fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #5286 ]

[ SECRET POST #5286 ]

⌈ Secret Post #5286 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 30 secrets from Secret Submission Post #756.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'm so torn about this ship. In theory, I don't mind enemies to friends romances, but they're so rarely handled well. I didn't really enjoy the journey in the books, though I appreciated them as a couple in the end, if that makes any sense? I just didn't like how it got there. I'm kind of wary of the idea that you can support and live a hateful, murdering ideology that basically amounts to genocide, but one person can change your mind after you fall in lust/love with them. That feels... icky. Not romantic.Like ohhh, I was okay with burning people live because I viewed them as subhuman, but because we went through some hardships together and you're hot, you've changed my mind about murdering innocent people! Yay?

The guy that plays Matthias is hot, though.

I mean, he HAS to be hot, or why else would Nina have been interested?

I'm just annoyed there wasn't ONE moment where he verbalizes that... yeah, maybe kidnapping and executing people based on in-born abilities that they don't ask for is a bad thing. Like that moment in HTTYD when Hiccup says of the dragons: "everything we know about you is wrong." Would have gone a long way.

And it genuinely annoyed me that Nina never once brings up the other two Grisha girls that were chained up in the brig along with her. I guess they died when the ship went down, but she doesn't seem to give a shit. (Kind of darkly hilarious though that Matthias doesn't bother bringing THEM any food because he's only attracted to Nina).

You're right. This is a terrible writing, and totally unsurprising in an adaptation that tries to condense a complicated relationship journey into a way too short time.

I'm kind of wary of the idea that you can support and live a hateful, murdering ideology that basically amounts to genocide, but one person can change your mind after you fall in lust/love with them.

Slightly OT, but this is why I'm so profoundly grateful that Zutara in Avatar: The Last Airbender never happened. Zuko won his redemption through his own hard work, not because he had the hots for Katara.

I feel it could have gotten close to working if the guy had show any care or concern for the other two kidnapped women, or even a smidge of guilt? But he doesn't, his 'care' for the named lady comes off as purely boner-based than any kind of genuine concern for her, and she is into him because... honestly I have no fucking idea. He gave her bread once??? (The show tries to argue that he had no idea that the women were killed, but come one, he's been doing this for 20 years, he would know).

I can understand her saving his life as she seems like a kind person who wouldn't let her captors die, but after they get to the inn there was no reason for them to stick together or make it seem like it was an even vaguely hard choice. It was just so bizarre and I didn't care for it at all.

but come one, he's been doing this for 20 years, he would know

Apparently they're teenagers in the books and it's essentially their first missions. That made a lot of sense to me once I heard that. In general I prefer the ages in the show (Kaz the leader of an established, if small, gang and club in his 20s versus a teenager) but it doesn't work for Matthias and Nina.

The first time I watched this I was under the impression that this WAS Matthias's first mission and he was essentially kept on the boat to guard the captives. That kind of alleviated the issue for me, since he wasn't directly directly involved in the kidnappings.

But then the second time around I realized that HE was the guy who threw the rope-thing through the window that incapacitated Nina (she notices it when he chains her up) - so oof, he's been doing this for a while. Which kinda put the whole thing in a much darker and less appealing context.

And yeah, in the books they're at least a decade younger.

Just having guard duty for now would have worked.

I think they did try to show he was somewhat new at this, like when he's told to kill the captives if something goes wrong and Matthias protest they haven't had a trial yet, but it's definitely undercut by how practiced he is at grabbing Nina.

And there was that other line from the Grisha who eventually finds Nina in which he knows Matthias by first/last name because he's apparently one of the BEST witch-hunters that his country has.

They just didn't think the implications of this subplot through.

Yeah, he seemed to genuinely believe that they had committed evil deeds but would have a fair trial, which is fine for a teenager on his first mission, but not for a 20-something actively engaged in the kidnapping part.

AYRT.

Okay yeah that changes the context quite drastically. Being a young and misguided kid is very different to being a grown-ass adult who's clearly very experienced at capturing these women. I get the reasons for aging the characters up, and I'm largely for that with YA adaptations, but for this dude it worked against his story imo and I just could not see any reason why the lady would be into him at all.

I'm kind of wary of the idea that you can support and live a hateful, murdering ideology that basically amounts to genocide, but one person can change your mind after you fall in lust/love with them.

It happens all the time in real life with parents of LGBTQ kids. So do you only think it's unrealistic if the love is romantic and there's a sexual component to it? Why?

Apples to oranges.

One, that's their kid--the being they've loved (probably) and protected (probably) since the day the kid was born--not some dehumanized enemy stranger they've just met as Nina is to Matthais.

Matthais appears to pretty much live his job/cause, and it's a very active job. He has to DO a lot of very active, challenging stuff for his cause on a regular basis. The majority of homophobic people don't have strenuous, dangerous full-time jobs that amount to skillfully, forcefully acting out their homophobia on a daily basis.

barf

In what universe are a majority of LGBT kids parents rounding up LGBT individuals, putting them on trial and then murdering them? This is such a bizarre and off-base comparison I am genuinely boggled at the point you're trying to make.

Also generally: people who only stop being shit because they find someone of a group hot don't tend to stop being shit to that group overall. Because it's less about acceptance and more about tokenistic fetishism.

More likely they fall for "exceptionalism" - my gay kid is ok but those gays are terrible. I have some very racist older people in my family and they do this with the non-white people who have married into younger generations - "all black people are terrible except for [cousin's wife], obviously she's different". That's how they don't get cognitive dissonance by, say, saying all black people are stupid and violent but Obama, he's great.

Assuming you aren't trolling, this is a terrible analogy...so terrible and lacking in intelligence that it's hard to believe you're making it in good faith.

I'm kind of wary of the idea that you can support and live a hateful, murdering ideology that basically amounts to genocide, but one person can change your mind after you fall in lust/love with them.

I actually think it is possible for those people whose ethical philosophy is oriented toward stopping the most harm, i.e. constant trolley problems, and they are misled or blind to the truth of who is actually causing harm, to have one person smack them into better ethics. I think it's very easy to teach regular humans to dehumanize people and limit the circumstances by which they could gain more information on what's actually happening, even if they have a fairly advanced moral understanding to people they haven't dehumanized. That said, I'm just not fond of this in media, and I think the "slaveowner frees his child but not his child's slave mother" or the Jefferson, as I like to call it, is more common.

For the people who just are okay with murdering people regardless, then no.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #5286 ]

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject