Casual Witterings #1

Hullo

I was watching more Steven Universe. The show is musical and there was one song that I keep listening to (Love and Death and Life and Birth). It’s just really beautiful, both in character interactions and in general. Though, watching more of the show, I do have concerns that the show, in its laudable effort to promote body-positivity, promotes unhealthy eating. Steven is constantly eating junk food and the like. So is Amethyst, a main character, though her alien nature renders her immune to the bad effects. Although, I personally believe that not everything in a kid’s show needs to be a lesson or that every decision needs to justify itself.

I was re-watching the finale of season five, a big moment for the series and I could understand detractors of the series. I think that what they were attempting was good conceptually, it just could have been executed better.

As with many others, I also know Rebecca Sugar (the creator and runner of Steven Universe) from her spectacular work on Adventure Time, which is also a show on Cartoon Network. She expanded the backstories of certain characters, such as the vampire Marceline and the tragic Ice King. She created many unforgettable moments not only in Adventure Time history, but in cartoon history. I think that her song-writing ability is her strongest talent, with writing coming next (of course, there are more people involved, especially with Steven Universe).

I was also thinking about Harry Potter's comparison with Steven Universe. I mentioned this in my review, in that both deal with the present generation inheriting the conflicts of the past. But I was thinking of the similarity between Severus Snape and Pearl. SLIGHT SPOILERS for Harry Potter and Steven Universe. They both had a woman they loved who didn't love them back, and were tasked with protecting their children. However, while Snape continues to consumed by hatred of James Potter, Pearl gets over her distaste of Steven's father and is a loving and caring foster mom. Despite the differences, the comparison is extremely interesting. HARRY POTTER SPOILERS. And that made me think about how Harry Potter would be different if Snape didn't die in the end. In the story, Harry is left to pick up the pieces and make the most of it, acknowledging Snape's heroism. If Snape lived, there's a question of how a Harry that knows the truth would interact with him and how Snape would interact back. Snape would be exonerated, but nonetheless distrusted for his cover. Snape would have to find another reason to live because Harry no longer needs protection, which is incredibly fascinating for his character. Snape's death unfortunately removes the possibility for a powerful story of self-discovery; a consuming question of "what do I do now, how do I live" is avoided and that's unfortunate. It would certainly make for a good AU.

Speaking of 'tragic' characters, I was thinking about why I sympathize more with Walter in Breaking Bad over Gus despite them being similar in several ways, such as their wits and ruthlessness. I realised it was because I view Gus as the man, the oppressor, the manifestation of this controlling force. While Walt is the underdog, the everyman just living and accomplishing goals. I find I also personally whitewash Walter’s horrific crimes because of my sympathy for him. It’s an interesting observation. His nature as the protagonist makes him the centre of our biased vision, which is another component. Protagonist-centered morality is everywhere, but I think this is a notable application of it. In some sense, Breaking Bad is where the writers want you to not only understand, but be in the mindset of a monster. And to pull that off is remarkable.

I was also thinking of this great 2018 sci-fi horror film Annihilation. There’s this scene near the end where the character finally reaches her goal. And it’s incredible. Both the soundtrack and the visuals had me in awe, as I knew I was watching true movie magic.

I was also realising there’s so much more stuff I want to write about, including War for the Planet of the Apes, which I saw recently. That title is way too long, so I’ll have to find some other way of referring to it. What’s worth noting is that it’s a brutal film, and the brutality is what the characters must navigate to to reach their goal, as is in every story; it’s just the extent of the brutality or hardship they face that fluctuates. Hardship within story serves a purpose, because doesn’t it feel so good when they finally succeed despite the obstacles. I found biblical symbolism in the film’s conclusion, and that’s something that’s really interesting.

Speaking of biblical symbolism, Attack on Titan/Shingeki No Kyojin also incorporates some of that. It also makes extensive usage of Norse mythology, and it’s quite intriguing.

Back to obstacles, I was thinking of a difference or the difference between the hero and the villain. The hero acknowledges their pain, yet continues to move forwards for progress. While the villain is consumed by their pain, and reaches a dead end of development. The anti-hero/anti-villain is a more realistic case of being inbetween.

Put in the words of Optimus Prime from that horrible, terrible movie (Transformers 2); “That’s why they call you the Fallen. I rise. You fall.”

I was thinking about Guardians of the Galaxy 2, both its failures and successes. I still don’t know what to feel about it, and I think that might actually be a success of the story. I don’t think it was a factory-made movie, there was handcrafted passion all over it. I think it does have flaws and the first one is the best. I wonder how I’ll feel about 3 when it eventually comes out.