don't pretend to be dead, it's bad manners

Bourne vs. Cross

Sat, 25 May 2013 05:06:00 -0400

Aaron/Marta »»» Jason/Marie

Why? Because The Bourne Legacy actually allowed Marta to be the stronger one. Not physically, mind you. Yet it was her who saved the day at the end. It was Marta who cured Aaron. It was Marta who warned Aaron, risking her life. It was Marta who killed the assassin. It was Marta who secured them a safe passage on the ship. AND they chose an actress of the appropriate age for the part, Rachel Weisz.

Aaron and Marta were partners in every sense of the word. And that’s why for me, The Bourne Legacy »»» every other Bourne movie.

John Harrison Character Profile (x)

Sat, 25 May 2013 04:38:31 -0400

John Harrison Character Profile (x)

Photo

Fri, 24 May 2013 16:29:05 -0400

It’s okay to enjoy Benedict Cumberbatch in the role of Khan despite acknowledging the fact...

Fri, 24 May 2013 16:22:22 -0400

It’s okay to enjoy Benedict Cumberbatch in the role of Khan despite acknowledging the fact said part should’ve been given to an Indian actor.

It’s okay to love a movie despite its flaws.

pleatedjeans: cat falls asleep in water. [via][video]

Fri, 24 May 2013 16:07:07 -0400

pleatedjeans:

cat falls asleep in water. [via][video]

voidance309: I haven’t drawn Johnlock for a while so have a silly comic where Sherlock has a...

Fri, 24 May 2013 15:57:58 -0400

voidance309:

I haven’t drawn Johnlock for a while so have a silly comic where Sherlock has a heart-shaped hole on his chest :).

Don’t worry Idk how that works either.

Benedict Cumberbatch, behind the scenes of STID // x

Fri, 24 May 2013 15:55:22 -0400

Benedict Cumberbatch, behind the scenes of STID // x

Hannibal 109

Fri, 24 May 2013 15:47:00 -0400

* I love that Will subconsciously ran to Hannibal when he lost time. Yeah, it’s fucked up but I think it’s awesome!
* I love that Hannibal explicitly stated that Will was his friend, that he showed concern for him, that was beautiful! Loved the part about the abuse Will’s empathic mind keeps taking.
* Poor Will, though, breaking apart, crumbling so hard!

* Loved the scene with Alana and Will in the empty hall - which, BTW, poor Will :(
* Loved that Alana has feelings for Will but she sees it wouldn’t be healthy to be in a relationship with him. But she still cares so much for him.
* Loved the hug, the way Will literally melted into it. An empathetic person like him needs physical contact, loving touches.

* Loved that Will figured it out, that he realized Abigail killed the guy. And loved that he went to Hannibal with it, not to Jack.
* Loved that Hannibal admitted the truth and CHOSE not to kill Will. Did you notice how he reached for the scalpel and then decided to not to use it?
* Loved that Hannibal convinced Will not to tell Jack. That he called them both Abigail’s fathers, that was lovely.
* Loved the way he touched Will, how he squeezed Will’s shoulder, the way the camera followed Hannibal’s hand to make a point of how important that gesture was.

* Loved the looks Hannibal was giving Freddie when she kept insulting Will.
* Loved that Abigail figured out that Will knew, that was wonderful. And that Hannibal was able to convince her that Will wouldn’t tell.
* And I can’t believe that Abigail actually helped her father kill the girls. When Hannibal hugged her… it looked so sweet yet so creepy at the same time! O.O

My favorite music bit in this episode was O Euchari by Hildegard von Bingen the chant that played in Hannibal’s office when Will came in… God, it’s so lovely!

I’m more and more convinced that this season will end badly for Will. I mean, those who read the books know what happened to Will Graham after he killed Garret Jacob Hobbs…

GOD, with every episode, I’m more and more in love with this series!

pixiepunch: So I watched the newest episode, and came up with...

Fri, 24 May 2013 07:39:30 -0400

pixiepunch:

So I watched the newest episode, and came up with this idea after Hannibal said he and Will were Abigail’s daddies now.

yesysabella: vagosphere: And their names are texas tornado and...

