seems that it’s made some cats sicker (puking uncontrollably) and has been infested with bugs often, also in general, i think it’s probably just low grade and can give cats problems (like purina for dogs)
What’s wrong with the bird cage? I could understand that it could be too small for a large bird like a parrot, but what about a canary?
Nope. That cage is far too small to be used as a home for any kind of bird. It’s acceptable as a travel cage for small birds, or as a sleeping only cage. But songbirds deserve to have room to move around and fly too.
For Canaries and finches, it’s recommended they have at least a 3 foot cage!
Canaries are birds that need to fly. They were not meant to be domesticated and profited from as pets. They are highly active birds that will self harm from stress in such confined spaces. Canaries are delightful to have in groups, though they are fine on their own, but every 1 bird adds 3 cubic feet to the space needed. They need multiple perches and toys. These are examples of proper Canary or other small bird enclosures.
Meow Mix is a horrible brand of cat food, I used to feed it to my cats and they would just throw it back up. It’s so low quality that half of the ingredients aren’t even food items. The meat is all scrap by products from slaughterhouses like hooves, eyes, tails and fat because it’s cheap. Which is something they don’t list on the packaging to fool pet owners. I always used to find worms in my bags of Meow Mix. Beneful literally uses antifreeze in it’s food, which has lead to the deaths of thousands of dogs a year. From conditions such as internal bleeding, seizures and cancers.
Rabbits shouldn’t be confined to a cage. (Especially a dog cage..?) Rabbits are curious creatures that need to jump, run, chew and play to be healthy. Keeping them locked in a cage 24/7 as a toy for your kids will make them sick or develop aggression from stress. Healthy rabbit lifespans are 10+ years. Rabbit cages should only be a place for your rabbit to use the litterbox and sleep after a long day of exercise and play. Also, never keep two rabbits together unless they are fixed. Rabbits are territorial and they will either fight or mate rapidly when intact. Up to 14 babies every month. This is the proper set up for a rabbit.
I’m cringing at that rainbow “my mommy got me a cute hamster” rodent cage. These are small creatures that need to run around and explore.They need to burrow and chew.This is the proper set up for a hamster or other small rodent.
Betta fishget stressed from any confinement under 5 gallons. They are the worst pet for being sold to kids as “accessories” in small cubed tanks. When kept like that the fish will die a horribly stressed life within a year when they can live for 7 or more. They need calm filtration with many dark caves and soft plants. They are aggressive to other fish. These fish are so intelligent that they actually play with you, and they need mental stimulation to live healthy. These are proper Betta setups.
Who the fuck would even feed an omnivorous bearded dragon pellet food…? Do they want a sick pet? If pet stores even bothered to care about the keeping of exotic pets, they would know that shit is bad for them. If you can’t feed live meal worms and crickets than you shouldn’t own an exotic pet in the first place. Pellet food isn’t even real food, it’s chemically made with preservatives.
Controversial opinion, but ur allowed to like things that suck
Like, sometimes there are just shows or books that are so goddamn awful for any number of reasons… But ya still like ‘em somehow, and that’s fine
It’s not required to write a 20+ page essay defending why you enjoy something shitty, you can just… Enjoy shitty things
Not all content is made equally and you’re allowed to like things that are far from perfect
Like, just, “This show sucks, but I like it anyway” is a totally valid response
“It’s comforting,” is a legit answer.
“I like reading about clothes,” is a legit answer.
“it’s brain popcorn, and I don’t feel like delving into something deep,” is a legit answer.
“I’ve read it so many times I can basically recite it, and it relaxes me by being familiar,” is a legit answer.
You don’t need to justify your taste. Stop feeling guilty about liking things, or liking the “wrong” things. Life is hard and bleak right now, get fun where you can.
Aimed at people who don’t know where wool comes from, it’s 100% plastic. Yes, plastic.
So any garment you wash will release microfibres into the sea. It’ll never decompose.
You’re supposed to believe that sheep shearing is violent and cruel. There are imbeciles out there that work in an unprofessional manner while shearing, but that’s not the case overall.
Sheep don’t suffer from having their fleece removed.
