Alex Mouse from Fantasyland

Yesterday I've got my third and final shot of HPV vaccine :)

At the time I was on my parents side, but looking back, after COVID, after my father got extremely antixax, after seeing how insanely misinformed the antivaxxers are, maybe they made a horrible mistake

Theres a scene between the two that gave me chill,and Marquand nails the emotions of both the gloating sadistic villain AND the distraught rage and pain filled hero,WHILE doing impressions of John Colicos and Cedric Smith ,WHILE talking to himself

Just damn

@countesspetofi @the-blue-fairie @ariel-seagull-wings @tamisdava2

@themousefromfantasyland @maimoncat @rose-of-pollux

@amalthea9 @themousefromfantasyland @alexa-santi-author

The Brownies and other Tales by Juliana Horatia Gatty Ewing (1841-1885)

1910

London, G. Bell & Sons

@themousefromfantasyland @the-blue-fairie @thealmightyemprex @professorlehnsherr-almashy @rayatii @princesssarisa @tamisdava2

If a woman is "ugly" she is considered to be an abomination, and gets mistreated as such.

Why is it that we only ever see women falling in love with hideous monsters and not the other way around?

Looksmaxxing has made it so even conventionally attractive people are constantly told they are not good enough, what hope is there for people who are unconventionally unattractive?

It seems they should just disappear, our screens should not be "ruined" by having to see them.

It's gotten to the point that people who aren't conventionally attractive are being driven away from public life, with a new trend emerging where they feel like a hare compared cute bunnies, a complete mismatch.

In a world where beauty is the most valued thing in women, from most songs that have been sung, poems that have been written, fairytales that have been told...

What's the fate for those who aren't attractive?

The villain. The hag. The spinster.

And what if they are in a relationship with a guy who is considered to be hot, like Brooke Monk is?

Everyone suddenly launches into attack mode, why is he with her?

He should be with his looksmatch!

Doesn't he know he deserves beauty??

The other Bennet sister shows us what life is like for those who don't quite fit and gives some nice hope...

But people are still weirded out by the fact the guys who want her are hotter than her, as if it's not something that should happen.

Timestamps:

00:00 intro

02:58 who is "ugly"?

08:01 you must only date your looksmatch / why is he with her?

12:27 the experience of being seen as ugly

23:27 the demonization of facial differences

28:09 loving the monster within

What interests me is that this was never a problem before.

Do you think a woman, even a rich woman in Antebellum south, would wear this make up?

Why Snow White, as a medieval German princess wears a 1930's bowb cut, and why this doesn't ruin immersion?

Do you think any woman in the Wild West would look like Marilyn Monroe?

Why a young man boarding the Titanic have the same haircut as a 90's hearthrob?

Hollywood has been using anachronisms and anachronistic beauty standards since it's very beginning.

And not saying it's bad for people to be aware of these things, I'm just curious about how something that never was a problem before suddenly is a huge problem now.

All period pieces no matter how accurate to the period they try to depict, carry anachronisms from when they were made in order to make a connection to current audiences and convey certain ideas. And film was always like that. But suddenly any hint of 2020's culture and aesthetics that appear in period films breaks immersion and makes people mad, and I wonder why?

I'm reminded of Christopher Nolan The Odyssey, and amid many awful choices, the fact that the characters use the word "dad" was what broke the camel's back for many? Like, serious guys, in an ocean of questionable choices THIS was what made you angry? You guys would certainly DESPISE Epic.

I have a theory that maybe it's social media. Social media makes us hyper aware of everything, so it's harder to willingly suspend your disbelief.

Another thing is that we use the cinema as escapism more than ever before, and modern audiences despise current culture, and are trying to escape from it as best as they can. The past itself became escapism, and audiences don't want anything to remind them of current times.

So what do you guys think? I would love to hear your thoughts about this, because it's something that amuses me a lot.

Putting my two cents... social media hyper awareness is just too easy an answer.

See, it was not just the stars who changed making people notice the anacronism of their in aesthetic beauty patterns.

The production of Hollywood movies changed, and with that it created a conflict between Setting Presentation x Casting Character Presentation.

What I mean by that is: in old Hollywood, ALL elements of a movie were highly stylized, so the stars were not the only fantasy sold to the audience, but the experience of watching a movie was transporting the audience to a fantasy.

It was embraced by the public and the production team that they would see everything be the complete opposite of reality, so the combination of the design and story and the casting collectively reflected that.

A technicolor western was completely presented as clean and glamorous so Marilyn wouldn’t be out of place in their saloons...

Gone With the Wind is a highly emotional melodrama where every choice of color grading in the photography, settings and costumes reflected the emotionality of the story and characters.

The Wizard of Oz, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and Pinocchio were Fairy Tales borrowing deliberately from different art styles and historical periods to create their own unique world.

Movies in contemporary post war settings like an American in Paris and Lili deliberately adopted an aesthetic inspired by impressionist paintings.

