & montrals grow thinner and more intricate with time, which is a bit hard to tell up until Rebels, but this is a fact supported by Tales of the Jedi:
Ahsoka (1 year old) in Tales of the Jedi.
As you can see, the markings on her headtails are thick and clunky, no real detail to them. While you're already looking at this picture, take a look at her facial markings. We'll get to those in a second.
Another reference picture for the lekku & montrals growth +the markings on them:
Ahsoka as a young child.
Her lekku are already growing larger, and you can see her lekku markings, as well as her facial markings, starting to take form.
Speaking of her facial markings, you can see how they go from being mere dots on her face, to rough outlines, to continuing to become larger and more detailed and intricate the older she grows. By season 7 of Clone Wars, you can see the marks on her cheeks starting to pull out more towards her cheekbones, which we see the full result of in Rebels.
So, having just discussed these facts about Togruta biology, how they age and grow, it's time to question the live-action version of Ahsoka.
Why are her lekku the same size when she's supposed to be 45, as they were when she was 15? Why are the marks on her cheeks so small and oddly thin? Why do the marks on her lekku/montrals make no sense? Why are her montrals the same size as when she was 17-18, but they're sagging backwards?!
It's no secret that Disney doesn't care much about continuity, but this is so lazy.
"Well it would be hard for her to do stunts etc. if she had longer lekku!"
1. How do you know that? 2. Is Disney not a multi-billion corporation with access to world class prosthetics and CGI? If they wanted to, they could. If they wanted to, they would. 3. So much harder problems have been solved in films throughout the times. They did it with Shaak Ti in episodes II and III. They did it with Twi-leks back in the 80's!
"It's a completely different medium! You can't expect her to look like an ANIMATED character!"
1. I don't, that's why I'm not shaking my head complaining about how her eyes aren't as big as the animation (lol). 2. It's not so much about "animation accuracy", more like universe accuracy? This is how a Togruta ages. This is how their lekku/montrals and markings grow. This is fact and also raises an important question of continuity. If it didn't matter, why would they go through the trouble of showing her markings and lekku/montrals slowly growing the older she gets?
"Maybe she's a sub-species of Togruta."
1. A sub-species where her lekku grow and grow down past her ribs, then suddenly when she reaches the age of 45 they shrink back up to the same length they were when she was 15? Ah, yes, this makes plenty of sense... 2. Stop making excuses for Disney?? They're just lazy, cosplayers do a better job than they do at most of the live action adaptions of previously animated characters (Hera Syndulla? Need I say more...). 3. Referencing Shaak Ti's appearance real quick, we know Ahsoka and Shaak are both Togruta, but Shaak's facial markings are quite different from Ahsoka's. This could be because she's older than we ever see Ahsoka (until live-action...), or also maybe because of VARIATIONS in species. There are so many different coloured togrutas, with so many different looking facial markings. But their lekku and montrals all grow about the same, even if their shapes differ slightly here and there. (See: Ahsoka's family from Shili and the people of Kiros. Don't act like Ahsoka and Shaak Ti are the only Togruta we've ever seen in Star Wars.)
"They kept her facial markings simple to make it easier to touch up on the make-up and to do it every day of filming, several times a day etc.!"
1. Have you seen Jennifer Lawrence get into her prosthetics & make-up for Mystique (X-Men)? Dave Bautista for Drax (Guardians of the Galaxy)? Karen Gillian for Nebula (Guardians of the Galaxy)? Jamie Campbell Bower for Vecna (Stranger Things)? Jim Carrey for the Grinch? Oscar Isaac for Apocalypse (X-Men: Apocalypse)? This is such a weak argument lmao. 2. Stencils...? Temporary tatoos...?
