1. inspired by [x]

    (Source: clintbartons)

     
  2. loudest-subtext-in-television:

    lokis-green-and-golden-queen:

    The scene removed from A Study In Pink that I FUCKING WISH WAS STILL IN IT OMG

    MOFFAT HOW COULD YOU WRITE THIS AND NOT INCLUDE IT OH GOD

    Every now and again, I get asks from people who’ve read the S&S entries for ASiP and TBB and don’t believe that we’re supposed to suspect Sherlock is suicidal. (Or John, for that matter.) Here’s another piece of evidence.

    The first episode is about suicide for a reason. There are suicidal shot compositions and visual metaphors for both John and Sherlock in that same episode for a reason. It’s because they’re both depressed and clinging to reasons to keep living.

     
  3. Captain America 2 and the Morality of Being a Soldier

    the-linaerys:

    In my first Captain America 2 meta, I talked about a bunch of things, including acknowledging the criticism that the movie accepted “being a soldier” as a pure moral good. 

    But actually, the more I think about it, it really did interrogate the “goodness” of soldiery. I wrote some meta yesterday on tumblr about the Winter Soldier and Captain America’s shield, and it occurs to me that Captain America and the Winter Soldier are showing the two different sides of being a soldier.

    Captain America is the good soldier, the moral pinnacle, in the movie’s morality. He is a team player, but more than that a team leader. He’s all about his fellow soldiers, completing the mission, and unit cohesion. He is also about questioning bad orders, which is something that the US military tells soldiers they have a moral obligation to do, but is very hard to do in practice.

    Natasha is shown to be at her best when she’s on board with this. She’s shades of gray. She is a spy.

    And the Winter Soldier is all the negatives of being a killer/soldier. He is someone else’s idea of perfection, but it’s a corrosive perfection. He is a pure killer, with no interest in cohesion, no morality at all. He is an assassin. 

    So this movie does show the shades of soldiery through these characters. (And in that continuum, Sam is another good/right soldier, but not as much of a leader as Captain America. At least in this story, he embodies the moral authority of the soldier who follows the right leader.)

    This is why this movie HAS to have the Winter Soldier in it, not just any other assassin. He is the negative that shows Captain America’s positives. He doesn’t have free will. It’s not that he doesn’t have an interest in questioning orders, it’s that his ability to do so has been threatened, beaten, and finally annihilated out of him. He is the horrible perfect end result of the fascist thinking that informs Pierce and Zola. Captain America is the kind of soldier that “freedom” produces; the Winter Soldier is the kind of soldier that “oppression” produces. 

    The Winter Soldier is the perfect adversary for Captain America in the grand comics tradition of having each hero face his dark mirror(s). (That’s why IMO Dr. Strange is a much better adversary for Dr. Doom than Reed Fucking Richards. I hate that guy.) Steve is a leader who draws people to him; the Winter Soldier works alone. Steve would never leave a man behind; the Winter Soldier, in his most perfect expression, would never bring a man with him. He gives no quarter and expects none, and so he is inhuman.

    But of course, a person like Bucky is not capable of being an inhuman tool like that without some enormous amount of twisting and control. 

    It’s an imperfect world that (arguably) requires violence at all to preserve freedom and justice, but Captain America 2 argues, I believe, that the soldiers who protect that freedom must be in the Captain America mold, not the Winter Soldier mold. They must question, they must lead, they must be part of a team, because it’s what works, because total pragmatism is always barbaric. You can’t protect freedom with barbarity. Those who would trade freedom for security for freedom deserve neither, and, more importantly, will end up with neither.

     
  4. image: Download

    cdlafere:

“let’s draw sherlock october: famous duos”Sherlock as Rosencrantz and John as Guildenstern from “Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead”.
Great movie of Tom Stoppard (Director and Writer), aother story of Hamlet.
this is one of my favorite movie .Tim Roth and Gary Oldman is brilliant!However, I want to watch this with starring Martin and Benedict!

    cdlafere:

    let’s draw sherlock october: famous duos”

    Sherlock as Rosencrantz and John as Guildenstern from “Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead”.

