Beautiful Analysis - Tumblr Posts
Was looking over screencaps for 3.15, and noticed these lovely shots when Ed has Harvey captured, and demands that Lucius answer his riddles
His shadow here magnifies his poise throughout the whole scene: posture upright but relaxed, hands loosely clasped in front of him. Even despite the extreme provocation offered by Ed - Lucius maintains this manner throughout. He never loses his temper, or panics, or throws insults. He’s calm and assured - offering a counterpoint to Ed’s febrile manner.
You can see this in this next one, too. This is a moment of extreme duress. Lucius has just confronted Ed - asking him if he killed Oswald. Ed was manic enough at the outset of this game, but we can see his grasp on himself worsening even more by the end: rubbing his eyes, and getting the words of his own riddle muddled. Lucius knows Ed is dangerous and fully capable of letting Harvey fall - yet again there’s that sense of stillness from him: hand resting lightly on the banister.
The next one is maybe the most striking. Ed loses his composure, and runs at Lucius with his gun trained on him. He wanted Lucius to be able to give the exact responses he wanted to his riddles, even though Lucius’ answers were correct in their own way. Lucius steps back, but still remains remarkably composed - one hand raised in an attempt to keep a defined distance between them. It’s authoritative in a non-confrontational way: this far and no further, but it’s also placatory - trying to calm Ed.
What’s really lovely is that we see this pose continued in the next shot:
This is maybe the best image. We see Ed retreating further up the stairs, clearly agitated. We can’t see Lucius himself behind him now, but we do see his shadow, hand still outstretched, calm and even elegant. Ed - for all he’s wearing his fancy new suit, is sweaty and scattered - talking to himself and clearly distressed.
I just thought it was a really nice example of using visuals to underscore a message. Throughout the whole encounter, Lucius is just the perfect counterpoint. He’s calm, despite the situation. He remains calm even as he gives the ‘wrong’ answer and Ed becomes more agitated. He’s genuinely authoritative. While Ed needs to resort to these games for a sense of power, Lucius establishes his authority from the outset - rejecting Ed’s claim that Harvey is fine, and telling him clearly that he wants to hear that from Harvey himself - to which Ed submits. He also calmly states the case for why his riddle answers are correct.
Lastly, he’s compassionate - and we’ll see that again later in their scene in the car. Ed is cruel here. He’s tormenting a terrified Harvey and tormenting Lucius. He continues to insult Harvey intermittently. He yells at Lucius for not giving him the answer he wants, and then threatens him - telling him he’s not ‘good enough’ to be his enemy.
In contrast, Lucius remains calm and non-judgmental. He’s obviously not pleased at what’s happening, but whereas every other characters would resort to impatience and anger and insults - he doesn’t do that. He’s measured and courteous, but never obsequious or flattering. He doesn’t patronise or insult him - we don’t hear the word ‘freak’ here. When he finally realises that Ed is responsible for Oswald’s disappearance, his tone is questioning, and then resigned. It’s not accusatory in the same way that Jim’s would be - it’s more calm, almost rooted in a knowledge of him
What did you do, Ed?…..Did you kill him?….You did, didn’t you
His face after this doesn’t suggest disgust or anger, either. It’s calm, sad, regretful.
The answer to Ed’s big riddle in this episode is ‘reflection’. Throughout the episode, Ed is trying to stage manage another phase of his ‘becoming’ - looking for his nemesis. He decides it’s Jim, but Jim - pretty hilariously - just isn’t about town this week to play the role Ed ordained for him.
Instead, he has to deal with Lucius - calm, thoughtful Lucius, who consistently refuses to behave in the way Ed has come to expect, who doesn’t exhibit fear, irritation, anger, or disgust, and who can answer his riddles in ways that are perfectly correct but that he did not anticipate.
Jim, Oswald, Harvey - these are all people that Ed is confident he can predict and use. Jim can be provoked, Oswald manipulated, Harvey insulted. They’re puzzles, in a way: he’s ‘solved’ their nature and can now use them for his own ends as a prize.
Lucius, though, refuses to be puppeteered in this way, and remains his own man - not a puzzle, or a projection, or a reflection. Ed recognises and appreciates this at the end of his spree.
Lucius: Is that the role I’m meant to fill? To be your reflection? Ed: No, because I know who I am. I know how to be him. And you helped that. So, thank you.
