Локиправда-256

[Замдежурного]

Бесит, когда Локи не любят только потому, что он, видите ли, образом не совпал с прототипом из мифов. В чем проблема? Просто не смешивайте этих двух персонажей.

рисовалка | Дача | словарик

Первое правило Локитреда: Нарушать все правила локитреда.
Второе правило Локитреда: Кат - для слабаков.
Третье правило Локитреда: Мир, дружба, попа Тома!
Четвертое правило Локитреда: 10 смайликов - это няшно и Локи и Томоугодно.
Пятое правило Локитреда: Одна фотка - один пост, и никаких превью!
Шестое правило Локитреда: Баяном считается запощенное не менее трех раз в одном и том же треде. Все остальное - новые няшные фоточге и интересные новые темы.
Седьмое правило Локитреда: Здесь любят Локи, Тома, всех, кто подвернется под руку и даже Бороду Томме.
Восьмое правило Локитреда: Обнимашге, лучи любви, окровавленный топор и маньячная улыбка - вот наши документы.
Девятое правило Локитреда: Мьеллнир - это не только молот, но и масса лулзов при просмотре фоток Томме.
Десятое правило Локитреда: Обсуждаться может абсолютно все, что угодно. Не нравится обсуждаемая тема - предлагай свою или молча проматывай дальше.
Одиннадцатое правило Локитреда: Несешь ссылку - подпиши, про что. Больше трех не подписанных ссылок на одну страницу треда подлежат выпилу, начиная с первой.
Двенадцатое правило Локитреда: ЛОКЕБОХ!!!!!

Слушайте мою клятву и будьте свидетелями моего обета... Ночь собирается, и начинается мой дозор. Он не окончится до самого утра. Я не пойду в другие треды и на другие соо. Я не буду писать от ника и не буду разводить холивар. Я буду писать и флудить только в Локитреде. Я — анон во тьме; я — Дозорный в Локитреде; я — луч любви, который разгонит регулировщиков; я — обнимашки для всех; я — пикспам, который радует заходящих; я — кат, который охраняет от других тем. Я отдаю свою ночь и сон Локитреду среди этой ночи и всех, которые грядут после нее...

Предыдущие темы:

1-100

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100,

...

101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255.

Вопрос: Локеаноны, какой самый локеугодный совет от Вилли?

1. Заветным мыслям не давай огласки, несообразным – ходу не давай.		19	(11.05%)
2. Будь прост с людьми, но не запанибрата.		14	(8.14%)
3. Проверенных и лучших из друзей приковывай стальными обручами, но до мозолей рук не натирай пожатьями со встречными.		15	(8.72%)
4. Старайся беречься драк, а сцепишься – берись за дело так, чтоб береглись другие.		11	(6.4%)
5. Всех слушай, но беседуй редко с кем.		13	(7.56%)
6. Терпи их суд и прячь свои сужденья.		11	(6.4%)
7. Рядись, во что позволит кошелек, но не франти – богато, но без вычур. По платью познается человек.		13	(7.56%)
8. Смотри, не занимай и не ссужай. Ссужая, лишаемся мы денег и друзей, а займы притупляют бережливость.		11	(6.4%)
9. Всего превыше: верен будь себе. Тогда, как утро следует за ночью, последует за этим верность всем.		30	(17.44%)
10. ЛОКЕБОХ!!!!! ТОММЕАВАТАР!!!!!!!		35	(20.35%)
Всего:		172 Всего проголосовало: 56

@темы: локиправда

Comments

[Гость]

Персы блондинки - 11 штук.
Тор, кэп, наташа, пепер, шэрон, глаз, вижн, старлорд, марвел, фандрал, коллекционер.

Актеры блондинки - 11 штук.
Купер, крися, крис, крис, лизавета, Скарлет, Гвен, рэннер, Бри, Шэрон (не знаю имени, ну вы поняли), Томме?

[Гость]

Сорри, не Томме, а вижн (тоже не помню имени).

[Гость]

глаз

Хоукай? Его вроде никогда блондином не называли

[Гость]

Я просто даже не знаю, кого кроме хоукая ещё в блондинки записать( Вряд ли же новые персы появятся. Селвига вроде не будет, а больше и некого.

