Story Symbolism: 1984 and Hamlet in Freaky Friday

 In honor of the release of Freakier Friday, I wanted to discuss and analyze the film Freaky Friday. Now, many of its topics like perspective taking in psychology, the journey both mother and daughter had to take to become selfless, and the other themes found within that could be discussed in heavy details.

However, when I rewatched the film this past Thursday, in preparation for watching its sequel on today. I remembered something very important when it came to Anna's English class. Any book or film mentioned within the story, usually isn't picked at random for the sake of needing something real there, but rather because it has symbolic meaning to the film's or book's story.

A quick fun example: In Pursuit of Happyness, Will Smith (the MC of the film), whose son plays the character's son, tells a joke about a drowning man asking god for help. Three boats come by, but the man turns them away. After dying and reaching heaven, the man asks god why he didn't save him. God reprimands the man because he had sent three boats to save him, and the man refused. The joke, while humorous and cute from a child telling his father, it actually is symbolic to the film's message - opportunities are always there, we just have to seize them when they come, or even help when offered.

So, in much the same way, both 1984 and Hamlet were brought into the film for a reason. So, we will discuss this in detail today.

Let's start with 1984 by George Orwell, which Anna actually nail's its theme and central conflict on the head. At this current moment in Anna's life, she is a teenager seeking freedom from both her teacher's and mother's control over her life. She is at the mercy at Mr. Bates's grading and him not being clear if he is really caring to help or not. Tess, doesn't make things easier either, by removing Anna's door, symbolic of her privacy, and trying to understand Anna, not for the sake of really seeing from Anna's perspective, but to help Anna see how her views are wrong and correct them. The difference here is that Tess genuinely cares for Anna, and is meaning well through her intentions. The same I'm sure could not be said for the government in the novel 1984.

The second literary novel brought to light in Freaky Friday is Hamlet by William Shakespeare. This play's plot is reflected a little deeper into the film like madness, betrayal, and other elements. Some of Anna's behavior, while validated by how Tess ignores and fails to listen, but also by the loss of her father three years prior to the film's beginning. This Tess brings up at the House of Chang, which Anna deflects by shifting the subject off her father. Hamlet also had to deal with the loss of his father, who visits him. While Anna's father never visits them, his ghostly presence is felt throughout the story.

After Pepe's mom's fortune cookies switches their souls into the other the following day, the madness has begun. This becomes aptly appropriate as both mother and daughter accept that they can't tell anyone for fear of what could happen if they did - yes, others will believe they have gone mad.

The betrayal aspect of Hamlet seems out of place in Freaky Friday, but don't forget that Tess in Anna's body recognizes Mr. Bates from her years in high school. A younger Mr. Bates had a crush on Tess. When he had asked her out to the prom she turned him down. While we can't guess the nature of how she turned him down at the time, it is clear Mr. Bates had held some bitterness of her turning him down and so he took out his vendetta on Anna, instead, failing her no reason. There is also Ryan, Tess's fiancee in the film, felt this when Anna in Tess's body rode home on the back of a motorbike with Jake, Anna's crush. Ryan, may have felt a twinge of betrayal there.

Finally, we come to the final analysis of Freaky Friday with Hamlet. Anna, deep down, didn't like Ryan because he is not her father. While three year may feel like adequate time for some, like Tess, but not for others like Anna, who was still having a difficult time moving forward from his passing. Both Anna and Hamlet felt uncertain around their mother's remarrying again so quickly. To Anna, accepting Ryan into their family could feel like a betrayal to her father's memory and legacy, while also feeling betrayed that her mother could just move on from her father's passing so quickly and remarry without a second thought to her and Harry. Anna reveals as much at the end with her speech when Tess asked Anna to call off the wedding, fearing they won't switch back that night and realizing her children aren't quite ready to move forward with someone who could play a father role in their lives.

Anna doesn't call off the wedding because she learns that Ryan isn't here to threaten what is already there, but to honor it and help it remain strong as it is. This, in addition to Tess helping Anna with the audition at the House of Blues, is enough selfless love to put each soul back where they belong. Thankfully, Freaky Friday proves to have a much happier ending than Hamlet, but then again, that's Disney.

These are my thoughts and insight to something that I felt hadn't really been addressed for this film. I would love to hear yours on the matter. Remember, please keep it civil.

Character Analysis: Regina Mills (Season 2)

I know, I know, this old stuff. The way I see it, classics like ABC's Once Upon a Time never get old. This is a timeless show for many of the reasons Harry Potter is considered a classic today. However, I'm not here to talk about what makes this show a classic, but rather talk about one of my favorite characters of the show: Regina Mills (aka The Evil Queen).

One of the reasons I love her character is because of the transformation she goes through from season 1 to season 7 (not a big fan of the final season, but it really adds to her arc).Today, I am not going to focus on the entire arc, but the arc she goes through in season 2, because this is the season where she really teeter-totters between hero and villain.

Season 1, Regina was hell-bent on kicking Emma out of Storybrooke so she won't take Henry away from her and won't break the curse. At the same time, she wants to keep destroying Snow (Mary-Margaret) and David's relationship. In the end, she fails, despite getting very close to succeeding. Thank you, Henry! As devastating as her loss was at the season 1 finale, this pushes Regina into the bottom of a very deep hole, kind of her own belly of the whale trope. Though, I feel she goes through two of these.

