Is Glee, dare I say it, losing it’s charm?

A few months ago I wrote a blog about the new love in my life Glee.

The show was so fresh and fun. It appealed to all my loves: 80s music, Broadway, and even Lady Gaga.

So far this season, there have been some promising moments…

But otherwise… the second season is not looking too good.

The inspiration for this blog was an article on Movie|Line. It mentions how Glee has been toning down one of its breakout stars Jane Lynch, yet somehow it hasn’t been detrimental to the show… Everyone loves Sue Sylvester but she’s getting a little repetitive.

Glee is falling into a trap. Every character has a persona and they can’t break out of it. Sue is always disapproving, Rachel is always annoying, Finn is always whiny. Everyone is playing their character. It’s boring. They’ve all become one dimensional. There is no fire beneath them- they’re just either the good guy, the aspiring star, the mean coach, etc. Where’s the character development?!?

There have also been a problem with the choice of episode. The highly anticipated Britney/Brittany episode fell flat. “I’m a Slave 4U”, “Baby One More Time,” and “Me Against the Music,” were all just taken straight from the original video. The great thing about Glee is their spin on the original. Like how bout:

Beautifully done- it’s a copy but it’s clever! But where is the spice in Glee’s “Baby One More Time” scene? There’s no creativity. It seems like they just did the Britney episode to check it off their list.

Their story has been coming second to their theme of the week. They’ve been continuing with certain story lines and keeping other in the dark. Sunshine Corazon was definitely someone I wanted to see more of. It would have been a good conflict between Rachel and her. I even really like Sam, but they kept him hidden till the fourth episode! And Emma, one of my favorite characters (!), has barely been featured this season. And what’s her storyline… John Stamos is her boyfriend? I love John Stamos, probably more than the next person, but I could care less for his character. He’s more smug than charming, and his rivalry with Mr. Schuester is pretty lame. Mr. Schue has been falling flat too. He’s always been essential to the story, but this season he’s just taking up space, and not contributing.

With shows like these it’s very crucial to keep it crisp and fun. I’m worried that this show won’t become one of those with a great first season and then it just loses it. It’s starting to become staged. It used to be so organic and soo good…

OK OK, I’m done ranting now. BUT after all my worries.. I’m hopeful it’s going to get better. The episode I was looking forward to all season is happening next week. Drum roll please. Get ready for it…

ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW!!! Beyond excited! looks amazing [note the Sue Sylvester pumpkin :-)]

So yes, it’s been a little drab this season, but I put my faith in Glee, and I know it’ll make me proud!

2010
10/14
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Television
TAGS





Leave a comment

Calling all Harry Potter fans!!!

Who doesn’t love Harry Potter? That’s right, no one. Don’t talk to me about this Twilight bullshit, Harry Potter is better and everyone knows it.

I’ve always been, and always will be, a die-hard Harry Potter fan. Everyone in our generation has those memories: staying up late reading the books past bed time, anxiously waiting for each book to come out, staying up to go to the midnight premieres of the movies, falling in love with Daniel Radcliffe (or was that just me…?), etc, etc. And do not underestimate just how big a fan I was: before I even knew how to use the internet properly I had an account on mugglenet.com (I believe my username was Luna Lestrange…), I have knitted multiple Harry Potter house scarves (all Gryffindor of course), I own several Harry Potter shirts and maybe even a plastic wand…

But is that fever still there? Has it been too long? Have we all moved on to college too busy to care about this childhood hero? Well 5 minutes ago I would have said yes.

The Deathly Hallows trailer premiered a few weeks ago, and I couldn’t even be bothered to watch it. I was like, “oh? Eh, I’ll get around to it.”

Frankly, I just didn’t care anymore. The first movie came out in 2001, almost 10 years ago! I remember reading the first book when I was 8 years old, that was about 12 years ago. I will always love and care about Harry Potter but it was just not in my scope anymore.

I didn’t get intrigued until I saw these posters:


(click here to see all of them)

Creeeeeeeeepy. What the hell is Deathly Halows gonna be like? Then I was like OK OK, let’s sit down and watch the trailer.

… Alright … That was pretty epic. I’m definitely excited now. There’s a trailer 2? OK let’s take a look!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! HARRRRRRY POTTEERRRRR I LOOOOOVE YOUUUUU!… Yes, that was my exact reaction. My point of this blog is to say: the once true love of all our lives is coming back, and it’s coming back in a very big way!

Both trailers look fantastic. Harry, Ron, and Herminone all grown up plagued with the task of saving the wizarding world from disaster.  It’s time for Harry Potter fans to raise back up and reclaim the torch that Twilight was pathetically trying to take away from us. VAMPIRES AREN’T COOL, WIZARDS ARE!

I’m calling out all of you- put on those scarlet and gold striped scarves, and draw that lightning bolt on your forehead. Prepare yourself for November 19, 2010.

Are you excited yet? 42 days and counting…

2010
10/07
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Literature
Movies
TAGS


4 comments

Week 6- Midsummer Night’s Dream

When I was reading the first act of Midsummer Night’s Dream one section stood out in particular.