Biblical and Sword and Sandal movies like The Ten Commandments and Ben Hur recreated luxurious classic paintings and illustrations to emphasize the epic escope of the story they were telling.

But after the 90s, something happened... in an attempt to bridge a gap between Old Hollywood Glamour, Cynical and Grim New Hollywood, the Blockbuster Era and the rise of the Indepedent Scene, searching extra prestige the Hollywood movies adopted a more grimm, unglamorous photorealism, to be taken seriously... but in contrast, the stars didn’t follow that realism.

If anything, they became even more unrealistically idealized in their beauty!

Notice how after the 2000s, both on TV and and Theatrical Film Releases, the Period set Movies Loose More Color, the Photography becomes more Subduded in Brown, Mute Yellows to Oranges, or Sandy Greys...

But with rare exceptions the red lipstick of the peasant woman is impecable, the hair is always perfect, rare are the people who are fat, and everyone has their teen shining white and intact.

Bear in mind, when early directors between the 60s to the 80s experimented with grounded and cynical realism in comedies, westerns, war movies or medieval period movies, they often casted actors accordingly with rough appearances to fit that stylistic aproach.

But Hollywood, in an attempt to attend every taste at the same time in the same movie even when it doesn’t make sense, forgot that lesson.

The Big Hollywood studios want to shoehorn in the same project, ugly photorealism with clean and glamorous movie star.

And those two elements are not mixing well, so it wouldn’t take long for people to be taken out of the fantasy, notice and point it out.

And this reminds me of another problem: The way all modern blockbusters look grey and desaturated.

There are many well known reasons for that: It helps hide bad CGI, it makes things easier for post production, it makes the work flow better. But one reason that stands out for me is that it helps make things feel more "gritty, realistic, mature, sophisticated".

And this is because these producers want their blockbusters to have the same amount of prestige and seriousness as small, indie films. But the reason these small, indie films are often grey and desaturated is exactly to differentiate them from the large, commercial, crowd pleasing films from the big studios.

So in the end audiences are left with huge, commercial films that look worse on purpose to mimic a false sense of prestige.

Maybe the problem is that Hollywood as a whole is in a very schizophrenic situation: They want their blockbusters to look gritty, realistic, and grounded, but to still sell the same amount of escapism and crowd-pleasing spectacle from the past. You can't have both.

OK so a great example of period casting for me is the Rockateer .It is not my favorite movie but it is a very good example of casting actors who could evoke a vibe in this case a pulpy 1930's adventure serial

The villain is a swashbuckling Errol Flynn esque movie star ,so they cast Timothy Dalton who has the look and feel of a 1930's movie star while also being able to play a suave villain

Paul Sorvino looks like a hollywood Gangster

Terry O Quinn just.....IS Howard Hughes,he evokes the Hughes vibes

And then we got Billy Campbell who I feel while hes got the 90's hair has a 1930's young hero vibe

And I think thats what is lost now ,not that they dont look or behave 1000% accurate but what is lost is attempt for the evoking of a feeling of an era ,stylization at least to me is just dead now

@the-blue-fairie @countesspetofi @amalthea9 @alexa-santi-author

@theancientvaleofsoulmaking @princesssarisa @punster-2319

@mollypondfromouterspacepart2 @rose-of-pollux @tamisdava2

"It's okay to cry. It’s important to show your feelings and let them out. Real weakness is being too afraid of looking weak to let other people see you cry.”

The way adults actually deal with tears:

*try to hold them back as much as possible and only shed them in private

*apologize when they can’t help but cry in front of other people

*look away when someone is crying in public, because that's the "polite" thing to do, to "save them from embarrassment"

*wear dark glasses to funerals to hide their tears

*praise other people to the skies for their "strength" and "dignity" when they face a horrible loss or trauma without crying

*"Crying doesn't solve anything!"

*"You're upsetting me and making everything worse!"

*"You need to learn self-control!"

*"Be a man!" (to males)/"Be a grownup!" or "Show some dignity!" (to females)

What interests me is that this was never a problem before.

Do you think a woman, even a rich woman in Antebellum south, would wear this make up?

Why Snow White, as a medieval German princess wears a 1930's bowb cut, and why this doesn't ruin immersion?

Do you think any woman in the Wild West would look like Marilyn Monroe?

Why a young man boarding the Titanic have the same haircut as a 90's hearthrob?

Hollywood has been using anachronisms and anachronistic beauty standards since it's very beginning.

And not saying it's bad for people to be aware of these things, I'm just curious about how something that never was a problem before suddenly is a huge problem now.

All period pieces no matter how accurate to the period they try to depict, carry anachronisms from when they were made in order to make a connection to current audiences and convey certain ideas. And film was always like that. But suddenly any hint of 2020's culture and aesthetics that appear in period films breaks immersion and makes people mad, and I wonder why?

I'm reminded of Christopher Nolan The Odyssey, and amid many awful choices, the fact that the characters use the word "dad" was what broke the camel's back for many? Like, serious guys, in an ocean of questionable choices THIS was what made you angry? You guys would certainly DESPISE Epic.

