Writing As Therapy. Writing As Healing. Writing As Discovery. Writing As Self-love. Writing As Making

Knives Out (2019) dir. Rian Johnson

"We'll teach just those whose ancestry's purest."

SALAZAR SLYTHERIN was a pure-blood wizard, noted for his cunning and determination, and was one of the four founders of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. He was regarded as one of the greatest wizards of the age for his abilities as a Parselmouth and as a skilled Legilimens. He selected his students according to their cunning, ambition, determination and blood purity. As a professor, he was in favour of teaching the Dark Arts, and also taught the Unforgivable Curses, such as the Imperius Curse, which were not illegal at the time.

Anakin + smiles

requested by @ahsokastars

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) dir. David Yates

can we talk about how harry james potter appreciates the finer things in life? if tom riddle is a magpie, harry potter is a niffler.

an hour into wee harry’s freedom from the dursleys’ clutches, his newfound riches barely warm in his pockets, and he’s decided on a solid gold cauldron

and what are all his riches good for if not treating himself and his new, first ever friend to every kind of sweet on the trolley?

third year, he ponders the wisdom of splashing out on a firebolt and solid gold gobstones, but very admirably chooses to be a responsible spender

harry spots shiny gleaming metal, and he makes a beeline for it. then he proceeds to shell out thirty galleons without blinking an eye because niffler he may be, he also has a heart of gold

it’s no wonder he never misses a tiny, fluttering gold sphere zooming through the air

James Potter was just okay to most, but he was fucking hot to Lily Evans.

#yes

I fucking love Edmund Blair Leighton and his medieval themed paintings. Every. Single. One. Of. Them.

couple goals

Hermione was wrapped in a borrowed dressing gown, pale and unsteady on her feet; Ron put an arm around her when she reached him.

Deathly Hallows

first off, no hate to this person or any of the people agreeing - at the end of the day, people have different thoughts/interpretations of star wars and its characters, so it's no big deal. but i just wanted to talk about this post/sentiment because i've seen it a lot in the fandom and i'm still new to SW. disclaimer that i'm actively watching TCW at the moment, so take my opinion with a grain of salt

i know most everyone is going to disagree with me on this, but to be kind of blunt, i feel like people like to be purposefully obtuse when it comes to anakin's characterization and it often seems to come from this place of trying to come off like an intellectual ('well *EYE* knew anakin was toxic/evil/a piece of shit the whole time ☝️🤓 ' type energy). i have various thoughts on this and i'm gonna start with the more nitpicky ones and then finish with what i think is the real reason we all disagree

for starters (again, this is just nitpicking) jedi do kill people and it's reasonable to think anakin has killed people prior to the tusken raiders just by nature of his position as a jedi (aggressive negotiations, etc etc). what makes it 'okay' is jedi, by nature of their beliefs, don't commit war crimes by killing the defenseless or innocents. but my point is that killing is already something he's likely done, whereas being a macho toxic fuckboy to his wife is not.

i guess your opinion on this next part of it varies depending on your thoughts when it comes to human nature/morals/whatever, but to ME at least, slaughtering a village because they enslaved and tortured his mother to death is definitely fucked up (because he also took out the innocents), but it's not the exact same thing as being abusive to his wife? like i'm not even trying to debate which one is worse either atp, i'm just saying both things are different and have different pathways of thinking to get to that point. with the tusken raiders, you can clearly see how anakin got there, even if it was wrong, fucked up and arguably evil when it came to the defenseless people he didn't know.