Left on, the fleece can become a home for fly eggs and the subsequent maggots which can eat the sheep. Chemical treatments are available to prevent that happening. It’s much better for the sheep, the land and the farmer to avoid chemical use.
Don’t be fooled. Wool is a sustainable material, one we should make more and better use of.
thinking about how john mulaney and the mcelroys talk about their marriages as juxtaposed to most male comedians and just like…god the bar is so low but after so many years of hearing “ball and chain” jokes it is unbelievably refreshing to hear male comedians love the absolute shit out of their wives
millennials are killing the hating your wife industry
Shakespeare plays as screencaps from The Good Place
when i was 5 years old my best friend was a boy named kyle who didn’t know how to knock on doors so he made dinosaur noises outside my window to wake me up in the summer until i demonstrated how to ball his fists and slam them against my doors. we collected caterpillars in my trailer park and built them houses while we traded pokemon cards. he wasn’t the only one. there was ben, and mitch, and noah—but kyle’s the only one who hurt me, because when he tried to kiss me and i asked him why, he told me “because you’re a girl and i’m a boy, shouldn’t we like each other?”
i missed him so much and i wondered why he couldn’t just be my friend like he always was
in the first grade there was rich and joseph and i got sent to detention with them almost every day with a smile on my face. we built block towers and sang to my teacher’s lion king soundtracks when she’d
turn the lights off during lunch time. one day they got in a fist fight
over me at recess, and i wondered why they felt they needed to share my
friendship, like it was something they owned.
in the second grade zach and i played yu gi oh under our desks during
free time and i got moved for talking to him constantly. everyone in
the class would tease him and i for talking, asking when we were going
to date already, asking him if he’d kissed me, and he stopped being my
friend.
when i was 11 i met a chubby boy with the name of a colour who wore
puffy vests and unwashed t-shirts, with greasy hair and bright blue eyes
and a smile that hid hurt behind it. people didn’t like him because he
was silly, but i liked him, because i was also silly. he became my
friend the day he bought me 5 giant roses and asked me to be his
girlfriend, and i politely declined but promised him i’d be his best
friend because i’d always wanted a best guy friend that stuck around.
we burnt our feet on the concrete during the summer and walked home
with the sunset silhouetting us. he talked often about how he loved me,
but never blamed me for being me, even though he refused to move on.
that boy dyed his hair jet black and sat on the end of my bed playing
songs to me on guitar, and all that pent up rage from before didn’t show
until the first time he slapped me across the face and called me a dumb
cunt.
in the 7th grade there was a boy named ryan who sat next to me on the
bus and talked to me about manga. he’d ask me personal invasive
questions but i didn’t mind because it was attention and i liked
attention. i was dating another guitarist with curly brown hair, one
who was much more kind-tempered than the other, and ryan mentioned how
much of an asshole he was every day. i wondered, why, why does he think
the love of my life is an asshole? but whenever i asked him, he just
told me, “girls only date assholes. there’s no room for nice guys like
me.”
i wondered, if he was so nice, why did he say such mean things?
he never stopped with me, taking me to movies, hanging out with me,
you know. being friendly. i thought we were friends. but then, how
many times had i thought that before?
how many times had i bonded with a boy, thought they got me, only for them to ask me if i wanted to make out?
how come when i told ryan i was coming out as a lesbian, he stopped
being my friend, and said “damnit, the one girl i really want to pound
into a mattress, and she’s only interested in chicks!”
there was a boy my junior year who stayed up all night with me until
the sun rose, talking about life, past loves, hopes, dreams. beneath a
million twinkling stars spanning forever, he brushed long brown hair out
of his eyes and listened to me talk about the history that made me.
then he asked me if i’d ever consider dating a guy, and complained
about how he’d never get laid.
when i told him no a couple hundred times, he found new girls to listen to.
i would sit on the couch and play zelda with dakota, and he’d talk
about all my favourite games with me. he was the closest thing to
support i had, and the letters and poems he wrote me were always so kind
and friendly. but he’d put his arms around me on the couch, and no
matter how many times i told him i was uncomfortable, he’d still come
over every day and do it.