Often times, we see heroes easily climb out of the belly of the beast situation like Luke, Leia, Han, and Chewie in A New Hope. True, they had to fight a bunch of Stormtroopers to escape the Death Star, but compared to Regin's climb out, their escape looks like child's play in comparison. Now, I'm not saying our galactic heroes' struggles weren't valid and worth their merit.

However, we need to keep in mind that Regina had been the villain for a very long time, always relying on unhealthy and unsafe means of dealing with her struggles. In season 2, we see her struggle with her dark and light side heavily, especially in the first few episodes. First couple, she flickers from the wallpaper trick on David to threatening everyone in Storybrooke, if Henry doesn't go with her. She even pretends to not know who Jefferson is in front of Emma, hoping this could be some tool she could use against Emma later down the road.

Henry, finally reminds her that love has to be earned and real love is allowing the people you care for to be happy and be themselves. Regina is reminded of how Cora had kept her like a prisoner in the king's castle and not letting Regina be herself. Regina finally tries to do better for Henry by letting him stay with David. That doesn't mean her struggles are over. She goes to Archie to help her not use magic and does snap at Emma after Emma and Snow return home. Regina quickly apologizes and tries to do better.

Sadly, the other residents don't make it easy. Change needs help and support. Henry believes in her and so does Emma. As for the rest, they are quick to blame her when evidence points to Regina killing Archie. Emma and Henry only believe this when this see the evidence through Pongo's memory. (I know Henry didn't, but I'm sure Emma confirmed this with him.)

In a later episode, Mary Margaret states at the hospital that she doesn't want to imagine what could happen if Cora finds Regina first, after learning of Regina's innocence and Cora has found a way to Storybrooke. Mary-Margaret is right. Cora pushes Regina back down the slippery slope she had been trying to climb. Regina, at her most vulnerable, and feels utterly alone, is left with no choice but to Cora, believing her mother is truly there to help her.

Regina returns to villainy, alongside her mother, but Snow knows putting doubt into Regina's head could help not just the heroes, but Regina herself to start waking up. Cora cares for Regina, but not in the way Regina might want it. The fall worsens after Snow kills Cora, and both Snow and Regina are back at each other's throats, well more Regina's back at it.

Now completely alone, Regina resorts to her evil, old ways, feeling it is the only option left for her. She puts her own needs and interests above everyone else, but then again I can't blame her. David and Snow discuss about returning back to the Enchanted Forest, and plan to make Regina's life miserable. Her support system isn't strong. Henry won't approve her moves and Emma, while understanding, doesn't either. These two have remained supportive, but their faith in Regina can only hold for so long especially how protective and insecure she reveals herself in becoming.

In result of pushing everyone away, as Emma assured her could happen, she is left alone and once more in the belly of the whale. She is captured and helpless at the hands of Craig and Tamara, and Hook has no interest in helping her. In the end, the heroes with guns ablaze save Regina. Afterall, she is family and a Storybrooke resident who doesn't deserve to die at the hands of outsiders who wish to destroy them all. As the famous saying goes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Being saved several times, and especially when she no longer had a way to climb out, Emma, Snow, David, and Neal (who took a bullet and landed in the Enchanted Forest) came to her aid. Even, the Blue Fairy healed Regina. Though, Regina still remains bitter, she is grateful and slowly is able to make her climb out and become a hero.

This is why I have made this a character analysis rather than a simple, straightforward hero or villain one. She had oscillated for most of season 2, but with all the growing pains, slips, and getting back up, helped her finally start on the true path of redemption.

While these are my thoughts and take on Regina's season 2 arch, I would love hear yours. Please share them in the comments below.

Harry Potter: The Boy Who Became a Classic

 The day before yesterday was Harry Potter's birthday as well as JK Rowling's, who in my opinion is not a transphobic, but has an opinion that isn't popular with the masses, and that's fine. I support her rights and freedom to express her thoughts and opinions, whether I truly agree with her on that is irrelevant and will not stand in the way of respecting the woman for who she is. I also support the LGBTQ community.

Okay, so now that is out of the way, I want to honor both the author and her famous character. While Harry Potter has so much to give in its themes and morals that help its readers to become better people each day, the one thing I want to focus on most is what makes Harry Potter a classic. I covered this in an academic paper, but I will not go into too deeply here and just touch the surface with this. Now, we can truly go deeper in the comments section if you'd like.

I am not saying that I won't talk about the morals and themes. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Usually what makes a story a classic is their timeless themes and morals. Key word "timeless", meaning these messages are ones that humanity has never gotten never tired of hearing and must continue to hear them. I know saying this sounds odd. True, none of us want to hear the same lecture over and over again, whether it is from our parents, teachers, or even the local priest or guru. Yet, the way non-didactic stories do this is where we learn them in an entertaining and an emotional way.

Didactic means when a story's primary purpose is to teach. Harry Potter, Star Wars, and many other great stories' primary purpose is to entertain; the lesson is a delicious bonus that makes the story all the more memorable and loved. Trust me didactic stories can't do this very well, at least none that I'm aware of.

