#dc#batman#dc comics#bruce wayne#tim drake#dc fanart#dick grayson#batfam#batfamily
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from Indonesia
seen from Czechia
seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from Czechia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Singapore
seen from United States
seen from Czechia
seen from United States
I know Hayden googled "ways for two men to have kids" after Shane came out
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.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
He's the most open-minded and non-judgemental character on the show, but I think some viewers overestimated the idea of Benedict's non-adherence/defiance of societal structure and norms. Because he...hasn't. He has extracurriculars on the side, but when in the mainstream or "polite society" he knows what it is and conforms accordingly. To the point that he can advise on the loopholes that work around but don't disrupt the status quo, like when he informed the Mondriches that most of the high society etiquette regulations are meant for maintaining the marriage mart so once you're married they don't apply as much. Then there's when he became interested in Tilly Arnold and, like a reflex--and in contrast to his previous flings-of-the-season--visited her during calling hours with a bouquet of flowers, as if they were properly courting, because Tilly was a Lady, and she was like, lol no, we're not doing all that. He's rolled his eyes and left parties early, but he hasn't rebelled against, pushed back on, or questioned the validity of their society, its rules, or structure, he's always accepted it as is, as just the way the world works.
Beef Season 2 is like: here's an avoidant and an anxious clinger on the backdrop of thematic capitalism and corruption. Let's see if this combination reveals the audience to perceive one as "better" than the other: the fearful, people pleaser who abides to capitalistic structures in the end or the aggressive, volatile partner who aims for control in every situation out of fear. Surely this choice doesn't say anything about you and your self-awareness or reveal any hypocrisy that shows you didn't understand the messaging that's very in tune with this climate
Why Did No One Tell Me OG Law & Order Is the Best of the Franchise??
Okay, I need to scream about this for a second.
I’ve been binging OG Law & Order and… wow. Everyone hypes SVU (and sure, it’s famous), but honestly? The original is where the real magic is—especially seasons 5–9. The cases are sharp, the cast lineups are insane, and Sam Waterston as Jack McCoy?? A powerhouse. Love love love.
Why OG Works Better
What makes OG stand out is how case-driven it is. Every episode feels like two shows in one—half detective work, half courtroom drama. Tight storytelling, no filler. SVU, for all its popularity, often sidelines the cases to focus on Olivia’s personal arcs. OG sprinkles just enough personal stuff in between, so you crave the next glimpse without it overwhelming the story.
And the ensemble cast? Unmatched. Briscoe, Logan, Rey, Schiff, Claire, McCoy—each brought a generational balance. No one was overshadowed, they all played off each other, which made the show feel bigger than just “one star character.”
McCoy + Claire + Schiff = Peak
Speaking of balance, I’ll never forgive the choice to kill Claire. That trio was gold:
Schiff as the weary-but-wise authority figure,
Claire as the challenger and grounding presence,
McCoy as the courtroom firebrand.
Together, they pulled out dimensions in each other. Claire especially drew out Jack’s bratty, chaotic sides in ways that humanized him. Later ADAs often just looked up to McCoy instead of pushing back, which flattened the dynamic.
Behind the scenes, Jill Hennessy wanted out, but instead of recasting Claire, Dick Wolf decided killing her would “give McCoy more depth.” 🙄 But honestly? Wouldn’t it have been deeper to show him finally trying (after two failed marriages) to figure out work-life balance? That’s growth. Instead, they locked him into the “lone courtroom warrior” box.
The Lone Wolf Problem
And that’s kind of Wolf’s whole philosophy across the franchises, right? To be the top of your game, you have to be alone. McCoy. Olivia. Stabler. They get written into that “lone wolf genius” corner. But what if the braver choice was showing that you can be brilliant and still have connection, still have balance? That would’ve been far richer.
Later Seasons… Meh
By the time I hit season 18 with Cutter and Rubirosa… I’m bored. They’re polished and good-looking, but flat. No spark, no tension. It’s so noticeable after the electric eras with Briscoe, Logan, Rey, Schiff, Claire, and early McCoy. The later ADAs felt more like mentees orbiting Jack than equals who could challenge him.
My ADA/DA Era Ranking (aka fight me in the notes):
McCoy + Claire Kincaid + Schiff — Peak. Balance. Sparks. Chaos. Brilliance.
McCoy + Jamie Ross + Schiff — Jamie had bite and perspective. She was principled but still knew how to push back.
McCoy + Abbie Carmichael + Schiff — Abbie’s fire and sharp edges made her the perfect counterweight to Jack.
Stone + Robinette + Schiff — The blueprint. Pure, case-first storytelling.
McCoy + Alexandra Borgia + Branch — Short-lived but promising. She had heart and grit before Wolf undercut her by fridging her.
McCoy + Serena Southerlyn + Branch — Serena was intelligent, but came across as high-handed and privileged, often missing real-world grounding.
McCoy + Cutter + Rubirosa — Polished, but flat and forgettable.
Anyway. Justice for Claire. Justice for the golden years when Law & Order was truly about the law and the order.
The Interview With the Vampire TV show is a perfect example of how adaptations do not have to follow the source material closely to be an excellent adaptation.
(This is a spoiler-free commentary, but it does discuss the dynamics of the characters in general.)
