• I’m going to Pennsylvania till Friday/Saturday, and there’s no wifi there, so I’ll be offline till then :( 

  • Apr 15 - 0 notes      

  • maytheodds:


    it’s really not a coincidence that winter soldier is being talked about as the best marvel movie yet

    when you give women and poc the same importance and development as you do your white males, amazing things happen


  • roseapprentice:




    oh my god, that was really violent

         (via starksexual)

    BUT NO SERIOUSLY CAN WE TALK FOREVER ABOUT HOW SHE STOLE THE ENDING. Because as soon as you get the idea that she’s alive, you think “oh, she’s going to come in at the last second and land a few punches and give Tony - the hero - enough time to get back on his feet and finish the battle, while she cheers from the side lines.” Just. Like. Every. Other. Movie. And then she FINISHES THE BATTLE. SHE KILLS HIM. 

    #also can we talk about how one man in that movie treated Pepper as an Object#as a prize to be won#as a lure for Tony Stark#what happened to that man I wonder?#PEPPER POTTS FUCKING KILLED HIM#PEPPER POTTS IS A GODDESS

    Now can we talk about how in the first movie pepper also defeats the final baddie? And how in the second movie she has arrested the one bad guy who didn’t kill himself? Can we talk about how Tony has never actually killed or captured the main bad guy in his own movies?

    The closest he gets is Avengers. Because he kills a bunch of Chitauri with a missile. And then the Avengers all get together and capture Loki. You know why? Because Pepper was on a plane somewhere far away. Otherwise she would have done it. I swear.

    And at the beginning of Avengers, Tony was all wanting her to stay the night. And she’s just like: Dude, you gotta handle this for a change. I’ll hold your flower.

  • consultingcupcake:



    #you know thor is gonna go throw his room all ‘I USED TO HAVE ONE!’ just so he can give it to jane so she can take apart    #maybe he can’t find out and asks volstagg for one bc his kids have 300    #but also!!! THAT SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS AN ASGARDIAN BALL IS SO ADVANCED    #and jane finds such wonder in it    #and even when she realised that it’s ball it doesn’t take away from it    #and thor doesn’t mock her for it    #he thinks it’s cute    #he’s definitely gonna find that ball    #he’s sure he had one    #maybe he broke it

    Yeah, I can’t resist to reblog just to remind everybody that Thor fell for Jane Foster in the first place because she was so damn clever, and curious, and passionate about her work, and obstinate, and he was impressed and amazed and so touched to see the humans more resourceful than he thought and hey, here is another bit of Thor’s personality, he’s just so happy to have been proven wrong now that it allows him to see the best in people—

    I just fail to understand why so many would dislike Jane Foster, and even more erase her character from their works; she is absolutely marvellous, both unbelievable and terribly realistic, adorable and awkward, driven but sweet, kind but relentless, and so fucking gifted. And there are people wondering why Thor is interested in her?! Argh!

    Also this scene is quite wonderful: you have two people who had a crush on each other last time they met, but who have been unable to see each other since, and the current events are hardly allowing them to get to know each other better—and they kinda find themselves in the same situation they were last time, and you see how they reconnect and it’s just perfect. Perfectly untimely and a little bit tragic, too.

    Plus, let’s not forget the things they’ve been through together. Even if it was just what, two days? In those two days they got to know each other better than some couples during decades of matrimony. The physical timestream and (in some cases multiple) emotional timestreams are not always necessarily congruent.

    Under normal circumstances, it would take Jane years to trust someone like that, if she does so at all. But they meet under extraordinary circumstances, both desperate and dependent on each other’s help. They get to see and appreciate each other very clearly, they come to risk their lives for each other (and in one case at least that’s not an empty promise).

    It’s true that by the end of their short time together, they may not have been lovers, but they were very close, very intimate, on an empathic level, something we cannot assume either of them has ever been with another person before. Such a special bond you don’t just forget and be done with. Such a thing haunts you, and you’d be a fool not to go after it.

    (What can I say, I have an essay for this. <= THERE I SAID IT)

  • marvelmeta:

    MCU Taskmaster vs. Black Widow





    I finally figured out the best physical opponent for Widow holy crap.

    This is a guy who has studied the moves of every single fighter known to man. His gimmicks would be easy to duplicate, it’d be a cool way to show Natasha could beat all the Avengers if they tried to fight her and he’s one of…

    The thing about a Black Widow film is that it wouldn’t necessarily need a “big bad”. I would like to think that Marvel Studios, in its attempts to distance itself from the formulaic approach to superhero adaptations that failed so miserably in the past, would understand that this film cannot take the black-and-white approach if it hopes to succeed in accurately capturing the source material. Discounting a rich and complex history in order to forcefully insert characters and villains who don’t belong in her canon is doing both Natasha and her fans a disservice. 

    I say this because, while Natasha may not have a rogues gallery equal to that of other heroes, any number of her experiences are incredibly film-worthy. Others have spoken at length about this, pointing out particular arcs that would be well-suited to an adaptation. I think the point I’m trying to make is that giving Natasha a film, only to frame it around characters and a plot that bear no significant relationship to her and to her struggles, is a pretty nonsense way to go about things. Natasha has literally fifty years worth of stories under her belt; why waste them, why waste their potential? 

    The thing is, Natasha doesn’t need help. It certainly isn’t at all true that she has no defining personality traits, and nor is it true that the themes and concepts relevant to her character couldn’t possibly hold a movie. In fact, arguably, the release of The Winter Soldier only makes her origins and her position within the MCU that much more critical.

    And, frankly the last thing on Earth I want to see is Marvel Studios’ sole female-led film being overrun by more male characters who shouldn’t even be there in the first place. There is no need to pluck unrelated characters and villains from obscurity in order to make her “more interesting”; the point is that she’s already interesting. 

    (As an aside, if you would actually like to see Natasha and the Punisher go toe to toe, they do so in Punisher: War Zone #2—but that’s not really reason enough to make Frank Castle the co-star of Natasha’s movie.)

    I hate to disagree with you, but we’re not just preaching to a comic audience. We’re preaching to a movie one too. And additionally, a mostly male audience.

    Sure, I hope every female under the sun goes to see this movie. But the truth is is that not everyone’s going to want to see it just because it has widow.

    I mean, look at Daredevil as an example of a character who didn’t have a good enemy to fight or really a good story to back it.

    The point is that Natasha needs someone to fight. And the red room/Russians cant do all the work for a movie release.

    It’s perfectly fine for you to disagree. I am aware that this film will be catering to purely-MCU fans, as well as those who are more familiar with 616-canon. But, that being the case, what makes you think that Punisher (whose 2004 film managed to gain the company more than it cost in terms of box office revenue, but received 29% on Rotten Tomatoes and ultimately didn’t leave a significant mark on non-comics fans) and Taskmaster (whose movie has been in development hell since 2008, and who is arguably a lesser known canon) would aid a Black Widow film in appealing to fans of the Marvel Studios movie franchise? 

    I would argue that Natasha (who has risen to a modest but undeniable level of fame since The Avengers hit it big) is better known to MCU-fans than Taskmaster, and equally as recognizable as Punisher. If I were asked to name-drop her to anyone in my age bracket who happened by outside my window, I would honestly be surprised if they couldn’t identify her; it wouldn’t shock me, though, if they hadn’t heard of Taskmaster. 

    If that in itself isn’t enough, Natasha will co-star in The Winter Soldier (I’m not sure if you’re familiar with the Brubaker arc this film will follow, but she has a very important part to play in the grand scheme of things) and Feige has confirmed that Natasha’s origins will be explored in the Avengers sequel. Given the sheer amount of exposure this will give a character who is already fairly well known and has a considerable following amongst fans of both the movies and comics, this film will definitely have more backing from the fans than Iron Man did when it hit it big back in ‘08. Make of that what you will. 

    In addition, I think that the male “majority” of comic book readers and superhero movie watchers has dwindled considerably in recent years. The Marvel Cinematic Universe has an enormous female following, as do the comics themselves (I believe the latest statistics had the female reader population weighing in somewhere around the mid-40% range, which is in the minority but not really significantly so). Marvel has been investing in merchandise for women because there’s a market for it—because there are many female fans, unappreciated and often unwelcome as they are. Furthermore, I would like to think that even male fans can suck it up and watch a movie which headlines a woman, and boasts a cast of various other women; perhaps they can even manage to engage with it—after all, female fans have been forced to content themselves with male-dominated casts for ages

    At the end of the day, honestly, the potential popularity of the film is the last of my concerns. Marvel’s marketing executives have managed to sell fans and non-fans on Guardians of the Galaxy, which doesn’t exactly have a relatable premise, and didn’t have a single character in its main cast whom I would expect the general non-comics-reading population to know by name. If they can manage that, they should have no trouble whatsoever selling them on a superhero who will have appeared in four MCU films by 2015. If they set their mind to it, marketing Black Widow would be a piece of cake by comparison. 

    As for the second point, obviously Natasha needs opposition for there to be a movie; but, like I said, she doesn’t lack it. She lacks an iconic, central villain, sure—but then again, Malekith is one of Thor’s most famed villains in 616, and he was a shrinking violet in Thor: The Dark World. Even Iron Man 3 made an intentional mockery of the Mandarin for the purposes of its plot, when it could have easily implemented this same, cut-and-dry, villain versus hero template instead.

