galax-arena

I've become so obsessed with Gentleman Jack. Suranne Jones as Anne Lister... 😍 I am surprised at how many people don't seem to be aware that Anne Lister was a real person. I definitely knew she existed, even though I didn't know all the (explicit, ha) details. I wonder how far they're gonna go with the television show. Maybe they'll end it on her final diary entry, which was (I think) written only a few weeks before she died.

Mmm yes, like Artie on Glee. Especially since IIRC the only reason they incorporated the dream sequence in the first place was because they wanted to show off Kevin McHale's dance skills; it wasn't an integral part of the character. That's not an apt comparison. Doctors aren't marginalized in society (quite the opposite). Disabled people are. If disabled actors got a fair shake with respect to casting, it'd be a different story. But the fact is that unless it's an "invisible" disability, disabled people are not going to be cast in roles written for abled actors. So when there's a role specifically written for a disabled character, disabled actors should absolutely be the priority. At the end of the day, Jacob Tremblay got to take off the prosthetics he wore for playing a kid with Treacher Collins syndrome and go back to being cast in roles as an abled boy. Would a kid with Treacher Collins get the same opportunity? No.

I looked up In the Dark and was like, "Oh, a tv show with a blind woman as the protagonist! That's awesome, disabled people deserve representation too!" I mean, yes, of course being blind and being woc aren't mutually exclusive, but speaking as someone who has always resented feeling like being forced to choose between my own different marginalized identities - in my situation, sexual orientation and race - and as someone who isn't disabled, I wasn't going to shit on this show unless it was explicitly problematic with respect to race. But then I googled, and it looks like the main actress might not actually be blind?? Not sure, I haven't found much info on the actress. But this show will be troubling in another way if it turns out that they cast a sighted actress in a blind role. But that's probably a subject for a different thread (do we have a disability representation thread?)....

It's nauseating how the show loves writing Betty and Jughead as the milky white saviors of the downtrodden. First Jughead's the Serpent King, and now Betty's the Griffin Queen? And everyone just mostly steps in line, unless they're an antagonist. And Betty's also sitting in on legal/prosecutorial meetings between Attorney McCoy and the Sisters of Mercy? Whatever you say, show. And now Cheryl and Toni are cat burglars, because of course they are. LMAO. Honestly as much as I hate Jughead in his masturbatory Serpent King role, Cheryl really did deserve to get kicked out for being such a goddamn idiot with her calling card. I just don't like how Toni got wrapped up in it; the optics of the white boy kicking out a WOC from a gang with POC roots are not good. But this show has always been a racist mess on that front anyway, and Toni's characterization completely fell by the wayside by the time she became Cheryl's gf. Veronica & Sexy Squidward finally hooked up. Okay. Betty just walks completely alone into the building to discover mass suicide by nuns. Sure.

As much as I liked Shiri Appleby/Liz in the OG series, I'm glad they didn't whitewash Liz this time around.

To me this just felt like a higher budget Lifetime movie. The acting was decent, although I'm not super enamored with Timothee's acting... for the most part he was good, but he had certain tics (?) or mannerisms that just felt... forced or affected? I'm not sure what the word is that I'm looking for. However, he was a lot better than Steve Carell, who I agree had some nice moments during the quieter scenes. But whenever he yelled - "This isn't us! This is not who we are!" - I could just see him ~!acting!~ if that makes sense. But in any case, what really pushed this into mawkish Lifetime territory to me was the music. Oh god the overly dramatic music choices made me cringe. I wish this movie hadn't been afraid to be more quiet.

Well my point is that Jughead fancy themselves as the town detectives, and if you're a detective, it's especially important to keep a good poker face when you're out there questioning people. You can't lose it when someone throws you a curveball because then oops there goes your game plan. That the other characters on this show are equally bad is irrelevant because that didn't factor into this episode. (Archie did lose it at that one moment when he started ripping apart his cell, but that had no effect/consequence. I'll wait until he inevitably botches up the breakout attempt.)