Harry Potter deals with timeless universal themes like death, love, discrimination, friendship, teaching, and much more. It has taught countless readers that death is inevitable, but the only way to truly conquer it is through love, and it isn't about love bringing the person we lost back, but rather honoring the people we loved in life through how we live. "It is our choices, Harry, that show us who we truly are, far more than our abilities" (Rowling, 1998, 333). Dumbledore's words ring true in the actions of the other characters in all seven books and in the real-world people.

However, it isn't enough to have these powerful themes written across the pages. It is also essential to have the entertaining stuff like magic wands, dragons, playing Quidditch, sneaking through Hogwarts at night, and having butterbeer and banter with friends. These moments make lessons all the moral powerful and meaningful.

On top of this, they have things that are things we associate with the story and want to have like butterbeer, chocolate frogs, house scarves, and character wands. A perfect breeding ground for merchandizing and creating recipes.

Another big aspect, are characters we can connect with and relate to. Characters have to be laired and complex, not black and white. Snape, Draco, Harry, Ron, and Hermione prove this alongside a number of other characters. It is why we love them, because they're flawed, making them more human and relatable.

Combine all this, you have a story that is worthy to be remembered, reread, rewatched, and have posted on all our mugs, shirts, and walls. Years ago, after the last Harry Potter film was released, people wondered would this series become a classic. It was probably too early to tell, but at the time when I wrote the paper, I knew it would become so. I knew this simply for these many reasons. It has been proven through a Broadway production, theme park, Harry Potter stores slowly opening around the world, Fantastic Beasts films, and now a TV series.  The stories are filled with rich world-building we wish we could live in, colorful characters that we can connect with, and themes that help us navigate the real world. This is why, today, it has been proven that has becomes a classic. And it always will be one. Always.

Trends and Traditions in Fantasy Storytelling

 First off, I apologize for not posting anything last week nor mentioning anything about it till now. I honestly, didn't have anything I wished to discuss last week. As a writer, it is important for me to feel a passionate energy in what I write or discuss. Now, granted there's a lot like discrimination found in the Harry Potter books, and I could even talk about the themes of love and death found within the text. I could talk about the theme of balance in Star Wars, but I wasn't feeling the energy about diving into these discussions at the time. If I don't have the passionate energy needed, then the writing will not be at its peak, my argument will be weak, lacking proper evidence, and, in the end, it won't be fair to any of my readers because you deserve strong, well-written discussion topics.

So, now that is out of the way, I want to talk about something that has been on my mind since I decided to forgo a post last week. I had been wrestling with this quire a lot recently, and I also touched on this in my Youtube vlog.

Now, normally I would like to avoid discussing things too close to my writing here because I want to keep these two things separate, but trending genres seems to be applying to both sides of the board - the readers and the writers. I discussed more in-depth on the writer's side, but I would I will expand on this and add more the reader's side in.

In the process of querying, one of the common points writers must be mindful of are topics trending in the market. This doesn't mean we need to write what is trending because the trend can change by the time a writer gets their book published, and even what they write could change the trend. In other words, become the new trendsetter.

These are current struggles, I am facing, but I am doing my best to be unfazed by the trending market. However, as a reader, it is becoming difficult for me to find books that I genuinely enjoy and look forward to reading the sequel. Okay, I'm not saying I don't enjoy many of the books I read, but I haven't enjoyed them as much as I've enjoyed Harry Potter or the Green Rider series or something along those lines.

I suppose, I'm someone who enjoys the classic fantasy stories like Lord of the Rings and the stories I grew up in the late 90s and early 00s. That was the trend during the time. Searching the Hogwarts castle for clues with Harry, Ron, and Hermione, or stepping into the wardrobe into Narnia with the Pevensie children, or flying on a dragon's back with Eragon.

Then those days ended with vampires falling in love with humans, yes I'm looking at you Twilight. Then shortly after teenage apocalyptic novels like Hunger Games, Divergent, and the Maze Runner took center stage saturating the market with teenage game stories taking place in a future world. I've read the Hunger Game novels, and while I found them jarring and at times annoying, I grew to respect them. Now, I didn't read the Divergent novels, but I've seen the films. While they're different in the themes and morals, they are similar in regards to the apocalyptic world being segregated into groups. Regardless, the vibe is still beating in similar beats. Even one of the recent stories I read, Caravel felt similar with the whole game feel, but it also uniquely did something different. It also belongs in the current trending market.

Today's trend is romantasy. Stories the blend both the fantasy genre and the romance genre. One of the most popular ones is A Court of Thorns and Roses by Sarah J. Maas. You can add Outlander, A Discovery of Witches, and Fourth Wing into this new trending genre. I did watch the A Discovery of Witches show on Netflix. It was intriguing and engaging, and the romance felt more or less realistic, if not a tad predictable. Keyword "tad", meaning not by a lot. The happily every after is there along with a few other elements I will not mention.

I, personally, am not a huge fan of romance. The idea they blended the two is making me cringe. As I said in my vlog, I've never enjoyed romance stories because of the constant pining for each other and the obsession they have for one each other. Its like they forget there are other important things out there, too, aside from each other.

