Review of the Thai BL Top Form

Let me start by acknowledging that the manga (at to a lesser extent) the anime based on that manga which was the source material for this BL was extremely problematic. Despite this, I found myself growing attached to the relationship between the two male leads and this show was essentially my introduction to the great world of BL. When I began watching the show I did not even know it was going to be BL, as the Japanese refer to everyone by their last name and I don’t believe there were any pronouns in the anime description on Crunchyroll. Fast-forward about six years and I’ve become practically a BL fanatic. I discovered that I really enjoy queer media in general and have consumed a lot of other gay and lesbian stories as well, but BL unlocked something inside me that I didn’t really understand at the time.

What I really loved about the Thai BL Top Form is that this adaptation removed the most problematic elements of the story (the only reason I considered this one to be a guilty pleasure) and kept everything sweet and wholesome about it. It even told the story in the order I wish it had been told originally, by starting with their first meeting instead of showing that as a flashback later. One thing I’ve always hated about Yaoi manga and (sometimes anime) is the non-con elements that often permeate the media. This is in no way a condemnation of those who enjoy stories that include this (as it can be a safe way for people with such fantasies to explore them without getting hurt) but I’ve never been a fan. Color me shocked when I found myself thoroughly enjoying the anime Daikaichi in which the top essentially blackmails the bottom into sleeping with him the first time (it’s worse in the manga since he rapes him). Over the course of the show, the two become the cutest couple, but that part always bothered me. Another issue that I had with the show was with the character of Ayagi (who tries to rape Takato after he gets drunk but changes his mind only because Takato drunkenly calls for Chunta which is his nickname for Junta) and how Junta handled the situation after Takato tells him he doesn’t remember what the two of them did because he was drunk.

When I say Top Form fixed all this, it is the understatement of the year. First, let’s examine why telling it in chronological order instead of beginning with their first night together works much better for a healthy story. In the anime and manga, the first time we meet Takato he has just been surpassed by Junta as the sexiest man alive and also begun a new working relationship with his old rival. Starting it here gets us to the sex faster, but the story-telling suffers because without seeing the depth of connection they shared after working on that first project together and the way it impacted Junta in particular, it’s impossible to see their relationship as being anything more than a fanboy living out his fantasy by finally sleeping with his idol. Once I saw the episode with their backstory I wondered why the story had not started there and thought it would have been much better if it had. I was right. Top Form starts with the original drama (the nature of the drama is changed for the Thai adaptation, but the heart of it remains the same) where Jin (Junta) and Akin (Takato) meet for the first time. It is also told beginning with Jin’s perspective which I appreciated since Akin is a bit of a Tsundere type which makes it harder to gauge his feelings right away.

Second, Top Form eliminated all the non-con from the main couple leaving only the attempted rape after Akin gets drunk and Johnny (Ayagi) leaves a hickey on his neck but stops short of rape after Akin drunkenly calls for “Jun” which is his nickname for Jin. This helped me to more fully support the pairing (since the main issue I had with the original was the non-con and dub-con element) and made the story all the better for it. I still felt the rage over the scene with Johnny. In the original anime adaptation, I actually shouted at my screen during the ensuing scene with Junta where he blames Takato for the molestation because he got drunk and can’t remember what happened. In Top Form, they keep the essence of devastation that Jin feels without the blame by having Akin try to hide what happened and refuse to tell Jin that he can’t remember because he was too drunk. This makes it seem to Jin as if Akin has cheated on him so his ensuing anger can be seen as justified rather than inappropriate.

In Top Form, the only one to blame for the incident is Johnny (who I will never forgive for the sexual assault, he can get bent). Another change to the story is the addition of the stalker which makes it a bit more modern since there are fewer paparazzi types than there are fans with phones taking pictures inappropriately. In the original story, it was a fame seeking paparazzi who took the photos in the first place, but in this story, he just capitalized on what the stalker had already done.

If I have one complaint about the series it might be that I did not feel like the roles were evenly cast. I got a lot out of Akin’s character with Boom’s (Thai actors all have nicknames that they use in place of their actual first name for promotion purposes) portrayal whereas I felt Smart did not give a similarly captivating performance as Jin. I still like it, I just feel like it could have been better.

In the original Takato’s nickname for Junta is “horny angel” because he appears sweet and loving on the surface but he’s always dragging Takato off to the bedroom. The angel wing effect that accompanied Takato’s exclamations of “horny angel” were kept for this adaptation even though Akin’s nickname for Jin is “wooden boy” (a reference to his less than stellar acting when they first met not his constant horniness). I liked the inclusion of the effect since this version of the character does not always act on his desires but mostly lets Akin lead the sexual relationship.

All in all, I would give this adaption a 9/10 since I liked more of the changes than I disliked and Akin was portrayed brilliantly even if Jin’s character was a bit flat in comparison. It might just be that Smart is younger and less experienced than Boom (which is also true of their characters).

Update on Google Ads

 So apparently, my blog content is "low-quality" for the purposes of Google Ads and they refuse to let me remonetize it. No idea what that means, but I guess it means you get an ad-free experience (although I will not be able to make any money off my blog unless I am able to find advertisers who want me to display their content links {doubtful}). I will still try to keep this thing updated as best I can, but my current financial situation is less than ideal, and I really want to focus as much of my effort on fixing it as is humanly possible. Again, if you can think of any movie, show, or book related entities that might like the content of my blog and want to advertise here, feel free to shoot me a comment about them (or them a message about me). I'm really no good at finding and making connections in the writing world. 

Until such time as I can make this a profitable venture, it must remain a hobby, and I can only relegate so much time and effort to its upkeep. Thank you for your support and understanding.

Jujitsu Kaisen: Season 1 overview

 I've begun watching Jujitsu Kaisen with my eldest. Like most shonen anime, it has some disturbing tropes and overt sexualization of certain female characters. The protagonist is the typical shonen teenage male protagonist who is somewhat OP (in this case because he has unwittingly formed a bond with a powerful curse) and forms friendships easily with those around him (although they don't all like him, and a lot of the adults are actively out to get him). He has the mentor figure who is also OP, the gang of friends who each have their own quirks, and the monsters he has to face (including the one that lives inside of him).

I think this show has some unique qualities you don't find in other shonen anime, and the world feels very different even though the monsters (called curses in this one) can feel somewhat similar to other shows like Demon Slayer. The first element that seems different to other shows is that no character feels safe. At the offset of the show, we are told that the life expectancy of Jujitsu sorcerers is very short, and our protagonist is told right away that he needs to deal with the fact that he's not going to be able to save everyone and sometimes he might even need to be the one doing the killing. This is different to most other shonen anime where the protagonist is generally a white knight even when he is paired up with morally grey mentors or friends. This time, being that good is not necessarily the virtue that sets other shonen protagonists apart but could be the thing that gets him or a team member killed.

Another thing that sets this one apart is that there is no clear line between villains and heroes. Some Jujitsu warriors can become villains, curses are born out of human emotions and therefore are, in some ways, simply the dark side of humanity. One of the main antagonist curses in the first season seems to be born out of fear for the environment and the damage humanity has done to it. Another thing that sets these monsters apart from monsters in other shonen anime is that curses can be formed from nothing, or they can be humans who are unwittingly cursed. Although most low-level curses seem to be mindless zombies just feeding off the negativity around them (it is stated that low-level curses tend to hang out together) the higher level the curse, the more intellect and understanding it has. The most formidable are able to speak and communicate and even manipulate, as one of the main antagonists from this season does.

The part about no one feeling safe comes from the third or fourth episode in which the actual protagonist of the show dies for the majority of an episode, and everyone is forced to mourn him. Because of his bond with the powerful curse, he was able to come back, but this event shakes the faith that most shonen anime give the viewer that certain characters are untouchable. This idea that no character is safe gives the show a certain edge and makes the cliffhangers more intense since you are unsure if the character who is on the brink will pull through or be destroyed.

Some of the female characters are well written, but there is still that underlying sexism that seems to permeate a lot of anime (especially shonen). Even the best female characters are never shown to be the strongest and often are in need of saving by their male teammates. This is one of the most distasteful elements of shonen anime to me. Especially in an environment where physical strength has very little to do with power and skill development is extremely important to survival. There is no need to make the female characters always be the ones who end up needing to get saved. There should be equal times where they are the ones who do the rescuing and there should be no qualms about this either. 

The sexualization of underage characters (both male and female) is another disturbing element of the show. I understand that the target demographic is teenage males, and they are expected to be hormonal and horny, but I feel like this feeds into negative and sexist stereotypes that keep young men from growing up with a well-balanced view of the world. Just once I'd like to see a shonen show that treats all its characters with respect and decency, refuses to sexualize anyone, and does not rely on tired and sexist tropes. In the same vein, I'd like to see a shojo anime that does not have a love interest and where the girl protagonist is the strong independent type who (although she does not hate men) does not need a man to validate her existence.

Perhaps my criticisms of the genre are simply my age showing itself and I should stick to anime geared towards older people. I don't know. Anyway, for all elements combined I give season 1 an 8 out of 10.

Time and Tide

I haven't found a lot of time or energy to watch shows and review them here lately. Part of that has to do with just everything lately draining my energy. I'm currently working full-time but not making enough to get by, so I'm contemplating getting a second job. I applied to a transcription service, but I have no idea how soon or even if they'll get back to me. I'm not adept at SEO, not even sure what it might entail, so a lot of the writing opportunities that will pay are closed off to me without furthering my education on the matter (something that will no doubt cost money I don't have to spend). I got a notification from Google Adsense that they were suspending my account, which probably means they're keeping the (what was it $15 or so) in ad revenue I'd already made from this thing. They don't let you cash out until you reach $100, which I probably never would have hit anyway.

I thought about doing an affiliate link program at one time, but the biggest issue with that is finding an affiliate that both relates to the content of my blog and has values that I agree with. Not going to advertise anything that I feel contradicts my person code of ethics. I would love it if I could find an affiliate that supports the Trevor Project or any other pro LGBT+ cause, especially since that is something near and dear to my own heart. If you (my readers) have any suggestions, feel free to leave a comment.

Since I've turned this into a review blog, I'd like to start on reviewing episodes of Frasier. The first reason for this is that the show never fails to make me laugh and I've been really needing some positivity in my life recently, but the second reason is that I've been meaning to do a rewatch. Watched a couple episodes with a friend of mine recently and got her into it too (love when that happens). I may also branch off into reviewing video games as well (although those will be limited because I currently can only play ones I can download on my mobile phone or computer). 

For this post I'd like to mention that I've recently started watching Jujitsu Kaisen (at the behest of my eldest, who has become thoroughly emersed in the show) and I have to say I am enjoying it (despite some of the problematic elements which I'll get into if I decide to write a full review). This is the first anime I have started watching in a good while. I also turned 21 on to Mob Psycho 100 in return so we've been taking turns on my days off watching first an episode or two of one, then an episode or two of the other.

If I can figure out finances, I'd like to take 18 (soon to be 19) somewhere for his birthday, but it is very quickly approaching and I'm not sure I'll have had a chance to find another income source by then. I am still writing, although I have stopped trying to get published. I think it may be something that will just never happen for me.

If there is a show, game, or movie you'd like me to review (any comment of The Bible will be unceremoniously deleted) go ahead and leave it in the comment section. Barring suggestions, I'll continue to review the shows I have been reviewing and the ones I intend to start reviewing as my mood dictates. I will try to update about once a week in the future.

The End Twist: It's a doozy

 Okay, once again, this is a review of season two of the new series Interview with a Vampire, if you don't want to be spoiled, please read some of my other posts.

Okay, no magic Claudia didn't die whatever. I guess that was too much to hope for. However, the twist that does come after Armand and Louis have finished telling their version of the story is no less shocking. Although I have said before that I was doubtful as to Armand's honesty about the situation, I didn't know to what extent he was being a lying little snake.

Because Lestat's on-stage apology wasn't the only thing he did for Louis that night. Okay, so let's rewind.

After the whole thing, when Louis is about to starve, Armand feeds him some blood and helps him escape after all the other vamps are asleep. Once Louis is free, he spends his time plotting a way to wreck revenge on the whole coven. However, he warns Armand to be gone as a courtesy and a thank you for saving him.

After mercilessly burning most in their coffins, exploding the two who rode their bikes off into the night, Louis faces off against the main conspirator the very hateable Santiago who brags about them using Claudia's ashes as eyeliner for their plays and antagonizes him completely by every word in this telepathic conversation. But Louis is prepared and when Santiago emerges from the sewers, Louis is waiting to decapitate him with a machete, probably the most satisfying death in the whole show.

Then Louis goes to Armand who spins his little web of lies about how he was helpless to keep it from happening and apologizes for lying to Louis. Louis asks if Lestat is still in town, they find him in what looks to be a torture dungeon where his maker kept him like in his story early on about how he was made. Lestat looks broken and defeated. Louis asks him if he feels anything at all about Claudia's death and of course Lestat talks about the great laws which Louis correctly reminds Lestat he's never followed before. Louis then says he's here to kill Lestat which Lestat responds with I have the blood of Magnus and he mentions someone else, then Louis says, well we share the same blood. There's no epic fight scene. Louis jabs Lestat in the most painful way possible by kissing Armand and telling Lestat that his death will be the knowledge that Louis chose Armand. Lestat responds, we'll see how long that lasts but he's obviously devastated. Then it cuts to Daniel taking down the story and Louis says that's all there is to it.

Now, I suppose you're wondering where Armand's treachery comes into this. The way it is revealed is so brilliant. A question here about something that doesn't make sense. A comment there. Then Daniel Malloy pulls the entire rug out from under Louis by producing proof positive that Armand was in on the play from the start. He has a copy of the script with footnotes written by Armand directing the play. It turns out Lestat not Armand was the one who saved Louis during the play.

It flashes back to rehearsal, where Armand is overseeing the play and Lestat is arguing about how they can't keep Claudia in check and they're underestimating her. Daniel gets a computer message from the people who sent him the stuff about the fire and the script saying: GET OUT OF THERE NOW. Louis and Armand fight, breaking a bunch of shit, but when Daniel goes to see Armand is obviously defeated. Louis tells him not to harm Daniel and swears that if he does, he will kill the older vamp. He then tells him he's leaving and when he gets back the other vampire better be gone.

So what does this revelation mean, well besides the obvious that Lestat always loved Louis, truly loved him, as his on stage apology would have seemed to suggest. It also shows that nothing Armand says can be trusted. I figured this when Armand left out the crucial detail about Lestat asking him to tell Louis that he loved him.

Louis goes back to New Orleans where he finds Lestat who has gone a bit crazy (he's playing a wooden piano and eating only rats). Lestat tells Louis how much he regrets what happened with Claudia and says, at the end before she died, she looked to him like a daughter looks to her father. I knew I noticed something in his eyes when the scene of her death played, but I wasn't sure how much to trust it since it was Armand's narrative. Lestat cries and Louis hugs him as a hurricane rages outside. This is a beautiful end to their relationship arc which was always filled with storm and passion. 

Next, we see Daniel Malloy has become a bestselling author for his book, but most people aren't taking it seriously as a memoir. He's on a talk show with a host who calls it a "work of fiction". Daniel insists on the veracity of his book and takes down the talk show host and his condescending remarks by saying "you haven't read it" and the host continues to act like Daniel is somehow delusional. Then, Daniel talks telepathically with Louis who is in Dubai revealing that before he left that day Armand turned him. The final act of treachery, not able to kill him without facing repercussions, he made him a vampire instead. Vampires all over the world are gunning for Louis because of the book and all the damning evidence that's written in it, but Louis sits down and issues a warning of sorts to those who would challenge him. End scene. It was such an epic way to end it. Louis has come full circle from the fledgling vampire who didn't want to be a vamp, to become someone powerful enough to confidently throw the gauntlet at anyone who dares come at him. I loved the fact that Lestat really had no choice in what happened to Claudia and that it scarred him as much as it did because he seems not to care about her for much of the story.

Well, that's all folks, unless they do a season 3. Not sure what they'd use for the story line if they did.

The Trial: Lestat Returns

One more time, for the people in the back, there are major spoilers for the AMC show Interview with a Vampire in this blog post. If you haven't watched and don't wish to be spoiled, please turn back now before it's too late.

Okay, I just finished watching this episode and I need to collect my thoughts but wow. It was a doozy. I knew that this would be the episode where Claudia would die, and I figured it would have something to do with sunlight and the thing they stole from the observatory and why they were having the matinee performance so none of that surprised me. Armand saving Louis by controlling the entire theatre of humans surprised me a little and Louis not witnessing Claudia's death surprised me too. It actually makes me doubt the veracity of the tale that Louis wasn't there to see it especially considering the fire that destroyed the theatre. 

I expected to be a bit more emotional at Claudia's death scene. Maybe I'm still in shock, or maybe it's because the only one with tears in their eyes as Claudia and Madelaine died in each other's arms was Lestat, but that wasn't the emotional scene that I expected. It felt more like the death in Braveheart where the martyr dies cursing his murderers. I was actually much more emotional at the scene where they almost killed Lestat.

So we know that Lestat is manipulative, and we know that not only because of Louis and Armand's narrative, but because it makes sense. Yes, he loved Louis, but he also hurt him. He chased after Claudia and forced her to come back. He might have done that FOR Louis, but he still did it. Lestat's version of events is probably skewed, partially because the story is scripted by the coven. When Lestat goes off script, they don't control him like they control the three on "trial" which makes me think they either can't control him, or he helped engineer the whole thing. If they got to Lestat through the lawyer, then the last letter is even a manipulation tactic because Lestat probably wrote that after the attempted murder. Even though his version of events is skewed, it gives us another piece to the puzzle, a piece provided by neither Armand nor Louis.

Louis says that Lestat's version of events of how Claudia came to be turned is probably more accurate than his. In Lestat's version he tries to tell Louis that turning her is a bad idea and that making someone 14 forever never works out because their mind matures but their body doesn't. He then claims that Louis begged and pleaded until Lestat caved promising he'll do anything. If Lestat's story is somewhat accurate it shows only Louis' desperation to redeem himself after having wrought chaos on his people. We've also seen that Louis' memory is patchy and often unreliable and that Armand deliberately hides or obscures things to "protect" Louis. Does Armand love Louis? Probably. That doesn't change the fact that he played a part in the downfall of Louis, Claudia, and Madelaine. The fact that Armand could have defied the coven and allowed them a chance to escape by warning them occurs to me. Yes, what he did was cowardly. It may also have had a tinge of thinking logical thinking in there as well, calculating the odds of them escaping the coven entirely even if they did run away. But if any of what Lestat said was true, you have to wonder how much and if you wonder how much, you have to wonder if he was talking about the human lover that Armand almost killed and then they turned and if Armand killed him out of jealousy before Lestat ran away. According to the story, Lestat was heartbroken at the loss of his lover and buried himself for years before finally coming up and going across the ocean. There is no probability that this is true, he would have starved. However, if he did spend a period of time in mourning for a lost lover, that would explain the gap between Armand's Lestat and Louis' Lestat. However, if Armand's story of Lestat is inaccurate, if Lestat didn't just use him for his power and then run away, but Armand actually had something to do with the end of their relationship, then that could also color his relationship with Louis and pretty much everything he says. I'm very suspicious about the fact that the only person who can attest to what happened to Claudia and Madelaine is Armand.

Now I'm not saying for SURE they're actually still alive, but... I mean, they could be.