Fri, 24 May 2013 06:18:37 -0400

yesysabella:

vagosphere:

And their names are texas tornado and johnny football.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE THESE FLUFFY ASS COWS!

FLUFFY COWS! I want to pet them *_*

Video

Thu, 23 May 2013 16:59:55 -0400

That’s what I call patience, LOL!

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:46:21 -0400

That’s what I call patience, LOL!

katerayearth: a list of favorite fairytale adaptations:Malá...

Thu, 23 May 2013 15:45:08 -0400

katerayearth:

a list of favorite fairytale adaptations:
Malá mořská víla (The Little Mermaid), Czechoslovakia, 1976

Funny fact: the Little Mermaid and the Princess (the one in the bed) were played by sisters. IIRC, the Princess is a good woman in this, not a bad witch or something. Man, it’s been years since I’ve seen this. Beautiful but incredibly sad.

mystery is my boyfriend: "elementary doesn't feel like sherlock holmes."

Thu, 23 May 2013 14:58:26 -0400

mystery is my boyfriend: "elementary doesn't feel like sherlock holmes.":

keire-ke:

drakamena:

cezura:

I’ve been hearing this claim a lot lately, in various forms, and it’s a little bit unsettling. “Elementary is great, if you just forget that his name is Sherlock.” “He just seems like a clever guy whose name happens to be Sherlock.” “I’m just not feeling Sherlock Holmes from this character.”

There seems to be one “logical” justification that people tend to use, that there is too much changed from the canon to be called Sherlock Holmes (which I will probably address in a later post.)

Instead of the “logical” focus, I thought about the gut reaction portion of it for a bit I think and I figured out why people don’t ~*~feel~*~ Sherlock Holmes in Elementary. And that is that we as audience members of his crime solving adventures, the way he employs his deductions are different from the “Sherlocky” method that is usually employed. The thing is, I don’t think that the “deviation” in deduction style is either substantive or significant.

When Sherlockians think Shelock-style deductions, we usually think wild, rapid-fire conclusions that seem to come out of nowhere that are later explained by joining strenuous networks of circumstances that happen upon something true. What we’ve found over the course of Elementary is that our Sherlock deploys his deductions a bit differently.

Of course, he does have his spurts of “traditionally Sherlockian deductions.” He deduces that Joan is a former surgeon, that a patient died on her table, each of his deductions explained later. He finds Moran seemingly miraculously, and calculates the vehicle where thieves have gone with only set of tire tracks. Among other moments, he sounds and feels more like Holmes is traditionally portrayed.

Why? Because when he initially announces deductions, they stimulate the surprise and admiration in his audience because his conclusions seem impossible to come to. It’s only later when he explains how he comes to these conclusions that we feel quite silly after understanding the clever yet simple logical jumps that Sherlock is able to make. There is wonder from the audience (and Watson, famously, in the canon and other adaptions) in the ways of Sherlock’s enigma and independence of thought. He is mysterious and unreachable in his ability.

The original Sherlock Holmes explains it adeptly in A Study in Scarlet:

“I’m not going to tell you much more of the case, Doctor. You know a conjuror gets no credit when once he has explained his trick, and if I show you too much of my method of working, you will come to the conclusion that I am a very ordinary individual after all.”

But our Sherlock in Elementary is different. The story was never about him. It was never about how he has a superior intellect or can blow everyone away with his deductions. The story was always about leading his spectators through his thinking process. It was always about working with Joan and Bell and Gregson as equally intelligent people to solve the crimes. It was always about relaying his thinking process out loud, so that everyone reaches the finish line of understanding at the same time instead of leaving his colleagues and his audience in the dust.

The story was always about our dear Watson learning by his side, about her working her way through the cases and receiving feedback from Sherlock as she improves as an investigator. We can see the very poignant message of the story in Snow Angels:

SHERLOCK: They came out of EROC with $33 million in small bills. They loaded their haul onto an ambulance American-made in the late nineties. They haven’t been gone more than an hour.