It just sucks that with all the technology we possess nowadays, Disney can't even do something remotely as good as we've already seen in Star Wars movies before??? Like, 1-6 were all masterpieces. They were beautiful, things looked real and accurate and had so much afterthought put into every little thing. It was a passion project. But now, it feels like it's all only about the money, which is why they're putting out shows right and left. Don't get me wrong, I love how much content we are getting, but it gets frustrating when they don't put full effort into it. It's clear they're only doing it to earn more money, and not to keep telling the stories of characters fans have grown to love. If they cared about that, they would care enough to make the characters accurate to Star Wars lore.
Notable mention: Shaak Ti was 40 years old when her lekku were all the way down past her hips and her montrals were larger than her head.
She was also in both Star Wars Episode II and III, and she had her lekku & montrals animation (togruta biology) accurate! And she still fought with them. And this was in the very early 2000's.
Ahsoka was 5 years older than Shaak Ti was (when she died) in Mandalorian and her lekku were literally tiny. Her montrals as well, and even worse, they were sagging backwards so bad.
Also, why are her lekku so flimsy??? Do they know lekku are organic matter............ which is heavy.......... not saying they wouldn't move at all in the wind, but that much...?
God, Rosario is so beautiful though, it's such a shame. It would've been so cool to see a new era of Ahsoka, to see how her lekku and montrals would've continued to grow in the 12 years between Mandalorian and Rebels, as well as her facial markings. I just feel like it's so painfully obvious that it's a headpiece, especially with the way it looks like the brown headband/headpiece is squeezing her???? It just looks so odd. Very disappointing.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
highly recommend everyone to put jewelry on their hearing aids, it's such a great motivator to wear it & make myself proud of it because it looks PRETTY ASF
The Phantom of the Opera (1990) - Content Warnings
Quick note before the warnings!
I watched both parts on YouTube, but couldn't find any content warnings ahead of watching it, so I decided to make a list of everything I noticed that needs a warning and post it here so if anyone googles it in the future, maybe this post will pop of and help you! <3
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
The portrayal of the Addams family in "Wednesday" || Part 1 - Morticia Addams
These are purely my thoughts and opinions on how the Addams family was portrayed in the new Netflix show "Wednesday" in comparison to the 1990's movies, the 1964 sitcom and the original books/comics by Charles Addams. I'll mainly be talking about Morticia, Gomez and Fester, with a small mention of Pugsley at the end. This is because I don't have much of an issue with the portrayal of either Wednesday or Pugsley in the show.
The styling of Morticia Addams
To the left is Morticia Addams portrayed by Anjelica Huston in the 1990's Addams Family movies. To the right is Morticia Addams portrayed by Catherine Zeta-Jones in the 2022 Netflix show Wednesday.
Let's talk about the styling choices here.
Catherine's Morticia has completely straight, flat, black hair that goes down past her waist. It always falls down her back, everything kept behind her shoulders or sometimes on one of her shoulders.
While Anjelica's Morticia also has black hair, everything else is different. Her hair barely goes to the tops of her ribs, it's slightly wavy and has more volume at the top. It also goes down the front of her shoulders, framing her face.
Even in the 1964 sitcom where Morticia is played by Carolyn Jones, her hair is the same length as Anjelica's, it goes down the front of her body and it's slightly wavy with some (though not as much as Anjelica) volume at the top.
Carolyn Jones as Morticia Addams in the 1964 Addams Family sitcom.
Next, let's talk about make-up.
Both Anjelica's and Carolyn's portrayals of Morticia Addams have very sharp, with make-up enhanced features: sharp cheekbones, jawlines and noses, as well as very pronounces eyebrow bones with the help of highlighter and contour. Their eyebrows are very dark, high up, slim and sharp.
But Catherine's eyebrows are low and light brown, for some reason. She also lacks a lot of contour around her nose and cheekbones and her eyebrow bone is practically invisible.
We're talking about features she has, but that need to be enhanced when it comes to playing Morticia, and they simply didn't do a very good job at that with her. With the lack of contour and highlighter, her face looks very flat and not sharp at all.
Another large difference is her eye make-up.
One of Morticia Addams' purposefully most pronounced features are her eyes. Anjelica wears extravagant eye make-up that pronounces both her eyes and her brow bones. The gray eyeshadow even manages to add a lifting effect to her whole face. Her eyelashes are long and black and there are often close-ups of her eyes where she flutters them seductively.
In the 1990's movies they also use lighting to draw attention to her eyes by illuminating that part of her face in a beautiful and mysterious glow in certain scenes.
One example of that is the picture above of Anjelica's Morticia, but I'm going to put in a few more.
I don't really care about the lighting, seeing as the Wednesday show has a completely different feel to it than the Addams Family movies, but this shows how Morticia's eyes are a very important feature of hers.
Another difference is that Anjelica's Morticia wears red lipstick and red nail polish, meanwhile Catherine's Morticia is wearing some sort of dark purple lip colour and black nail polish.
Red is usually seen as a very sensual, seductive and beautiful colour, which are also words that can be used to describe Morticia's personality and looks.
While on the topic of the nails, let's move right onto talking about their dresses as well, seeing as in the next photos you get a clear views of the nails as well as the dresses.
Morticia can be described as nothing less but a gothic queen. Which is why the simpleness of Catherine's Morticia's dress is so wrong. Not only is the cut and design of her dress incredibly underwhelming and basic, but her jewelry is as well. She doesn't wear any of the beautiful rings Anjelica's Morticia wore in the 1990's movies and she wears a pair of basic, very out of character, silver hoop earrings that are almost completely hidden by her hair anyway.
I really don't understand the styling choices here.
Carolyn's Morticia also wears rings and even a necklace.
Carolyn Jones wearing the 1964 version of Morticia's dress.
And while Carolyn's Morticia is wearing a dress with about as much detail as Catherine's, the design and cut of it is still far more mysterious, beautiful and elegant than Catherine's.
Honestly, Catherine's dress kinda gives me Kardashian vibes, and I'm not here for it.
--------------------
The writing, acting & directing of Morticia Addams
Most, if not all, of the flaws in Catherine's portrayal of Morticia Addams can (and should) be blamed on the script and the director (Tim Burton).
If we take Christen Haydensen's portrayal of Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars as an example; he's a great actor, who did a great job, but the script was so awkward and his lines were incredibly unnaturally written, so it's not his fault that many ended up critiquing his performance, but rather George Lucas'.
I think this might be the case for Morticia Addams in the show "Wednesday". She feels like a cold and distant mother, she's not as seductive and sensual as she is in the movies and she's far more serious in the show as well.
Tim Burton has a thing for making things dark and depressing, but one of the main staples of the Addams family is their surprisingly healthy relationship with each other (choosing to look aside from Wednesday & Pugsley trying to kill each other all the time, because this is still a fictional, horror based story where they're supposed to be creepy, spooky, mysterious and kinda kooky). So it surprised me very much when there seemed to be a rift between Wednesday and her mother. The Addams family is known for being very accepting of each other, putting family above all else.
Morticia always encouraged her children to be themselves, and never once is she seen pushing them to do anything like she does. However, in the show, she seems almost obsessed with the idea of Wednesday making the same history at Nevermore as she did (captain of the fencing team, member of the nightshades, resident in Ophelia Hall, winner of the Poe Cup...). This is very out of character for Morticia.
In the movies it's hard to get a reaction out of Morticia, she seems very indifferent to a lot of things, but in the show it seems far too easy to rile her up etc.
In addition, I found the way her younger self in the show (portrayed by Gwen Jones) reacted to killing Garrett Gates was also vastly out of character. She cried, she shook and she seemed completely shocked by it. I simply don't believe Morticia Addams would react like that, teenager or not, I don't believe that matters.
--------------------
That was about all I had to say about Morticia Addams, next post will be about the portrayal of Gomez Addams, after that I'll write about Fester Addams and in the end I'll write a little something about the difference between Morticia & Gomez' relationship in the 1990's movies vs. the 2022 show.