Did You Know?
that in BTS ‘봄날 (spring day)’ MV, the train station that showed taehyung waiting in the beginning is actually a real train station, iryeong station in yangju city, gyeonggi-do, albeit an abandoned one, since they only transport cargo now.
and that the music video is one helluva train ride to a place where there stood a tall tree, the place where they got together and come in terms with grief and hardships in life because the cold winter does end at some point, and spring comes. but let’s talk about that later :) lets, lets talk about the very first lines namjoon uttered so carefully, such vulnerable words
i miss you saying it like this makes me miss you even more even looking at your photos, i miss you ain’t time so heartless i..hated us the us who now can’t even look at each other’s face even once
보고 싶어/bogoshippeo means ‘i miss you’, an informal, casual tone that you can use freely to significant others, friends, families, it literally means ‘i want to see you’ but essentially, it means, ‘i miss you’, here, though, namjoon used 보고 싶다/bogoshipda, which is also an informal word, but a non-conjugated form of 보고 싶어/bogoshippeo, it holds a slightly different meaning than just ‘i miss you’ because it’s not a verb. 보고 싶다/bogoshipda for lack of better words, is an expression of longing, and carries a deeper emotion than just i miss you, kinda like a monologue (?) cos he’s not saying it to someone in particular, the expression feels a bit colder, which is ironic cos then he went on about how cold time is for making him missing someone.
this place is all winter, even in august winter comes it’s like my heart/mind races with time the lonely ‘snowpiercer’ who travelled to the south (i want to) while holding your hands, go all the way to the other side of the earth i wish i could end this winter, i wonder, friend, how much does the longing should fall like snow for spring day to come?
설국열차 is the korean title for the movie ‘snowpiercer’, also the name of the train in the movie that holds the last remnants of humanity after an attempt at climate engineering in order to stop global warming has unintentionally created a new ice age. essentially, ppl in the train thought no life can exist outside of the train, not knowing there is (a polar bear), which showed up at the end of the movie. i thought it was brilliant how namjoon referenced this movie, it’s like he’s saying no matter how hard circumstances can be, no matter how hard you think you have it, there is always hope, there is always a way out, there’s always spring after a cold cold winter, even when it seems impossible, you can have your cake and eat it
(or not ;p)
the lyrics in this song isn’t that hard to comprehend tbh it’s quite straightforward but the way they express it is both poetry and cynicism at its best, and despite the repetitive chorus the song is atcually quick and full, leaving nothing short of amazement.
like the tiny dust that floats/flies in the air if i’m the snow that flies in the air i would’ve reached you a little faster
my heart swells a little here, because they are reiterating what namjoon says about wanting to hold hands so we can end this winter together, that they want to, if only they’re with us, doesn’t it soothe your heart a little? knowing there are people out there who knows how cold life can be, and wants to get to us quickly so we could the end it together
and when some of the members lament
the snowflakes are falling little by little bit more, they fall i miss you (i miss you) how much longer do i have to wait and how many more nights do i have to stay up, to see you? will i ever get to meet you?
the others be consoling like, well,
after we pass by the end of cold winter until spring day comes once again until the flowers blossom at that place (even when it’s cold/even when you have to wait long), for a little while, please stay please stay
but then yoongi’s part came and i sobbed a little because it’s so??
i wonder if you have changed, or if i have changed. perhaps, i’ve changed. i hate the time that’s flowing at this very moment i guess we have changed, huh i guess everyone does that, huh yeah, okay, i hated you but even when you left, there was never a day that i’ve forgotten about you and even though i actually miss you, i’m gonna erase you now cos that’ll hurt way less than blaming you
and it doesn’t help when both seokjin and jimin go on to say
i try to blow away the cold you who is like smoke, like white smoke even when i say i’m going to erase you the truth is i still can’t let you go
/crieS/ which is why the ending gets me because
you know it all you’re my best friend the morning will come again no matter what kind of darkness or (bad) seasons they can’t last forever
(and) it looks like cherry blossoms are blooming (now) and this winter too, is coming to an end i miss you if i wait just a little bit longer if i stay up just a few more nights i will come to see you i will come to take you (away)
after we pass by the end of cold winter until spring day comes once again until the flowers blossom at that place (even when it’s cold/even when you have to wait long), for a little while, please stay please stay
i want to mention here that omelas referenced in the mv as we are all prob aware of by now, tells a story of how a child was kept hidden in a secluded place in the omelas city, with horrible conditions, in exchange of happiness of the entire city. and that the same tragedy also shares with children in the movie snowpiercer itself, where they were enslaved and used as replacement parts to keep the train functioning. to put it simply, children depicted in both stories were convinced to give their life for the continuation of a way of life that was totally oppressive to their own circumstances, which is extremely radical in a way that has deep resonance for our real world, like how can you stand being together in a society that is built from abuse and discrimination, entrenched inequality, and do nothing?
and it is precisely because of this, bangtan continues to voice out their opinions as they did in previous albums, and call out the perpetrators as well as the bystanders for everyhting that has gone wrong, that could go wrong, and that is going wrong in the society, especially in the events relating to their home country south korea
let me bring you back to the music video where jimin picked up the white shoes from the winter sea
the white shoes that middle-school/high school students wear in south korea
and how he carries the shoes all through out the mv
before he brought them to a tree after they all got off the train
and hang them
these scenes imo is very much referenced to the sewol ferry tragedy that took place in april, 2014, the incident that had resulted in more than 300 deaths, including 250 second-year high school students and their teachers from danwon high school who were on a field trip that day, and is recognized as one of the most devastating maritime disaster in decades, and it’s not just because of a sinking ferry itself but because of willfull negligence and corruption.
