"All my ex-girlfriends are Asian."
If you’ve ever come across this charming come-on, you’ve probably been exposed to yellow fever
YES, THERE IS NOW A MUCH NEEDED GIF SET FOR THIS!
Slow music playing in restaurants creates the perception of slower time and also makes customers buy more food and drinks than normal.
i think we all know this one person…
People with body dysmorphia, eating disorders, and low self esteem exist and this comic is a steaming pile of shit
stop portraying these people as irrational and start portraying them as people with valid feelings who stand on their own, not just as Irritating Devices That Bother You
Plus this enforces the idea that girls should just settle for the first guy to like her
The person who made this comic and anyone who reblogged it must be really shitty friends
(Seriously if you hear your friend berate their body and all you can do is get angry you’re a horrible person)
Scene Queens: Where Are They Now?
i didn’t know just how badly i needed to see this
Which states have the most people with state pride?
its like the shittier your state is the more pride you have
Myself as god-tier John
Oh god he’s back
Ridiculously photogenic John on my dash
(Seriously though if John was like 17-18 You’d be my headcanon him and I know a shitton of Johns man)
john egbert more like fuck me over the table
my headcannon face owo
“We changed Astrid’s haircut, which can really change the look of a person. She was difficult because her changes were so subtle.” –Nico Marlet, character designer
Concept art by Nico Marlet
please someone reassure my this is just fuckin w people right.
this is bullshit what the fuck
Wait y’alls cups are really that small? holy fuck
why the fuck anyone needs 1.3L of coke in one sitting is beyond me but anyway
I knew American sizes were bigger but wtf???
those are movie theatre cups not mcdonalds cups omg
Some people say I look like this guy by MrLegenDarius
OH MY GOD YES
gekkan shoujo nozaki-kun is a treasure,
lmao like the only time i EVER see hard disney fans even mention ghibli and miyazaki in comparison to disney films is in light of disney’s own mistakes and laziness like damn y’all need to calm down
lemme teach you a lil’ somethin’ somethin’ about stylistic choices in animation and sheer laziness
STYLISTIC choices is about having the full capability of creating characters separate from the previous protagonists while at the same time tying them to the studio that produced them.
And that’s not even scratching the surface.
Considering that a good portion of Ghibli’s library consists of LEAD FEMALE PROTAGONISTS who are usually very young, they need to find a set balance between recognizable and unique.
Ghibli was founded on traditional art and the studio still holds many of those values with it. This is of course including hand-drawn animation in which there is no single model, only the same character drawn over and over again. Is this about CGI vs traditional? No, both can and have provided beautiful films and scenes but it’s not about which one deserves more recognition. It’s about the methods used and how the choices for each one vary. I only bring up the animation methods because it’s part of the reason as to WHY these characters are so simplistic in design.
Still though, they need each lead character to stick to the Ghibli/Miyazaki style to a certain extent. They need to share certain qualities to make them fall in line with the rest of Ghibli’s library.
I mean, they have their differences but they’re obviously Ghibli characters so okay they all have relatively small eyebrows (though considering that they are Japanese that ties in with their ethnicity but OKAY moving on), they all have the eye highlight thing going on, and they all have very non-pronounced noses. I suppose yeah those are all the same. They do shift but those characteristics are roughly the same.
Still though, that isn’t a problem nor is it blatant same-facing. All LAIKA characters have skewed noses, all Dreamworks characters have thin noses, and all Aardman characters have bulgy eyes. Does that mean they’re same-facing? No. It means they’re sticking to stylistic choices to keep themselves separate from the competition.
Don Bluth MADE the choice to stick to a style closely resembling Disney. You know what happened? A whole generation grew up thinking that Anastasia and Thumbelina were both DISNEY films, not Bluth and Fox animation.
There’s a reason why studios tend to go for their own set style.
But hey! Want even more evidence that it’s a stylistic choice?
Because THE VERY SAME CHOICES CAN BE SAID FOR THE DUDES
Save for Haku because he’s a fuckin’ dragon.
While gender is never really brought up in Ghibli films, masculinity and femininity are both neutral here, it’s safe to say that their designs and treatment are both equal. Ghibli isn’t out to make exclusively beautiful/handsome characters, they make them as simple as possible to keep them relatable and much more easier to manage.
The difference here is that Disney has always set out to make their MALES different while sticking their females to the same “doe eyed, small nose, thin lips” ideal. Yes, there is a set Disney style and it has always focused on those features and that necessarily isn’t a bad thing. It’s the Disney style. HOWEVER it seems to only apply to their females. Even worse is their marketing of said females.
GOTTA KEEP THEM GURLS PURTY
The Disney style has shifted from time to time and it shows evidence that it CAN include more diverse female designs. Both Kida and Calhoun are wonderful examples of this. It’s not as if Disney hasn’t evolved or changed their views on female characters to a certain extent. Unfortunately, said shifts haven’t always worked out in our favor or headed in the right direction. It wasn’t until Tangled that Disney came out with it’s true “get richer quicker” scheme with their female leads.
watch as i shift into MAXIMUM PUNZEL-DRIVE
As of late it’s Disney’s sheer laziness when it comes to female design and their own avarice that has caused SUUUUCH a dramatic shift in how fans are taking the Disney style now. When Ghibli audiences and fans never look at a new movie and go “oh it’s Chihiro but tiny” or “oh it’s Chihiro but on a broom.” That is the set style, not a lazy copy-paste.
But hey, let’s bring in OTHER females to see how this works out. I mean, the Ghibli style is prevalent to ALL of their characters so surely they all the parents look exactly like their children.
Let’s look at these lovely lady leads and compare them to their parents.
Congrats, kids, you’re all adopted!
WEIRDLY ENOUGH all of the characters and their parents (if they have any) share same characteristics while at the same time remaining completely unique to each other. It’s almost as if they also take after their father and/or previous generations of their familly. Haha, genetics!
But okay, let’s be a little more fair with Disney.
Let’s look at two families with two daughters.
Mitosis or go home
There is having stylistic choices and there is being lazy.
There is creating a character with similarities to their parent and there is making a recolor of your lead character.
There is creating simple designs for a traditionally animated film and there is reusing the same model because it worked so well the first time.
There is being a small Tokyo-based studio with 300 employees and there is being a large American animation studio with 800+ employees.
THAT is why no one ever complains about Ghibli’s approach to character design and THAT is why Disney doesn’t even come close to Miyazaki.
Let’s finish this off with some MORE wonderful Ghibli characters (most of which being my personal favorites so they belong on here too.)
Now go watch more Ghibli.
i love the Women Against Feminism that are like “I dont need feminism because i can admit i need my husband to open a jar for me and thats ok!” cause listen 1. get a towel 2. get the towel damp 3. put it on the lid and twist. BAM now men are completely useless. you, too, can open a jar. time to get a divorce
Young!Hiccup's pores/chin scar/freckles appreciation post
See, this right here is why I love Dreamworks’ movies more than I do Disney’s when it comes to the CGI and the detail that goes into it.
Look at Hiccup in every one of these pictures. You can see his pores, his abundant freckles, the little scar on his chin. His skin in uneven, it’s imperfect, it’s spotted. He has the tiniest hints of facial hair on his chin that you can only see in close-ups because it’s THAT fine. His lips are clearly chapped, his teeth are uneven, his eyelashes are super small and hard to see.
And don’t even get me started on his shirt and vest. It looks like I can just reach out and touch them; feel the fur that is probably from the same animal as Stoick’s cape is and touch the sleeves of his shirt and feel the texture that must be at least a little itchy if you’re not used to its touch.
Meanwhile, Tangled came out the SAME YEAR as HTTYD and this is what we get from Disney, the company with the bigger budget and much more publicity than Dreamworks has even now.
Sure, Disney’s doing pretty well with clothing at this point. Eugene’s vest is clearly leather, his shirt’s basic cotton most likely.
But when we get to his face is where it’s much more… plastic. He’s got thinner hair branching off of his beard and side burns, but that’s really it as far as little details on his skin. Otherwise, he’s flawless. No pores, no scratches or evidence of dust/dirt/ anything despite his life as a thief on the run doing whatever he can to get by and get what he wants. His lips are so soft looking that he might as well be wearing lip gloss or something.
And now, how about something more recent from Disney, shall we?
Disney’s definitely improved when it comes to clothing texture, once again. Kristoff’s coat is all scratched up, it looks like I can touch the fur making up the inside for extra warmth. It’s patched up and his sweater looks rough too.
But, once again, we’re really lacking when it comes to skin because of the sake of selling dolls that look like the characters. Sure, this time we’ve got a dusting of freckles on his cheeks and some unevenness around the nose because of the blush there. But it’s nowhere near enough.
I mean, what mountain man is so particular about his facial hair that there’s not even a but of scruff on him? He lives in the mountains with trolls and a reindeer; it’s not like a lot of people see him, if this is a matter of not liking having facial hair when he’s in public or something. But even that doesn’t make sense because Kristoff’s outfit gives off the rough and tough mountain man look that Disney’s trying to convey with him. At least, I think it does it’s job.
They simply just stopped at the face. Idk about everyone else, but I don’t think of a cleanly-shaven man with not a scar nor scratch to be seen on him. I think of a man with a nice, unkempt beard or scruff because he’s got better things to do than shave every day. I see a man who’s got a story behind every scar from accidents in the great outdoors or tangles with the wild wolves. I see a man with calloused hands, a dirty face, and an overall rugged look to him. Kristoff is… more of a middle class man than a man who lives in the woods and sells ice for a living.
Meanwhile, Hiccup. He doesn’t have a manicure like other Disney men. He doesn’t have oh-so kissable lips and a perfect complexion. Hiccup’s a Viking and Dreamworks conveys that very well in his details. His hands are rough; they have dirt and charcoal on then almost all the time, his lips are chapped from the constant cold of living in Berk and his habit of sucking on them or biting them. His freckles are literally everywhere the eye can see and, most importantly to me, he has the uneven skin of the typical 15-year-old teenager. It’s bumpy, it’s imperfect, it’s got more than enough flaws to it but, hey, that’s puberty for you.
Now, this is not a matter of my personal opinion on the companies as a whole. This is just me noticing all of the details that I squeal about all the time when I watch Dreamworks that are simply not there in Disney’s latest films. This is me looking at pictures and pointing out the things that I see and don’t see. And, from those observations, I can comfortably say that Dreamworks without a doubt put in much more attention to the fine details than Disney has to date.
And that’s because Dreamworks isn’t trying to sell toys. They’re trying to sell stories.