but putting those points aside, i think the main thing we're disagreeing on with the whole TCW characterization vs prequels characterization of anakin is the when of it all. like for ME (you're free to disagree), anakin's behavior of actively hurting padmé when he force choked her in ROTS was SUPPOSED to be 'out of character', and because of that it signaled that he was an evil sith lord that's now too far gone. that was the marker, right behind him killing the younglings. which people also do talk about when they're arguing about this topic:

the difference in thought i'm having from this person is from MY personal perspective, from a story-telling technique/standpoint alone, i just don't like the idea of putting toxicity towards padmé before that marker (what he did in ROTS). it fucks with the whole classic myth type tragedy of it? anidala is supposed to be somewhat idealized even if something like that shouldn't be irl. that's why luke 'redeems' darth vader and brings him back through a mirror of padmé's love for him. we're supposed to recognize vader is a villain, yes, but we're also supposed to take from the story that padmé's love for him was worth it in the end. and that the circumstances of that situation in ROTS (and leading up to ROTS) created the perfect storm to cause anakin to 'fall' and become a sith lord. the tragedy of it is that he WOULD have kept being a good person, without that perfect storm of circumstances (grooming from palpatine, feelings of isolation from parental figures, being heralded as this chosen one, his own arrogance/passion, trauma from how his mother died, force visions plaguing him that he KNEW would come true like with the one of shmi's death, etc).

for ME, as a story, i like that anakin's push into evil is signified by the force choke. the youngling slaughter is definitely like "well, he's gone now", yeah, but when we see him choking the person he was fighting to save? a character we've been personally watching love him the entire movie? that's when we know anakin is lost. so to try and be like 'well, he was just like this all along' undermines that tragedy of this scene that i just talked about. that's why a lot of people don't like some of TCW anakin's characterization. because it undermines that over-arching story. is the prequels-trilogy darth vader story unrealistic to real life? yes, completely. but that star wars story is not supposed to mirror real life. in real life you would not tell luke skywalker to try and save a man who genocided people, destroyed a planet and upheld a dictatorship for one of the most evil men to ever exist. but you have to suspend some of your disbelief in order to enjoy the story. it's just art. and sure, it's 'valid' if you want to accept anakin's TCW version along with some of those scenes people critique. you're free to think he was just toxic and bad all along, but i just think that's a shame and i disagree personally because i don't like what it does with the flow of the story or the work of art that's both trilogies overall. something i think encapsulates it well is this quote written by matthew stover in the ROTS novelization:

"The dark is generous and it is patient and it always wins – but in the heart of its strength lies its weakness: one lone candle is enough to hold it back. Love is more than a candle. Love can ignite the stars.”

in this situation, the candle was anakin and padmé's love for each other, persisting in their son. and the message wasn't that anakin was toxic and evil all along? it was that their love persisted and it came back in the end because it couldn't be blotted out by evil or death.

you could even delve into the force choke scene deeper? it's really the perfect example of 'a storm of bad circumstances' that make it a tragedy. because no, there's NO excuse for what anakin did and at this point he has slaughtered actual children. him hurting padmé is 'evil'. however, (and i know nuance goes to die on the internet, which is part of why i'm writing this lmfao) from anakin's perspective, padmé had just brought obi-wan to kill him. it's not a justification but it does establish the length padmé had to go to (we as the viewer know she didn’t go to that point, but anakin does not know this) in order for anakin to be 'evil' and toxic with her. he had to think that padmé was actively trying to kill him in order to force choke her. and even AFTER he was burned alive and lost his limbs to obi-wan (someone he saw as a father figure), the first thing he thought when he came to was if padmé was alright. he still loved her. and at this point he still thought she wanted him dead and hated him. it took him thinking padmé wanted him dead and hated him for him to snap enough to force choke her?

so with that in mind, yeah, people are going to view anakin's characterization in regards to her in a specific way. some people prefer that that was his breaking point into evil towards her, because of the story it's attempting to tell with the original movies. and him being this macho man towards her over things smaller than that just doesn't feel organic to what we saw in the prequels and it doesn't seem consistent with the flow of that over-romanticized story being told.

people are free to disagree or not like that over-romanticized story (in fact many people don't? and that's one of the reasons why some people don't mesh with star wars or anidala) but i'm not sure why they're surprised some people don't like that clash of characterization between prequels anakin and TCW anakin. this gets even more complicated when you factor in how people didn't like how anakin was overly romantic and 'simp'-like and even hayden had backlash for his acting and just his existence in the role. so of course when making a cartoon for kids, that younger boys would probably be watching, they would distance themselves a bit from that romance vibe and make it more 'obvious' he's just darth vader

#ENDGAME