I know what snark is. And no, I don't think you were claiming it as the literal equivalent to affirmative action. I'm talking about the mindset of thinking that it's somehow unfair to judge Auj and Jer for their friends because you like who you like, and they shouldn't have to force their crowd into being a United Colors of Benetton ad. Look, the bottom line is that I'm 150% fine with judging a Trump supporter who once referred to Mexico as "that b*aner place" for only having white friends. It confirms what I already knew about them. (Okay, to be fair, Audrey has never used racial slurs that I'm aware of.) They're good with judging me for going to hell because I'm gay, so turnabout's fair play, eh?

Well, I'd say a large part of the problem is that you (and perhaps JerAuj) see this as affirmative action, the implication being that being friends with POC is something that you need to essentially force yourself to do and that POC are somehow less "qualified" to be your friends. I never had to force myself to be friends with white or black or hispanic people, it just happened because I didn't see them as some sort of weird Other. No, I don't think you need to force yourself to become friends with anyone you don't want to. But then I question why is it that you "just so happen" to only naturally be friends with white people or gravitate towards white neighborhoods. Being judged by the company you keep is not some new unique concept. ETA: Especially with Jer's history of racial slurs, somehow I'm supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt? LOL yeah right.

Jughead fucked in the bunker because of course they did. "Ben's death haunts me... he didn't scream... why not? I wonder... because that's one of the rules?" Lili's line delivery here was painful. Also, for all that Jughead like to consider themselves true detectives, they're really not good at keeping up their game faces when things don't go their way. I know Riverdale operates in its own special version of reality, but there is just something very annoyingly 80s moral panic about this Griffins & Gargoyles plot. Dungeons & Dragons doesn't deserve this!

Sure, Oregon is white af in general*... but they did once post a group photo of their LA friends and every single person in that picture was white too (except for maybe one or two who looked racially ambiguous). Not gonna lie, I absolutely judge the fuck out of anyone who lives in a diverse city and yet all of their friends are still white. I don't give a rat's ass if the city is segregated or whatever, because the people are still THERE, you're just choosing to participate in the segregation. (I lived in NYC up until recently, I would know. I judged all the white hipster Brooklynites who chose to stay in their white hipster Brooklynite bubbles.) And I absolutely think that the people you choose to surround yourself with says something about you. Couple that with Jeremy's history of racism, not to mention the fact that they subscribe to a version of white evangelical Christianity that is not exactly known for being inclusive, especially the circles that talk positively about Trump (which Audrey has done before, even if she backtracked because she's a coward).... well, I don't care if it's considered ~bizarre to question the whiteness of their social groups. Speaking of not being inclusive, I noticed that they plugged Rosaria Butterfield, who is famous in evangelical circles for being a "former lesbian" who is now married to a guy. Read: she's a bisexual woman who had actually expressed attraction to men before but saying that you're a bisexual who married someone of the opposite sex is less profound than saying that you're a former lesbian who has changed because JESUS. Love that Jer and Auj believe in that ex-gay shit. /s * Yes, even Portland! Maybe it's less white than the rest of Oregon but it's still pretty white. Then again I'm pretty spoiled because I've lived in the Bay Area, Los Angeles, and NYC. Now I live in Austin, which is comparable to Portland in terms of racial demographics I think, and when I first moved here, I immediately thought, "This city is white as hell." ETA: Oh, I meant to say, it never fails to kill me how Jeremy are Audrey are convinced that he's an intellectual because he likes to read. Didn't Audrey once say that he was the more "cerebral" of the two? IME people who are insecure about their intelligence/intellect like to use reading as shorthand for how s-m-r-t they are.