My struggle dealing with this new trend has never felt so real till recently due to me querying my own manuscript, which isn't a romantasy, and finding ideal stories for me to read in bed or watch in a TV series format. Some would be nice in a film, too, but it seems those days have come and gone. I love traditional fantasy stories where real-life themes like plutonic love, death, balance, good vs evil, discrimination are placed in a high or epic fantasy adventure or political intrigue. At the same time, the worlds need to be lush, beautiful, and immersive.

While, I do enjoy the classic tropes, I don't mind them changing and twisting to tell a better story, but that doesn't mean they need to be gritty and edgy. I have yet to find a new story to love, aside from some of the Star Wars content that has been coming out in recent years. Changing the old, tired tropes is understandable and is certainly needed, but don't compromise what makes those traditional stories beloved to do so.

This is what I am hoping to change by adding something that pays homage to what is beloved most in the high and epic fantasy stories, but doing something different and giving something new and fresh. My current manuscript is exactly this with magical creatures, sword fights, political intrigue, but heavily dissects a mother-daughter through the themes of class, nature, and finding hope through failure.

So, this is my view on the current trends, and also my own personal tastes and hope for the future. Granted, many of you will not share my personal tastes and opinions on this, but that's what makes the world all so colorful. Please share your thoughts and feelings below, and remember to be polite and respectful the thoughts and opinions of others.

Film Review: Snow White (2025)

Upfront, this film has received a lot of backlash, especially with its choice casting of Rachel Zegler as Snow White, and other aspects like CGI dwarves. However, I am make my opinion on this film solely on the film itself - story, setting, CGI, casting, and the whole shebang. This means I am putting aside popular opinions negative and/or positive aside. Now this doesn't mean I will completely ignore it. I will certainly acknowledge and address them, but I will do so with the other aspects into consideration.

This past Friday night, I sat down and watched Snow White (2025). Off the bat, it isn't a bad film, but it isn't great either. In other words, nothing to write home about. For Disney, adapting one of their most iconic classics that made history, it is kind of disappointing. However, standing on its own, it was satisfactory.

There were certainly things I enjoyed about about this film, in terms of how it addressed many of the outdated issues of the first one. Now, I'm aware many found this is very annoying, considering the film being woke to many people and destroying what made the original Snow White film what it is. I get that we won't get the feel of the nostalgia, but honestly, I feel this world has become a little hypocritical. People constantly slander the original Beauty and the Beast for displaying Stockholm Syndrome, which it doesn't, The Little Mermaid for telling girls that they need to change for their man, and while I see the angle, people forget Ariel wanted to be human before seeing Eric, and of course, Cinderella gets attacked for making children believe that love at first sight is real, and you can marry that person the next day. The latter, I am happy to back that claim one 99%.

There's nothing wrong in addressing outdated themes. One example I loved was that Snow White had the dwarves clean their own home, and she helped them. So, she wasn't above joining them in the labor of cleaning their home, but neither beneath them in doing it all for them. Snow White was equal to the dwarves in this way.

The one worry I had prior to watching this film was that Snow White would be too far removed from her Hufflepuff qualities found in the original. Thankfully, they kept them, and the changes they made only strengthened those values, rather than weakening them.

While, I can't speak for others on this matter, but I am glad that they tweaked Dopey's character. I was apprehensive, but it seemed to work well here, and really helped represent those with learning disabilities or people like Dopey, who feel more aptly represented in an empowering way.

These were certainly the film's golden qualities, but not I wish to address the areas where I am feeling rather mixed about and feel aren't working in the story's favor. One of which are the clothing of the bandits. They appeared too modern for my liking, especially Johnathan's, which felt jarring in this fairytale setting set in a German-like location.

Upon the casting of Rachel Zegler and Gal Gadot, I originally expected the setting to be in Spain rather than Germany. There's nothing wrong of changing a setting to film that never truly specified, and felt more generic. However, from some of the tunes to the architecture, it is very clear that it is set in Germany or a setting inspired by Germany. So, the casting choices now make little sense. While, I don't mind their point of fairness is something found within you rather than being the color of your skin, but Snow White has always been associated with fair skin. Zegler is not deeply tan, of course, but not fair enough in complexity for me to kind of feel irked at times when I watched the film. Returning to the setting issue, I found the forest to be very German. I visited the Black Forest once, and the setting reminded me of that very real forest. Yes, so did the cuckoo clock in the dwarves' home because I know cuckoo clocks originated from Germany. Yet, many of the new tunes and the cast are not German.

The bandits with their modern clothing didn't help with the setting either. Even their presence was a little confusing. It was difficult to get a feel of their purpose in this story. The plot since encountering the bandits, honestly, became more rushed and confusing. I understood what was happening, but I couldn't understand why. Why was it taking Snow so long to journey to another kingdom to find out if her father was alive or not?

On the downside, the newly added musical pieces were not catchy and fell flat. Snow's and Jonathan's relationship felt rushed and not so passionate as I found in the other Disney remakes. Snow was placed to rest on a big rock. I'm surprised Snow didn't complain about it after waking up. On the other hand, some of the nods I loved, like Jonathan imitating the Snow's funeral scene during the song. Though when that did happen, it felt like a checklist item rather than a plot point. Honestly, Maleficent did this better.