I have a theory that maybe it's social media. Social media makes us hyper aware of everything, so it's harder to willingly suspend your disbelief.

Another thing is that we use the cinema as escapism more than ever before, and modern audiences despise current culture, and are trying to escape from it as best as they can. The past itself became escapism, and audiences don't want anything to remind them of current times.

So what do you guys think? I would love to hear your thoughts about this, because it's something that amuses me a lot.

Putting my two cents... social media hyper awareness is just too easy an answer.

See, it was not just the stars who changed making people notice the anacronism of their in aesthetic beauty patterns.

The production of Hollywood movies changed, and with that it created a conflict between Setting Presentation x Casting Character Presentation.

What I mean by that is: in old Hollywood, ALL elements of a movie were highly stylized, so the stars were not the only fantasy sold to the audience, but the experience of watching a movie was transporting the audience to a fantasy.

It was embraced by the public and the production team that they would see everything be the complete opposite of reality, so the combination of the design and story and the casting collectively reflected that.

A technicolor western was completely presented as clean and glamorous so Marilyn wouldn’t be out of place in their saloons...

Gone With the Wind is a highly emotional melodrama where every choice of color grading in the photography, settings and costumes reflected the emotionality of the story and characters.

The Wizard of Oz, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and Pinocchio were Fairy Tales borrowing deliberately from different art styles and historical periods to create their own unique world.

Movies in contemporary post war settings like an American in Paris and Lili deliberately adopted an aesthetic inspired by impressionist paintings.

Biblical and Sword and Sandal movies like The Ten Commandments and Ben Hur recreated luxurious classic paintings and illustrations to emphasize the epic escope of the story they were telling.

But after the 90s, something happened... in an attempt to bridge a gap between Old Hollywood Glamour, Cynical and Grim New Hollywood, the Blockbuster Era and the rise of the Indepedent Scene, searching extra prestige the Hollywood movies adopted a more grimm, unglamorous photorealism, to be taken seriously... but in contrast, the stars didn’t follow that realism.

If anything, they became even more unrealistically idealized in their beauty!

Notice how after the 2000s, both on TV and and Theatrical Film Releases, the Period set Movies Loose More Color, the Photography becomes more Subduded in Brown, Mute Yellows to Oranges, or Sandy Greys...

But with rare exceptions the red lipstick of the peasant woman is impecable, the hair is always perfect, rare are the people who are fat, and everyone has their teen shining white and intact.

Bear in mind, when early directors between the 60s to the 80s experimented with grounded and cynical realism in comedies, westerns, war movies or medieval period movies, they often casted actors accordingly with rough appearances to fit that stylistic aproach.

But Hollywood, in an attempt to attend every taste at the same time in the same movie even when it doesn’t make sense, forgot that lesson.

The Big Hollywood studios want to shoehorn in the same project, ugly photorealism with clean and glamorous movie star.

And those two elements are not mixing well, so it wouldn’t take long for people to be taken out of the fantasy, notice and point it out.

And this reminds me of another problem: The way all modern blockbusters look grey and desaturated.

There are many well known reasons for that: It helps hide bad CGI, it makes things easier for post production, it makes the work flow better. But one reason that stands out for me is that it helps make things feel more "gritty, realistic, mature, sophisticated".

And this is because these producers want their blockbusters to have the same amount of prestige and seriousness as small, indie films. But the reason these small, indie films are often grey and desaturated is exactly to differentiate them from the large, commercial, crowd pleasing films from the big studios.

So in the end audiences are left with huge, commercial films that look worse on purpose to mimic a false sense of prestige.

Maybe the problem is that Hollywood as a whole is in a very schizophrenic situation: They want their blockbusters to look gritty, realistic, and grounded, but to still sell the same amount of escapism and crowd-pleasing spectacle from the past. You can't have both.

And then there's a bit right at the end of the story as the wife and the husband are walking out of court:

Jill turned abruptly. "What is your name? Your real name."

The man's gray eyes flickered. He smiled a little, kind, gentle smile. "I'm afraid you would not be able to pronounce it. The sounds cannot be formed..."

Jill was silent as they walked along, deep in thought. The city lights were coming on all around them. Bright yellow spots in the gloom. "What are you thinking?" the man asked.

"I was thinking perhaps I will still call you Lester," Jill said. "If you don't mind."

"I don't mind," the man said. He put his arm around her, drawing her close to him. He gazed down tenderly as they walked through the thickening darkness, between the yellow candles of light that marked the way. "Anything you wish. Whatever will make you happy."

And I. God. There's something there. A soupcon of monsterfuckery. To tell your partner in a moment of intimacy that yes, you're something so inhuman that the lips you're stealing can't speak your actual name. You're a parasite that not only had the ability to burrow under this man's skin and take over his life, but you were so desperate to escape a dead, dry, blasted planet that you did.