ohfantine:

les mis staging

original vs dallas



ensignbeedrill:

Monsieur l’Inspecteur
photo by Allison Blackwell

ensignbeedrill:

Monsieur l’Inspecteur

photo by Allison Blackwell







Shout! Readies ‘Jack and The Cuckoo-Clock Heart’ for Retail →

wannabeanimator:

AWN:

On October 7, 2014, Shout! Factory, in collaboration with EuropaCorp, is proud to present Jack and The Cuckoo-Clock Heart on DVD, two-disc Blu-ray Combo Pack (plus DVD and Digital) and Digital HD. The Blu-ray Combo Pack allows viewers to enjoy Jack and The Cuckoo-Clock Heart on the platform of their choice and includes spectacular movie presentation on Blu-ray, DVD and a digital copy of the movie. This internationally acclaimed film can also be seen in select U.S theaters and on VOD September 24.



Face Squirrels Were Requested

plinytheyounger:

Lo, squirrelwards a young man’s fancy turns
when pugs hang all too heavy from his jaw;
and coelocanths have dealt him stubble burns
he longs for Sciuridae the more!
The noble sidebush of legality
peeks from his hat like suffrutescent spikes
of lavender in the municipality
in the capital (till ’89) of Aix.
Now nibbling sweetmeats by his ears
and gripping his hat-band in their paws
they make him colleagues without peer,
obedient to the unquestionable laws -
looking for criminals through the darkened brim,
and, trusting their master, never watching him.



Mugen’s Tattoos

roolph:

image

Well, thanks for thinking Id know this! I tend to get a bit anal about finding out everything about something i like haha anyway I tried to figure this out a few months back and what I found out was pretty interesting. First of all, you can see the prisoners from cosmic collisions with very similar wrist and ankle tattoos:

image

image

image

From what I understand, if someone committed a harmless crime like theft or burgulary they would be tattooed in something called irezumi kei, which meant tattoo penalty. Tattooing a petty criminal was a much less brutal solution to cutting off the thief’s whole arm or hand, which was the norm before irezumi kei. Face tattoos were also common, usually using the kanji for “bad” or “dog” and coupled with a caning and expulsion from the area.

"A person caught stealing for a second time, for example, would usually be tattooed with two lines across the forearm to mark them as a recidivist. A third offence would sometimes result in a third stripe. More often it meant death."

Since we can assume that Mugens wrist tattoos are from stupid things like stealing, I think that his thick ankle tattoos are probably from going to prison for the sugar ship. You cant see Mugen’s wrists or ankles in any of the flashbacks, so my headcanon is that after he jumped off the cliff and escaped he probably fucked around for a few years and got caught stealing a few times before meeting Fuu and Jin.


"After being tattooed in the jailhouse in Edo, prisoners were held for three days until the ink under their skin had dried and the wound caused by the needles used to implant it there had begun to heal. They were then released back into society, their marked bodies once again serving as signs of the warrior government’s power to punish. Not surprisingly people quickly came to associate tattoos with criminality, and those who had been punished in this way often found themselves being shunned and excluded from their communities."

imageimage

Anyone else have some info?



jade-cooper:

Stephen Maturin (Paul Bettany)  X





awwww-cute:

Kitten rolling around in a cup

awwww-cute:

Kitten rolling around in a cup



Delicious surf n turf, a tall beer and a sketchbook to round out a lovely laid back afternoon ^_^

Delicious surf n turf, a tall beer and a sketchbook to round out a lovely laid back afternoon ^_^





Tell me about americasathinfection

carmarthenfan:

plinytheyounger:

even drunk i was like this post is offensive and i referenced quentin tararantino.

americans are peopelt oo. we sjohuld love them ares our brothers. in aemrica there is less tea and mroe guns eg this is because tpeople do not apologsie so often instead…….guns. in america also though there are doughnuts and a huge bal of string and democaracises and literautre and HBO the best channel.

in america: people are friednyl. people go on SEGWAYS. people are in vintage cars. in aemrica: people…….are speaking spanish too. and aevery lagnuage. in america is OPPORTUNITY bt also the repubclians??? 

surprise!!!!!! some aemrican people had sex. new american is formed. american get pregnant.

Most accurate description of my country ever.



vouksen:

angualupin:

esteliel:

I’m so fascinated by the way the Les Mis Dallas photos produce such a vastly different emotional response in me than seeing photos of a production set in 19th century France does. There is no way I am going to see it (unless videos pop up) but I’m just forever intrigued by this deep, visceral reaction produced by seeing for example Javert wearing a US police uniform. And of course that too is an image I can only relate to through my exposure via media or news and so once removed from my own reality, and I’m sure the emotional response someone from the US feels when looking at the photos is even deeper and more multi-layered yet — but even so, just through that difference in costume and staging, it is endlessly fascinating to me how deeply that affects and alters my response and emotions.