[Гость]

Анон думал тут 300 каментов про Локи-Гамлета...

[Гость]

Вряд ли же новые персы появятся.

Новых как раз обещали. Помимо Осы и Марвел вроде интриговали, что еще будут. Но вряд ли Атланта читал сценарий, скорее имел в виду тех, про кого точно известно.

[Гость]

Чуть-чуть по мультику www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/...

[Гость]

Новых как раз обещали. Помимо Осы и Марвел вроде интриговали, что еще будут. Но вряд ли Атланта читал сценарий, скорее имел в виду тех, про кого точно известно.
Хз, вообще за Атлантой надо следить, т.к если не путаю, прошлый раз он не соврал про Тома.

Не уловила когда именно, но на имдб крисю из вери клоуз френд (близкий) перевели в разряд гуд (хороший). Как шипер всего и вся, я грущу(

[Гость]

Вангую останется 4 страницы))

[Гость]

Потерли лавстори с няшкой и детективом За что? Под катом же было( Замдп, я тебя тоже сшиперю с кем-нибудь.

[Гость]

[Гость]

Review: Hamlet at Jerwood Vanbrugh Theatre


«Sir Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet starring Tom Hiddleston was the third prolific Hamlet I’ve seen since moving to London two years ago. It started with Cumberbatch, then Andrew Scott earlier this year. All three productions had both good and bad elements, and if you were to ask which I preferred I don’t think I could tell you. They were all just different. I will say, the smaller spaces in which Hiddleston and Scott’s productions were staged (the Jerwood Vanbrugh Theatre and Almeida, respectively) aided their productions much more than the grand Barbican, though the set in Cumberbatch’s production was worth the ticket price alone.

Before I go into Hiddleston’s performance, I have several other things to say first. The first thing I’d very much like to say is THE. LADIES. IN. THIS. PRODUCTION. BROUGHT. IT. Branagh’s cast of ten was split evenly by gender, with Rosencrantz (Rosacrantz), Gildenstern (Guildastern), and Horatio (Horatia) all played by women, and my goodness what a difference it made. There were new layers to explore, new motives and reasons for characters’ actions, and, most importantly, all of these women were given agency. Each of them, at one point or another, where I had seen in other productions female characters sit back, made active, bold choices, that may not have always worked perfectly but were almost always far more satisfying to watch. Guildastern shouts angrily at Hamlet that he has offended his mother with the play, Rosacrantz pulls a gun on Hamlet after he has hidden Polonius’ body and resists being brought before the King, Gertrude actively spurns the King after learning his true nature (also gone was the Oedipal nature of her relationship with Hamlet, instead it was a relationship based purely on affection, which was a nice change). For the first time I thought Horatia was an active participant in the story, rather than a spectator, and there was a hint of a possible past relationship with Hamlet that informed their closeness. But most notably, Ophelia was a strong, intelligent woman, who may have respect for her father but makes her own decisions in the end. Her body is her own – she kisses Hamlet and removes her blouse during the “get thee to a nunnery” scene, actively pursuing him. Absent was the traditional abuse in this scene, Hamlet doesn’t toss her about, pull her hair, or throw her on the ground as I’ve seen staged many times. His rejection of her is more flippant, careless, which in many ways seems far more hurtful – that he is so easily able to let go of their relationship. When she goes mad she is not listing pointlessly across the stage scantily clad, singing weakly – she was downright furious in her madness, whirling about and threatening everyone with a gun should they resist mourning her father. Branagh also chose for Ophelia to be pregnant, which contributes greatly to her madness and explains her angry desperation, for not only has she lost her love and her father, her child will grow up fatherless and grandfatherless, and she will be cast out of society with nothing.

A second, just as important casting choice was the completely color-blind casting. The cast was wonderfully diverse, succeeding in making the story even more universal. It in no way affected the story, it was still crystal-clear what the relationships were between characters, and it was all effortless. Sure, there are always plays and productions that require specific casting when it comes to gender and race, but Shakespeare is not one of them. If we are to argue that Shakespeare’s work is timeless and universal yet fail to cast it diversely in both color and gender it is nothing short of lazy. I could go further into this but will let it go for now.