In conclusion, this is why I am giving this film a satisfactory middle mark. It was reasonably entertaining, but there were certainly areas that could be improved like the CGI animals and dwarves. I get the animated cartoon feel for them, but it just didn't work for me, and it would have been nice to cast some actual little people for the roles.

While I'm aware this wasn't the most beloved live action remake, I'd love to hear your thoughts and comments on the film with politeness and textual evidence to back it up (meaning specific examples from the film).

Hero Analysis: Padme Amidala

In honor of 4th of July I have decided to do a hero analysis. Last night I rewatched The Phantom Menace. So, I will do a hero from Star Wars. Now, I could, honestly, do any of the heroes from Episode I, but many of these characters like Anakin and Obi-Wan have been studied and analyzed thoroughly in the last 25 years. Yes, it celebrated its 25th anniversary last year. I decided to analyze my favorite Star Wars character of all time - Padme Amidala (Naberrie/Skywalker).

So, why Padme do you ask? Why not Jar Jar or another hero that has often been left in the dust. Well, the funny thing is Padme was not intended to be like those characters due to the significant role she plays in the overall arc of the six episode story. Yet, she is constantly treated like a minor character rather than the major character she is. The reason behind this, I feel, is largely on how George Lucas wrote her character across the three films. This I will touch on more in a bit.

First, what really inspired me to discuss her today is because earlier this week, there was a Youtube video I watched about ways to introduce your main characters and open up your story. This got me thinking about Padme's unique introduction to Star Wars. Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, Jar Jar, R2-D2, C-3PO, and Anakin all got some pretty interesting introductions in Phantom Menace. Padme's is by far the most intriguing.

The scene she gets her first introduction is when their outside the main hangar where the "queen" has to decide whether to stay on Naboo with her people or leave with the Jedi. The queen turns to her handmaiden who simply says "We are brave, Your Highness." That's it. That's all we got. Honestly, in most films, it would have simply have been an extremely minor character getting their one moment in the spotlight. Yet, in Padme's case, her role continues to increase as the film progresses from cleaning up Artoo to then finally revealing herself as the queen. Later, she goes on to represent Naboo in the senate before and during the Clone Wars, marries Anakin, fights in a number of battles, and eventually, gives birth to Luke and Leia.

Such a move certainly makes you scratch your head as to why Lucas decided to introduce her in such way, where we are meant to assume she's simply a minor character. I personally feel that Lucas did this is to show who she is. She was a queen disguised as a handmaiden in plain sight. We were meant to overlook her and not give her second thought. It goes back to the academic paper I wrote in college about Star Wars (Yes, I wrote a paper on it), which was about the visual meanings and representation in the Star Wars universe. One of the first things I mention, is that Obi-Wan in A New Hope, says to Luke "Your eyes can deceive you. Don't trust them." This echoes the entire Star Wars story. Every visual element is important in Star Wars. This includes that well-known brief interaction between a queen and her handmaiden outside the main hangar. Padme made you think she was nothing more than a handmaiden, but throughout the film, she slowly revealed herself to not be a mere handmaiden.

Honestly, I could go on all day about this, but now I want to focus on her as a character and hero in the Star Wars universe. George Lucas did showcase Padme splendidly as a politician who is different than others in her field because of her kindness, intelligence, strong morals, and fierce combatant on the front lines. Timothy Zahn, the creator of Admiral Thrawn, best described Padme as someone who has a toolbox with her. Depending on the situation, she will either use her negotiating skills or she will charge into a situation with her blaster firing. These are things that Ahsoka Tano admires about Padme and even learns to apply after a year in hiding in the reign of the empire. Hence, Padme's legacy continues even after her demise.

However, I myself found her character arc in Revenge of the Sith, disappointing. As did, I'm sure, others. I fell in love with Star Wars through Padme's personality whether it be her way of talking her way out of situation or fearlessness to join the fight alongside her Jedi comrades. She was not a damsel in distress as I had believed most Disney princesses to be when I was nine-years-old. Though I hadn't gotten into Star Wars officially till I was eleven. Yet, she became a romantic, damsel in Episode III. My cousin argued that she was pregnant and a character who was convinced that Anakin could do no harm, especially to younglings. Pregnancy, fine, I get you will be out of the action, but that doesn't mean your entire character growth over the past two episodes is to slide backwards. Also how could she not believe Obi-Wan saying he saw a holo-recording of Anakin killing younglings when Anakin had confessed to killing Tusken Raider children alongside the men and women in Attack of the Clones. Also, I refuse to believe she just lost the will to live. Anakin Force-choked her, and I don't believe Force-chokes can leave medical marks on the body.

Thankfully, Clone Wars redeemed her character. She was the woman I grew up admiring. In addition, I learned about her personal weakness and struggles, which made her more human and relatable. That empowering speech she made about defeating the bill for more clones was mind-blowing and certainly left the one she gave Boss Nass in Episode I in the dust. What made that speech every impactful was that she still respected and honored the clones that currently served on the front lines, and that it got under Palpatine's skin.