fyi when the ferry was sinking, the captain of the ship and a number of cabin crew made announcement for the passengers to stay where they were when they themselves chose to abandon the ship while hundreds of people were still trapped inside. and being good citizens they all remained at their cabin, where they waited for further orders, which never came
the members of crew who stayed to help passengers were among those who died.
and the disaster doesn’t end there. it was found out later that the ship itself was illegally modified and was carrying almost double its legal limit with inexperienced crew and a questionable relationship between the ship operators and state regulators. the investigation was also conducted behind closed doors where the families are not permitted to observe the recovery operation, these allegations as well as the way the government lacked transparency adds more to the lengthy laundry list of grievances souht koreans have against park geun hye’s administration. there were questions raised as to where she was when it happened that morning and why wasn’t the issue addressed publicly even 7 hours afterwards.
the yellow ribbons symbolize hope and solidarity with the families victims and i think it’s genius how they incorporate this knowing very well that they can be blacklisted from the government which is ridiculous at every level. the government was highly blamed for many lives lost that day, what with the lack of safety standards in the country, the families were also mostly left out of the investigation, there’s just so many dissatisfaction ppl have over park geunhye’s administration, and that itself is an understatement. and with bangtan and bighit donating 100 million won (approximately $85,000) to the sewol ferry disaster 416 family council, they are probably blacklisted already :/
the pile of clothing could also be a metaphor to ppl who left this world as exhibited by french artist christian boltanski’s work entitled ‘personnes’ as part of monumenta in 2010. i quote, “These grouped clothes may represent mass graves, or corpses arrayed for identification in the school gym, but they also constitute a kind of cemetery. For the experience is just the same: that there is nobody here and yet the place is crowded. Personnes, the piece is called: people, but at the same time no one.”
which is why even though tying shoes high on a tree branch or power lines have variation in meanings for different country and culture, there is one famous belief taht i think is what is meant here; that tying shoes high on a tree branch signifies someone has died and that the shoes belong to the dead person. that the reason they are hanging, is so when the dead person’s spirit returns, it will walk that high above the ground, that much closer to heaven
and it would’ve been fineeeee to just reference spring day like this as a remembrance to the passing of the passengers and the beautiful children because the song DOES talk about grief and hardships in life, and that no matter what kind of darkness or (bad) seasons they can’t last forever
but then bangtan had these lines that are repeatedly voiced melancholically all throughout the chorus until the very end of the song and i just–
after we pass by the end of cold winter until spring day comes once again until the flowers blossom at that place (even when it’s cold/even when you have to wait long), for a little while, please stay please stay
it’s as if bangtan is throwing shade at the captain and his crew for being dishonorable, asking the children to stay where they were ‘until the rescue boats arrive’ when they themselves were up and about ready to get out of the ship,
it’s just.
when the boys say these last lines it’s as if, it’s as if the boys are saying to the children that they know it’s hard to wait, but just stay there. it’s okay to stay there, i’ll come to you instead, yeah? just you wait there till i come to you so we can end this suffering together
My thoughts about Vito Scaletta.
Vito is my favorite character. Not much of a surprise, I know. Vito is possibly the most loved character from the series. Yet, from what I’ve seen, not everyone was pleased with Vito in Mafia III. After reading a lot of comments on the issue, I came up with my own conclusion about him, and I hope this text helps any mafia fan who’s not sure about playing the third game.
I remember having recently finished Mafia I and still being heartbroken about it (who wasn’t?), when deciding if I was going to play Mafia II. By the time I already knew Vito was Tommy’s killer and all, but at the same time I was too curious to back away.
It was love at first sight. I always found Vito extremely relatable, and the fact that we had the same age (19 - 20) in the beginning only add up to the feeling that we had a connection. This feeling is what allowed me to constantly observe Vito, especially after Mafia II ending.
Then Mafia III comes and I have to admit I wasn’t very keen on the idea of playing it after reading so many bad reviews, but one thing convinced me: Vito. I was one of the fans who would end up hooked by the opportunity of seeing my bff once again. I’d eventually fall in love with the game itself and everything, but I still feel like there’s something to be said about Vito in his forties.
Since I love him so much, I usually take my time analyzing him, and the outside perspective Mafia III offers makes things even better. So here’s what I saw:
Vito’s story is about a boy who daydreams about entering the Mafia. He keeps an idealized image of it, and the whole plot of Mafia II is about him doing everything he can to make this dream come true (and that’s why the second game is my favorite one). The rise of a poor but determined boy and the fall of a made man whose ideas were all wrong right from the start but he never saw any of it coming. His monologue, the sadness in his eyes while looking at his family album, his expressions while listening to Leo’s reprimands, his coldness when arriving at the observatory, the way he says “what the fuck is this?” and the look in his face when realizing he couldn’t save Joe – everything is there, proving that an old Vito was dying right there, right in that moment. Leaving his old self in the city that raised him.
Remember when he was all dressed up looking at the mirror right before meeting Eddie for the first time? His reaction when hearing about how Joe talked about him to Henry? His pride during the Omerta? That’s the old Vito. The innocent Vito. That Vito remained at Empire Bay.