I know Kevin's a dumb lovelorn high school kid and yeah his dating pool is limited, but I just find it annoying when gay people knowingly date people in the closet and then get salty because the latter wants to stay in the closet. I mean, sure, encourage them to come out, but don't whine "are you ashamed of me?" as if you didn't know what you were signing up for. When that one guy said how he had been running drugs since he was in the fourth grade (?), and Archie's response was to go, "Then you haven't experienced the highs and lows of high school football!! :D :D :D" .... oh my god. Someone stick a shiv in him, please. There's something profoundly annoying about Bughead getting pissy with Sheriff Minetta and hiding stuff from him but also resorting to using him as a threat to get Ethel to comply with their demands/questions. To be clear, I don't blame them for not trusting him, it's more the latter - invoking his name as a threat - that irritates me.

I know this is the least ridiculous thing from the season premiere, but I was stuck on how quick Archie's murder case took. So he was arrested near the end of the school year, and by the time summer is almost over, his trial is already wrapping up? I know that it's technically possible, depending on what state you're in - I googled that in California, the defendant has the right to request a trial within 60 days? IANAL - but I don't think I've ever heard of a first degree murder case actually moving that swiftly. Of course, Riverdale operates in its own very special version of reality, so why not? I wouldn't have wanted to deal with the murder trial being the overarching plot of season 3 anyway. It really is nauseating. I hated the whole Native American backstory they gave the Serpents to begin with, especially since the group was being led by white savior Jughead. So that was bad enough, and now we have the equally milky Betty and Cheryl being treated as the serpent queens? Ew. ETA: Also, this is superficial af, but Archie looked like a goddamn putz wearing a bowtie to court. Archie, dude, you're on trial for murder, you're not at the prom.

I've really enjoyed the progression of Eddie's character over the last couple of seasons. I still remember when he was by far the most disliked character when the show first aired.

I liked it, although I'm already tired of the love triangle (love square?). One review I read called this a "race conscious" version of the OC, but if the cliffhanger is alluding to what I think it is - it feels too obvious/telegraphed, but this IS the CW, after all - then it's more like a race conscious version of the OC blended with One Tree Hill lmao. I agree with liking how they made Spencer a good student in addition to being a good athlete.

I was watching a clip from a couple of years ago featuring Molly Ringwald and Ally Sheedy reminiscing over The Breakfast Club. Molly said she wasn't really on board with a straight-up remake - she said she thinks Hollywood could do a movie inspired by TBC instead - because, as much as the movie spoke to a lot of people, in hindsight the movie is "so incredibly white." lmao I liked that. She obviously has fond feelings for the movie but is also self-aware enough to point out the lack of diversity. I think a lot of people could take a leaf from her book when it comes to talking about classic movies. (I wonder what she thinks about Bender's harassment towards Claire nowadays. But I digress.) Re: biracial actors being told that they're not ethnic enough, or asian actors being told that they're not the exact right ethnicity - as a Korean, for the most part I don't give a shit if another East Asian is cast as a Korean. If Asians had to wait for roles written for their exact ethnic group, many wouldn't be working at all. There are some exceptions, of course - if you're making a movie about comfort women, maybe don't cast a Japanese actress. If you're making a movie about a real Korean person, cast a Korean. If you're making a movie about an important Korean folk hero, cast a Korean. (Similarly: As much as I like Jamie Chung, I think a Chinese actress should have played Mulan in OUAT.) And don't cast an East Asian as a South Asian or Southeast Asian, or vice versa. But about biracial actors being told that they're not ethnic enough, well, I think it's telling that almost all of the biracial actors we talk about when this conversation comes up are part white. And that's what people have an issue with. Of course their whiteness is working to their advantage! When Hollywood casts biracial actors in Asian roles, they're not casting actors like Sydney Park (Black/Korean). So I don't think this is a case of mean poc excluding biracial people, it's about recognizing that Hollywood thinks it's being slick by specifically casting biracial people who are part white in roles that aren't supposed to be white at all. Wake me up when Sydney is cast in a role for a Korean character. ETA: As a digression, I think it's weird that some people think that Lucy Liu must be biracial because "Asians don't have freckles." Erm, okay.

:D I love little old ladies in hanboks!

One part of the show that I didn't like was that at times Doug seemed to be encouraging Casey's antagonism towards Elsa. There was one scene where Casey said something mean/nasty about Elsa, I don't remember what exactly she said, and Doug just sorta laughed and riffed on that. I get that Elsa did Doug dirty, and I wouldn't give a fuck if Doug wanted to keep giving Elsa shit himself, but he shouldn't be putting Casey in the middle of it. I mean, okay, Casey was obviously already in the middle, but he shouldn't be encouraging it! A good parent doesn't do that. He should be putting his own feelings aside and not trying to encourage Casey's growing alienation from her mother. One thing that I always respected about my own parents was that they tried to keep my brother and me out of older adult relative drama when we were kids. And ftr, I'm not an Elsa fan. I just didn't like the way Doug handled things either, at least with respect to Casey. Of course, depiction isn't synonymous with endorsement, but with the way the show framed it, I felt like we weren't supposed to see anything wrong with Doug encouraging Casey's antagonism. Yeah, for real. I took one look at her in season 1 and was like, "That girl ain't straight." I was more surprised when she ended up being into Evan. But hey, turns out she's bi (maybe? I agree that sometimes it seemed like she was trying to make herself be into Evan sometimes, so IDK), so the world makes sense again lmao. A friend of mine who's also a lesbian just started watching season 1 and immediately texted me, "She reminds me of myself, I think this chick is gay." (I hadn't spoiled anything for her.) I feel like Casey's queerness didn't come out of left field to most gay/bi viewers, although there were some of us who figured, okay, maybe it's just wishful thinking on our part. And, re the idea of so many friendships between girls veering into romantic territory.... please, tell me what all of these shows are! I don't know, I just can't agree that platonic female friendships are suffering wrt representation because lesbians/bis. It's all relative: yes, we're seeing more same-sex female relationships on screen compared to a couple of decades ago, and that's not a bad thing, because lesbian/bi girls deserve representation too. It's like, back in the day it used to be that 100% of the female relationships on screen were just platonic friendships with maaaaybe some homoerotic subtext. And now we're at, what, 96% platonic female friendships and 4% explicitly romantic relationships, and people are acting like the lesbians are taking over and "why can't girls just be friends anymore!" There are still PLENTY of shows out there that show platonic female friendships, I assure you.

I always found the narrative surrounding Michael not only annoying, but borderline offensive because I believe that the idea that adoptive parents are selfless saints/saviors is an incredibly toxic narrative that only hurts their kids. (Obviously this doesn't apply to every adopted child out there but) I know a lot of adopted kids who have talked about feeling guilty and conflicted about their identity issues re adoption (e.g. looking for birth parents) because they feel as though they're supposed to just be eternally grateful to their adoptive parents for "rescuing" them. Or, like, even if the adoptive parent is abusive, the kid is made to feel like trash for complaining or speaking out bc "if you had been in foster care it would have been worse!" So I definitely didn't think much of Michael for going along with this saintly narrative, even if he was only doing so reluctantly. The "omg this shy little girl can sing like THAT?" narrative for Courtney might have been annoying - come the fuck on, are people really still surprised that shy/introverted people can still be great performers? I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of performers who fit that mold - but inoffensive. I wish she had come in fifth place instead of Saint Michael.

I LOVE Casey/Izzie. I gotta say that Casey was pinging hard in season 1 so I'm glad that (as a lesbian) my lez/bi-dar isn't completely dead lmao. Re: the idea that it would have been nice to see a strong platonic female friendship on tv so they shouldn't have gone there with Casey/Izzie, I don't agree just because I think that well-written f/f relationships are a lot rarer/less visible than female friendships are. If we're talking about undervalued platonic relationships, I feel that way about male/female friendships on TV.... which is why I was disappointed that Nate ended up being a douche. But I guess I should've known the truth as soon as Graham Phillips appeared on screen lmao. Anyway, Evan is a sweetie, so I hope the show finds a way to go Casey/Izzie without doing Evan dirty or writing him off the show. I'm also glad that the show cast autistic actors this season. Hopefully if this show gets a season 3, they can cast an autistic actor in a bigger role because the ones we saw this season were just bit parts. As much as I like this show, I can't disagree that the show's portrayal of autism in season 1 was a huge fucking mess, so I'm glad that they're working to course correct that. (Sam's season 1 storyline where he was a creep and broke into Julia's house gave me hives.) ETA: I knew Izzie's actress looked familiar... turns out she's Booboo Stewart's sister. (He played a werewolf in the Twilight movies.) And why do I know who Booboo Stewart is? I don't even know.

