[ SECRET POST #2654 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2654 ⌋

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

01.
[Ioan Gruffudd/Fantastic Four 2005]


__________________________________________________



02.
[Laurell K. Hamilton]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Bates Motel]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Sherlock]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Korn; Breaking Benjamin]


__________________________________________________



06.
[American Horror Story]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Gwyneth Paltrow, Iron Man]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Kino's journey/Kino no tabi]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Roxy Music]












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 019 secrets from Secret Submission Post #379.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

What purpose would a Rule 63 Doom serve besides pandering to small group of SJWs and Tumblr users?

[(Anonymous)]

That. But I am pretty sure Doom has already been cast with a male actor.

[(Anonymous)]

Nope, not anymore.

Don't you know that Rule 63's now transphobic because it fetishizes trans identies?

[(Anonymous)]

Yeahbutwhaaat

[vethica]

JESUS DICK

[(Anonymous)]

Uh, no. Rule 63 is transphobic because YOU DON'T HAVE TO LOOK FEMALE TO BE FEMALE! Get it right you cisscum.

[(Anonymous)]

No, no, no. Rule 63 is sexist because it reinforces gender roles.

[sarillia]

Things like this are supposed to have a purpose beyond "I think this sounds like a fun idea"?

[(Anonymous)]

Well it's one thing to say "Hey that sounds fun" but on ONTD and Tumblr at least people seem really invested in making Doom a female in the movie.

[sarillia]

I just find this argument weird when it comes up. People complain about SJWs going on a crusade to add to representation but then they keep talking about it in terms of "purpose" when I thought the idea was to focus on making a good story without worrying too much about ~implications~, not to replace one purpose that you don't like with one that you do.

I feel like I'm not explaining this well but there's something about this that never seems very consistent to me.

[insanenoodlyguy]

On ONTD and Tumblr at least there's a lot of fucking idiots.

[(Anonymous)]

+1, I love DOOM and seeing a woman would just be fun. also, lady!doom/lady!loki porn

[(Anonymous)]

What purpose would casting Mr. Fantastic serve?

[(Anonymous)]

Casting him as what?

[(Anonymous)]

Uhhhh, allowing the Fantastic Four to not be called the Fantastic Three?

[castle_anon]

Pretty sure anon is saying "What purpose would casting the guy who previously played Mr. Fantastic as Victor Von Doom serve?"

OP

[(Anonymous)]

Admittedly, the main reasons I wanted him cast (apparently moot, since the role's already been cast) are:

1. To add a sense of menace; you have a mature villain facing off against young adult heroes, so there's a slight power-play dynamic going on.

2. Because the meta-fanfiction about how Reed Richards fell into an alternate universe and became that Universe's Doom would be fascinating.

3. I just really like the actor.

Re: OP

[celeste9]

Ok, I was on board because Ioan Gruffudd, but now I REALLY want this. *is sad it won't happen*

[arcadiaego]

Ioan Gruffudd is hot.

[insanenoodlyguy]

Exactly. Even people who want DOOM 63 shouldn't really want Doom 63 in their film. Because that means they had so little they got desperate as hell.