Sounds familiar? Yeah, c'est la vie. We all grow up, sooner or later. I have a feeling that for Vito it was later. Anyway, he’s not the same when arriving at New Bourdeux. And here’s where we start our conversation.
He comes to a new town (the opposite of everything Empire Bay was), this guy Marcano (older than him) HATES him, Leo probably disappears leaving him all by himself and he’s given an ugly, poor district called River Row to run and make money out of it. Cool. Oh, and I didn’t even mentioned the fact that he was still carrying the weight of losing his best friend. Nice.
Mafia III takes place 17 YEARS LATER Mafia II. Imagine Vito going from a young and scared 26-year-old to the 43-year-old man who you found inside a freezer, cursing at the four winds. Can you imagine what hell he went through during all this time? Did the people who complain about “Vito not being the same anymore” EVER imagined what he had to endure in New Bourdeux that would eventually turn him into who he is now? How on earth would he still be the same? Come on, guys. It’s a no-brainer.
Even though I really miss my quiet Empire Bay boy, I really like who Vito has become. He’s clearly the smartest of the underbosses, took River Row out of its misery, kept his own business out of records, has a lot of experience in the mob, doesn’t allow himself to get carried away by other ideas but the job (drinking/race war) and his ending is absolutely the best – proving once again my thesis that Vito’s not a wonderstruck boy anymore, but a mature man who knows “how this shit works”.
Also, his italian accent mixed up with a bit of a southern accent is just really cute.
And you can still see something of the Old Vito. The way he spent 12 years and a lot of money to find Joe and how he works at a dock (AND HIS JACKET) definitely shows his Empire Bay ghosts still revolve around him. But it makes me happy to see that he grew out of his kid fantasies.
Even now, in his forties, while realizing how cruel reality is, I still can relate to him. He’s simply one of the best things from the Mafia franchise.
That’s all, folks. Thanks for the read.
(TL;DR: VITO GREW UP YOU COCKSUCKERS, GET OVER IT!)
ok. look at these.
look. that's the same look. right?
let's take a closer look. to do that, i'm gonna have to zoom in a bit on the first one. because, as you can immediately see, the shots are slightly different. the first is a little farther away, showing both mike and el, walking next to each other, whereas the second is much more intimate, a closeup on mike's expression as he looks at will's face in the foreground. a minor but telling difference about the levels of emotional intimacy in each scene.
so, moving past that first element of contrast, let's look at each shot in full, because in both of these scenes, mike goes on a bit of a face journey before he gets to that final smiling expression, seen above.
personally, i think studying actors' body language and micro-expressions is inconclusive at best, but i won't deny that these look similar. however, it's pretty clear to me that they aren't the same.
toward el, i see confusion, intrigue, maybe pleasant surprise, followed by a glance down (to emotionally process and/or watch his step), and then a nervous but friendly smile.
toward will, i see awe, relief, and overwhelming affection, followed by a shy glance down and a slight schooling of his slack jawed expression into a warm smile.
but, again, that's just my interpretation, and i can't say with any certainty what the intention of all of finn's micro-expressions are. but from my perspective, even a surface level viewing of these two expressions depicts a very different emotional experience. however: there's no denying the connection between these two scenes. they clearly mirror each other, just like a lot of things about mike's relationships with el and will mirror each other. i don't think that's an accident.
whatever you think his sexuality is, mike is undeniably in a romantic narrative with el. beginning in season one episode three, when the concept of their romantic relationship is introduced, the narrative arc mike and el share is heavily focused on that relationship. the first scene above actually happens in that same episode (s1e3), not coincidentally almost directly afterward. and the former scene, with mike, lucas, and dustin behind the baseball field, provides very interesting context for several reasons:
first: bear with me, because we're going back to look at the context behind this context. this is only episode three of the show, but already there's a lot going on, both in text and subtext.
and since we have the entirety of their relationship so far presented to us on screen, when lucas accuses mike of looking at el romantically, we're easily able to go back and figure out where he got that impression: we can examine every time lucas has seen mike look at el at all.
the first night, after finding el in the woods instead of will, and while insisting that the next day she'd be gone and they could focus on will again, mike's behavior is directly reminiscent of benny's. taking el in, and providing her with shelter, food, and clothing.
the next day, after learning that she's in danger and changing his mind about pawning her off on his mother, mike infers that she might know something about will. when lucas arrives, he exclaims that she recognized him and knew he was missing.
later, when lucas tells her that will is their friend, she asks what that means and mike explains. a friend...
and then she displays that she might really be able to help them find will. and mike looks at her like this:
each and every one of these interactions is directly related to will. but lucas, through the omnipresent lens of heteronormativity that surrounds boys' interactions with girls (especially a group of boys who have no experience with girls... more on that in a bit), only seems to consider the fact that mike's behavior, which is undeniably about will, is being directed at el.