    Great movie of Tom Stoppard (Director and Writer), aother story of Hamlet.

    this is one of my favorite movie .
    Tim Roth and Gary Oldman is brilliant!
    However, I want to watch this with starring Martin and Benedict!

     
  5. 09:26

    Notes: 1954

    Reblogged from capt-john-h-watson-md

    Tags: Martin FreemanOliviers 2014

    BACKSTAGE AT THE OLIVIERS: Presenter Martin Freeman peeks on stage from the wings (x)

    (Source: abitvertiginous)

     
  6. clearlycumberbatched:

    Oz Comic-Con Sydney

     
  7. voodooling:

    There’s a saying somewhere about the heart growing fonder when someone has been away.
    Sherlock was not one to keep up with such idioms, and he was quite sure that he did not have a heart.
    But things have changed, and time has passed.
    At first, he thought the phantom pain in his chest had been a side effect from the fall; something psychosomatic, possibly from the stress of all that’s happened since then. It wasn’t until a cold evening in Siberia amid the civil twilight that Sherlock realized, as he stood over the body of one of Moriarty’s top snipers, that the ache was because he missed John. He missed John, he needed John, he wanted John to be able to look at him at the end of this ordeal and say ‘it’s alright. You aren’t a killer, you are wonderful. You are extraordinary. You are brilliant.’
    ‘You are Sherlock, and I love you.’

    For Sherlock loved John. x

    ——

    Since I’m not doing the angstlock book anymore, I thought I’d start posting the pages I did do for it. So here’s two of them =)

     
  8. 16:21

    Notes: 376

    Reblogged from deducingbbcsherlock

    Tags: BBC Sherlockanalysismeta

    Anonymous asked: I'm sorry if this comes as offensive because I'm not trying to offend you: your metas and your slow mo gifs are entertaining and funny but half of the things you say don't make sense to me. I'm not homophobic (the thousands of fanfics are enough proof of that) but I fail to see Johnlock. I'm not kidding. I don't see it. When I talk to nay-ers they say it's because the johnlockers are crazy. Now I'll try to ask the other side. Who'd the crazy in your opinion?

    deducingbbcsherlock:

    Hello! No need to apologize, I’m not offended. And thanks re: the metas and gifs. :)

    I don’t think either “side” is crazy. And I definitely don’t think everyone who doesn’t believe John and Sherlock are in love is homophobic. That’s absolutely untrue.

    I do think the heteronormative lens is very powerful, and difficult to comprehend (especially for those who don’t want to accept it exists). This has been said many times, but the simplest way to put it is that if the roles of Sherlock and John had been cast as a man and a woman and the writing and everything else remained the same, the debate would not exist at all. Sexual tension between a man and a woman is never explained away as a sort of coincidental element in their particularly deep platonic friendship. Even if people didn’t ship the couple, they’d still see where the show was going. A slow-building romance.

    Here’s a simpler way to say it: viewers generally default characters to heterosexual unless explicitly told otherwise through dialogue or blatant stereotyping.

    As far as things in my metas not making sense, I understand what you’re saying. And you’ve asked me this very respectfully, so please know I’m answering honestly here and am not in any way trying to insult you.

    I write fiction for a living. It’s not a hobby – it’s how I pay the bills. I have a few novels in bookstores and several more under contract. I also teach creative writing, and I’ve written a few scripts for a very small production company. That’s why my metas focus mostly on metaphor and subtext and such, because those are standards in any writer’s toolbox. I know how to use them, and I know how to identify them when they’re used by other writers. Moffat, Gatiss, and Thompson are highly experienced, skilled, successful writers. They know what they’re doing.

    You’ve probably read other metas on this show as well. Some are written by film school students and graduates. Some are written by actors. Some are written by photographers, some are written by gender studies majors, musicians, doctors…and so on. They all use their expertise to shed light on certain elements of this show. And at one point or another, a lot of them have been called crazy, too.

    Some people think claiming that an episode of a show contains an metaphorical mystery illustrating one character’s unspoken revelation of love sounds crazy. 

    To a writer, it’s not crazy at all.

    Some people think analyzing the objects on a character’s desk in order to better interpret his mental state sounds crazy. 

    To a production designer, it’s not crazy at all.

    Some people think using lighting and shot composition to explain a character’s emotions or secret desires sounds crazy. 

    To a still photographer, it’s not crazy at all.

    Some people think studying themes and motifs in a soundtrack to interpret character motive and mood sounds crazy. 

    To a composer, it’s not crazy at all.

    Some people think claiming viewers are wildly misinterpreting the main character arc in a popular show thanks to an institutionalized ideological system which asserts that heterosexuality is the norm sounds crazy. 

    To a gender studies academic, it’s not crazy at all.


    There are many, many roles involved in putting together a show or film. Roles filled by educated, experienced individuals all collaborating to tell a story. Subtext and lighting and set design, all of it – there are teams of people dedicated to this stuff. Don’t believe me? Do your research! ;)

    That’s why I cringe when I read comments about “over-analyzation” and “reading too much into it” and “tortured metaphors” and “delusional.” Not because I’m offended, but because the commenter is oblivious to how ignorant they sound. (Not you, Anon!) 

    Frankly, this is also why I cringe when I read things like “stop making arguments based on a ship that isn’t even canon!” or “it’s not canon yet, you’re just seeing what you want to see!” Well…false.

    There are nine episodes of canon. A canonical romance does not magically appear from nothing when two pairs of lips touch. Canon is foundation. Canon is structure. Canon is building towards something. The writers and all of the cast and crew have given us nine episodes of canon. Good storytelling is about much more than The End.

    I’m absolutely not saying all the metas (including my own) are hitting the nail on the head every single time – theories are theories. But I, and a lot of meta writers, are basing our observations on facts. 

    To end on a positive note, here’s where I confess something bordering on blasphemy: I love hiatus. I really do. As excited as I am to find out what happens next, I love having all this time to absorb and digest these few episodes, to pick them apart and discover new connections, to speculate on what’s to come. And I appreciate that this extra-long wait is the reason this show is so high-quality. Sure, it’d be great if we got three more episodes this coming January. But would they be as good when written, filmed, and edited under such a rush? We all joke about how hiatus is torture, but I think it’s one of the most fun parts of being a fan of this show.

    Hell, maybe I really am just crazy after all. 

     
  9. thedragonflywarrior:

    The head-turning Game of Thrones actress Gwendoline Christie is a towering 6ft 3in tall and admits she often felt she couldn’t relate to women on the big screen because of her Amazonian frame, but is now relishing the opportunity to play a tough, fierce warrior in the medieval fantasy drama.

    She said: “It’s really vitally important to me the way women are portrayed. As someone who has always felt at times pretty genderless because of my size, it interests me to challenge ideas of prejudice and femininity, and what it is to be a woman.”

    The towering actress reveals that she had numerous setbacks in her career before landing a prized role as Brienne of Tarth in the hit show, adding: “I found it so frustrating, particularly at the beginning, because I would be told, ‘Sorry love, you’re too tall.’ At one stage I was like, ‘I’ll give this another six months and if this persists, ‘I’ll become a nun.’ “

    For her role as warrior Brienne, Gwendoline trained how to fight with swords and ride horses and says it’s “empowering” to know she can “break a man’s nose with my elbow.”

    "I do all my own stunts and come away with bruises and scratches. After one scene I was absolutely covered in bruises all down one leg and up one arm. But it’s worth it. It’s quite fun. I enjoy knocking around with the boys."

    I cannot get enough of this woman. She deserves all the awards.

     
  10. amyyam:

    "You shouldn’t have lied to me. I know what kind of man you are."

    Edited by Amy Kinley

     
  11. Anonymous asked: When Sherlock hears John's voice in his head during the Jack the Ripper debacle, what do you make of John's voice saying, "Jealous?" What does it suggest? Sorry if you've answered this already in more detail. Love the metas and love you btw <3

    deducingbbcsherlock:

    Thank you so much!! :)

    Apparently I’m incapable of answering this kind of thing without turning it into a full-blown meta. Let’s just look at the whole scene, because it’s funny, but (as always) the humor is masking quite a bit of darkness.

    (transcript credit here)

    MOLLY: What is it?

    (Sherlock gets his phone out and holds it up high to try and get a signal.)

    MOLLY: You’re on to something, aren’t you?

    SHERLOCK: Mm, maybe.

    image

    This one’s obvious. John calls Sherlock a “show off” frequently. But next time you watch this scene, listen to the tone of John’s voice in Sherlock’s head. It’s harsh, insulting. It’s not the same tone Real John uses when he tells him to stop showing off. So why does Sherlock hear it this way?

    Because despite his arrogance, Sherlock’s self-esteem is actually crap. In fact, that actually explains the arrogance – after all, arrogance is not always a matter of overconfidence. Sometimes it’s the opposite of confidence. When John says stuff about the showing off thing or being all mysterious with your cheekbones and turning up your collar so you look cool, Sherlock hears the words but he fails to understand the truth behind them, the real reason John says this stuff:

    It’s what John likes.

    He likes the showing off. Fantastic! (Do you know you do that out loud?) Sorry, I’ll shut up. (No, it’s…fine.)

    John loves watching Sherlock show off, and Sherlock loves showing off for John. But of course, John isn’t going to act like a simpering fanboy on the outside, nor will Sherlock openly acknowledge how much he loves basking in the attention. These are two men who have a lifelong habit of suppressing those types of emotions. Unfortunately, the hard exteriors they’ve built are so damn near impenetrable, they even manage to fool one another.

    So John doesn’t realize Sherlock shows off for him just because he craves John’s appreciation and attention and approval. John doesn’t realize he’s special. He only sees the exterior; he thinks Sherlock’s an arrogant show off.

    And Sherlock doesn’t realize John’s sarcasm is just a mask for the frustration and confusion he’s experiencing due to the effects the showing off and the cheekbones and the being all mysterious have on him. Sherlock doesn’t realize he’s special. He only sees the exterior; he thinks John’s irritated by his act.

    That’s what we’re hearing in Sherlock’s head right now. Not real John, who actually loves watching Sherlock deduce. These are his words, but spoken the way Sherlock interprets them, rather than the way John means them.

    SHERLOCK: Shut up, John. 

    MOLLY: What?

    SHERLOCK: Hmm? Nothing.

    —-

    LESTRADE (glancing towards Molly): This gonna be your new arrangement, is it?

    SHERLOCK: Just giving it a go.

    LESTRADE: Right. So, John?

    SHERLOCK: Not really in the picture any more.

    (He moves away from the table and turns back to look at the whole picture. Cement dust drifts down from the ceiling as a distant rumbling can be heard.)

    MOLLY: Trains?

    SHERLOCK: Trains.

    Right, John’s out of the picture. And Sherlock hears the distant rumble of unseen trains. Nothing subtextual to see here, move along…

    MOLLY: Male, forty to fifty. Ooh, sorry, did you want to be …?

    SHERLOCK: Er, no, please. Be my guest.

    image

    Molly makes this deduction first. She beats him to it. Jealous, Sherlock? 

    SHERLOCK (angrily, through gritted teeth)Shut up! 

    ——

    LESTRADE: “How I Did It” by Jack the Ripper?!

    SHERLOCK: Mm-hm.

    MOLLY: It’s impossible!

    SHERLOCK: Welcome to my world.

    image

    SHERLOCK (quietly, through clenched teeth): Get out.

    This scene isn’t just about Sherlock missing John. It’s about just how fucked up Sherlock’s head and heart are right now. John refuses to forgive him, and Sherlock’s beginning to understand just how much he hurt him. He screwed up the fall. He screwed up the return.

    Low self-esteem + guilt = self-loathing. 

    That’s why John’s voice is so harsh, why even the text appears different than it does with normal deductions – fast, sharp, fiery. The words are like bullets and Sherlock’s exterior is starting to crack.

    He’s still trying to keep up the act, though.

    SHERLOCK: I won’t insult your intelligence by explaining it to you.

    LESTRADE: No, please – insult away!

    image

    That’s right, do your little trick for the ordinary people, and don’t forget to look all cool and mysterious as you do it.

    SHERLOCK: The-the-the corpse is-is six months old; it’s dressed in a shoddy Victorian outfit from a museum. It’s been displayed on a dummy for many years in a case facing south-east judging from the fading of the fabric. It was sold off in a fire-damage sale … (he gets his phone out and shows the screen to Greg) … a week ago.

    LESTRADE: So the whole thing was a fake.

    SHERLOCK: Yes.

    LESTRADE: Looked so promising.

    SHERLOCK: Facile.

    MOLLY: Why would someone go to all that trouble?

    image

    SHERLOCK (offscreen): Why indeed, John?

    Cue his shadow slipping through the busted, fragmented, splintered door.

    If you ever hear anyone complain that Woobie!Sherlock in TSoT was unexpected, that him working so hard on planning John’s wedding was OOC, that his brain meltdown upon learning that John considered him his best man and his best friend didn’t make sense, then refer them to this scene.

    Because this is when we start to see Sherlock truly believes he’s nothing more than a world-class fuck-up, and that’s how John sees him too. His exterior is pretty much shattered, and in TSoT, the real Sherlock is exposed.

     
  12. image: Download

    johix:

"Shut up - you love my clothes.”

    johix:

    "Shut up - you love my clothes.”

     
  13. image: Download

     
  14. consultingaytective:

    anigrrrl2:

    my John.

    This is the story of how I died. 

    good fucking bye

    (Source: rominatrix)

     
  15. An Q&A with Benedict Cumberbatch; (or rather an evening with Jack White/Bill Murray/Alan Ginsberg/Laurence Olivier…and Tigger!).

    duskybatfishgirl:

    Actually scrap that description above; Benedict Cumberbatch is who he is. Quite unique and quite extraordinary; an iconoclast, a rationalist, a raconteur, a satirist and both a humanist AND a cynic. (This is a bit of a long report but his Oz Comic Con panel session in Sydney last night was so layered and interesting; I want to get it all out of my head. Please bear with me & read on!…).

    The poor man; after 2 days of taking 2000 photographs and signing thousands and thousands of autographs came 30mins late to the last panel of his tour and looking pretty exhausted. (He said at last night’s meet & greet that he strained his arm putting his arm around so many fans; and that he had been up since 3am on Sunday morning. He was rubbing his shoulder throughout the Q&A…). He worked so incredibly hard the entire weekend and he did it with such love & commitment.

    Everyone’s already posted brilliantly about his entrance at the Panel on here so I’ll skip the rock star intro. Except to say that that man can dance; he’s got great rhythm and did a dirty urban groove to Daft Punk(??) which brought the house immediately down. As always his agenda was strategic; he wanted us to stop using the hacked video of him dancing at that private wedding (the Thriller dance) and use this footage instead. (I was surprised that Comic Con didn’t check that with him first).

    From memory these were just a few of his answers to questions from the packed room of 1000 fans…

    About Directors: He said that a good director needs to speak three languages; for the crew, for the funders and for the actors. He cited Tomas Alfredson (TTSS) as a great experience, and also working with Danny Boyle whom he described as “an engine of creativity and love” which helped him (Benedict) deal with the exhaustion and injuries throughout Frankenstein. He described Stephen Spielberg as “playful, anecdotal and avuncular” and also lauded Thea Sharrock (After the Dance) and Hattie Dalton (1st-time feature director of Third Star). He praised JJ Feild in particular as a great inspiration and support in the filming of that movie.

