I AM SO FUCKING EMOTIONAL ABOUT THE HAND TOUCH IN PRIDE AND PREJUDICE YALL

there are actors that people refer to as shapeshifters bc theyve played in so many movies in which they look nothing like their other parts and then. there’s michael sheen.

Oh, no, no. Don’t do your magic act. Please. Please! I’m actually begging you.

😂😂😂

But also, why would you send "good"?

Me on Tumblr app after finally reaching the end of a long post I wasn’t interested in:

Prompt: Sita & Rambha (victim of Ravana who cursed him, thereby protecting Sita)

A woman remains behind when the gods descend upon Lanka to bless the captive Sita with security and sustenance, and Sita need only look once at the stranger’s eyes, bright as the dance of sunlight against water, and her hair, shining like the waves of the river to know: an apsara.

“Their Queen, in fact,” says the woman–Rambha herself–confirming Sita’s guess, and inclines her head in response to Sita’s folded hands.

All the world has heard of what she suffered at the hands of the demon king, but Sita must know for sure. “Did he–Did Ravana try–” She breaks off, unsure of how to phrase her question delicately, but it is unnecessary. The apsaras are hardly undiscerning, and Rambha no exception.

“He did more than try,” she says bluntly, and Sita, now knowing all too well what it is to know such powerlessness, shudders with sympathy.

“I am sorry,” she says awkwardly, words insufficient to express what she feels, but Rambha shakes the words away.

“Perhaps, it was for the best. At least it is now such that he can never do so again, not on pain of instant death. If my suffering was necessary to bring that to be, then as Queen I would have accepted the cost regardless.”

Sita marvels with this, enough to dare ask the question that has haunted her. “And your husband–he forgave you?”

Rambha shakes her head. “No,” she says, “for he said there was nothing for which he needed to forgive me. His punishment fell solely on Ravana’s head, to ensure it should be split into pieces should he attempt such atrocity again. Ah yes,” she confirms, smiling at Sita’s clear relief, “such is the nature of my gift to you; to us all, I suppose. And even were it not so—allow me to reassure you again, dear one: you are blameless and innocent, come what may. Whatever sin has been committed is on Ravana’s hands; you need carry none of it.”

“As are you,” Sita dares reply, and Rambha’s smile in return—the smile any number of gods, sages, and demons would have died to earn—remains with her, even into the flames.

Tips That Can Save Your Kid’s Life.

They actually stopped the plot in episode 3 to show us for thirty minutes how obsessed with each other Crowley and Aziraphale are that is an actual thing they did

im about to test the limits of discord nitro

So I watched the first episode of Lucifer today, and it really made me realize the lack of male gaze and objectifying women in Good Omens.

(Disclaimer: I’m not trying to get into arguments with Lucifer fans or say that Good Omens is a better show - I have no opinion on Lucifer as a show. I’m just trying to compare and contrast on this one thing based on one episode).

So, Lucifer lays heavily into the “let’s show he’s the devil by having him surrounded by strippers and sleeping with women all the time.” The camera itself does a lot of sexy shots of women. There’s also a number of plot points that focus on female sexuality (including the male main character teasing the serious female main character, who’s trying to be taken seriously as a detective, for having previously been a nude actress.)

In contrast, Good Omens never feels like it’s sexualizing women. Like, not once. Not even the female characters you might expect it of. Anathema literally has a sex scene, and it still doesn’t feel male gaze-y; the camera doesn’t pan down her body or zoom in on parts. She doesn’t strip her clothes off, and when she puts her clothes back on it’s very matter-of-fact. Madame Tracy is literally a sex worker and you don’t see it on screen. 

(It reminds me actually of Mad Max: Fury Road, and how it was notable that even though the plot was centered on sex slaves, there were no depictions of rape on screen, because the audience didn’t need to see it. Seeing that wouldn’t have empowered women. Seeing them escape and screw over the system *was* empowering).

We also don’t see Hell on screen using sex for their schemes. Hastur verbally recounts tempting a priest with lust, but we don’t see it. The absence of any sexual scenes involving Crowley is so notable that the Ineffable Husbands fans are left to wonder if he’s asexual.

Again, I’m not trying to put down Lucifer - it just made me realize how rare (and wonderful) it was to not have a sexualizing male gaze ever-present in Good Omens. 

I also want to link this great post about gender presentation in Good Omens, with a great bit at the bottom from Neil Gaiman himself. Thank you, Neil and everyone else who made this show. Thank you so much.

So, I started watching the kids’ show “Just Add Magic” on Amazon Video last night. Something about it is so compelling.

It’s very much a kids’ show.

Three 7th graders acquire a magic cookbook. Shenanigans ensue. (There’s also a kid with a “food bike” until he can get a food truck, and he doesn’t need magic to cook awesome things.)

In the background, there are all sorts of adults having their own problems, a plot with a spell-trapped grandma that’s a metaphor for living with a senile relative, and a guest appearance by Mira Furlan (who played Delenn in Babylon 5 and basically plays Delenn in this show too).

Is anyone else watching this? Or am I the odd adult out?