The style and design of the production was highly traditional, so traditional that it was a bit boring. While I believe the intention of this was to put focus purely on the words and the acting, it grew a bit boring to constantly be staring at various shades of navy blue and beige. If a stripped-back production had been what they were going for I’d have liked it to go even further, less costumes, less set, less props. The cast overall was strong, and the doubling worked better than productions with bigger casts I’d seen – though sometimes characters could have used a bit more change in terms of costume to indicate they were playing a different character. A stand out was Ansu Kabia, who played King Hamlet, the Player King, and the Gravedigger. For the former two parts he was greyed up and I truly didn’t realize he wasn’t actually age 50+ until the grey was removed for the Gravedigger scene. His presence was that of an actor three times his age. This is also one of the first times I’ve really liked the portrayal of Claudius. Nicholas Farrell played him in such a way he would fit right into today’s politics, with his slimy, used-car salesman enthusiasm. He was unrepentant, failing to even briefly regret his actions, and it really worked.

Now, to Tom Hiddleston. He made for a really wonderful Hamlet. I felt that both he and Branagh’s direction worked actively against the dramatic, as it’s so easy in this play to fall into being over the top. There weren’t any moments of pause where Hamlet broods, no dreary silences between lines as he mourns his position. When he was sad he was truly sad, rather than melancholy. When he was happy, he truly was happy. When he was angry, he was frighteningly angry. Everything he did was done with sincerity, not with the intention of building suspense or, as sometimes is crudely said, for masturbatory purposes – in that everything Hiddleston did he did for us. There was an utter lack of selfishness and an inherent joy that never really left, even in the saddest moments. There was a constant momentum – where many would take a pregnant pause before “To be or not to be,” Tom walked right on stage, planted his feet, and began speaking, not moving an inch the entire speech. There was no calculation, no contemplation, just feeling that was launched through action. He laughed at himself, laughed at his inadequacies and indecision, at his circumstances. It was a believable interpretation of the character – that Hamlet doesn’t do anything because he still cannot truly believe the situation in which he’s found himself. This played out in a moment of absolute elation, after Claudius storms out of the play, effectively confirming his guilt, Hamlet breaks into ecstatic laughter, smiling from ear to ear, lifting Horatia off the ground. He finally has something tangible, and from then on there is far less laughter.

To no one’s surprise, the most enjoyable part of Hiddleston’s Hamlet was his voice. Yes, he sang, played piano, danced and fought, but above all else Hiddleston handles the text with complete control, weaving the syllables in their pleasing iambic pentameter, using the structure of the sentences rather than fighting against them. I could have closed my eyes this entire production and been content just to listen to him. That being said, the final fight scene was extraordinary, with some of the more believable stage combat I’ve seen in a while. Hamlet’s death was, I felt, more heart-wrenching than the other recent productions that I’d seen, but for different reason. Usually, I am somewhat relieved for Hamlet, almost pleased that he can finally rest, as there is so little for him left and so much of himself has already died. In this production, where Hiddleston played him with such inner joy, despite his extreme sadness and anger, I felt there was something still left for him on earth – a zeal for life, a love for his friends, a desire to continue on – and in that way I found it more heartbreaking that usual. That being said, the staging of the death did him no favors. As he died, feet towards the audience, his final words are said as his head drops back, which makes it difficult to both hear and see his final expression. Unfortunate really.

The choice was made, similarly to the Andrew Scott version, to scrap Fortinbras, which I thought was wise, though it does mean the production fails to end on an even remotely hopeful note which Shakespeare’s tragedies traditionally end on. Hamlet is carried out by his fellow cast members, arms hanging biblically to the sides. Watching his body, once bouncing around the stage with endless energy, now limp and lifeless refocused the story to the needless loss of human life, and the ultimate fruitlessness of revenge. There were, of course, things about this production that did not work, and several cast members I thought were ill-suited to their parts, which I could wax lyrical about, but overall, this Hamlet was simple, engaging, and, most importantly, human.»
thefeministmonster.wordpress.com/2017/09/11/rev...

[Гость]

thefeministmonster.wordpress.com/2017/09/11/rev...