The part that actually did get me emotional in this episode, was surprisingly a part of Lestat's testimony. When Lestat goes off script and states that what he did to Louis was wrong and he'll never stop being sorry for it. That was genuine. It didn't move Louis, probably because Louis understood that no matter how sorry he was for having hurt Louis back then, Lestat was still here, helping the coven convict them and doing nothing to prevent what was happening to them. Not sure what Lestat might have been able to do if even Armand was powerless, though. He was able to defy them about the script and did not seem bothered by the fact that the coven planned to kill all three of them. I do wonder how the finale is going to play out when Louis realizes that Claudia is gone and how he and Armand are going to escape the coven. I think the fire might have something to do with that, but obviously Lestat survives because Armand reached out to him when they were in San Francisco after Louis tried to run into the sun.

Really excited for the finale next week and if Claudia makes a reappearance, I'm going to be so...I told you so about it.

Claudia and Madalaine: Star-crossed lovers

 As always, if you don't want spoilers for the new season of Interview with a Vampire, check out some of my other posts instead. Here we go with episode 6.

There are so many things about this episode that I want to touch on. I absolutely loved the evolution of Claudia, I even saw her falling for the dressmaker when she first showed up and demanded a dress but thought it again when she went back. Madaline's story is tragic. Labeled a monster because she slept with a nazi at the height of the war, but also perhaps because she survived when so many around her died, she has become a leper in post-war France.

As always with episodes that contain a SA scene that the love interest has to rescue a character (usually a woman) from, I didn't care for that bit. The bullies could have just tried to beat her up or something, but no...since she's a woman they had to try r*ping her instead. This always leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I did enjoy that Claudia who has been a victim of this type of assault, and not the male vamp who's supposed to be watching the dressmaker, is the one who rescues her, though. It also helps because this is the intro to the idea that Madaline should be turned, so she and Claudia can be together.

I love the scene where Armand and Madaline talk about her becoming a vampire, even though he's just yanking her chain because he's not even planning on entertaining the idea of turning her. Love the little conspiracy going on in the background throughout this episode as the vampire coven conspires under Armand's nose, and the ending...well they get me every time.

I have questions. First, can that really be Lestat? I'm thinking no, because it showed his reflection, and vamps aren't supposed to have reflections, right? But if that's true, then it can't be another vampire playing him either, it must then be a human. But it looked like Lestat. However, the coven is accusing them of his murder so it would be strange to invite him there to a trial of his murderers when he's clearly not dead. Even more than that, if they're going to accuse the trio of breaking the law by turning a child, shouldn't they also have Lestat on trial since he was the one who actually did the turning (whether it was on Louis' behest or not)?

Madeline's back story is pretty tragic, but it's one of survival. She's a survivor. This is probably why she takes to being a vampire even though Louis has never turned anyone before. It was interesting that the vamp sees a victim's life when they drink in their blood. Does this only happen with victims they plan to turn, or does it happen with every single one?

Then there's the reveal that Louis asked Armand (according to Armand, which who knows if he can be trusted or not) to erase his memory of the 6 days in San Francisco. Now that the show has reminded me, I remember the exact number. That doesn't change the fact that Armand seems to exist for Louis to need him. He needs to be nurturing. Perhaps it has something to do with guilt for betraying him. Yes, it is finally revealed that it was Armand's betrayal that led to the events which culminated in Claudia's death. I still have yet to figure out exactly what happens and if the theatre burning down has anything to do with it, but if that actually was Lestat, perhaps he is the one who rescues Louis, since Armand was the one who fed him to the wolves to begin with. Or maybe Armand has a change of heart and starts the fire in order to rescue the man he loves thereafter letting the rest of the vamps fend for themselves against the fire. He does have the power. I often wondered why not just use his power to dispose of the bodies instead of the rats. He can also survive in sunlight and none of the rest of them can, so he could probably wrap Louis up in something and make a run for it and no one would be able to chase him since it's still daytime out.

There is the suggestion in this episode that Louis has amassed his fortune by dealing in art which he has a good eye for. He obviously still has next to nothing in the 40s, and even in San Francisco they seem to be living meagerly. I love that the secret agent or whatever he is who sent Daniel all the encrypted files and stuff tells him that he needs to fear Louis rather than Armand. I think this speaks to Louis' unpredictability. He's like a time bomb. He's already been shown detonating in several different ways throughout the story. The first is when he impales the rich white man which in turn brings a race riot against his neighborhood. Lestat was hoping this act meant he had finally embraced his vampiric nature and decided he was no longer human, but Louis can't help but feel responsible for the ensuing chaos and all the innocent people who are affected by it. 

Perhaps Armand is not doing what he is out of guilt or love but out of a sense of duty. Since he had a hand in an event that probably set Louis off even more than anything else might have. Now it isn't for sure that Claudia dies in the fire, or gets killed in the trial, but the fact that it is cannon that Armand has a hand in her death should not be discounted when looking forward to future episodes. I think she'll probably die in the next one. I just wish she and Madaline could be happy, but they were never going to be one of those vampire couples that last centuries because of the machinations that had already begun to conspire against them before Madaline was even turned.

Buffy: Pilot Episode

 Okay, initial thoughts:

Xander is creepy as ever in the first episode and I think maybe the first time I watched I just didn't catch how creepy he is thanks to his friend Jesse being slightly more so, but they're both kinda yuk. Giles is too quiet. Everyone else speaks at normal volume and he speaks about three decibels too low it makes it difficult to hear anything he says. That does make sense for a librarian character though. Baby Willow is too cute and a touch naive and way too much of a pushover. Makes the transformation to bad-ass witch Willow even more amazing to watch her in this version. Buffy is kinda annoying at first with all her trying to avoid her destiny and getting herself in over her head because she underestimates the danger. Also, Angel comes off a bit creepy in this episode too. The master is a pretty boring villain: "I'm hungry, bring me something young." Ominous voice. Luke is way more interesting. Darla is pretty cool in this episode too, but she gives up and hands the reins over to Luke too quick. The Bronze is a club where teenagers hang out, but no one is ever carded? Does this mean they don't serve alcohol? Cordelia is too funny. She's probably the most interesting character in the show so far. Buffy's mom comes on a bit strong and I can't watch any of these episodes without remembering The Body.

Creep factor for this show was pretty high, so I'll give it that. Lots of spooky effects, low lighting, a few jump scares. Love the Buffy line: "It's just one vamp" and then the cut to Darla who we've already seen at the show's opening sequence to be a vamp. It's a TBC episode, so it cuts off right as Luke is about to bite Buffy. Of course, we know he isn't going to keep the upper hand, but pretty good way to keep suspense for the pilot episode. I get it, when a show first starts you're just learning who your characters are and how to play them, so they feel a bit stiff at first. Cordelia's line: "What's your childhood trauma?" is one of the most memorable lines of the show. I forgot that she was initially nice to Buffy because Buffy looked like she'd be one of the mean girl types. No Harmony yet, I seem to remember her being Cordie's right-hand man, so she'll probably show up in the next few episodes.

The principle ripping up her transcripts and then seeing the note about the fire and trying to tape them back together is too funny. I know he gets eaten in the Hyena episode, which is when they get Snyder (the prick everyone loves to hate), but this guy is too funny.

Episode rundown: Episode opens with a couple breaking into the school. The girl is acting afraid like she's scared they'll get caught. Typical damsel in distress trope thrown on its head when it turns out she's the vamp in the situation. Cut to Buffy having nightmares of some foreboding omen. Then Buffy wakes to a room with packing boxes all around. Buffy's mom calls her. Next we see Buffy's mom dropping her off at school and leaving with the parting words "try not to get kicked out, okay?" Then Xander skateboarding down the sidewalk despite dozens of students he's almost hitting like he has more right to be there than them. Yeah. That is our first introduction to Xander, and the typical checks out a girl and crashes into something trope as he hits the stair railing while watching buffy climb them. Creepy much? Willow and Xander have a moment as Xander sweet talks Willow into helping him with his homework. Next Buffy is talking to the principle who isn't at all worried about her track record until he finds out she burned down the gym at her old school. Then she walks out of the office just to bump into Xander and drop a bunch of her things. He helps her pick them up, tries hitting on her and I suppose we're supposed to feel bad for him because he's so awkward about it, but really, I think he's being super creepy here too. Buffy goes to class where Cordie generously lets Buffy read from her textbook and then starts a convo. Buffy doesn't seem too impressed, probably because Cordie goes out of her way to be mean to Willow without provocation. Cordie takes Buffy to the library where we meet Giles for the first time. He tries to give Buffy a book about Vampyrs and she makes a run for it without talking to him. Buffy then approaches Willow about helping her get caught up on schoolwork. Willow seems to think Buffy wants her to move at first. Xander and Jesse join them. Xander is being creepy at Buffy, Jesse is just being creepy all together. Cordelia walks up to inform Buffy that gym has been canceled after a dead body was found. Buffy starts asking morbid questions thereby solidifying her status as social leper in Cordie's eyes. Buffy goes to check out the body and racks up her first amount of damage to Sunnydale school property when she forces the door open, breaking the wood where the lock is placed. The victim is the guy from the previous night who was with Darla, he's dead with puncture wounds. Buffy goes to Giles, and they have an argument about her being the slayer which Xander overhears without announcing his presence because I guess he just wasn't creepy enough before that.

It's night. Buffy is getting ready for her first night out (was her first day of school on a Friday?). Buffy's mom has no problem with her going out and doesn't even ask her anything about the club she'll be going to. Did she let Buffy go out to clubs in LA? Buffy is still only sixteen in this episode and she's walking to the club at night. Now we all know that Buffy is strong and capable, but a mom not offering her 16-year-old at least a ride to the club so she can sus it out...I mean, it takes all kinds, I guess. Buffy's mom is a pretty good mom for the most part throughout the show (well, despite not being aware that her daughter is literally fighting demons while she's asleep in bed) so I guess I'll forgive her this one slight. Buffy notices that she's being followed and hides so she can confront the guy who's stalking her. We get our first glimpse of a very cocky Angel. He warns Buffy about something called "The Harvest" and gives her a cross necklace. She gets to the club where she finds Willow who says she's waiting for Xander. Buffy tells Willow to seize the day to help her get over being too shy to talk to boys and then notices Giles up in the rafters. Buffy goes to talk to him acting like it's creepy that he (an adult) is at a club frequented by his students. It's a club, it's supposed to be mostly adults, isn't it? Buffy tells him about Angel's warning, calls Angel handsome but says she doesn't like him (yeah, right). Then Giles says Buffy is right, there's nothing to worry about, it's not like she's been having visions. Then he tells her she needs to be able to spot a vamp and to try...she spots one by his outdated look and notices the girl he's talking to is Willow. Buffy then goes on a cat and mouse hunt for the vamp and Willow, accidentally traumatizing Cordie in the process. Giles offers to come with, but Buffy says she can handle one vamp. Screen cuts to Darla picking up Jesse. Then Buffy into Xander who acts super arrogant about what he overheard in the library. Then Buffy and Xander go in search of Willow and somehow get there just in time before Darla and the unnamed vamp have had time to feed. Well, Darla's already bitten Jesse "I got hungry" she pouts and the unnamed vamp. They are presumably bringing the kids to the Master to replenish his hunger but seem about to feed themselves when Buffy interrupts them. A fight ensues. Buffy dusts unnamed outdated clothing vamp. Just realized that their clothing also disintegrates when they turn to dust. So bizarre. Darla is holding her own for the first bit, but Buffy starts getting the upper hand and Xander helps willow and Jesse escape. Luke shows up and Darla runs away. Luke and Buffy Tussle, he breaks her steak and throws her into whatever that thing in the center of a tomb is called where they keep the dead body. Then, just as Xander Willow and Jesse end up running into some more vamps in the cemetery, Giles is looking up the harvest, and Buffy seems about to get bitten, the screen freezes and the words to be continued show up. Not the strongest pilot episode I've ever seen, but not the weakest either. Characters that were best established in this episode: Cordelia played to perfection by Carisma Carpenter and Giles by Anthony Steward Head. Also give props to Allison Hannigan for her baby Willow, just because of how much Willow expands as a character from this point. Right here, she's just your garden variety nerd with a touch of cute and awkward shyness. Characters 7/10, Villains 5/10 (I gave an extra point because Darla's pretty good in this episode), Plot 6/10, Creep factor 9/10 final tally: 6.75/10

Interlude: Upcoming reviews

 So, as I was writing the last post about Interview with a Vampire, I realized that I really want to do an in depth, episode by episode review of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and maybe one of The X-Files too. I'd also love to do one of Frasier (since that's one of my favorite shows ever) and I think I could do at least one episode a week from various shows and write up a review. I see that my blog is getting hits on my episodic Supernatural reviews, so I'd also like to continue with that as well. I really need to finish watching the show as a whole eventually anyway. I've been taking Saturday or Sunday as my day off recently, so I think that would be the best time to schedule a watch and blog post, but maybe I could watch an episode of several different shows and then write up a blog post about it. I also kind of want to learn SEO to help my blog get more traffic. Maybe I should change the name. I think I had this vague idea at one point that the name would be ironic if my blog ever took off, but now it just seems stupid.

Anyway, if you like my episodic reviews and want me to do them on a specific show, feel free to post a comment. I'd also love to do one on The Good Place (another comedy gem). That's all for this time. 

Louis and Armand: Codependent Toxicity

Once again, I've come here to voice my thoughts about the new Interview with a Vampire show on AMC. If you have not watched yet and don't want spoilers, come back to this post later. Otherwise, enjoy my delve into the relationship between the long-term vampire couple, Louis and Armand. Are they soul mates, or do they just have a different type of toxic relationship than Louis and Lestat? 

In episodes leading up to the big reveal that Armand has been toying with Louis' memory, Daniel begins to have flashbacks to Armand berating him with questions: "In high school, you told a girl you'd only do her with a paper bag over her head..." Armond says in an angry voice. Daniel looks over to see a corpse wrapped up in clear plastic on the floor nearby. At this point in the story, their facade of the perfect relationship has begun to fall apart when Louis realizes that Armand has replaced some of the photos he took in Paris with professional photographers' photographs. They have a screaming match about it while Daniel struggles with his memories from that day in San Francisco when he first began the interview.

We open the next episode as if the fight has never happened. We're back to the interview, and Louis and Armand are both calm and collected. However, when Louis makes comments that give Daniel pause, the older vampire is the one to suggest it is merely because his lover is tired. Armand leaves to hunt a human who is in on the game. He knows that if he gets away, he'll get a reward, but he doesn't seem to know or care that no one has gotten away so far. Daniel notices this and comments on it. Armand is vicious in a different way than Lestat. He doesn't eat frequently, but he likes to hunt his victims when he does. Once Daniel and Louis are alone, Daniel decides to confront Louis with the memories that have started to come back to him about that night in San Franscisco. He knows that Louis attacked him, he was pretty high the whole time, so he doesn't remember much that's not on the tapes, but he also has been told that Armand saved him, so what is with the memory of getting the third degree from Armand? Where did it come from?

As the two talk about their night together (Daniel was almost sure that they'd slept together but Louis says no) they both realize something. Neither of their memories of that night are clear. They both have missing pieces. Daniel plays the ending of the last tape after it has been cleaned up and it reveals an argument between Louis and Armand, an argument which culminates in Louis trying to commit suicide by sunlight. Then the two start to remember what has been wiped away by Armand. The three missing days between when Daniel went home with Louis and when he woke up in the drug den where they'd dropped him.

What becomes clear with this reveal is that Louis cannot trust the happiness he thinks he's experienced with Armand. All of it could just be the times in between his mental breakdowns which have been conveniently erased as if they never existed. This is not a healthy dynamic because you cannot grow from pain if you're not allowed to feel it, to remember it. Sure, it could just be this one time. Maybe Armand didn't want Louis to remember that they fought about Lestat or that he contacted Lestat, but Louis chose him, so that's doubtful. More likely is that Armand was exceedingly jealous of Daniel for being someone Louis treated differently. In their fight, Louis calls Armand boring and Daniel fascinating. Armand also intimates that he thinks the reason Louis trash talked Lestat was because it was a call for Lestat to find him and take him away. Like bait if the book were to get published. So yes, Armand might have erased his memory just this one time because of jealousy or because he didn't want Louis to remember trying to kill himself, or he could have been doing it all along.

Armand needs Louis. He needs someone to take care of. He needs to be needed. Keeping Louis in that perpetual state of healing would be advantageous to him, then. Louis also needs Armand. He needs someone to pull him back from the edge of the abyss every time he starts to lean into it. During their first interview in San Francisco, Louis tells Daniel that he was going to stay out in the sun after watching Claudia walk away the first time. Perhaps that is why Lestat forced her to come back. He knew he wasn't enough. Every time Louis sought something outside Lestat (his humanity, his human family, his people), monsieur de Lioncourt acted out. And now, Armand has taken over that mantle of Louis' protector. But their relationship cannot be truly happy if one is being controlled with false memories and manufactured peace, now, can it?

Those are my thoughts on this week's episode. I'm sure next week we'll be discussing the episode where Claudia dies and I'm sure I'll be in tears while I type the post up.

Lestat and Louis: Fire and Gasoline

 Hey all, been a while. I've been watching the newest adaptation of Anne Rice's Interview with a Vampire, which is deliciously gay, BTW. If you'd like to watch, beware that there will be spoilers in the following review.

First, I want to acknowledge that Louis x Lestat is toxic AF. Lestat cheats on Louis, he manipulates him, and he gaslights him. No one even knows if anything Lestat tells Louis is the truth because he lies so often. It is, however, a very powerful and dynamic relationship for a couple of reasons.

Lestat is the first white man to acknowledge Louis without seeing him as inferior, even though Lestat looks down on humans in general. There is a nice little bit where Lestat loses his cool over religion while he's wooing Louis and that kind of gives you some indication about his past. This is confirmed later in the show when Lestat mocks the other vampires for fearing the cross. Lestat definitely has some religious trauma in his past, but prior to hearing Armand's side of the story we don't really get any glimpse into the Lestat before Louis. He claims he wants Louis because he's lonely, but he then cheats on him because he "likes variety". I have my suspicions about why Lestat cheats, and I don't think it has anything to do with his bi-sexuality (and don't even get me started on why portraying Lestat as cheating with a woman and saying it's because he likes variety is problematic and bi-phobic because that is a whole other blog post). Anyway, moving on...during the period of time Lestat is wooing Louis, he tries to pull him away from thinking of himself as inferior, but after Louis chooses to be vamped (a really violent but sexy scene BTW) he feels inferior in a different way. He can't let go of his humanity and just be a vamp. Lestat hates this about him and it is the cause of most of their bickering.

Then along comes Claudia. Prior to vamping her, Lestat and Louis already have plenty of problems, but after Lestat concedes to Louis' request, they seem happy for a time. This is a band aid on their relationship just as the journalist states. The big problem with that is, band aids only work if the damage is minor. Lestat and Louis have major problems. After Claudia accidentally kills her first boyfriend in the throes of passion, she and Lestat begin to clash a lot. However, it is not until she runs away that things really get out of hand because she finds out that other vamps can be just as dangerous as Lestat claimed. I don't know if you've ever had a relationship with an abusive or authoritarian person before, but when they give you kernels of truth like this, and you end up getting hurt by straying from what they're trying to control you to do, it messes you up. Claudia comes back broken, and then the enormous fight between Lestat and Louis happens after her return. This is the first time Lestat ever brings the abuse to a physical level, and just as many abusers do, he attempts to make amends afterwards by romantic gestures. However, it is not until he appeals to Louis' jealousy about Lestat having a relationship with his human lover Antoinette that Louis finally relents and lets Lestat back into his life.