Sadly, this does little to make up for the damage Episode III did to her because it is still part of her arc. However, her legacy continues. As we saw in the "Obi-Wan Kenobi" show and the Star Wars: Ahsoka novel by EK Johnston. She lives on through her children. Obi-Wan ensured that Leia knew this, though he didn't share Padme's name with her. A year after Order 66, Ahsoka struggled to find a way to live in a galaxy that no longer welcomed Jedi, of any sort. Ahsoka tried applying the teachings Anakin and Obi-Wan taught her, but they failed her. Through meditation, Ahsoka discovered that she had to rely on Padme's teachings because Padme was never a Jedi, but the noble senator survived countless battles using her own strengths and understanding the situation before acting. Ahsoka applied this in her current situation during the Empire's reign and it worked. Padme also taught Ahsoka about the politics of the galaxy, which allowed Ahsoka to become mindful how political systems can affect the entire galaxy and its people.

Padme Amidala deserves far more credit and love than she had received. While Lucas's writing of her character kind of went downhill in Revenge of the Sith, but she is still a major character that has done so much service to the galaxy during her lifetime and even beyond. The last part doesn't just apply to her children and Ahsoka, but also to the Rebel Alliance. She had urged Bail after Palpatine gave his speech, which brought in the age of the empire, to obey and keep your head down, but in secret work against the empire and all it stands for. Hence, the birth of the rebellion.

While I'm certain many of you might disagree, feel free to share your thoughts on Padme's character. Do you feel the same as I? What are your hopes for her character in the future of Star Wars? Also, once gain remember to be nice and civil like Padme herself because she would not approve of foul play, nor would I.

Live-Action Remakes

 Recently, I watched Lilo and Stitch live-action remake in theaters this past week. The remake in my personal opinion landed in the middle for me. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either. There were certainly changes made. Some of these made sense, and had some realistic approach backing them, but others felt more awkward, and made me scratch my head. Plowing forward, I will not delve too deeply to avoid major spoilers at the current time. I will continue the discussion of remakes after the asterisk lines. If you do not wish to be spoiled in the slightest then stop reading now.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

***********************************************************************************

The few awkward decisions that they made were to remove a major character and change some aspects of Lilo's and Nani's personalities. With an essential, original character missing, it changed the third act of the film greatly, shocking many. While, I personally don't mind a surprise twist, like Prince Hans being the villain of Frozen, this one, in a similar boat, didn't have the same effect. It left the film feeling awkward and odd. They also removed Lilo's disability side and Nani's empathy to a degree that left it feeling more off. Other minor changes even removed the emotional strings of the original too.

**********************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Now, I wish to address the ongoing discussion about live-action remakes in a broad general way because analyzing each and every adaptation is going to be a too lengthy of a discussion here. Each individual remake will have its due on this blog, so don't worry.

I always love to start broad general discussions like this with my own personal view on the matter as a whole. I personally don't mind an occasional live-action remake from time-to-time of animated film that had come over a decade or so ago. Like it has to feel like a generally long time to a point where I think - it would interesting to see this in live action. This isn't something I think about with most animated films, much less recent ones. In other words, they need to be old enough that times have changed, the film feels kind of outdated in some of its elements, and that it is screaming for a remake like Beauty and the Beast, Peter Pan, and etc. At the same time, a live-action remake of a classic cannot be taken lightly. They need to be thought through and lot of thought needs to be put in to consider the best approach in remaking it.

Frankly, I feel that Disney and even Dreamworks, now, aren't entirely getting this. They are more concerned about a financial gain from a box office hit than the story itself. This is what I feel has happened to Lilo and Stitch, Peter Pan (Peter Pan and Wendy), Mulan, and other live-action remakes. These films are quickly made and released with little thought and heart, which had been put into the originals. In the process, the remakes lose what made the original animated film so special. It could be certain minor elements like not mentioning why the main character's parents have died, casting choices to be more inclusive, or visual effects. It honestly feels like these concepts look like an amazing draft to a beautiful remake, but remain just that - a draft.

Films like 101 Dalmatian, Alice in Wonderland, and Jungle Book, did a fine job in the remake department. Now, I know some might argue with me due to their own personal opinions, but I'm here to bring my own, and back them up with reasonable evidence. 101 Dalmatians with Glenn Close came out sometime in the 90s, I believe, and I really fell in love with story, visuals, and art styles picked for the film. True, it is certainly different from the animated film, where the animals could talk and it had a cat aiding in the puppies' escape from DeVil Manor. Yes, the live-action didn't have talking animals and Sargant Tibs was missing, but despite the changes, the execution of the film was stunning. You didn't need to hear the animals talk; you can figure out from the body stance to the barks and tweets of the animals to know roughly what is going on in a scene with just animals.

Alice in Wonderland from what I heard was a mixed bag in terms of its reception from audience and fans. For me, I loved it. However, I didn't watch the Disney's original Alice in Wonderland, but I did read the book by Lewis Carroll. I personally disliked the book because there was no sense of plot and felt like a very weird dream, as dreams often are. Yes, I'm aware that is kind of the point because it was all Alice's dream in the novel. This doesn't mean I want to be in one while awake and reading. So, watching Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland was a pure joy for me. I felt it certainly did better than the book in this regard because it had a plot. As for the remake aspect from the animated, I cannot judge it. However, I will say this - Walt Disney himself had admitted that Alice in Wonderland was one of his worst animated films he'd ever produced. Yes, the man himself hated it. Sadly, I can't speak for the legend himself, if he would have loved the live-action remake, but I feel, based on his response to original, and my take on the live-action vs the book, it is better.