throughout season one (and beyond, in more subtle ways), will and el are repeatedly connected to each other through the trope of mistaken identity. will is abducted on the same night (and due to the same series of events) that el escapes the lab. hopper, in his investigation into will's disappearance, keeps running into clues about el. and mike, lucas, and dustin, sneaking out in episode one to search for will, find el instead.
later in the season, hopper eventually realizes the truth of his own more overt mistaken identity arc: while he was under the assumption that he'd been following will's trail, he'd actually been following el's. interestingly, the realization is triggered by one specific distinguishing difference, which tells him beyond a doubt that he's been looking for two different kids: their art.
though much more subtle (aka hidden in the subtext), mike's arc with his feelings about will and el follows a very similar pattern. the main difference, though, is that in season one, the swapping of places is eventually reversed but never acknowledged as such, and mike ends season one with el now missing and will back in his life, but a lingering sense of something yet unresolved.
second: (i'm not going to deep dive into this one here, because it's a whole analysis in and of itself, but i need to mention it because it is relevant) this scene introduces the recurring motif of superheroes being directly connected to mike's feelings for el, which is an association we see follow them all the way into season four and become a defining metaphor for their incompatibility.
third: lucas is the character who first introduces mike's romantic feelings for el into the narrative. and instead of giving any indication that lucas' interpretation is correct, mike's reaction is... difficult to read. his response is immediately defensive, both verbally ("what are you talking about?" "shut up, lucas,") and physically (leaning away and shielding himself when lucas hugs him). we can infer from the original character descriptions why mike might be defensive about this subject:
obviously, this description is only a vague impression of what Mike Wheeler became, but it's clear that the core elements of his character outlined here did come to fruition on screen. here, mike's insecurity is linked both to the bullying he undergoes, and to his inexperience/ineptitude with girls. and it's presented as key to his character motivation (the original concept of his character arc put forth here is very straightforward: at the start, mike has insecurity centered around bullying and is romantically inexperienced. by the end, mike has courage against monsters and romantic experience.)
in any case, this scene is the first hint of this aspect of mike's character in the show itself (the earlier scene of bullying in the show focusing on mike consoling dustin over what he’s being bullied for (“i think it's kinda cool. it’s like you have superpowers or something!”)... see my last point here… mike holds the idea of superpowers in high regard, and they are consistently connected with his feelings about el. something about the mistaken identity through-line feels apt here: mike mistakes his feelings of admiration for el as feelings of romance.) in this scene, mike is confronted with both romance (in direct relation to himself for the first time in the show) and bullying.
but due to the way this is shot, it's impossible to get a read on what mike is truly feeling. it reminds me a lot of another scene, actually...
in both of these scenes, mike's genuine emotional reaction is hidden from us. in the first, lucas forcibly hugs him, teasing him about how much he "loves" el, and in effect introducing the idea of el as a romantic prospect to mike. in the second, el hugs mike tightly, her hand still around his neck from their kiss and his arm trapped in between them, similar to the way he shields himself from lucas. we're then shown that he's signed the card on the flowers squished between them "from, mike." hm. so... not love, as lucas suggests.
we come to learn over the course of season four that this is something mike is actively struggling with: his inability to "love" el in the way that she wants, expects, and deserves. this scene, introducing that season-long arc, conceals mike's true emotional state and motivations from us, again, mirroring the first introduction to their entire romantic plot line way back in season one.
(an aside: lucas' "if you love her so much, [then] why don't you marry her?" aka the inciting event of their romantic arc, is a based on a conditional statement with the hypothesis that mike loves el. as mr. clarke might posit (in, say, season one, episode one): what's the difference between an experiment and other forms of science investigation? ...well, an experiment is a controlled test of two or more variables against a hypothesis. does that remind you of anything happening in mike's romantic narrative? something about...... [murray voice] experimenting sexually?)
anyway. then, after extracting himself from el's embrace, mike finally drops his bag(gage) and opens his now empty arms to will, before preemptively cutting himself short with a punch to the shoulder.
...did someone say internalized homophobia?
and then immediately upon being introduced to argyle, mike is called out for his presentation here not being genuine. ("it's a shitty knock-off,"/"i really thought it was ocean pacific...") we're being told that something about mike's performance is not what it seems (and may even be a case of one thing being mistaken for something else).
and speaking of homophobia...
fourth (and finally): this scene, of lucas' teasing mike about his "love" for el, which i'll remind you again is tied directly to lucas mistaking mike's behavior regarding will as being solely about el, is quickly interrupted by an onslaught of homophobia, during which mike is specifically targeted (read: tripped) by the bullies.
the juxtaposition is immediate and obvious: mike's friends lovingly teasing him, even embracing him, over a crush on a girl vs. bullies maliciously taunting them about will being killed for being queer and then physically harming mike.