“don’t you know how it feels to love someone and not have them love
you back? don’t you know what it feels like to be friendzoned?”
when i meet guys who talk about the friendzone, who talk about the
girls who don’t give “nice guys” like them i chance, i always want to
just say
when i was 10 years old i met a girl whose brown hair fell across her
shoulders and whos eyes sparkled when the sunlight hit them, whose
voice was like velvet and whose scent was like mountain smoke, who made
me dizzier than a fly climbing a sugar hill. and i’m 18 years old, and i
still love her, and she knows, and she doesn’t love me.
but my first thoughts upon hearing her rejection were not “what a
bitch,” were not “she just wants a douchebag and not a nice girl like
me!” were not “im going to keep pushing her until she dates me,”
they were
“she is the best friend i have ever had, and i am the best she’s ever had, and i would hate to take that away from her.”
so before you play the victim, mr. Nice Guy, before you angrily throw
your fedora on the ground and blame the girl you claim to adore so
much:
put yourself in the shoes of a girl who thought she made a wonderful
friend, only to find out that he just wanted her for sex. that he just
wanted her for a relationship. a girl who was just an object to win, a
prize. a girl who’s trust you’ve just shattered.
maybe she friendzoned you. but you girlfriendzoned her, first.
when i watch old movies i’m constantly surprised by how much acting has improved. not that the acting in the classics is bad, it’s just often kind of artificial? it’s acting-y. it’s like stage acting.
it took some decades for the arts of acting and filmmaking to catch up to the potential that was in movies all along; stuff like microexpressions and silences and eyes, oh man people are SO much better at acting with their eyes than they were in the 40′s, or even the 70′s.
the performances we take for granted in adventure movies and comedies now would’ve blown the critics’ socks off in the days of ‘casablanca’.
there’s a weird period in film where you can see the transition happening. right around the fifties, I think. the example my prof used when i learned about it was marlon brando in “a streetcar named desire” - he was using stanislavski acting methods and this new hyper-realistic style and most or all of his costars were still using the old, highly-stylized way of acting. it makes it way more obvious how false it is.
i even noticed it in ‘the sting’, which was 1973. i actually think they used it on purpose to get the viewer fished in by the second layer of the con; the grifters at the bookie’s were acting like they were acting, and the grifters playing the feds were acting for reals. if you’re used to setting your suspension of disbelief at the first set’s level, then the second set are gonna blow right past you.
or possibly the guys playing the grifters playing the feds just happened to be using the realistic style for their own reason, and it coincidentally made the plot twist work better. but i like to think it was deliberate.
i was thinking about this again, and when you know what to look for, it’s really obvious: old movies are stage acting, not movie acting. it just didn’t really occur to anyone to make the camera bend to the actors, rather than the other way around. just image search old movie screenshots and clips and gifs, you’ll see it. the way people march up to their mark and stand there, the way they deliver their lines rather than inhabiting the character. the way they’re framed in an unmoving center-stage.
this is a charming little tableau, quirky and unexpected, but it’s a tableau. it lives in a box.
now, i usually watch action movies, and i didn’t think it was fair to compare an action movie with what appears to be an indoor sort of story, but i do watch some comedy tv. so i looked for a brooklyn 99 gif with a similar framing, intending to point out that the camera moves, and the characters aren’t stuck inside the box. but i couldn’t even find the framing. they literally never have all the characters in the same plane, facing the camera, interacting only within the staging area. even when they’re not traveling, they’re moving around, and they treat things outside the ‘stage’ as real and interact with them, even if it’s only to stare in delighted horror.
as for action, it took a while for the movies to figure out what, exactly they wanted to show us, and how to act it. here’s a comedy punch:
here, also, is a comedy punch:
the first one looks like a stage direction written on a script. the second one looks like your friends horsing around and being jerks to each other. the first one is just not believable. the physics doesn’t work. the reaction is fakey. everyone’s stiff. even the movement of the camera is kind of wooden. the second one looks real right down to the cringe of his shoulder, and the camera feels startled too.
i’m not saying this to dis old movies, i’m just fascinated and impressed by how much the art has advanced!