The reason I feel the three of these did well is because they had had enough time in between each other to do well. A lot of time and effort was put to execute these films well. Now, I'm not saying the rest are complete trash because of it.

2017's Beauty and the Beast did a phenomenal job of cleaning up the plot holes left by original animated film. Also, I love the artistic musical approach it made. That doesn't mean the film was without flaws. Two of which I feel was Emma Watson's singing and her dress. Watson I feel was perfectly suited to the role of Belle, but I can't say the same for her singing voice. I also agree with many about the ballroom dress she wore. It certainly felt too modern. While, I appreciate wanting to change it up and get a new vibe and feel, but sadly it failed to deliver.

Films like Peter Pan and Wendy, while I appreciate the concept of maturity added, and being faithful the to Native American culture, which the original Disney film didn't do, I feel the magic joy I felt watching the original fell short with the visuals, and the filmmakers trying too hard to not make Peter the sole hero of the story. I don't mind Peter going on a character arc journey of learning to be selfless and mature, but I felt it was poorly executed.

The last aspect I wish to bring up, which I've heard many bring up and it has bothered me, is that people complain about not sticking to the originals scene for scene. I understand the desire to see every scene and moment you loved in the original animated film be adapted, but at the same time I feel it is tad unrealistic and boring. A lot of the remakes, brought new, interesting twists to outdated themes, which made the watch of the remake a little more enjoyable and appreciated. Honestly, I've seen a strict and faithful adaptation of A Wrinkle in Time and I was honestly bored because I knew what would happen next because I've read the book. Certain things have to change because the times have changed, and I might sound woke about it, but it is true. We have to respect and represent all aspect life, faithfully. We needed Cinderella and the prince to meet prior to the ball, otherwise it would be the same theme of "love at first sight" which isn't always true.

Overall, remakes have to walk the delicate balance of keeping what works and makes the heart of the original, at the same time, changing the things that are outdated. The best way I feel studios can do this is by giving these masterpieces time. Work through the stories and analyze all this before production. Also, pick stories that could use work because they did poorly in the box office and have room to grow like Atlantis, Treasure Planet, and The Black Cauldron. In addition, give these stories room to breathe and become their own classics before deciding to make them into live-action like How to Train Your Dragon and Moana (Yes, Moana is becoming a live action.).

These are my opinion and thoughts on all this. Please feel free to share yours. Do you agree? Disagree? Remember, be polite. Rudeness will not be tolerated here.

Inclusiveness in Remakes and Adaptations

 I struggled to find a suitable topic for discussion today. This past Friday, I rewatched the live action Beauty and the Beast, and considered discussing this. However, as I planned on what I might cover in the blog, I realized that there's a far more controversial and current topic trend spreading across the internet with each new remake and adaptation made.

Off the bat, I am all about being inclusive and representing every race and ethnicity out there. One of my favorite Pixar films is Coco alongside Brave and Inside Out. I even grew up loving the 1997 Rodger's and Hammerstein's Cinderella. Though my brother and I questioned the realistic approach because the Prince didn't look anything like his parents. Later, as an adult when I rewatched it, I think I heard one of the character's mention he was adopted, which makes a little more sense.

So, I have no qualms of a black Cinderella or anything like that, but it has to make some obvious sense. This is something I've picked up on in the recent show Rings of Power. I don't mind some racial diversity. However, having a random black elf and hobbit in the middle of a land filled with characters who are mostly white is a little off-putting. Tolkien's Middle Earth setting, as I understand it, is based on the English landscapes. (Yes, I know the films were filmed in New Zealand - a topic for another day and time.) Now, I don't have a clear history on this, so I could be wrong here, but from my understanding on this, blacks probably weren't heavily present in those areas at those times in history. If Middle-Earth is a representation of the UK at the time then it feels even more odd to have them. But, yes, I understand the need for diversity and inclusiveness, but that doesn't excuse lazy writing and world-building. There could very well be black dwarves and elves coming from elsewhere outside of Middle-Earth, or some backstory in how a random black hobbit integrated himself with the white hobbits. Do you see my point here?

I am aware some of you are rolling your eyes - It is a work of fiction? It doesn't take away from the story. So, drop it.

I hear you. Yes, it is fiction, and so are the number of other stories that have been subjugated to this lazy inclusiveness. In truth, and for the most part these race swaps don't often affect the story, but it can be jarring for those who aren't sure if the work is taking a romantic or accurate approach to the setting. Romantic approach, for example, would be the live action Lady and the Tramp where diverse inclusiveness is spread thoroughly through the story, but does not represent how the real world at the time and place truly worked. New Orleans, during that time, didn't have blacks who can own their own shops and be wealthy enough to afford the shipment of a fancy vase from Africa. Even a romantic approach can be jarring, but less so. When there's only one character who has been race swapped than it is even harder to swallow.