(there's also something to be said about the later scene in which these bullies force mike to drop his bike in the woods and chase him to the edge of the quarry, mirroring exactly how the cops assume will must have died... and, to be clear, i'm not saying that mike himself is being bullied for being queer in the way will was. no, mike's queerness is invisible to those around him in a way that will's isn't, so his relationship with it and the ways it affects him are hidden in subtext.)
which brings us directly to the following scene in the woods. el asks about mike's injury (sustained from the aforementioned bullying, thereby linking these two scenes even more concretely) and with a little prodding ("friends don't lie"), he opens up to her about what happened, and about being bullied at school. she listens, tells him she understands (this also follows her recent flashback of brenner's abuse in the lab), and they share a "cool," "cool," and a smile.
so... let's quickly jump over from here to the van scene with will. something similar, yet notably different, is happening in this scene, leading up to that infamous smile at the end. mike is sharing his insecurities with will now, but instead of will prodding him to open up, mike, prompted only by will's "she's gonna be okay," begins rambling so much about his insecurities (while speaking in superhero metaphors) that he eventually cuts himself off, saying it's "stupid." instead of letting him brush it off, will guesses exactly what mike is afraid of: "you're scared of losing her." he gives him The Painting (a symbol of his love for mike) and a long speech about feeling lost and different, while insisting upon mike's value (you're the heart, leading us, inspiring us, etc). and then they share a "yeah?" "yeah," and a smile.
so we can see the similarity in the way the shots are set up, the progression of the conversations, and mike's visible reactions. but we can also see distinct differences, all of which together inform a significant difference in emotional weight between these two scenes.
while mike's conversation in the woods with el takes place in the third episode of season one, at which point mike has known her for less than 48 hours, the van scene is in the second to last episode of season four, and is the fourth of five heart-to-hearts mike and will have this season alone (and following three previous seasons and beyond that years of close friendship). it is also arguably the climax of their shared arc this season. on the other hand, mike and el's season one moment is part of the introduction to their storyline, and the introduction to their romantic arc. in this moment in the woods, mike is looking at el romantically (did you think i was gonna argue that he isn't? because no, he definitely is). in fact, this is the beginning of mike's entire romantic arc, which sets out to address the foundational insecurity that is key to his character. we, as an audience, right alongside mike, have just been told (by lucas) that mike has romantic feelings for el. and then we are presented with this scene. we are supposed to view this as romantic. because mike is starting to view it as romantic.
had stranger things been one season long, then the climax of their romantic arc would have been the kiss they share in the cafeteria, followed by the denouement of el's symbolic death (the gay implications of which i could write another whole essay on...). but the end of season one was not the resolution of mike's full romantic arc. by the nature of the five act structure (which is what stranger things has, being five seasons), the entirety of season one serves as exposition for our full narrative. which means, in effect, that the entire arc of mike and el's season one relationship is there to serve as groundwork, a foundation for mike's complete five season arc. season one, starting from before he even meets el, all the way through to when he eventually kisses her and then loses her, is only act one of that arc. the first act of five act structure is when the driving conflict is presented. so in the context of the entire show, for us as the viewer, mike's narrative arc surrounding the romantic aspect of his insecurity begins with his season one "romance" with el.
and we know that this insecurity is an element of the full five-act narrative, rather than being presented and wrapped in the course of the mini "self contained" narrative of season one, because we can see plainly, three seasons later, particularly during mike's heart-to-hearts with will, that this insecurity has not yet been resolved. we know this, on a basic level, from having watched mike and el's relationship struggles progress, but it is still explicitly laid out for us in season four. and will is consistently the only person who genuinely hears mike out, encourages him to open up, and addresses his insecurities, instead of brushing him off, like most other people in his life (including will at some points) have done. will understands him in a way el only claimed to in season one.
looking back to the character outline: mike has now "kiss[ed] a girl" and even "had a girlfriend" and still hasn't resolved his insecurities even remotely. in fact, after the first season arc wraps up, this romantic relationship becomes the main source of that insecurity. his difficulty navigating a real romantic relationship with el is the basis of their arc in season three. and by season four, mike is consciously struggling with being unable to tell el that he loves her. despite will's reassurances that things will be okay (which stack onto lucas' constant relationship advice in season three), mike keeps circling back around to it. because he can't move forward on the path he is on.
he has reached a point of no return, like a “fight you can’t come back from.” he is unable to find the security he is searching for in his romantic relationship with el... and this is where we arrive back at the van scene with will.
if the scene in the woods marks the beginning of the introduction of mike's romantic arc, then the scene in the van marks the beginning of the conclusion of mike's romantic arc. if the introduction of his romantic arc (season one) presents his insecurity, then the natural conclusion of that arc (season five) is security. throughout season four, mike lays out for will the insecurity that his relationship with el still brings him. he is unable to find that security with el, and, in the van scene, finds it with will instead.
or, should i say, begins the journey to finding it. because, especially after the lie that brings them into that moment, and then traumatic pizza dough freezer incident, we're still at the beginning of the conclusion. there's still a lot to resolve, but season four (alongside mike, who now understands what he's been going through) finally began moving the subtext of mike's arc into the actual text. and this moment indicates that season five will take that next step to fully, textually, actualizing it.