    He mentioned Martin Tyrrell again as one of his greatest influences (Head of Drama at Harrow) and said “he made me want to keep pleasing him; a sign of a great director”… If that’s not a parable of how a great teacher can define a great person, I don’t know what it. Well done Mr Tyrrell – and thank you!

    BC also would like to work with “the Andersons” i.e Wes and Paul Thomas; in regards to the latter spoke so eloquently about the unique West Coast America dystopian landscape that PT Anderson has created (in films like Magnolia and The Master). Also would like to work with Scorsese and Spike Jonz (me “yay!).

    He spoke about the British actor Stephen Dillane (95% sure) in both panel sessions as someone he highly regards and with whom he’d like to work (amongst others which he machined-gunned off way too fast for me to remember).

    About Fans: he wouldn’t divulge the craziest experiences he has had with fans which was wise. He mentioned the famous cheese question (his favourite variety is Manchega. I think…). He revealed that it was best mates Tom Hiddleston and Patrick Kennedy who sent him the riding crop anonymously in the mail after ASiP. (Decibels in the Clancy Theatre at that point broke all Randwick records…).

    About Sherlock: He described how he has to speed up his mind and train his body before each season of Sherlock. On the day of long scenes and deductions he goes through what sounded like rigorous verbal and mental preparations; which oddly Martin Freeman would often join in on, even if Martin had no lines that day (!). When asked about what he thought the funniest episodes were, he spread the love across all three series with a special mention of TSoT. He did say he thought the motorbike scenes in TEH didn’t come out as spectacularly as he would’ve liked especially as he does ride himself (I agree! I thought they were a bit…tame, in the final cut).

    About Geekdom: someone asked a perceptive question about the rise of “geeks and nerds” and the acceptance of them in contemporary culture, and how he might see a correlation between his rise to fame and the acceptance of the geek in pop culture. I get the feeling he’s trying to broaden people’s view of him in solely geeky, genius roles (“I’ve played dumb roles too!”) he did say “that geeks have always secretly ruled the world. The thing is that if you can think intelligently for yourself, then you have a moral responsibility to the world to do some good with it” [my paraphrasing]. He did close the answer with the adage “the chic geek is back”. Yes sir, indeed.

    About Peter Guillam: in the context of imbuing idiosyncrasies (physical/costume) in a character; he said of his TTSS character that he loved the “1960s James Bond cool” of Guillam and particularly the subterfuge of having Peter dressed so overtly heterosexual to hide his closeted life as a homosexual from his Circus colleagues…

    About what Fans should look out for: “Um, well, a lot!” in particular The Imitation Game. He described it as a very very special film (Benedict just exuded care and concern over this project; it just makes me so fucking excited to see it. Everyone who talks about it just seems to be struck so deeply by it..). He spoke again about the significance and tragedy of Alan Turing’s life; preferring to see his death as a tragic suicide and not as a MI6 conspiracy etc. He said he was deeply emotional (my paraphrasing) after filming the last few scenes of TIG and said it was so sad that “Turing couldn’t live with his own way of loving”; and said again that it is Turing who needs to forgive not for us/society to pardon him. (This movie will kill me. If you haven’t seen him in Turing character look at this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpSwP1XapTI ).

    He also said Lost City of Z will HOPEFULLY begin filming in June; the word “hopefully” sent a groan around the room. Please make this happen! After the cancellation of Blood Mountain AND The Flying Horse not getting funding – please! Come on Brad work your magic…

    The 1-hour(ish) Q&A felt more like an event; I have never seen so many whip-smart introverts in one room so enthralled and so unabashed in their celebration of someone. It’s kinda awesome; he’s the pied piper of nerds everywhere. But he ended by cajoling us into not allowing us to be defined by a single category or subset. But to be human and embrace our beautiful differences.

    And he doesn’t seem to have a single embarrassing song on his iPod. How is that even possible….