"No homo" cries the team at the dig site. The head archaeologist sinks to his knees, sobbing. He has dedicated his entire career to the pursuit of homo habilis, an important part of the hominid evolutionary line. All his work led up to this archaeological dig site. But now, his whole life has been for nothing. There is no homo….there is only Australopithecus.
I read this to a group of archaeologists and they completely lost their shit
“I had gotten kind of like a monster make up kit when I was about eight for Christmas and I spent the rest of Christmas Day and Christmas lunch sat there covered in scars and stubble that I had added - I was basically dressed up as Will Graham, age eight.”—Hugh Dancy, Aperitif commentary (via meganmachine)
Hasbro:Let's make a new MLP cartoon for all the little girls to enjoy!
College Age Guys:Hey, this show is pretty cool!
Hasbro:Wow, you guys weren't our intended demographic, but that's cool! We'll just throw in some references that will make you feel more included and here, have some cool merchandise we know you'll like!
College Age Guys:Wow, thanks!
Warner Brothers:Let's make some new DC cartoons for all the little boys to enjoy!
College Age Ladies:Hey, these shows are pretty cool!
Warner Brothers:WELP. Looks like no one likes these shows, guess we'll just have to cancel them.
College Age Ladies:WAIT! We like them! And we'd love merchandise to show our support!
Warner Brothers:....you're not little boys, why should we listen to you?
Thoughts about the whole Hannigram shipping frenzy? are you into it or not and why? (personally I'm not into it) I just like their dynamic, like "friends" and future enemies.
I don’t really ship anything, tbh—not as it’s usually meant, anyway. Even though people have made allowances for non-romantic or non-sexual ships in their verbiage, when someone asks you if you ship a pair, they usually mean in a romantic or sexual way. And the answer for me really is no.
But I don’t mean to mislead you with this: the relationship between the two men is my #1 interest in the show, and the reason why it’s so interesting to me is because of its emotional depth. Hugh summed it up for me at SDCC.
For both of them—two people who have been wandering their whole lives through a world in which they have not really experienced any viable form of connection—because they’re two extremely unusual people. And then they meet…and their appreciation for each other only deepens from that point on.
I love this. I love everything about it. It’s their uniqueness and extreme isolation from others that makes it so interesting. I’m all about fiction that stretches my mind in ways it hasn’t stretched before: it’s what attracts me to science fiction, where emotional connections are reimagined as drift compatibility or manchi or some other thing. I love that this has been managed with characters ostensibly from an ordinary version of our world, but against the surreal backdrop of serial murder as art.
And I love the fact that this connection exists between men who aren’t destined to remain friends forever. You can find enemies or friends in any story, but ones who are both, simultaneously—and done creatively and well, with characters who are particularly unique—well, that’s a real treasure, and in this way, I ship it. I love that the torment that they could provide each other, from this point forward, should be all the more insidious and excruciating because it will come from a place of emotional intimacy between them.
Bryan said it best.
It brings up an interesting question about what is love? And love between two characters doesn’t necessarily have to be sexual. It can still be love. And still be valid and still be powerful.
“For the record, when I took this job, in 2011, I made one stipulation. That’s it. I just said… I swear to God, I said, ‘I will not do this film if you will not guarantee me one thing. You have to guarantee me there will be no love triangle.’ And there wasn’t. For the…