Review: Hamlet at Jerwood Vanbrugh Theatre
Posted on September 11, 2017 by The Delirious Dramaturg
Sir Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet starring Tom Hiddleston was the third prolific Hamlet I’ve seen since moving to London two years ago. It started with Cumberbatch, then Andrew Scott earlier this year. All three productions had both good and bad elements, and if you were to ask which I preferred I don’t think I could tell you. They were all just different. I will say, the smaller spaces in which Hiddleston and Scott’s productions were staged (the Jerwood Vanbrugh Theatre and Almeida, respectively) aided their productions much more than the grand Barbican, though the set in Cumberbatch’s production was worth the ticket price alone.

Before I go into Hiddleston’s performance, I have several other things to say first. The first thing I’d very much like to say is THE. LADIES. IN. THIS. PRODUCTION. BROUGHT. IT. Branagh’s cast of ten was split evenly by gender, with Rosencrantz (Rosacrantz), Gildenstern (Guildastern), and Horatio (Horatia) all played by women, and my goodness what a difference it made. There were new layers to explore, new motives and reasons for characters’ actions, and, most importantly, all of these women were given agency. Each of them, at one point or another, where I had seen in other productions female characters sit back, made active, bold choices, that may not have always worked perfectly but were almost always far more satisfying to watch. Guildastern shouts angrily at Hamlet that he has offended his mother with the play, Rosacrantz pulls a gun on Hamlet after he has hidden Polonius’ body and resists being brought before the King, Gertrude actively spurns the King after learning his true nature (also gone was the Oedipal nature of her relationship with Hamlet, instead it was a relationship based purely on affection, which was a nice change). For the first time I thought Horatia was an active participant in the story, rather than a spectator, and there was a hint of a possible past relationship with Hamlet that informed their closeness. But most notably, Ophelia was a strong, intelligent woman, who may have respect for her father but makes her own decisions in the end. Her body is her own – she kisses Hamlet and removes her blouse during the “get thee to a nunnery” scene, actively pursuing him. Absent was the traditional abuse in this scene, Hamlet doesn’t toss her about, pull her hair, or throw her on the ground as I’ve seen staged many times. His rejection of her is more flippant, careless, which in many ways seems far more hurtful – that he is so easily able to let go of their relationship. When she goes mad she is not listing pointlessly across the stage scantily clad, singing weakly – she was downright furious in her madness, whirling about and threatening everyone with a gun should they resist mourning her father. Branagh also chose for Ophelia to be pregnant, which contributes greatly to her madness and explains her angry desperation, for not only has she lost her love and her father, her child will grow up fatherless and grandfatherless, and she will be cast out of society with nothing.

A second, just as important casting choice was the completely color-blind casting. The cast was wonderfully diverse, succeeding in making the story even more universal. It in no way affected the story, it was still crystal-clear what the relationships were between characters, and it was all effortless. Sure, there are always plays and productions that require specific casting when it comes to gender and race, but Shakespeare is not one of them. If we are to argue that Shakespeare’s work is timeless and universal yet fail to cast it diversely in both color and gender it is nothing short of lazy. I could go further into this but will let it go for now.

The style and design of the production was highly traditional, so traditional that it was a bit boring. While I believe the intention of this was to put focus purely on the words and the acting, it grew a bit boring to constantly be staring at various shades of navy blue and beige. If a stripped-back production had been what they were going for I’d have liked it to go even further, less costumes, less set, less props. The cast overall was strong, and the doubling worked better than productions with bigger casts I’d seen – though sometimes characters could have used a bit more change in terms of costume to indicate they were playing a different character. A stand out was Ansu Kabia, who played King Hamlet, the Player King, and the Gravedigger. For the former two parts he was greyed up and I truly didn’t realize he wasn’t actually age 50+ until the grey was removed for the Gravedigger scene. His presence was that of an actor three times his age. This is also one of the first times I’ve really liked the portrayal of Claudius. Nicholas Farrell played him in such a way he would fit right into today’s politics, with his slimy, used-car salesman enthusiasm. He was unrepentant, failing to even briefly regret his actions, and it really worked.