I'm not sure what Simon was on when he told Shin Lim to move away from the cards and make it more of a performance. It's one thing if close-up card magic just isn't your cup of tea, but.... cards are Shin's thing. Telling him to move away from what he's known for would be like... I don't know, telling the Savitsky cats duo to move away from the cats lol. As for making it more of a performance? What exactly does Simon want? IMO what separates Shin from other card magicians (other than pure skill level ofc) in the first place is the level of performance involved, to the extent that it can even come off as kinda pretentious lmao. (Not saying that to rag on him, I find it endearing... I agreed with Penn & Teller when they said that what they love is how seriously he takes card tricks, which are so fundamentally silly.)

Oh, I want Sandra to win, but I think the award is Elisabeth Moss' to lose. And if not her, then Keri Russell might get it because the Americans is over and this is her last chance and the voters know that. Something that's been bugging me: I've come across a lot of Keri fans who say that yeah, sure, Sandra is great and they love her, but she can wait until next year because this is Keri's time and she's been snubbed for years. It's completely fine if you think that Keri is a better actor than Sandra and therefore deserves to win! But I hate the argument/phrase that Sandra should "wait her turn" because it's Keri time. WOC have been expected to let white women go first for forever. Keri's been snubbed for years? So has Sandra, and not just in terms of not getting Emmy awards. She's been snubbed in the sense that the roles haven't been there for her to begin with! There's a reason why she's the first Asian woman to be nominated for best lead actress in a drama - it's because there are very few leading roles for Asian women to play in the first place. There's no guarantee that Killing Eve will retain the same level of hype & critical acclaim next year. And after the show ends, how much longer will it be before Sandra gets cast in another great role? Keri's show might have ended, but she's a white woman who has already been announced as reportedly joining the new Star Wars movie, not to mention a new thriller by Guillermo del Toro. She's going to be fine. Like I said, it's absolutely valid if you think Keri is simply the better actor and that's that, but spare me the argument that she's been through 1/10th of the shit that Sandra or any WOC actress has.

There was a very slim they were both getting nominated for best lead actress, the category was way too stacked. A lot of people initially didn't think Sandra stood a chance either, it was really only in the last few weeks before noms that she started inching her way up people's ballots. I think that Jodie would have stood a decent shot at getting nominated - and winning! - if BBCA had been willing to commit category fraud and submit her in the supporting actress category. But the network said that they thought that doing so would essentially be an insult to Jodie's work (there is no way in hell that she's a supporting character) so they decided to take their chances with best lead actress. On the one hand, I respect that stance because blatant category fraud can be obnoxious. On the other hand, Jodie really did deserve recognition and I'm willing to overlook category fraud when it benefits my faves. ;) But between the two of them, Jodie and Sandra, it was always going to be Sandra, since she's a veteran of the industry and has the more compelling story to use on the awards show campaign. BBCA went balls to the wall campaigning for her.

I see that Scarlett finally got someone actually PR-competent on her team. You know she was seething when they wrote that statement to Out.

The first Thai cave rescue movie is from the people behind God's Not Dead. They insist it's not going to be a religious movie, but who wants to bet that they'll erase the coach's Buddhist beliefs? Also, at the risk of sounding like a hypocrite (re my first paragraph), I know it's not like a movie's coming out next week or anything, but it all just seems so crass for everyone to be talking about movie rights while some of the boys are still recuperating in the hospital.