Now Lestat is a complex person, and the way he treats Louis is absolutely horrific, but I will concede that I think he actually does love Louis in his own way. Take, for instance, how things play out for the plot to kill Lestat towards the end of the first season. Louis and Claudia decide on this course of action after Louis realizes that Lestat has lied to him about killing Antoinette and that he's still cheating with her, and after Lestat prevents Claudia from leaving him. One could contribute Lestat's downfall to him being overly confident in his abilities, but I maintain that he knew that Claudia would succeed in taking him down from the moment she beat him in chess. There are a couple of clues I found which support this assessment:

First, at the ball, when Lestat supposedly thinks he's got the upper hand (Antoinette has been eavesdropping on all the conversations between Louis and Claudia when Lestat cannot, after all) he talks to Louis as if he's saying goodbye.

Second, you don't learn this until the next season, but Lestat wrote Louis a note in case something happened to him. Now perhaps this was just because he suspected that Armand would try to kill him upon their arrival in Europe, which was why he resisted it for so long, but if he thought he would win, why would they be arriving in Europe at all? Wouldn't he just keep Louis in the US and just move to a new place? He could have even planned to kill Louis for his betrayal, although, to be fair he could have killed both Louis and Claudia the moment he learned of their intentions. He did not. He allowed the ball, and the cockamamie scheme of drugging him to go on. In truth, he probably wanted to die that night, by Louis' hand. I think because he actually loved Louis in his own way, the knowledge that Louis wanted to kill him made him want to die.

I don't think Lestat ever loved Armand. He used Armand's attraction to him to manipulate the older vampire. I think he decided to do this when Armand kidnapped his human lover, although it is doubtful that Lestat had any feelings for him either. After turning him, he quickly turned his back on the man making out with Armand right in front of him (though he did this to Louis too with Antoinette), so perhaps he did have some small love for the human lover that Armand corrupted. 

Now, you may ask, why does Lestat cheat if he loves Louis and it's not about his bisexuality? He cheats on Louis because he wants to elicit that jealousy from him. Louis doesn't take to being a vampire, still clinging to his human life, but when he's riled up, he tends to let his vicious side out. Lestat wants him to be vicious. He doesn't want him to be sweet, or kind. This is why I think Lestat was so eager to let Louis kill him. Not only because the idea of Louis doing that hurt because he loved him, but because he knew it would create in Louis the monster Lestat was hoping to cultivate. The one who fully embraced his vampire side without remorse.

Anyway, it is a very poignant show. Some elements are problematic, to be sure. I did absolutely love that it was their shared trauma concerning Lestat that brought Armand and Louis together, although I would also argue that Louis' trauma is much greater than Armand's. The older vampire got his heart broken after someone he loved used him for what he had. Louis was played with, cheated on, beaten, and lied to over many years. He spent so much time revolving around Lestat and then had to live with the trauma of having "killed" him. I don't really know if Lestat is possibly still alive since they didn't burn his body. According to the lawyer, he hadn't been in contact, so if he was he probably decided to leave Louis to it and not seek revenge (unless the note was a part of his revenge, there is more to come after all).

I am dreading the eventual death of Claudia because of how adversely this is going to affect poor Louis. He's been through enough shit. I just want him to get to be happy. However, knowing he gets to live the next 70 years in a loving relationship helps a bit.

Love Actually (does suck a bit)

So I recently watched the much acclaimed (and equally derided) Christmas movie Love Actually for the first time after hearing so much about it. Here are my thoughts:

I wish there had been at least one LGBT couple portrayed in the movie. With so many different relationships, they could have done more than just allude to the fact that gay people exist (in the Liam Neeson scene with his step son when he's first learning about the boy's crush, and in the scene between the aging rock star and his manager), they could have presented a gay relationship as well. They did not. The aging rock star and his manager was shown to be platonic love (as evidenced by the fact that his manager jokes about him "turning gay" when he breaks down and admits that the manager is the person he loves most in the world and the ending where the rock star has a girlfriend). Although it only portrayed straight relationships, it did portray them all as complicated. Here are the relationships I liked the best, the ones I absolutely hated and those I really didn't care either way.

I hated the Hugh Grant story arc. Loathed it. He was presented as a man in power, she was a woman in his employ. When he gets a fit of jealousy after seeing another man in power exerting his influence to sexually harrass this poor woman, instead of realize that is what happens he has her fired. Are we supposed to believe that this is love?

I also hated the Keira Knightly story line where the best friend of her new husband reveals his long-standing crush on her (creepy much) and especially hated how they tried to make it out to be romantic. It would have been better if he'd had a one-sided crush on his best friend to be honest. Although confessing it to either of them would still be creepy.

I was meh over the Alan Rickman story-line. The aging man getting attentions from a younger woman arc has been done to death. I did feel that Emma Thompson's performance as the wronged wife was very moving, but overall I could have done without this arc and its less than satisfactory conclusion.

The Laura Linney storyline was very sad, and was not given any kind of conclusion at the end when they're all meeting at the airport either. Presumably, the woman is still without boundaries towards her brother because she assumes he cannot understand boundaries since he has some kind of mental health problem. I do understand this story-line of her putting her own wants and needs on the back burner for years so she can tend to the needs of someone she loves, however, I would have liked to see her gain some boundaries or something. It was just so obvious that she felt harangued by her brother and the whole martyr character trope doesn't sit well with me. No one is that selfless. In real life she would have snapped and said something mean to her brother when he called during the one chance she had with the guy she's been mooning over for years.

I was much more impressed with the Colin Firth storyline where he is a bumbling idiot writer, she is his temporary maid and they have a communication gap because neither speaks the other's language. Not so impressed that I bought him proposing to her the first time they have a real conversation, but impressed nevertheless. I liked how they kept saying the same things even though they didn't know what the other was saying.

I was especially impressed with the asexual nature of the Martin Freeman story arc where even though they are playing a couple being sexually intimate on screen, they are simply having normal conversations about everyday things. It felt refreshing.

I loved the Liam Neeson arc because it was about him bonding with his stepson. I could have done without the part where he met the hot mom of one of his stepson's friends near the end. The fact that he just wants to help his stepson despite his own grief at the recent loss of his wife was moving. I also loved how ready he was to accept that his stepson might be gay and didn't just assume that the person he was crushing on was a girl.

The older rockstar and his manager being the only platonic relationship represented did feel a bit offputting. I mean, obviously there were other relationships, familial relationships between the characters, but the main interactions were always with the love interest, except in this instance (and the father/son dynamic). I was hoping (before the kiss) that the Martin Freeman arc would be platonic in nature, but I like that it was asexual at least.

All in all I agree with the synopsis that there are too many different story lines and none of them gets developed enough. The ones that are good seem rushed, I'd like to just cut out all the ones I didn't like and further develop the ones I did. Also, make the rock star bi at least and the relationship with his manager romantic. Why not?

Better Omens: Comparing the 1990's book to the 6-episode series

 First off, I'd like to say that I thoroughly enjoyed reading the book Good Omens. There was nothing wrong with it (apart from the occasional use of the f slur to refer to gay men), it was a very good book. I think there were a few things that dated it. I liked that they updated those for the special. I also liked that they made God a woman by casting a female actress to narrate (as God) even though they kept Metatron (the voice of God) as a man. There were some things they added to the plot for the special, a special bit at the end, for instance. I'm going to warn you right now that this post is going to contain spoilers for the show Good Omens. If you don't want to see these (although you really should have watched already, I mean I covered this show in my blog once before) stop reading now.

Okay. Moving on. The book explores the human characters a little bit more (especially the Them and Adam in particular). I really liked this aspect of the book the best and it was worth the read if only for the added bits you uncover about these characters and their interactions with each other. The book insists that Aziraphael is not gay even though he bears all the hallmarks and most people assume he is, because angels don't have a gender. I think this, added to the fact that Neil Gaiman (one of the authors) has previously confirmed he and Crowley love each other, could have been a way to get their relationship past the gay panic of the 90s and has less bearing on the story than people give it credit for. Their interactions in the book are mostly the same (except there are fewer). There is a lot of back and forth banter between them that is in the show only.

Another thing they changed with the show (besides making God a woman) was that they made Pollution an enby (non-binary individual). I really liked this aspect of the show as well. The bit at the end that was added to the plot was the bit about Aziraphael and Crowley swapping bodies to face each other's punishments. In the book their last interaction is right after everything is set to rights. There is no kidnapping and no judgment. I really liked the addition of this scene because it made their relationship so much more intimate.

I also liked the addition of scenes showing their past together. The book gives a vague indication that they've known each other and been seeing each other all this time, but it does not give any details about their past. My favorite part is when Aziraphael is about to be discorporated by the French revolutionaries and Crowley saves him. I really like their exchange about the oysters as well. 

The original story is well written and I liked the characters but the best part of the story is the improvements that were made to it for the special. I rarely say that about an adaptation, but this is one that I feel it suits.

Thank you for reading. I have not yet decided what my next post will be about. Catch you next time.

Comparing Sherlock with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's works

 I'd like to start off with a disclaimer. Although I have consumed quite a bit of Conan Doyle's original work, I am by no means a Sherlock Holmes expert. I have read at the very least: A Study in Scarlet (the introductory story where Watson and Holmes meet), The Hound of the Baskervilles (a book length Sherlock story), A Scandal in Belgravia (the story that introduces Irene Adler aka the woman), and a few others whose names I cannot recall at the moment. I know a bit more about the character quirks of our favorite sleuth than someone who has consumed a similar amount of these works might because my dad's friend was super into Sherlock Holmes and used to write fanfiction about him. This meant that he would talk with my dad about the detective in front of me and I would pick up tidbits that I hadn't gleaned from my own reading. I have also watched many adaptations. We used to watch the Masterpiece Theatre adaptations starring Jeremy Brett as the titular detective when I was a child and I know more stories from this adaptation than from reading the original books, although my father owned The Complete works of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and I reread my favorite A Scandal in Belgravia about a half-dozen times when I was a kid.

That being said, I do remember quite a bit about what I did read from the original and I was able to recognize little easter egg nods to it as well as appreciate the ways in which Sherlock became its own story entirely. The first element I'd like to discuss is the characters.

In the original, you don't get much insight into Sherlock's actual character because you always see him through the lens of JohnWatson. Now, I'm not saying that John is necessarily an unreliable narrator, but he's definitely not as observant as Sherlock. Watson always views Sherlock with this kind of respectful awe, but he also notes that he's different. In one of the original stories, Watson notices that Sherlock lacks some knowledge that is common knowledge to other people simply because he deems it unimportant. Sherlock tells John that his brain is like an attic and it can only store so much stuff so he throws out extraneous knowledge. The line in the show is updated to "My brain is like a hard drive, it only has so much space so I delete unnecessary files." Little things like this made the show for me.

Throughout the show Sherlock refers to himself as a "high-functioning sociopath" correcting a police detective who likes to call him a psychopath. I like the little details about Sherlock's character that remained the same and he does seem like he might be asexual although I know there are a lot of people who ship him with John. I'm not denying that the two have an amazing friendship and great chemistry, but I think Sherlock works better as an asexual character. However, Sherlock is shown to care deeply about the people he holds dear, which isn't common in people with sociopathy. When they are threatened, for instance, he allows his reputation to be tarnished to keep them safe. I would say Jim Moriarty is more of a sociopath/psychopath. 

Sherlock is a good actor. He often changes his tone and inflection to elicit a response from others, whether that is anger and outrage or sympathy. He does this in order to learn things he has yet to observe or things he can't figure out from the information that he already has. All these little facets of Sherlocks character are nuances that the show added because it was necessary to flush out his character a little bit more than oddly brilliant detective who gets bored and does drugs or plays the violin to keep his brain busy.

John's character is also flushed out a bit in the series. He is an adrenaline junky, which explains why he hangs around Sherlock. This added element to his character elevates their relationship a couple notches from what it was in the books. No longer is Watson a passive observer, he invites the danger and he loves the chase.

In the first episode John kills a man who is trying to manipulate Sherlock into taking a poison tablet. So the case, A Study in Pink is a modernized version of A Study in Scarlet. A woman is found in an apparent suicide one of a string of similar cases which no one seems able to link. She has scratched a message into the wood with her fingernails, not an easy task. It is Rache which someone observes is a German word, but Sherlock, based on other clues, decides it is a name she didn't get to finish writing. He takes in the entire scene and asks where her luggage bag is. This is because he can tell from the splash that she had one and that she doesn't appear the type to leave it somewhere. He looks around and finds it in a dumpster. Her phone isn't in it. She planted it on her murderer. So Sherlock is able to meet with the man who has been murdering people and he explains what he's been doing. He has two identical pills, one contains poison, the other is harmless. He lays them out in front of the victim and has them choose one. Sherlock asks him what happens if he doesn't choose. The man draws a gun, which Sherlock immediately recognizes as fake. He tells the man to shoot him, calling his bluff. But the man is trying to goad Sherlock into playing anyway. John figures out what Sherlock is doing and traces him, but he goes into the wrong building and ends up in the building next door to the one Sherlock and the murderer are in. Just before Sherlock can take the pill, the man is shot.

After the police get there, Sherlock privately observes to John that the man who did the shooting must have been in the military, indicated that he knows what Watson has done and he doesn't intend to tell. This cements their friendship which is a large part of the show and a driving element of what makes it so good. Many of the elements of this show, the unexplained deaths, the carving of a message from one of the dying victims, etc, were in the original story. The cool thing was how they modernized the story to fit modern times. Sherlock and John's first meeting is a prime example of this. In the book, John has just come back from the war and he is looking for an apartment but doesn't seem to think anyone would be willing to share the expense with him. The friend he is talking to tells him he is the second person to say that two him today. The first person being Sherlock. It plays out exactly like this in the show as well. When John meets Sherlock, Sherlock asks him "Iraq or Afganistan" in the original it was something similar, but I'm pretty sure it was two places soldiers were commonly stationed at the time and I don't remember exactly which places they were. John reasons that someone must have told Sherlock about his military service, their mutual friend perhaps. Sherlock instead tells John everything he has observed about him including from his phone (in the story it was his watch) when he borrowed it briefly, and everything is spot on.

There are some characters that were added. Anderson, who is a pithy side character always exchanging jabs with Sherlock. Anderson works with the forensics branch of homicide investigation. The chief inspector has the same name as the one in the stories, Lestrade. His character is way more nuanced in the show, though. In the stories, he's kind of an idiot. In the show, he's just in over his head. There is also the added character of Sally Donovan, a deputy inspector who dislikes Sherlock and warns John that he should stay away from the man. Donovan is a chief player in Moriarty's eventual scheme to bring Sherlock down, but she doesn't do it intentionally. She just leaps to the conclusion that Moriarty has guided her towards. We don't see much of Donovan in the last two seasons, if I recall. Perhaps that is because she served her purpose.

The character of Molly Hooper is an added character that I thoroughly enjoyed. I believe she is supposed to be a fan self-insert type character. She is a mortician who has a huge crush on Sherlock. Despite all his observational abilities, he seems completely oblivious to this fact. It is through this crush that we see how Sherlock's use of his skills can hurt the people around him. For instance, he observes that he thinks the man she is dating is gay (it turns out to be Jim Moriarty in disguise, so only kinda gay) I mean there is a certain homoeroticism to his relationship with Sherlock. In another instance, Sherlock observes that Molly has taken extra care with one of her Christmas presents and muses that she must have found herself a new boyfriend, she runs away and Sherlock sees that the name on the present is his own, but it is not until the very last season that this comes to a heartbreaking climax. I will not spoil it for those of you who may not have seen it, but it is totally worth the watch if only for this moment.

Now we come to the character of Mary Watson. As anyone who has read the stories knows, Mary Watson does not live long. She is killed at some point, so I knew when her character was introduced that this was the probable inevitability. So Mary is introduced in the first episode of season three. Everyone thinks Sherlock is dead. Watson has moved on, he is dating someone. Sherlock shows up at the restaurant where he is about to propose to the woman and disguises himself as the waiter. John doesn't notice at first and when he does, he goes ballistic. Sherlock let him think he was dead for two whole years, there's a lot of anger there. So after getting kicked out of the restaurant for having a fist fight, then another place because John attacked Sherlock again in the middle of his story of what happened. Mary tends to their wounds and calms John down. Then, John proposes and Mary says yes.

Mary Watson has to be the best development of a character who, in the stories, was just a distraction, into the most nuanced and beautiful character that the moment she dies rips you in half. I loved her character. I loved that Sherlock ended up loving her (in a completely platonic way of course) despite the fact that she kept secrets. It could be argued that all of the people Sherlock cares deeply about have some hidden side to them. Mrs. Hudson has some kind of a shady past connection to a drug cartel. John is an adrenaline junkie. And Mary, Mary is an assassin. Or, at least, she was. This doesn't come out until after the wedding. I love how Sherlock reveals how much he cares about John in his best man speech despite trying to catch a killer who has somehow infiltrated the wedding and is gunning for one of the guests. It's great character development to show flashes to Sherlock standing speechless as he explains all the ways he thanked John for the offer, but he finishes by saying "it turns out I had said none of this aloud". 

Okay, so lets talk about the villains. Of course you all know the big bad Jim Moriarty (James in the original stories). He stays mostly behind the scenes in the first few episodes, only coming out to play in the last episode of the season where he has Sherlock complete a series of puzzles culminating with him kidnapping John and threatening his life. Sherlock gives in to Jim's demands and rescues John just in the nick of time from the bomb that is strapped to his chest. As the series continues it turns out that, just as Sherlock is what they consider a consulting detective, Jim is a consulting criminal. He has his hand in every pie and he just loves playing with Sherlock. Jim is the perfect foil to Sherlock. He is brilliant and there is no limit to what he is willing to do. The rooftop exchange between the two of them and Sherlock's subsequent conversation with John is some of the best writing I've seen in a drama series ever.

Besides for Jim, there are minor villains. Irene Adler (who is more of a grey character than all out villian) who bests Sherlock, but perhaps also has feelings for him. She ends up being on Moriarty's payroll as well, but the culmination of her character arc was brilliant. Since the story with her character in it is the one I read the most growing up, and my favorite Sherlock story of all time, I was super interested in how they were going to portray her character. I loved that they made her a dominatrix and that she chose to greet Sherlock naked for their first meeting to confuse him. Everything about her arc was done brilliantly and I really appreciated how they modernized it.

Magnussen was a villain only brilliant in that he was thoroughly detestable and the only qualm the audience has with Sherlock killing him at the end of season three is that he is going to face some kind of consequence for doing it. You see, Magnussen is the reason that Mary Watson's secret comes out, and he is blackmailing her with it. To protect her, Sherlock meets with Magnussen and learns that he doesn't actually have physical copies of the documents he's using to blackmail her, they are filed away in his brain. In other words, the only way to destroy them is to destroy him. So Sherlock does what he needs to to protect the people he loves. Because Mycroft is basically one of the highest people in the British Government, he is able to make it so as long as Sherlock leaves the country he doesn't face charges. Sherlock gets on a plane and the season ends with all TV screens playing a video short with Jim Moriarty's face saying "Did you miss me?" on loop. They decide not to send Sherlock away after all.