so, getting back to the parallel we're looking at here: each of these scenes is a catalyzing moment in mike's romantic arc. in season one, when lucas suggests that mike has a crush on el, and then what follows is a conversation with el where she is (to quote lucas) "not grossed out" by him, he actively begins his journey toward resolving this character motivating insecurity. he looks at el and he sees the possibility of romance.
and just look at him. he looks excited. hopeful. a little nervous. but... i want to remind you again: mike has known el for less than 48 hours at this point. this is the first conversation they've had in which they've related to each other as equals. for their entire relationship before this and afterward, outside of their romantic interactions (and also. often. disturbingly. concurrent with their romantic interactions...), mike's role has been as el's protector, a makeshift father figure, the elliot to her E.T. here, though, el tells mike that she understands him.
in season one, mike is twelve years old (read: pre-pubescent). he has no personal understanding of or experience with romance. dustin starts to comment in s1e2, "you're letting a girl...?" and ted later scoffs "our son with a girl?" and outside of the queer coding, what we can take from both of these (which draw back to the original character description) is that mike has no experience with girls whatsoever. (outside of, you know. family. but that's not what this post is about.)
and again, this scene happens almost directly after lucas first introduces the idea of romance between them, both to the narrative, and to mike himself, who, very significantly, up until this point, has shown no romantic interest in el. the sequence of these events is not a coincidence. 1. lucas assumes mike has romantic feelings for el. 2. el and mike have a moment of personal connection and understanding 3. mike "boys only" wheeler puts these two together and assumes the connection between them must be romance. but the expression on mike's face here isn't a representation of already existing romantic feelings. there's no basis for those. again, this moment represents for mike the potential for romance.
which... makes his expression in the van scene hit even harder. because unlike el, will isn't a stranger he barely knows, but rather his best friend of ten years. and it isn't lucas telling mike how mike feels. it's will professing his own feelings about mike, in direct response to mike's self-professed insecurities. (ding ding ding, are your alarm bells going off?) mike's expression at the end of this scene, if we're viewing it as a reprise of his season one expression, is a representation of hope for his romantic future. but this time, heading into the resolution of mike's romantic arc, with all of the knowledge and context we (and mike) have gained over the course of the past four seasons, it's directed at will.
ok. so. with the basic connection between these two scenes established, i'm gonna move a little bit sideways here. at the end of their romantic arc in season one, el disappears from mike's life and will reappears in it, effectively swapping their places (remember that we've been dealing with the mistaken identity trope between these two), and leaving the question of mike's romantic security glaringly unresolved.
and we know why - this is a five act narrative we're watching - but just within the context of the season one arc... the climactic moment of mike finally asking the girl to be his sister kissing the girl was preceded by her locating will in the upside down (leading to his rescue) and followed by a resolution in which she disappeared... and will took her place. at the end of the season, mike is left in the same place he started: playing games in his basement with will, his first attempt to resolve his arc of romantic insecurity, with el, ultimately ending in tragedy.
after season one, this arc picks up again, but this time will is the one present in mike's life. and mike's behaviors toward el in season one, during which they were undergoing a romantic story arc, begin showing up again in his behavior toward will. but unlike with el, mike's particular (read: romantic) behavior toward will happens without outside intervention, and in fact, often in spite of outside intervention. now, this isn't to say that all of mike's behavior with el was a result of others' influence. when el reveals to mike that she is on the run from "bad people," mike is immediately protective and caring toward her. however, as i've already explained, this caring behavior (which, again, we know right off the bat is not romantic because it directly mirrors the way both benny and hopper care for her) doesn't turn into romantic behavior until lucas introduces that idea.
on the opposite side of the spectrum, right from episode one of season one, mike's behavior toward will is fully self motivated, even in the face of opposition.
and as we move through season one and beyond, we can see that mike continues to rely on constant guidance in the way he cares about el (particularly and most consistently from lucas).
stranger things is, at it's horror filled core, a coming of age tale. like many of our other characters, mike's full character arc, romantic and otherwise, is about self-actualization. from the very conception of the show, his insecurity is presented as a central character flaw to overcome, while also being directly linked with his romantic fulfillment. the overcoming of this fatal flaw, the resolution of his romantic arc, and his final achievement of self-actualization are all inextricably intertwined.
the reprisal of this specific expression of romantic hope as we enter the end of mike's romantic arc is not an indication that mike is in the same place emotionally at the end of season four as he was at the beginning of season one, just with a different person now. instead, it is an indication of his romantic arc coming full circle. mike began in a position of hope for his romantic future with el, only to have the actualization of that hope (their romantic relationship) gradually degrade his romantic fulfillment and self-esteem. the longer mike and el are together, and the more serious their romantic relationship becomes, the worse mike's insecurities become. this is, i would argue, directly related to the fact that mike's pursuit of a romantic relationship with el is not due to his own genuine desire, but instead a combined result of heteronormativity (lucas assuming mike's feelings for el to be romantic), compulsive heterosexuality (mike's subsequent assumption that his feelings for el must be romantic), forced conformity (mike's attempt to resolve his insecurities firmly within these heteronormative boundaries, under the assumption that a rejection of these boundaries is unacceptable), and the trope of mistaken identity that has been following will and el since season one.