Now, to Tom Hiddleston. He made for a really wonderful Hamlet. I felt that both he and Branagh’s direction worked actively against the dramatic, as it’s so easy in this play to fall into being over the top. There weren’t any moments of pause where Hamlet broods, no dreary silences between lines as he mourns his position. When he was sad he was truly sad, rather than melancholy. When he was happy, he truly was happy. When he was angry, he was frighteningly angry. Everything he did was done with sincerity, not with the intention of building suspense or, as sometimes is crudely said, for masturbatory purposes – in that everything Hiddleston did he did for us. There was an utter lack of selfishness and an inherent joy that never really left, even in the saddest moments. There was a constant momentum – where many would take a pregnant pause before “To be or not to be,” Tom walked right on stage, planted his feet, and began speaking, not moving an inch the entire speech. There was no calculation, no contemplation, just feeling that was launched through action. He laughed at himself, laughed at his inadequacies and indecision, at his circumstances. It was a believable interpretation of the character – that Hamlet doesn’t do anything because he still cannot truly believe the situation in which he’s found himself. This played out in a moment of absolute elation, after Claudius storms out of the play, effectively confirming his guilt, Hamlet breaks into ecstatic laughter, smiling from ear to ear, lifting Horatia off the ground. He finally has something tangible, and from then on there is far less laughter.

To no one’s surprise, the most enjoyable part of Hiddleston’s Hamlet was his voice. Yes, he sang, played piano, danced and fought, but above all else Hiddleston handles the text with complete control, weaving the syllables in their pleasing iambic pentameter, using the structure of the sentences rather than fighting against them. I could have closed my eyes this entire production and been content just to listen to him. That being said, the final fight scene was extraordinary, with some of the more believable stage combat I’ve seen in a while. Hamlet’s death was, I felt, more heart-wrenching than the other recent productions that I’d seen, but for different reason. Usually, I am somewhat relieved for Hamlet, almost pleased that he can finally rest, as there is so little for him left and so much of himself has already died. In this production, where Hiddleston played him with such inner joy, despite his extreme sadness and anger, I felt there was something still left for him on earth – a zeal for life, a love for his friends, a desire to continue on – and in that way I found it more heartbreaking that usual. That being said, the staging of the death did him no favors. As he died, feet towards the audience, his final words are said as his head drops back, which makes it difficult to both hear and see his final expression. Unfortunate really.

The choice was made, similarly to the Andrew Scott version, to scrap Fortinbras, which I thought was wise, though it does mean the production fails to end on an even remotely hopeful note which Shakespeare’s tragedies traditionally end on. Hamlet is carried out by his fellow cast members, arms hanging biblically to the sides. Watching his body, once bouncing around the stage with endless energy, now limp and lifeless refocused the story to the needless loss of human life, and the ultimate fruitlessness of revenge. There were, of course, things about this production that did not work, and several cast members I thought were ill-suited to their parts, which I could wax lyrical about, but overall, this Hamlet was simple, engaging, and, most importantly, human.

[Гость]

Театральное Томме

[Гость]

[Гость]

[Гость]

ох какой чумазенький😍

[Гость]

Щекастик.
Все-таки худющщим ему лучше.

[Гость]

блин блин, это я про фотку на кровати. От окровавленного лица аж сердце щемит от жалости😢

[Гость]

[Гость]

Интересная рецензия, ну по крайней мере мне так показалось с моим английским. Подробная такая.

[Гость]

Во всех ты, душенька, нарядах хороша (с)

[Гость]

От него реально сдохнуть можно...
Лицо, волосы...
Вечеринка после "Отелло"

[Гость]

Мамусин сыночка.
Там же.

[Гость]

А на репетиции совсем сопляком не выглядит...

[Гость]

Это откудова к нам такого красивого дяденьку занесло?
Сорян за оффтоп, попалось.))

[Гость]

Фанаты кудрях, не кидайтесь томатами, но хорошо, что он их состриг. Мягкие волны, как сейчас и в генрихе красиво, но вот эта стружка так ржачно. Мои любимые волосы вообще периода НА и Конга

[Гость]

[Гость]

Оригинал)


А я люблю кудри времён Генриха. И даже бороду.

[Гость]

На репетиции.

Анону бы такую шерстку...