2 minutes ago   •   43,745 notes   •   VIA: vlavian   •   SOURCE: seldrew
  • My God, are we gonna be like, our parents? Not me. Ever.

    3 minutes ago   •   27,894 notes   •   VIA: vlavian   •   SOURCE: gongchantv
  • gongchantv:

    do you ever see spoilers for a show you don’t watch anymore and just 

    image

    7 minutes ago   •   7,992 notes   •   VIA: tonybannersoundsgreat   •   SOURCE: trissprior
  • 7 minutes ago   •   786 notes   •   VIA: nbchannibal   •   SOURCE: nbchannibal
  • nbchannibal:

    Happy

    image

    October

    image

    FIRST

    image

    7 hours ago   •   474,586 notes   •   VIA: sixpenceee   •   SOURCE: lvloonlight
  • 7 hours ago   •   85,338 notes   •   VIA: enterprising-gentleman   •   SOURCE: disneypixar
  • strangeducks:

home-stuck-in-desert-bluffs:

typette:

sharkchunks:

disneypixar:

A trip down sensory lane.

Filmmakers take note- This five second scene not only fully describes a characters backstory, but the entire reason he acts the way he acts through the film, taking him from a villain to a sympathetic character and justifying a total reversal of his actions in the present. In five seconds, this movie does for the development of a character more than most movies do in two hours. This is why you should be studying Disney and Pixar along with Martin Scorsese and Stanley Kubrick, and ignoring professors and elitist students who deride them as “kids stuff.”

wasn’t there a theory that Anton’s childhood cottage is the cottage Remy learned his craft from eavesdropping inside before travelling to Paris, and the recipe he’s tasting really is his mother’s ratatouille?

WHAT

YES

    strangeducks:

    home-stuck-in-desert-bluffs:

    typette:

    sharkchunks:

    disneypixar:

    A trip down sensory lane.

    Filmmakers take note- This five second scene not only fully describes a characters backstory, but the entire reason he acts the way he acts through the film, taking him from a villain to a sympathetic character and justifying a total reversal of his actions in the present. In five seconds, this movie does for the development of a character more than most movies do in two hours. This is why you should be studying Disney and Pixar along with Martin Scorsese and Stanley Kubrick, and ignoring professors and elitist students who deride them as “kids stuff.”

    wasn’t there a theory that Anton’s childhood cottage is the cottage Remy learned his craft from eavesdropping inside before travelling to Paris, and the recipe he’s tasting really is his mother’s ratatouille?

    WHAT

    YES

    7 hours ago   •   4,468 notes   •   VIA: vlavian   •   SOURCE: starwinter
  • 7 hours ago   •   443,250 notes   •   VIA: ddagent   •   SOURCE: sossidge
  • sossidge:

    me 11:59 September 30th

    image

    me 12:00 October 1st

    image

    7 hours ago   •   118 notes   •   VIA: enterprising-gentleman   •   SOURCE: jenesaispourquoi
  • So You Want to Read Young Wizards

    jenesaispourquoi:

    What is Young Wizards?

    Young Wizards is a book series by the lovely Diane Duane (dduane on tumblr) which is easily my favorite series in the history of ever. It’s right on the fantasy edge of sci-fi, about kids (and some adults and aliens) who do science magic and save the universe.

    Read More

    7 hours ago   •   25,851 notes   •   VIA: vlavian   •   SOURCE: daisyeriksen
  • This led to one of the most intense arguments our group has ever had.

    7 hours ago   •   218,636 notes   •   VIA: vlavian   •   SOURCE: sunscorchx
  • poorhornycat:

sunscorchx:

Somebody tried to stump this squid by putting it in front of a background that its camouflage mechanisms could never hope to imitate…
So it turned itself transparent.

stick it to the man, Squid.

    poorhornycat:

    sunscorchx:

    Somebody tried to stump this squid by putting it in front of a background that its camouflage mechanisms could never hope to imitate…

    So it turned itself transparent.

    stick it to the man, Squid.

    7 hours ago   •   66,609 notes   •   VIA: maskedbanditt   •   SOURCE: hollyoakhill
  • dandraco:

hollyoakhill:

do you ever think about how little Michelangelo cared

All right, everyone, grab a chair and sit back because I’m going to share with you what I learned about Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel in my Art History Class.
The man NEVER wanted to paint the damn thing. But the pope at the time “forced him to” According to my teacher. Michelangelo hated this man, I MEAN REALLY HATED HIM. So did a majority of people. The pope’s nickname translated literally means “Terrible pope”.
And the working conditions were awful. He had to work on his back with all that paint, which is filled with some toxic shit that gave Michelangelo a limp for the rest of his life. (Also, our teacher made us get on our backs and try drawing with both hands JUST to prove how bad and uncomfortable it is.)
At the time, the ceiling was so high, you could barely see it. You need binoculars to get a good look at what’s up there, by the time people could see the paintings, there was a lot of weird symbolism that Michelangelo hid up there.