JOAN: The driver had a lazy eye, the other two men had basketball caps, and one has canine lupus. See how it feels?

If that isn’t a hit in the face I don’t know what is. The tradition of Sherlock Holmes expects us to be impressed with Sherlock’s deductions that come seemingly out of nowhere. We are supposed to applaud his talent and expect an explanation later. Not so in Elementary. From the get-go - the very first episode - Watson establishes that this behavior is patronizing, immature, and unacceptable. The showy shimmer of Sherlock’s deductions is soured once we realize that it actually makes more sense to be upset about Sherlock leaving us behind in the dust, rather than struck with wonder. It’s this arrogant, showy behavior that feels like Sherlock Holmes, but also manages to make everyone around Holmes feel inferior.

If that’s what it means for Sherlock to “feel like Sherlock Holmes” then I don’t want it.

I want our Sherlock, who is still incredibly intelligent and can make great logical leaps without pause, who has a vast knowledge of useful topics for crime-solving, who thinks and acts in such a peculiar way that is characteristic of the Sherlock Holmes from so long ago. There’s no question that Elementary’s Sherlock is Sherlock Holmes. The difference is that he is able to prove himself able to grow and develop as a person, willing to accommodate others. Sherlock Holmes from canon was afraid of being an ordinary man. Sherlock Holmes from Elementary has no qualms with helping make extraordinary of “ordinary” people. And that doesn’t subtract from the integrity of Sherlock Holmes at all.

I love Elementary but yeah, it’s not Sherlock Holmes or John Watson, it’s just two people who share the names of Holmes and Watson. Especially in Watson’s case. And no, it’s not because she’s a woman or Asian, it’s because she has never been in the military, she has never been shot, she doesn’t suffer from PTSD, she never had to deal with coming back home from war, with the admiration or prejudice aimed at soldiers. The experiences of a civillian ex-surgeon will never come anywhere close to an ex-military doctor who was shot in the line of duty.

And THAT’s what bothers me about Joan. They could’ve easily made her an army medic, but they decided not to. From the get-go, they cut off her balls, they neutered her. There’s no doubt that she’s a strong person but the military background that very much defined the original Watson, his pride in serving his country is missing. And it didn’t have to be so. She’s Monk’s Sharona, not Holmes’ Watson.

And that’s why Elementary will never feel like Sherlock Holmes show for me.

I’ve yet to catch up on Elementary, but as an avid reader/writer of AU fics, I have to take offence. Watson isn’t defined by having been in the military and having been shot in the line of duty any more than, I don’t know, Henry VIII is defined as a person by “he had had six wives”. It’s something that was brought about by the things which define him. And in that particular case I don’t recall ACD Watson having any noticeable PTSD or struggled with his Afghanistan memories (although it’s been a while since I read the books). Yes, national pride plays a part in how Watson behaves, but that’s as much an epoch thing as it was a personal trait, and let’s not forget Holmes himself was a very patriotic, which, for one, Sherlock eschews.

Lastly - I very much and loudly disagree that to “have balls” a character needs to be physically involved in a war/fighting. In fact from what I hear the show did the opposite of neutering Watson: instead of making Joan a passive bystander for Sherlock to bounce his brilliance off, they gave her her own demons to overcome and her own goals to accomplish, plus the ability to successfully call Holmes on his bullshit.

But you can’t take away such a huge portion of a character and still have the character. Doyle could’ve made Watson A doctor but he made him a MILITARY doctor. You can’t take away the military, service, being shot in the line of duty and still have Watson. You have A Watson. Hence in name only. But this should be a Sherlock Holmes show, not House MD. And I love AUs, but then they should state that it’s “based on Sherlock Holmes” and NOT “Sherlock Holmes.”

Also, they had a huge opportunity to show a female soldier, the struggles a female goes through in a miltary and how of an impact that has on her, a thing pretty much unseen on TV. Yet they DECIDED not to make her a soldier. Instead of Captain Joan Watson, we got a failed surgeon. They made her someone who couldn’t keep her job.

And that’s why this show will never be a Sherlock Holmes show for me anymore than House MD was.

nbchannibal: All eyes are on “Trou Normand,” tonight at 10/9c....

Thu, 23 May 2013 14:31:06 -0400

nbchannibal:

All eyes are on “Trou Normand,” tonight at 10/9c. Will you be watching?

lifeandotheroddtales: Different Sherlock portrayals as cats....

Thu, 23 May 2013 14:24:13 -0400

lifeandotheroddtales:

Different Sherlock portrayals as cats. Because I can.

House is the uncontrollable crazy cat.

Robert Downey Jr. cat is the flaunting type.

BBC Sherlock is the brooding cat.

Elementary Sherlock is the cuddly one.

Canon Sherlock is an awesome YouTube keyboard cat that Watson is always impressed by.

Photo

Thu, 23 May 2013 14:23:40 -0400

mystery is my boyfriend: "elementary doesn't feel like sherlock holmes."

Thu, 23 May 2013 06:17:47 -0400

mystery is my boyfriend: "elementary doesn't feel like sherlock holmes.":

cezura:

I’ve been hearing this claim a lot lately, in various forms, and it’s a little bit unsettling. “Elementary is great, if you just forget that his name is Sherlock.” “He just seems like a clever guy whose name happens to be Sherlock.” “I’m just not feeling Sherlock Holmes from this character.”

There seems to be one “logical” justification that people tend to use, that there is too much changed from the canon to be called Sherlock Holmes (which I will probably address in a later post.)

Instead of the “logical” focus, I thought about the gut reaction portion of it for a bit I think and I figured out why people don’t ~*~feel~*~ Sherlock Holmes in Elementary. And that is that we as audience members of his crime solving adventures, the way he employs his deductions are different from the “Sherlocky” method that is usually employed. The thing is, I don’t think that the “deviation” in deduction style is either substantive or significant.

When Sherlockians think Shelock-style deductions, we usually think wild, rapid-fire conclusions that seem to come out of nowhere that are later explained by joining strenuous networks of circumstances that happen upon something true. What we’ve found over the course of Elementary is that our Sherlock deploys his deductions a bit differently.

Of course, he does have his spurts of “traditionally Sherlockian deductions.” He deduces that Joan is a former surgeon, that a patient died on her table, each of his deductions explained later. He finds Moran seemingly miraculously, and calculates the vehicle where thieves have gone with only set of tire tracks. Among other moments, he sounds and feels more like Holmes is traditionally portrayed.

Why? Because when he initially announces deductions, they stimulate the surprise and admiration in his audience because his conclusions seem impossible to come to. It’s only later when he explains how he comes to these conclusions that we feel quite silly after understanding the clever yet simple logical jumps that Sherlock is able to make. There is wonder from the audience (and Watson, famously, in the canon and other adaptions) in the ways of Sherlock’s enigma and independence of thought. He is mysterious and unreachable in his ability.

The original Sherlock Holmes explains it adeptly in A Study in Scarlet:

“I’m not going to tell you much more of the case, Doctor. You know a conjuror gets no credit when once he has explained his trick, and if I show you too much of my method of working, you will come to the conclusion that I am a very ordinary individual after all.”

But our Sherlock in Elementary is different. The story was never about him. It was never about how he has a superior intellect or can blow everyone away with his deductions. The story was always about leading his spectators through his thinking process. It was always about working with Joan and Bell and Gregson as equally intelligent people to solve the crimes. It was always about relaying his thinking process out loud, so that everyone reaches the finish line of understanding at the same time instead of leaving his colleagues and his audience in the dust.

The story was always about our dear Watson learning by his side, about her working her way through the cases and receiving feedback from Sherlock as she improves as an investigator. We can see the very poignant message of the story in Snow Angels:

SHERLOCK: They came out of EROC with $33 million in small bills. They loaded their haul onto an ambulance American-made in the late nineties. They haven’t been gone more than an hour.