I’m going to bed, but I also want to say that I think, without actually bothering to explore it and make sure, that there’s been a similar shift in comics, probably related to the shift in acting/camera work. And I think you still see remnants of old “stage acting” comics in the three-panel style set ups (you might still see it in long form comics, but you’d probably call it bad composition)
Now can someone explain why people in old films talked Like That
Y’all, THAT’S HOW PEOPLE TALKED.
Seriously, I used to work in a sound studio, and one series of projects required us to listen to LOTS of old audio recordings. Not of anything special - just people talking.
AND THEY TALKED LIKE THAT.
It was so fucking wild to hear just a couple of people being like,
“WELL HI THERE JEANINE, HOW ARE YOU TODAY?”
“OH, NOT TOO BAD, JOE, THOUGH MY HUSBAND’S BEEN AWAY ON BUSINESS FOR A FEW WEEKS AND I MISS HIM SOMETHING TERRIBLE.”
“WELL IT’S A HARD THING, JEANINE, BUT YOU’LL GET THROUGH IT.”
“WELL I SUPPOSE I’VE GOT TO, HAVEN’T I JOE?”
All in that piercing, strident, rapid-fire style we associate with the films of the era. If you’ve watched lots of old movies you can imagine the above in that speech pattern.
I don’t know if people talked like that because it was in movies but I suspect it’s the other way around.
Same goes for the UK - When they made the TV series The Hour, set in the 1950s, they had to tell the very well spoken, privately educated Dominic West to tone down his imitation of a 1950s newsreader because being accurate would have sounded to a 2011 TV audience as if he was doing a parody. When you watch Brief Encounter they’re not speaking like that because they can’t act, they’re speaking like that because it was the norm on screen. It now sounds unnatural because it’s not the norm any more.
Obviously there were people with regional accents and who didn’t speak in a heightened manner, but they didn’t get to be on TV or in movies unless they were villains. (And usually the villains were putting it on, like Richard Attenborough in Brighton Rock. Sure, he was Richard Attenborough, but he was brought up in the Midlands, and by the on-screen standards of the time, that was common.)
Even the Queen’s very posh accent has changed over the last 50 years and become “more common" - check out newsreel footage etc for proof - and recordings of her father are almost like someone from a foreign country (well, it is the past).
There is, for many film historians/critics, an actual turning point from mannered, theatrical, or “overplayed” acting on screen to naturalistic/American Method realism on screen. It happens in the 1954 movie On the Waterfront, during a traveling shot in which Marlon Brando’s character and Eva Marie Saint’s character are walking together. Eva Marie Saint accidentally drops her glove in the middle of the scene. Marlon Brando instinctively picks it up as his character, and continues the dialog, all the while playing with the glove–turning it about, trying it on, etc. Eva Marie Saint stuck with him, never broke, and the director didn’t call “cut.”
Before that scene in that movie, if an actor dropped a prop by accident, they would have re-shot the scene–because Brando mostly disappeared out of frame as he bent down to pick up the glove, and (as is explained above) movies were framed to keep the people in the scene in the frame. I
t’s a pretty famous scene in movies because Brando’s character doesn’t give the glove back, but instead uses it to amplify what the two characters are experiencing, naturally and without artifice. It is, for all intents and purposes, the exact moment that screen acting changed.
Okay, but here’s the thing about television specifically: given the size of TV screens when they first came out? Stage acting was the only thing that could be READ. Watch Star Trek: TOS on a modern screen and it looks absurdly overacted. Film of the same era is not, and yet the TV is.
And that’s not a fault of the actors; they were all very capable of naturalistic film acting (yes, even Shatner) – as the later movies would bear out. It’s because they were acting for the small screen, not the big one.
Stage acting and stage makeup is what it is because people are far enough away from the stage that you have to cake on the makeup garishly and exaggerate the hell out of your for it to be VISIBLE. And in early television? Yeah, those constraints actually very much applied. You could move the camera, sure, but the quantity of visual information you could send was just damned limited.
Here’s another example of that.
Watch some Classic Dr Who. You may or may not notice it without watching for it, but every shot of the TARDIS is taken from the same angle.