What is the big issue? I didn't mind Cinderella. "Cinderella" is a classic, timeless fairy tale that has had many iterations of its story. It is, therefore, immune to race swapping. However, stories that have characters with clear distinct descriptions or a specific film is being adapted into live action that comes with a certain set of expectations could prove problematic. By the descriptions and by what we grow up seeing, we get used to, or imagine without our own heads. So, when Little Mermaid live action remake came out, I was disappointed like many others because I expected a white female red-head to play her. Also, this move also created another problem, which I will get into shortly. The same occurred for me with the "Percy Jackson" show with Annabeth being black with black hair, and Percy being a blonde-haired kid. See, I got bothered by Percy's appearance, too. It has nothing to do with race. I read the books and knew to expect both these characters to be white, with blonde for Annabeth, and black for Percy. Granted a similar feel occurred with the "Forbidden Child" play where they made Hermione black too, but I was willing to let this one slide because the description of her never mentioned her skin, but her bushy brown hair, and buck teeth, which were open to interpretation. It jarred me a little, still, but that's because I knew I never ended up picturing Hermione like that, and I got used to Emma Watson in the role of Hermione. But, I do understand that others may have pictured her differently. So, I am able to get behind this one. However, I can't get behind Harry being Indian. I get it is a classic Indian boy look. Even as someone who has Indian born and raised parents, I can't get behind this one.

Now before diving into the case of Snape, I want to cover something quickly about the Little Mermaid live action. Disney's live action Little Mermaid ended up not just race-swapping the main character, but it also pulled a move that other films and shows have done with specific types of characters - red-headed females. I had watched the CW's "Flash" and I had no idea that Iris was originally meant to be red-headed white. Ariel is a female red-head, and she got swapped for a black. So, in the process of being inclusive for blacks, they're doing the opposite for female white red-heads. That's not cool.

In the case of Snape being black, it is given in the description that he is sallow skinned, and due to his backstory, Snape being black is going to take on a whole new meaning when James bullies Snape, which I don't think Rowling intended. There's already a theme of discrimination in Harry Potter, and I agree we don't always need the classic black against white happening all over again. I get it we need to ensure that future generations learns the power of treating people equally and that discrimination is bad, but surely we can find creative ways to say the same thing. Just look at Zootopia. And there are other races and ethnicities that could use some love, too.

Bottom line, I enjoy watching films and shows, and reading books with characters that are black, white, red-headed, Asian, etc. We grow up watching stories with a certain image in mind of how a character is supposed to look, and while their change in live-action might have little affect on the plot, can be off-putting due to not being used to the change. Even reading a book where a character is given a certain set of descriptions, and then the adaptation wishes to change it, can be upsetting because our minds have used those descriptions within the book to create the character in our heads. If the book mentions the character to be dark-skinned, then I will imagine that character to be dark-skinned.

Inclusivity is fine and important in our culture, but that doesn't excuse lazy writing and world-building. Don't just pick and choose characters at random who will be black for the sake of being inclusive. And don't push other minority groups further into the dark in the attempts to keep putting another race in need of inclusivity in its place.

Be creative and original with a diverse cast or a specific group focus story. Or find a way to be explain randomness. The Inheritance Cycle is a wonderful example of this. I remember one of the characters, I forget her name, is black and it is explained that she is from a certain tribe of people who have their own cultural norms. I loved this because it supported the reason why there's a random black character in the story filled with white characters.

Please share your thoughts. Do you agree? Do you disagree? Do wish to add to it? Did I miss something? Now keep in mind, please be courteous to everyone here. We all have a right to speak and be heard, no matter our opinions. You can say your opinions without hurting someone else.

Returning to Blog!

    It has been nearly six years, since I lasted posted on this blog. My journey over the past few years have been filled with many trials filled with both failures and victories. It has recently been made clear that what I do here is essential to my future. 

    So, now with my personal writing ready for querying, I've decided to redirect my focus here and on my vlog. The Tree Nook vlog will no longer be active, but this one will. However, this blog will have some changes. Nothing physical, but rather what this blog will focus on. I will focus not just on giving you quality writing from me, but also quality content focused primarily on discussions from a wide range of entertainment sources like books, films, and shows. 

    I know I've done so in the past, but I've also added things that may not relate or connect well. Those particular topics like parties, events, and theming will find a new home in a new blog. I don't know if I will be doing it soon or not. However, I will let you know.

    This blog from this day onward will focus on in-depth discussions on topics I enjoy discussing whether it be a book, film, or show. You are welcome to follow and join me in discussing these in the comments section below. I will do my best to respond in a timely manner, and, of course, respectfully too. I also ask you to do likewise. I will not tolerate insults, slurs, or misconduct here. That's fine if people disagree on things, but disagreement doesn't mean we need to hurl insults at each other.

    I am hoping to release one a week. At the moment, I don't know on which day. I am leaning towards one of the weekend days. Maybe Sunday. Also, if this does well, along with my vlog on Youtube - The Questing Bard, I may consider adding a podcast to this blog. My vlog will continue my writing progress and updates.

    So, stay tuned. Next week I will be bringing up a topic for discussion.