    What I’m saying is that the MCU has proven superhero movies are ripe for change, and the Black Widow movie is an ideal platform for that. Yelena Belova, under the thumb of The Red Room (now 2R) is much more than a stereotypical villain, and would probably be ideal to fill the position of “villain” you’re looking for, although I use that term lightly. Like Natasha, she has been used and abused by her country, and there is a fascinating dichotomy at play between the two of them. Inserting Yelena would allow for all the kick/punching that every superhero film calls for, while also accessing some of the themes central to Natasha, tapping into her experience and her ruthlessness and her enduring compassion and how all of these traits clash with one another when challenged. Take away Yelena, replace her with a nameless villain (separate from Natasha, and from her legend) and what does that leave you with but fighting? What is the point

  • iron man 3: review and reaction post


    needless to say, major major spoilers ahead. do not read if you haven’t watched it.

    disclaimer: not mine, other people’s, also whenever i mention comics, know that i am drawing on ari’s tony stark tag and wikipedia.

    here is some basic information you need to know about the movie

    • this movie was not directed by jon favreau
    • who did the first two iron mans
    • this movie was directed by shane black, who did kiss kiss bang bang with rdj and co-wrote this film
    • so it was a lot like kiss kiss bang bang
    • this movie is set directly after the avengers
    • this movie was really funny

    my overall reaction to the film is that it was a really good film. really really good - much more nuanced and intricate and complex than iron man 2, which people agree is the ginger stepchild of the fanchise, so maybe it’s not that hard to get better than that. the point is: this film is good, but this film marks, more than any other marvel film to date, the crossing of the rubicon, the die is cast, the point of no return, etc, etc. it’s very clear, from the first, that this film is the game changer, which is appropriate when you’re introducing us to phase 2. let me just state now though: i really liked the film. but i am also very worried.

    Read More

  • spocksjazzhands:

    all i learned from the new cap america is that he’s madly in love with bucky barnes and bucky barnes doesnt give a fuck about milk

  • numenorss:

    Have you ever wondered why Loki’s eyes are so blue in The Avengers? In fact, Tom Hiddleston’s eyes are blue and he had to use green contacts plus effects in Thor. Loki’s eyes are blue in The Avengers because of his scepter. The same happened with Hawkeye and Selvig. Loki was very vulnerable when Thor smashed him on the floor. He had a few moments of lucity, just like when Natasha slapped Hawkeye. Thor asked Loki to look around and see the damage he caused, asking to help him. It was a conflict, you can see. Then his eyes became green. You can see in the last gif. The change is VERY notable. It was a conflict but the power of the Tesseract was stronger. Loki did many bad things, but he was being possessed most of time. NOT like a robot, as with the others, but as Loki said “It touches everyone differently”. Everything makes sense to you now? One of the reasons why I can’t hate Loki at all. I’m not saying he’s not guilty, he is, but the Tesseract’s power fueled his hatred. He was being, in fact, controlled. Now we have proof of it.

    #COMMENTARY HURTS #though personally i think the scepter only amplified everything that was already within loki anyway #it wasn’t ‘control’ like this puts it #it amplified everything in him to the point where he could do everything he did in this movie with very little prompting #it’s like when the boys are having their pissing contest about any little thing #and bruce only gets dangerously angry /when he picks up the scepter/

  • In Britain, make-up might have been hard to find, but it was worn with pride and became a symbol of the will to win. ‘Put your best face forward,’ encouraged a 1942 Yadley advertisement in Churchillian tones. ‘War, Woman and Lipstick' ran a celebrated Tangee campaign. Bright red was the favourite wartime colour for lips and nails and lipstick names were often patriotic: Louis Phillippe's Patriotic Red; Fighting Red by Tussy and Grenadier - The new Military red created by Tattoo, effective with air force blue and khaki.

    During wartime, a subtle change had taken place in the marketing and the perception of make-up. It was no longer about making a woman seem ‘dainty’, but making her look and feel strong. Rosie the Riveter became a wartime icon in the USA, representing the six million women working in factories for the war effort. [Rockwell] portrayed Rosie as a vast figure in work dungarees, her short sleeves revealing arms the size of prize-winning hams. Behind her hangs the stars and stripes, squashed carelessly under her feet is a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, and on her mighty lap rests a lunch box and a huge riveting machine like an enormous gun. [Her] henna red curls, lipsticked mouth and painted finger nails stress her femininity, emphasising the fact that make-up too was a weapon of war [Madeleine Marsh, Compact and Cosmetics: Beauty from the Victorian Times to the Present Day]

  • swanjolras:

    do you ever just think about how stunned and delighted steve rogers would be by supermarkets

    like, obviously he’d pretty quickly calm down and start learning about food deserts and immigrant labor and environmentally safe practices and he’d have Feelings, but, like, the boy grew up during the great depression, just imagine the very first time he steps into a grocery store

    "natasha they have sixteen kinds of peanut butter here"

    "natasha look they have a display of oranges LOOK MORE ORANGES OVER THERE HOW MANY ORANGES CAN YOU EVEN HAVE, IT’S FEBRUARY"

    "natasha there’s ice cream in TWENTY-TWO DIFFERENT FLAVORS"

    "natasha they have so much food. natasha they have SO MUCH FOOD, NATASHA, CAN WE BUY ALL THE FOOD"

  • ratherdielaughing:

    Parenting, you’re doing it right.


  • tszarina:





    this video is entitled “tumblr feminists” and i prepared myself to get angry before watching it but damn if it isn’t spot on

    "What they are really saying is that they hate women. They hate women with opinions who are honest and angry."

    I thought this was gonna be cissexist and then it wasnt

    required watching

    If anyone doubts the truth of the bolded quote from the video above, just read the comments. What a trip. Men are so fragile and whiny and weak.

  • BW