I read the books back in the day, and of course, saw the original movie. Despite a laundry list of big changes, the series still feels extremely true to the books because it captures the spirit. It gets the characters and their fucked-up dynamics right. It doesn't shy away from them being melodramatic monsters. It keeps to the rules established in the source material. The show also makes sure to preserve key moments and key scenes, but always with a twist.
Since they did that, they were free to shift things in time, amp up and adapt certain dynamics, and change the race of characters in a way that deepens the story and complicates already extremely complicated power dynamics.
The original movie stuck more closely to the era and the appearance of the characters as described by Anne Rice, but I don't think the story loses anything by changing those two elements. In fact, it gives it modern relevance and room for political and social commentary.
I have never ascribed to the idea that an adaptation has to be slavishly accurate to the source material to be a good adaptation. It just has to be smart enough to identify what to keep and what can change. An adaptation adapts. Honestly, I find it boring when I see exactly what was in a book up on screen with no surprises. Where's the fun in that?
The difference between a good adaptation and a bad one is not how accurate it is to the source material, but how well the adaptation respects what made the story compelling to begin with.
What's important here?
Lestat is dramatic and powerful and a monster who is deeply charismatic, but also manipulative.
Louis is overdramatic and self-hating, but oddly drawn to Lestat.
Claudia is fierce, but bitter about her eternal childhood.
Their relationship is deeply toxic but with true affection. They are monsters, but monsters capable of intense love and devotion - to the point where it has the power to destroy them.
THAT is at the core of this story. THAT is what they keep intact. This frees up all sorts of avenues for play around a few key plot beats.
This room for play also gives opportunities to expand on thinner characters or rewrite them entirely. It's been a long time since I read the books, but I don't recall Daniel standing out as more than a framing device, especially in earlier books. But in the show, he's one of the best parts. Not only does he take a much more active role in the story, he delivers some of the most hilarious and cutting lines of the entire series. If the show had stuck closely to the source material, we wouldn't have this Daniel.
It was also smart of them to make Claudia a few years older. The eternal child element is preserved, but the layer of arrested teenaged hormones and womanhood that will never blossom adds an extra layer of angst and sadness. She is stuck forever in a state of rebellion, never allowed to settle and come into her own.
Having her be a young Black woman also deepens her attachment to Louis, visually, socially and symbolically. They are different from Lestat and they understand each other in a way he never can. She's still very much the Claudia from the book but with layers added to deepen her character and add new, fresh dynamics and complications.
It's also delightful to see the show take the homoeroticism that was subtextual in the early books with Louis and Lestat (and in the original film) and making it unapologetically text. Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles have always been incredibly queer and subversive, but it's amazing to see that side of it fully embraced and stated plainly with no ambiguity or qualifiers or hints. It's queer and that queerness is woven into the fabric of the entire narrative. Louis and Lestat are the toxic beating heart of the Vampire Chronicles.
It's also important because we need messy, dark, fucked-up queer narratives. Sweet, coming-of-age stories and romances are of course, important - especially for younger queer people. But us older queer folk not only want to see ourselves in multiple genres, we want permission to see imperfect, messy, and yes, even evil characters. It's a way of reclaiming the monstrous queer that was villainized for so long and making it our own. We want to find something beautiful in the dark.
If we all thought about it, we could probably think of dozens of examples where a show or movie went far off-script from the source material and was still an excellent adaptation.
Interview With the Vampire is just the most recent and one of the best examples of a stellar adaptation that respects the source material but also builds and expands on it.
I look forward to seeing how they surprise me next season.
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.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Belgian beauty ✨
She became viral for how speaking at TV
The one thing I will always find fascinating about The Gilded Age is white audiences asking seemingly innocent questions and then acting hostile when they are answered by Black ppl who definitely know what they’re talking about. Like on fb the other day, some lady asked what the deal with bustles were, and she got many answers. However, when it came to Black watchers telling her that one of the reasons for the bustle is no doubt racial they were told they didn’t know what they were talking about and that they were simply assuming. The idea that they could in fact be fashion historians or historians in general was never considered and this often happens with period dramas. Bridgerton being the main example. A lot of things in the Americas are racial, literally down to the most minute detail, and the sooner y’all realize that the sooner we can progress with these conversations. I’m not even gonna mention the sidelining of the Black stories in the show cuz that’s a given by now.
THE LIST OF BL DRAMAS/MOVIES I'VE WATCHED (w personal ratings):
I thought sharing my huge bl archive with you guys might be nice and maybe helpful in some kind of way. I mean what else am I supposed to do with this list anyway other than yapping about it???? I'll keep sharing many many different lists of what I've watched under different titles as well, so no worriess
My points are based on my personal criteria, such as a unique plot, good acting, consent, a healthy relationship, on screen chemistry, if I enjoyed watching it etc. Keep in mind that these ratings are solely based on my personal opinions.
• Oh and, you see that some of em don't have any points next to them? Rarely, I either forgot or didn't think a rating was necessary BUT (and it's a big but as you can see) most of the time, no point means; The drama/movie probably contains nonconsensual/unpleasant scenes. •
Whew enough talking. Here's the list of all bl dramas/movies I've watched (w personal ratings):
