case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2025-05-02 06:52 pm

[ SECRET POST #6692 ]


⌈ Secret Post #6692 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Xenoblade Chronicles X]



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________





















04. [WARNING for discussion of fictional incest]




__________________________________________________



05. [WARNING for discussion of JKR and related topics]




__________________________________________________



06. [WARNING for discussion of Neil Gaiman and rape/sexual assault]

























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #956..
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.
volkameria: Rodney (SGA) with a cool oval frame around him (pic#rodney_lookingcool)

[personal profile] volkameria 2025-05-03 02:53 am (UTC)(link)
This is a phenomenon that's really difficult to put into words, because there's definitely a difference between a mediocre movie and a mid movie. There's something to be said about a film with interesting ideas, or that was clearly made with passion and fun, but just doesn't quite stick the landing in some aspect.

(Anonymous) 2025-05-03 05:10 am (UTC)(link)
100% this. There are some mediocre movies that are genuinely fun and enjoyable to watch! But then there are also ones that are just... meh. They're two completely different things and can't really be compared.

(Anonymous) 2025-05-03 12:00 pm (UTC)(link)
Wait, which is which?

For me, “mediocre” and “mid” are pretty close synonyms.

I do make a distinction between flawed movies that tried to do something interesting or seem to have someone’s passion behind them and flawed movies that just seem tepid all the way through.

But I don’t think “mediocre” vs “mid” captures that contrast well. I’d be much more likely to say “fun/interesting but flawed” vs “mediocre/mid/middle-of-the-road”.

same anon

(Anonymous) 2025-05-03 12:04 pm (UTC)(link)
I guess the difference is whether something averages out to medium quality because it has highs and lows or whether it’s just solidly middling throughout.