This one? The creation of the sun and moon? God is mooning you. And the pope and all others after him prayed under that without knowing.

This one? At the time, dissecting was sacrilegious and everyone found out how behind God was what looked like half a brain. blah blah, science, science, that pissed everyone off.
And also, ALLLLLLL the men and women in the Sistine Chapel are all on fucking steroids. My teacher described the women’s bodies as "Men bodies with boobs slapped on."
And then there is this:

Now this is the back wall. Michelangelo actually wanted to paint this one after he finished the ceiling. (and there was a different pope too, I believe.) However, originally, EVERYONE in that painting was naked. And they didn’t like it. Adam and Eve naked? That’s cool. But Jesus? Now you crossed the line. So the pope at the time hired someone else to censor it and give the important figures clothes. He worked on it for 6 or 9 months before he died.
And then the symbolism in this one is great. Somewhere in the right, there are homosexuals in heaven. (No matter what, the Vatican will say “Those straight men are happy” I’ll get to that in a second), Michelangelo painted himself near Jesus, and the terrible pope is in hell with a snake biting his balls.
And if you were to point ANY of this out to the Vatican, they will deny all of it and claim Michelangelo was a catholic hero. In fact, when they discovered the symbolism around the 60s or 70s, the guy who told the Vatican was kicked out of the Vatican for life.
TL;DR: Michelangelo hated the pope and made the best “fuck you” of all time.

    dandraco:

    hollyoakhill:

    do you ever think about how little Michelangelo cared

    All right, everyone, grab a chair and sit back because I’m going to share with you what I learned about Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel in my Art History Class.

    The man NEVER wanted to paint the damn thing. But the pope at the time “forced him to” According to my teacher. Michelangelo hated this man, I MEAN REALLY HATED HIM. So did a majority of people. The pope’s nickname translated literally means “Terrible pope”.

    And the working conditions were awful. He had to work on his back with all that paint, which is filled with some toxic shit that gave Michelangelo a limp for the rest of his life.
    (Also, our teacher made us get on our backs and try drawing with both hands JUST to prove how bad and uncomfortable it is.)

    At the time, the ceiling was so high, you could barely see it. You need binoculars to get a good look at what’s up there, by the time people could see the paintings, there was a lot of weird symbolism that Michelangelo hid up there.

    This one? The creation of the sun and moon? God is mooning you. And the pope and all others after him prayed under that without knowing.

    This one? At the time, dissecting was sacrilegious and everyone found out how behind God was what looked like half a brain. blah blah, science, science, that pissed everyone off.

    And also, ALLLLLLL the men and women in the Sistine Chapel are all on fucking steroids. My teacher described the women’s bodies as "Men bodies with boobs slapped on."

    And then there is this:

    Now this is the back wall. Michelangelo actually wanted to paint this one after he finished the ceiling. (and there was a different pope too, I believe.) However, originally, EVERYONE in that painting was naked. And they didn’t like it. Adam and Eve naked? That’s cool. But Jesus? Now you crossed the line. So the pope at the time hired someone else to censor it and give the important figures clothes. He worked on it for 6 or 9 months before he died.

    And then the symbolism in this one is great. Somewhere in the right, there are homosexuals in heaven. (No matter what, the Vatican will say “Those straight men are happy” I’ll get to that in a second), Michelangelo painted himself near Jesus, and the terrible pope is in hell with a snake biting his balls.

    And if you were to point ANY of this out to the Vatican, they will deny all of it and claim Michelangelo was a catholic hero. In fact, when they discovered the symbolism around the 60s or 70s, the guy who told the Vatican was kicked out of the Vatican for life.

    TL;DR: Michelangelo hated the pope and made the best “fuck you” of all time.

    7 hours ago   •   321,154 notes   •   VIA: lotsaboutnothing   •   SOURCE: daftvunk
  • peniscruncher:

    dusknoirs:

    who was the asshole that decided tattoos looked unprofessional 

    the generation that did is dying out so don’t worry

    7 hours ago   •   20,209 notes   •   VIA: elluvias   •   SOURCE: ghostofsteverogers
  • [insp]