It’s the way something that is fictional/historical becomes immediate reality - it makes it impossible to ignore the fact that a story might not only have a message or point out problems that could still be present today, but immediately turns it from a fictional story into your own reality. You know that it is not fictional because you only need to switch on the news to see the same pictures. And of course this doesn’t mean that any modernization is always perfect, but I still believe that if there is a message in art that is truly relevant, and not even only on a political level, but also for example just on an emotional level, then it should be possible and a valid choice to choose to portray the way it is still relevant to the present, or other periods/settings, by staging it in different ways.
I’ve had this discussion far too many times ten years ago with people who should know better - a family member actually involved in opera/opera management/classical music journalism. And I still think that if you believe that an opera (or a play, or a musical, etc.) is just an entertaining old story with nice music and pretty costumes, and always needs to be told exactly that way so that people have a nice evening and leave the theatre feeling entertained, but without any question or any thoughts of how what they saw is relevant to their own experience, then your degree in music doesn’t mean very much after all, or at least hasn’t given you the ability of critical thinking.

Obviously not all art needs to make you feel horrible about yourself, or about society - but most famous stories are about a message, a theme, an emotion that is relevant to being human, and not only to being human 300 years ago. So while I absolutely do not think that all stagings need to be modernized to be relevant, I do think that if someone decides to do so, that is a valid choice, especially because it is so fascinating to me to see this response I have when you take a well-known fictional or historical story and through your staging take it out of the safe fictional and put it right into your audience’s reality. For most people (as those past discussions have proven) it is apparently very easy to enjoy a story as just a story, and to react with contempt when someone tries to experiment, to figure out how a story is relevant to today’s reality. In general, I think that something that makes you think is good. And while I’m also not against enjoying a story just for being a story (I’ve written 90k of Les Mis porn, I’m the last person who has the right to demand that any interaction with a text needs to  be political or that simply entertaining an audience - or also yourself - is not also a valid choice) my problem is when someone’s reaction to modernizations (or a text) in general is that entertainment is the only thing of worth an audience should get out of it. If you deny even the possibility of how there might be questions raised that are relevant for today, of the validity of critical interaction with a text/an opera/a play etc., then I can’t help but think that there is a deeper problem, and that maybe it is because you do not want to see how a fictional problem is actually still a real problem, affecting real people around you. And that is so sad, because if you truly are passionate about art, you should be able to see the worth in criticism, in wanting to make people think.

(Also, quite tangential, but one of those immediate emotional responses I had to pictures of Dallas Javert was “uuugh no I couldn’t write porn about him” - because apparently one thing this filtering of a story through the fictional/historical lens does is make me think of Javert as “what a tragic character, his redemption arc could have followed Valjean’s, he could have changed, they could have saved each other” while present-day cop Javert makes my immediate response “ugh what an asshole I know people like that they never change I don’t think I want to imagine you touching Valjean”. Anyway, sorry, I said this was introspective, I just find it fascinating to look at how differently I respond to things!)

Yes to all of the above

And in response to your tangential aside — it’s interesting that you discuss your reaction to modern!Javert, because my husband is of the opinion that Hugo’s major failing was refusing to recognize that many (most) of the people of an authoritarian mindset simply don’t change, and won’t. Ever. Hugo was very, very insistent that redemption, wherein redemption is defined as becoming a moral creature who listens to God-within (aka human conscience) instead externalizing one’s morality and blindly following societal norms, is possible for everyone. Mr. Angua thinks that Hugo was being willfully blind on this subject, because he believes that authoritarianism is a personality trait that is essentially immutable, so that those who externalize their morality will always externalize their morality. We debate this quite often, because I’m more on the Hugo side of things. Because our debate is always framed by a modern lens — modern authoritarians vs. modern societal changes — it’s really interesting to see how reframing the original story changes other people’s perceptions on it.

A lot of my involvement in all versions of Javert’s storyline (though I agree with esteliel that Dallas/modernvert is more culturally immediate in ways that make it more difficult due to similar personal associations) is that I really, really want to believe that Hugo is right and that no one, not even the javertiest javert, is completely incapable of change and moral growth. I really don’t want to believe that authoritarianism is wholly, totally incurable and that all we can hope to do is replace the external systems with ones that are less terribly corrupt and oppressive in order to reduce the damages caused by people who are divorced from internal conscience.  And part of my drive to write and read seine fix-it is to continue that growth and develop a character who can survive that post-authoritarian shift, and particularly an authoritarian who was previously so active in maintaining and applying the externalized framework both willingly for himself and forcefully onto others.



thecitysmith:

Little Cosette having bad dreams and Valjean doing a big show of checking under the bed and in all of the wardrobes so she knows she’s safe.

Valjean having nightmares about his time in prison and waking up in a cold sweat to find nine-year-old Cosette opening the wardrobes for him to show him that it’s okay.