The TARDIS was, at that time, a stage set. The camera was behind the fourth (Sixth?) wall. It was fixed. And most TV sets were built like this. They had a specific fourth wall and everything was filmed from that angle.
Fast forward to the new series, and you’ll see that the TARDIS is being filmed from different angles all the time, including following the actor around.
Three things have changed:
1. Cameras have become much smaller.
2. Set building for TV has developed as an art. Those early sets were built by people who were trained to build stage sets.
3. Overall technological improvement resulting in things being cheaper.
The TARDIS set that was just retired? Each of its walls was designed to slide out. So you could put the camera anywhere you wanted. Presumably this is the case with the new one too. They couldn’t imagine doing that back in the day. Nor could they afford the complexities of a set like that.
It’s actually my opinion that TV has very much matured as an art form…this century. This decade. We are doing and seeing things that couldn’t be done ten years ago, twenty. Heck, even five.
Going back to speech patterns for a moment – I was a young child in the 80s, so my memories of the norms of the time period are limited (especially because I was incredibly sheltered), but the books I read at the time and the popular movies of the time all have this kind of – whimsical, sardonic speech pattern going on. Think John Waters dialogue.
I always thought it was kind of stylized. But then I ended up in a weird part of YouTube one night and found someone’s home video of just walking aroud a 7-11 convenience store at midnight talking to people in Orlando, Florida. Just trying out their new camcorder for shits and giggles, talking to other customers, talking to the cashier, etc. And you know what? They all talked like a goddamn John Waters movie. It was the weirdest thing, like I was watching outtakes from The Breakfast Club or Say Anything. I expected one of the Cusacks to walk into frame any second.
Anyway, so I think it’s super cool how human speech and interaction shifts over time, and if you’re living through the shift, you don’t really notice it as it happens.
apparently there’s some Straight Girl discourse out there in the reaches of the internet about how bi men are unappealing to date?? and anyway i want to make this post to remind everyone that bi boys & bi guys & bi men are wonderful and awesome and you don’t need the approval of straight people EVER.
depressed kids in the media: I don’t wanna go to therapy! I don’t need help! I’m not some specimen for you to dissect!
me, rollin up to my therapist’s office and collapsing in relief: what is UP my homeboy I fuckin missed you,, hope ur ready to hear some Bull Shit that fuckin happened to me this week
families of depressed kids in media: okay sweetie we’ve researched depression for ten hours straight and signed you up for therapy and re-arranged your school schedule to be less stressful
actual parents of depressed kids: look i get you’re sad but someones gotta do the goddamn dishes stop being lazy get up. why didn’t you go to school today, what’s wrong with you, you’re such a burden on this family.
Therapists in the media: *understanding head tilt*
My real live therapist whom I adore: Natalie, that is the DUMBEST thing I’ve ever heard.
Therapists in Media: Lets do some art therapy and be really quiet while we talk about your feelings :)))))) also I’m prescribing you 500 different medicines
My therapist Brian who I love to death: Jack, I think your first problem is you stay up too late looking at memes, so let’s try taking a nap
My real life therapist: Okay, before we start, I found this hilarious video I know you’d love.
Therapist in media: serious face the whole time
My therapist: *laughs awkwardly*
therapists in media: refined, cultured, poised, “I’m afraid I haven’t [heard of the nerdy thing their patient just referenced]”
my old therapist derek, from across the reception area, seeing me for the first time after the summer of 2015: HEY DID YOU SEE AGE OF ULTRON?? IT SUCKED, RIGHT???
my current therapist ian, in our very first appointment: do you like star wars? anxiety is like the force, it can consume you, or you can learn to keep it in balance… you’re my padawan now
Actual things my therapist has told me:
“You’re bassicly a glorified sad lizard.” (It makes sense with context)
“Damn girl you need to get your shit together.”
“Go home and cry. Stop drinking in bathtubs. Eat something that isn’t bleach or memes.”
Welcome, thanks for stumbling onto my blog. Well let's get the basics out of way I'm a left-handed-fandom obsessing-sometimes writer that has way too much time on her hands. I guess a lot of people put their sexuality on here but I kind of don't identify with any certain thing so there's that. That being said look around, explore and generally have a good time, I promise not to judge you.