Other notable villains: the driver from A Study in Pink, the tribute to HH Holmes, and Sherlock's sister Euros. I'm not really going to talk about these villains much as I've already written a pretty long post, but they are all interesting in their own right, especially Euros.

Sherlock is one of the few pieces of media that I would say improved on the source material. It is, without a doubt, the best adaptation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's character that I've ever seen. It is brilliantly acted. The writing is excellent. I thoroughly enjoyed the character development and the dialog. All the plots are nuanced and well executed. It is just a brilliant piece of work. I'd like to see more, but it's at the point that I don't want them to ruin it by making more.

Thanks for reading, tune in next time as I compare Good Omens the mini-series to the book by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett.

Comparing Anne of Green Gables to Anne with an E and other adaptations

 I first read the Anne of Green Gables series when I was a child. I reread the series aloud to two of my siblings as a teen and read some of it to my own kids as well. One thing I always loved about Anne was how she was ever curious and inventive. I also liked that she tried to help others and accepted them without judgment. That is why I think Anne with an E is the best adaptation because it really captures what her character was like even if it changed certain parts of the story.

Anne with an E is a modern adaptation (not set in modern times) which adds things that wouldn't have been possible to explore in a series written at the time Anne of Green Gables was first written. Anne with an E does a good job of highlighting Anne's past trauma before coming to Green Gables. It differs from the books in several ways. The first major diversion is added for dramatic effect (which I didn't like because I rarely like it when they change the story for purely dramatic reasons), it is them sending Anne back to the orphanage and Matthew needing to go after her once Marilla realizes that Anne did not (in fact) take her brooch. In the books it was much less dramatic, Marilla just banning Anne from going to the ice cream social and making her stay in her room.

The major changes that I liked revolved around including LGBT issues and issues of class and race which would have existed at the time but not been talked about. In Anne of Green Gables, Diana's great aunt is rich and eccentric and crochety. In Anne with an E she is all of those things, but also gay. It was so well written, and so in keeping with the spirit of her character that it made me doubt my own memory about the actual books not containing even a hint of this aspect of her character. I know for a fact that the books did not contain Anne learning of this or anything like that (which happened in the series). The fact that Anne is so open to and accepting of Aunt Josephine even after learning this was so in character for her that I loved it even more.

Another major change was the inclusion of  Ka'Kwet who belongs to an indigenous tribe that lives nearby Avonlea. This wouldn't have been included in a major publication at the time Anne of Green Gables was written, but the indigenous peoples of Canada and their struggles would have been happening and it is really good to see a work that was previously entirely anglo-centric being adapted to include people of color. Also, the entire struggle with her being sent off to a conversion school is in keeping with the policies of the day when dealing with indigenous peoples. There is also a side story with Gilbert befriending a black man after his father's death when he goes off the sea. This is an entirely Anne with an E storyline as Gilbert and Anne exchanged letters because she was working while he attended medical school (see Anne of Windy Poplars) not because he went to sea following his father's death. Even so, I liked this development of Gilbert Blythe because the one in the book isn't really very well developed, especially not compared to Anne or even several other characters around her.

One character that hasn't really been adapted into any of the movies or television series that I've seen is Lavender Lewis. I really liked her character when I read the book (Anne of Avonlea) and I have always been disappointed not to see her character appear in any adaptations of the series.

I have also seen the movies starring Megan Follows as Anne. The series of three movies stays pretty true to the story for the first two movies changing only a few details and skipping a great deal of both Anne of Avonlea and Anne of the Island by combining them into one movie, but it goes an entirely different direction with the third movie. It seems to have moved the timeline up as the war (which started when Anne's youngest Rilla was a teenager) is already in full swing and Gilbert is fighting. I didn't like this change much. I would have preferred to see Rilla of Ingleside adapted. I loved the books focusing on Anne's children, but especially Rilla of Ingleside. I wish Anne with an E would continue its adaptation after Anne's marriage to Gilbert and follow her children, or that an adaptation would be made that focused solely on the last two books of the series. I can completely see Walter being gay, from the way he is described and his whole tragic story, given that he is Rilla's favorite brother I would say that Rilla possesses a lot of her mother's open-mindedness.

Thanks for reading. Tune in next time when I talk about the BBC adaptation Sherlock as opposed to the original stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

Girl with the Dragon Tattoo: Book/American Film comparison

Steg Larsson's book The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and its two sequels are not for the feint of heart. The books challenge the idea of a female being helpless simply because she is weaker or smaller. From the moment the protagonist of our novels Mikael Blomkvist meets Lizbeth Salandar we the reader can tell she's different. She's brilliant, she's mysterious and she's strong. She's also physically smaller than even the average woman. So today I want to examine what the movie got right and ways in which it messed up in order to wrap everything up neatly.

The characterizations are pretty much spot on for most of the movie. That is, until our protagonist and Lizbeth sleep together. For whatever reason the movie decided that Lizbeth would bare her soul to Mikael after they slept together which she did not do in the books. This is completely out of character for her. In the book series it took lots of working together and him having her back and vice-versa before she revealed anything to him. She wouldn't have become vulnerable just because they had sex and that the movie changed this about her character is a little discomforting to me.

The movie only covers the first book of the series, at the end of which Mikael still knew very little about Lizbeth. He learned that she was a hacker (on his own) and confronted her about it, after which she admitted to it, but apart from that, she's still very mysterious. Even the reader doesn't know much about her character that Mikael doesn't. We do learn that she's resourceful, and that even when victimized, she finds a way to rise above. We also learn that she is willing to do a lot of morally ambiguous things to get where she has to be. After being raped (for instance) she does not kill her rapist, despite considering that as a possibility, because she knows the job of guardian will go to someone else and she sees an opportunity to control her guardian the way he intended to control her so that she finally has control over her own money. The movie did a good job at capturing this aspect of her personality and I love that she's still the one to save Mikael from the killer. I would have loathed the movie if they had made her a damsel in distress.

I also feel like the movie really glossed over the fact that Lizbeth is bi (or pan) sexual in favor of concentrating on her relationship with Mikael. While I believe it does show some of her relationship with the girl that had been her sex buddy before she started working with Mikael, the very act of her opening up to Mikael in the movie changed their relationship. In the books, she sleeps with him on a whim and it is made clear that the act meant more to Mikael than it did to her. She just likes sex. When she is accused of murder in a subsequent book, even Mikael doesn't know if she's innocent (though he wants to believe her and ends up working with her to help prove she wasn't involved). The movie wanted to resolve their relationship right away (presumably because they didn't intend on making the subsequent movies that explained more about her character).

So while I think the American movie adaptation was good. I would definitely say you need to read the books. I've heard that the Swedish movie series is better, that it does a good job of staying faithful to the books, but I don't think I've seen it to be able to make that analysis. For now, if you want the best version of Lizbeth Salander, stick to the books.

Thank you for reading. Tune in next time when I talk about the Anne of Green Gables book series vs. The first movie adaptation series and the series Anne with an E.

Comparing Pride and Prejudice the book with many adaptations I've seen

It is a truth universally acknowledged that Jane Austen was a writing genius. And if you don't get the reference, the first part of that sentence is how Pride and Prejudice begins. But if you don't get that reference, you probably won't be interested in reading the rest of this post, because this is all about that particular story. I have watched three film versions of Pride and Prejudice, one was a mini-series starring Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy one was the Bollywood production Bride and Prejudice, and the other was the newest adaptation with Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennet. I will be examining how impressed I was with these adaptations as well as diving into the modernized versions I've seen and the fanfiction adaptation Bridget Jones Diary. I have read the original book through at least twice, I have also gone over certain passages for different classes I took during college, and written a few papers on it. This being said, there may be a few things I misremember since it has been a few years since my last reading and all the films have been viewed over the course of several years as well. So bear with me and if you notice any glaring errors, feel free to address them in the comment section and I'll be sure to fix them.

First, since it is a miniseries instead of a Hollywood film, the Colin Firth adaptation is able to stay fairly true to the original source material. All of the adaptations I'll be examining kept most of the key plot points, Mr. Wickham and his wickedness, Mr. Darcy's clandestine manipulation of the situation allowing what would have been a huge scandal to blow over quickly and saving Elizabeth's entire family from a ruined reputation, The sister element is not present in Bridget Jones Diary to my recollection, but all the other adaptations I'm going to examine have a version of Jane and a version of Lydia who are the most important sisters to the plot. Mary and Kitty are just kind of there, they don't really progress the plot at all. I also don't recall a Mr. Collins-esque character in Bridget Jones diary (correct me if I'm wrong Bridget Jones fans). But Mr. Collins is a part of all the other adaptations if I'm recalling them correctly. The person that Mrs. Bennet is just salivating to matchmake to one of her daughters but who, because of Elizabeth's refusal ends up marrying Elizabeth's best friend Charlotte instead. What each of the stories do differently is mostly in their portrayal of the main characters and in the direction of the action so I'll be examining all of those in my analysis.

In the Colin Firth adaptation, Darcy is shown as being conflicted between his pride and his love for Elizabeth Bennet. We see him agonize after her rebuttal of his proposal and we see him play with his dogs. These are character building moments. In the original novel. Jane Austen writes from Elizabeth's perspective. We cannot see Darcy's attraction to her until she is able to see it but we see her attraction to him before she does. The letter changes everything. In the Keira Knightly version, we see the passion between them in the rain scene where he declares his undying love for her and an argument fraught with sexual tension. In fact, all the scenes of Darcy and Elizabeth together, even when she is cutting through him with her sharp wit, are charged with that same tension. The director did a fantastic job of showing this especially in the dance scene where everyone else fades away and the two of them are the only ones left showing that they are so focused on each other that it's as if the rest of the ballroom doesn't exist. I also loved the portrayal of Mr. Collins in this one simply because he is just as slimy and unlikeable as he is in the books, with an added layer of awkwardness after he gets married (stumbling on the word intercourse while exchanging a glace with Charlotte, for instance).

Of course, no analysis of the Pride and Prejudice series starring Colin Firth would be complete without talking about the swimming scene. This scene only exists in this version. It is not pertinent to the story, it simply serves as eye candy for the female audience, but I love it all the same. In it, Darcy goes for a swim at a pond on his estate and Elizabeth and her family are touring the estate at the time and he sees them right after while his shirt still clings to his wet body. The sexual tension in this scene is almost as high as it is in the Keira Knightly scene at the pavilion where Darcy proposes for the first time.

One of the things I really enjoyed about the book, and one that is best captured in the Colin Firth version, is the dialog. I really loved Elizabeth Bennet's quick wit and her exchanges with all the other characters. I think, however, the character of Mr. Bennet is best captured by Donald Sutherland (such an amazing actor) in the Keira Knightly version. My favorite exchange between the two is included in both adaptations. It is where Mrs. Bennet is in a dither about Elizabeth turning down Mr. Collins' proposal (since all she can think about is marrying her daughters off without a single thought to whether or not they'll be happy) Mrs. Bennet seeks her husbands aid in convincing his daughter to accept the proposal. His response is epic: "From this day, you shall be ever estranged from one of your parents. Your mother will not see you again if you do not accept Mr. Collins, and I will not see you again if you do." The Keira Knightly version does this scene beautifully, setting it in the woods where Mr. Bennet is going on a walk when approached by Mrs. Bennet. Keira Knightly does a fantastic job of seeming anxious when Mr. Bennet starts talking and then throwing her arms about him in her relief. It's just so well done. This is my favorite scene with the two of them.

So now that we've explored both actual adaptations of Pride and Prejudice, let's turn our attention to the Bollywood production and the fanfic. I loved the Bollywood decision to make it so the scandal of the young Ms. Darcy's involvement with Wickham went beyond just eloping. In the Bollywood version, Wickham got Darcy's teenage sister pregnant and she had to have an abortion. This is as modernized as I've ever seen the scandal. I also love that Darcy finds Wickham in a theater and attacks him in front of a movie that's playing. The songs were good, but some of them did distract me from the overall story. I liked the dynamic of a culture clash between the American Darcy and the Indian Lalita (the Elizabeth Bennet character). In this version, however, the main character is there to witness Darcy's interference with Wickham and her sister, she does not hear about it second hand as she does in the original story.

Finally, in the fanfic Bridget Jones Diary. Mark Darcy is a stuffy lawyer type and the Wickham character is Bridget's boss Daniel Cleaver. The misunderstanding of why Darcy and Cleaver hate each other is (just like in Pride and Prejudice) facilitated by Daniel's lying to Bridget about something by making himself out to be a victim and painting Darcy as the bad guy. Eventually, Bridget learns the truth, but not from Darcy because it's too personal for him. In Bridget Jones' Diary, it is not Darcy's sister who Cleaver has wronged, but Darcy himself by Cleaver's cuckolding him on his wedding night. Bridget learns of this from a third party who knows about the situation. There is also an awesome Mark Darcy and Daniel Cleaver fist fight after Cleaver says something to make him snap. The sister scandal in Bridget Jones' Diary is not actually Bridget's sister, but her mother who runs away from home and gets into financial straights thanks to her new boyfriend swindling her. Darcy ends up helping her out on the DL because that's just who he is after a distraught Bridget turns to him for comfort about the situation.

I liked all the versions I've seen and though I would never say any of them are "as good" as the book, they all have their own charms. Every adaptation that I've seen did some things better. The Colin Firth version was the most faithful to the original story, the Keira Knightly version had the most passion, the Bollywood production was the most modern while staying with the original story and the fanfic was the most creative adaptation. I loved them all, but I'll continue to read the book because there's nothing like the original story and Jane Austen does it so well.

Thanks for reading. Tune in next time for my analysis of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo book series vs. the American movie version.

A Silent Voice: Manga/Film comparison

 So I've been thinking recently about how I like to read, I have all these books and manga that I've read and also watched the film or anime counterparts and I thought it would be interesting to compare what I thought of each. The one I've chosen for today's analysis is a movie I've watched several times, and even though I've only read the manga through once and it was a while ago. That being said, let's dive right in.

So the first thing I want to say is that the manga is pretty long so it was only going to cover everything if they had made it into a series and they made a movie instead. It was natural that some things would get cut. The first thing on the chopping block was most of the childhood bullying. The manga really shows Shoya's state of mind throughout. How he's trying to alleviate his boredom and show off to his "friends" who join in as well and then throw him under the bus when shit hits the fan. The movie relegates all of this to the opening montage, which is a perfectly fine artistic choice. The bullying is the backdrop, the main focus is the affect it had on the kids after they got older anyway.

Next, a lot of the friendship with Tomohiro gets cut, but enough of it is left that you get a good sense that this is Shoya's first friendship since he was like ten and he doesn't want to mess it up. I really loved that they kept the x's on the faces and the camera angled to show that he's always looking down was a good choice as well. I also really love the musical accompaniment they picked for the most emotional moments because it really fit in nicely.

The only thing they cut, which I understand they didn't have time for, that I would have liked them to keep because it had such an impact on me, was the movie. You see, in the manga, the friend group that starts to form around Shoya and Shouko decides to make a movie. The movie requires them to talk to the elementary school teacher at the school where Shoya bullied Shouko and you see just how much the teacher's attitude factored into the hostile environment where the kids thought it was no big deal to bully one another for being different. Shoya finds out just how devastating this can be when he becomes the target instead of the bully, but you also see something else and that is the development and exposure of Toshi as a character. In the movie, his character is kind of a backdrop character, necessary only as the fuse that ignites Miki Kawai to show her true colors since she has a crush on him. In the manga, he is a staunch protector of bullied kids because he endured that as a child and he goes off on the teacher for allowing it to happen in his school. When he finds out that Shoya used to be a bully, that sets him off which is the beginning of the friend group unraveling. It is also the movie that eventually brings the friend group back together as Shouko gets everyone back together to finish it and they show it to Shoya at the cultural festival as proof that they all love him. 

The other thing they downsized for the movie was the extent of Ueno's animosity towards Shouko, especially after the suicide attempt. In the manga, Ueno keeps Shouko from visiting Shoya in the hospital when he won't wake up. She physically baracades the door so Shouko can't get in. Some of this animosity is shown in the movie because the rooftop attack scene is kept in, but the majority of it, and the final culmination of Shouko actually getting Ueno to agree to help with the film is a progression that I liked seeing in the manga. 

Overall I would probably rate both of them a 10/10, both were very emotional. I also have to say that this is one of the handful of anime movies I can watch in dub because they did such a wonderful job with the VA for the dub. I still prefer hearing the original Japanese, maybe someday I'll be able to read the manga in the original Japanese script as well.

Well that has been it for this episode. Hope you enjoyed and tune in next time when we discuss one of my favorite authors Jane Austen and the many adaptations of Pride and Prejudice that I've seen.

"Yes, God, Yes" Movie review

 Sorry, having trouble thinking up a clever play on this movie name. I watched this last night on Netflix. The MC is played by the same girl who plays Nancy in Stranger things, which is what initially caught my eye. The story follows a young girl going to Catholic school as she goes through a sexual awakening despite being told by everyone around her that anything sexual outside of marriage is a sin that will earn her eternal damnation.

The movie was made in 2019, but seems to be set in the early to late 90's because of the technology and computer chat rooms. The MC Alice is currently the object of a rumor that she "tossed someone's salad" a phrase I'd never even heard before that apparently refers to anilingus. Anyway, Alice doesn't know what it means either but that doesn't stop everyone (even the teachers) from believing it as unequivocally true. Alice goes off to a retreat sponsored by the school where you're not allowed to have your phone or watch (the better to brainwash) but Alice keeps her phone at first so she can play the snake game on it if she gets bored. Eventually she figures out that the vibrate feature meant to keep you alerted while it's on silent can have other uses.

Anyway, having grown up in a super religious household I kind of get it. I mean, I never went to school or anything, so the being bullied and the object of unfounded rumors part is foreign to me, but the idea that if you step out of line you're going to hell (or as my father called it, the lake of fire) struck home with me. I was appalled at the double standard the people around her seemed to have. The father at her school teaches in class that masturbation is a sin, but Alice accidentally stumbles on him watching porn on his computer and masturbating to it. Alice also sees one of her group leaders giving another a blow job and she tries to tell her friend about it and her friend accuses her of lying.

Eventually, Alice realizes that this life isn't for her and decides to stop letting it box her in. She also, finally, finds out what it is that everyone has been saying she did. The movie ends with her watching the sex scene in Titanic and using a vibrating toy to get herself off. Showing that she has accepted her sexuality and is comfortable with it now.

I'd say this movie is a pretty good portrayal of how it feels to grow up in a super religious context and try to be the "good" one only to find yourself constantly falling short. At least my parents didn't teach masturbation as a sin (although pornography was considered to be one). They did, however, drive home a particular homophobic message that haunted me well into my adult years. Thankfully, as I got away from people who shared this obnoxious point of view, I realized that there is nothing wrong with attraction to the same gender and that some people are just born like that. 

I was happy that the movie showed her moving past that brainwashing hypocritical ideology that was being shoved down her throat. The fact is that trying to suppress sexual urges is the worst way to manage them. Masturbation is a completely healthy alternative if you're not ready for sex yet and a young person should never be shamed for doing it. They shouldn't be allowed to do it out in the open, of course, but they shouldn't be taught that it's wrong or that there's something wrong with them for wanting to do it.