JOAN: The driver had a lazy eye, the other two men had basketball caps, and one has canine lupus. See how it feels?

If that isn’t a hit in the face I don’t know what is. The tradition of Sherlock Holmes expects us to be impressed with Sherlock’s deductions that come seemingly out of nowhere. We are supposed to applaud his talent and expect an explanation later. Not so in Elementary. From the get-go - the very first episode - Watson establishes that this behavior is patronizing, immature, and unacceptable. The showy shimmer of Sherlock’s deductions is soured once we realize that it actually makes more sense to be upset about Sherlock leaving us behind in the dust, rather than struck with wonder. It’s this arrogant, showy behavior that feels like Sherlock Holmes, but also manages to make everyone around Holmes feel inferior.

If that’s what it means for Sherlock to “feel like Sherlock Holmes” then I don’t want it.

I want our Sherlock, who is still incredibly intelligent and can make great logical leaps without pause, who has a vast knowledge of useful topics for crime-solving, who thinks and acts in such a peculiar way that is characteristic of the Sherlock Holmes from so long ago. There’s no question that Elementary’s Sherlock is Sherlock Holmes. The difference is that he is able to prove himself able to grow and develop as a person, willing to accommodate others. Sherlock Holmes from canon was afraid of being an ordinary man. Sherlock Holmes from Elementary has no qualms with helping make extraordinary of “ordinary” people. And that doesn’t subtract from the integrity of Sherlock Holmes at all.

I love Elementary but yeah, it’s not Sherlock Holmes or John Watson, it’s just two people who share the names of Holmes and Watson. Especially in Watson’s case. And no, it’s not because she’s a woman or Asian, it’s because she has never been in the military, she has never been shot, she doesn’t suffer from PTSD, she never had to deal with coming back home from war, with the admiration or prejudice aimed at soldiers. The experiences of a civillian ex-surgeon will never come anywhere close to an ex-military doctor who was shot in the line of duty.

And THAT’s what bothers me about Joan. They could’ve easily made her an army medic, but they decided not to. From the get-go, they cut off her balls, they neutered her. There’s no doubt that she’s a strong person but the military background that very much defined the original Watson, his pride in serving his country is missing. And it didn’t have to be so. She’s Monk’s Sharona, not Holmes’ Watson.

And that’s why Elementary will never feel like Sherlock Holmes show for me.

lets do a thing. reblog and add your city and country. if it's already there, don't add it again. lets take a look at tumblr's diversity

Wed, 22 May 2013 14:17:20 -0400

New Delhi,India
Shanghai, China
Pisa, Italy
Longkou, China
Brisbane, Australia
University Place, USA
Salamanca, Spain
Cambridge, England
London, England
Siuntio, Finland
Edinburg, USA
Huddersfield, England
Rendsburg, Germany
Cardiff, Wales
Bridgeport,USA
Groningen, The Netherlands
Cody, USA
Antwerp, Belgium
Greenville, USA
Great Falls, USA
Ghent, Belgium
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
St.John's, Canada
Bourgas,Bulgaria
Terneuzen, The Netherlands
Berlin, Germany
Frankfurt/ Main, Germany
Brescia, Italy
Enschede, The Netherlands
Doetinchem, The Netherlands
Florence, Italy
Venice, Italy
Sheffield, England
Altach, Austria
Vienna,Austria
Richmond Hill, Canada
Doha, Qatar
Ostrava, Czech Republic

bakanochibi: Guys if we’re going to discuss ethnic accuracy let’s just break down this name: Khan...

Wed, 22 May 2013 07:42:14 -0400

bakanochibi:

Guys if we’re going to discuss ethnic accuracy let’s just break down this name:

Khan Noonien Singh

1. His first name is an Islamic last name.

2. His last name is a Sikh last name.

3. I’m Indian and I don’t even know what a Noonien is.

So if the name isn’t even a proper Indian name

Don’t complain when the actor isn’t a ‘proper’ Indian actor.

Don’t defend my people against white washing

When you don’t even understand what you’re ‘defending’ us against.