and of course i don't know with any concrete certainty what season five will contain, but based on the narrative so far, and optimistically expecting a satisfying resolution to his character arc, the actualization of his romantic hope regarding will is going to lead to true romantic fulfillment and coincide with his self-actualization (a big part of which is coming to terms with his sexuality).
now, i'm not going to conclude this whole analysis by saying, "and that's why mike is gay!" because while i think this all is a good indication of that, based on all of the context and my impression that this narrative is being presented in a way that focuses on the subtext and deeper symbolism of each of these relationships rather than being a case of specifically el vs. will, you might still have a different interpretation than me. that's fine. however, i am going to end by insisting (me when i argue with the wall), based on everything i've laid out, that this parallel and others like it (ie parallels between byler & miIeven's romantic arcs) are not evidence of mike's feelings, specifically whether they are genuinely romantic or not. this parallel serves as a narrative device in his romantic character arc... the conclusion of which is mike realizing and coming to terms with the fact that he is actually in love with will, and not el.
just to be very clear, i'm not saying these parallels alone are proof against mike being bisexual, but i am saying that they are not evidence in support of his being bisexual. again: they do not indicate that mike is romantically attracted to el. what they indicate is that will and el are foils in mike's romantic arc.
before i finish, i want to address a couple misconceptions:
1. the fact that mike actively and willingly participates in a romantic relationship with a woman means he can’t be gay. this is straight up homophobia. gold star bullshit. no.
2. mike and el being presented in a romantic light means that they have genuine romantic feelings for each other. this is a misconception of the way narrative tools are used to tell a story. going right back to my first point: it is an irrefutable fact that many gay people have romantic relationships with the people of different genders (read “the opposite sex”) before they come out/realize their true sexuality. it is also a fact that many of these gay people fully believe their feelings to be genuinely romantic before realizing that they are not. as i've already gone over, mike is twelve years old when his romantic arc begins. on the surface, his relationship with el is presented as romantic. he participates in (and even initiates) romantic behaviors because he believes that his feelings for el are romantic. in seasons one and two, mike is one of our main POV characters. we can see a romantic tilt to the way some of their scenes are shot because, to mike, while they are happening, they are romantic (keeping in mind what i said before about mike having no experience and therefore no personal knowledge informing his perspective, AND keeping in mind that many of these on-the-surface "romantic" scenes are also consistently subtextually linked (read: paralleled) to familial relationships for both of them... and i haven't even touched the cultural context surrounding homosexuality in 80's. there's so much nuance informing the way this story is being told). and we, as the audience, are supposed to read them as romantic on first viewing, because otherwise the season five plot twist, revealing the truth of mike's feelings, would not work.
it is not a coincidence that the active degradation of their romantic relationship (outside of all of the other context, parallels, symbolism, family coding, etc, that are there to hint along the way that things are not as they might seem) begins full force in season three, at the exact point when the two actually enter a real relationship for the first time, and also when our characters are entering puberty, the time during which a person's sexuality (in a general sense, but also in regard to sexual orientation) begins to fully emerge. after his season one arc with el, mike underwent another season-long romantic arc: this time, with will. it's more subtle, because (i believe) mike doesn't realize yet that it's romantic, but it's there. then at the end of season two, mike makes a choice: he encourages will to dance with a girl and he dances with el, re-writing their tragic ending from season one, but now leaving his romantic arc with will frustratingly unresolved, again mirroring the sense of unresolution from season one: mike has swapped out the end of each romantic arc with the wrong love interest.
and then in season three, now having had the experience of both romantic arcs, and now, for the first time, with both will and el right there beside him, all we can see anymore is the overt contrast between the two relationships, depicted most blatantly through the same type of visual and narrative "parallel" we've been looking at here.
but at the end of this season, instead of making a choice, mike's choice is made for him. he has a romantic moment with will, and then el kisses him, confusing the resolution of these two romantic arcs once again.
mike's season four arc closely mirrors his season one arc (searching for one love interest with the other by his side, mistaken identity trope abound), but with important distinctions: 1. mike is a little older, a lot more experienced, and has a better understanding of both the context of romantic relationships and the scope of his feelings for both el and will. and 2. mike's only real guidance in season four comes from will, and he doesn't simply listen and act based on will's advice, as he did with lucas' in seasons 1&3. now, he fully engages with will's input, pushing back against it when he doesn't agree, and accepting it when he can acknowledge its truth (up until, of course, our fourth (and hopefully final) tragic, incorrectly resolved ending). mike is finally taking control of his romantic narrative in a way he hasn't previously, and the direction it's heading in now is toward security, self-actualization, and will.
so the point of all of this is: nothing is as simple or straightforward as it may seem on the surface. the narrative has always been deeply complex and layered with subtext and symbolism. and most of all, when interpreting the meaning of anything presented directly to us on screen, context matters.
also uh. yeah, mike gay