“Then let us teach our trial patience,

Becuase it is a customary cross,

As due to love as thoughts, and dreams, and sighs,

Wishes and tears, poor fancy’s followers”

(1.1.154-56). Hermia says this to Lysander when they’re planning their runaway together. It’s a beautiful sentiment talking about how they must be patient for love. It’s always interested me how in every movie, book, or play- there has to be conflict with the two main lovers. And it was Shakespeare who finally put it so eloquently into words, pointing out that with love comes many trials and tribulations, but with patience happiness can be achieved.

Patience is something stressed in these lines. That is a common lesson throughout Shakespeare’s plays. He says often that if young love not be tamed then there will be a bad ending- like what the friar told Romeo and Juliet, and we all know what happened to them.It’s even mentioned in the bible “Love is patient, Love is kind…” This theme has been popping up a lot in my life with a lot of friends my age getting married. My first thought is, “what’s the rush?” Be patient, if the love is real it will still be there in years to come. Love is not easy- “poor fancy’s followers.” We’re all poor dopes who have to play by love’s rules to reap the benefits.

When thinking about love patience isn’t necessarily thought of first, but it actually does have a huge part to play in love. For Helena for example, she has to be patient for Demetrius, Hermia and Lysander must wait for each other- it’s a large theme in the book. But when looking at the big picture- patience is the glue that can hold marriages together. We all forget from time to time that you need to put work into a relationship for it to be successful. As Shakespeare says through Hermia, patience is “customary.” It’s just as important as the good things and the bad.

Only with patience will love be steady and long lasting. Think of what would have happened in Romeo hadn’t acted so drastically and drank the poision. Maybe then Romeo and Juliet would be a comedy like Midsummer Night’s Dream, and not a tragedy about to impatient teenagers.

2010
10/06
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Literature
TAGS

Leave a comment

Holla.

More blogs to come. I promise ❤

2010
10/05
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Uncategorized
Leave a comment

Julius Caesar- Week 5

One of the reasons I love Shakespeare is his versatility. His plays are for everyone. While reading Julius Caesar my male friend commented on how he loved that play and was even quoting it! Then later that night m female friend said it was probably her favorite Shakespeare play.

Shakespeare is for girls and boys!

This comes through so clearly in Act 2 Scene 1 where all the conspirators are coming together and Brutus is making these extravegant speeches detailing how they want to kill Caesar and how they don’t need an oath to prove their loyalty. It really reminded me of a speech a coach would give or a Mel Gibson in Braveheart. These strong male leads can become role models (minus the whole plotting to kill part).

The character of Brutus interests me, because all the while he’s making these speeches and being such a strong leader- this whole time he’s actually a puppet. Does the fact that he is so easily influenced undermine his leadership? When reading his speech in Act 2 scene 1 Brutus comes across as a very level headed, but powerful leader. He controls the crowd, who seems more like a blood-thirsty mob, saying things like,

“Let’s be sacrifices, but not butchers…

Let’s kill him boldly, but not wrthfully

Let’s carve him as a dish fit for the gods

Not hew him as a carcass fit for hounds,”

(Act 2, scene 1, line 172-175). Brutus wants them to act more mature, not like dogs. They are dignified, not like animals trying to get scraps for food. When Brutus calls them “sacraficers” he’s talking about the people. Brutus thinks he is doing what is right for the people. Caesar is not fit to rule the people, and Cassius has convinced Brutus it’s his job to rid the people of him. So, depending on the side you’re on, Brutus is acting noble. He is a character to respect. It’s seems, as of now, that he’s not doing this for power, like Richard III. In this speech Brutus becomes someone to respect, someone to lead a revolution, someone men can look up to, and girls can appreciate. If only Brutus wasn’t planning on killing someone…

2010
09/29
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Literature
TAGS

Leave a comment

The Taming of the Shrew- Week 4

In a play like “Taming of the Shrew” gender roles are obviously taken into question. When Curtis exclaims, “By this reck’ning he is more shrew than she,” (Act IV scene i line 76), the audience gets a sense that maybe the play is about Petruchio being tamed and not Kate’s.

This first came to my attention when Petruchio was looking for a bride to marry who had a very large dowry. Which is strange since in today’s society it is usually women who are the “gold diggers.”

Petruchio also is irrational and seemingly emotional. His actions come across more as a nagging wife than a strong male head of house. He enters his house and nags, “why aren’t there servants to greet me, or to take care of my horse?” He acts much like a needy wife who needs to be waited on hand and foot.

And with this monologue at the the end of Act IV scene i, he basically says how he’s planning to control her using all of these mind games, much like women do. In the scene iii he concerns himself so fully with their appearance it showcases his immense vanity. Stereotypically clothes are the the woman’s business.

It is interesting to note that Petruchio is behaving much like  a modern day woman. I’m curious to know if Shakespeare intended to model him after a demanding wife, or if gender roles have changed so much in hundreds of years that women now are starting to act as men.

While I see the overall theme of Petruchio being the man and trying to control Kate, I feel that it’s so exaggerated it comes across as he’s a nagging rich wife with a husband who just goes along with her. Let’s just say I think Petruchio would be a good character for the Real Housewives of Italy…

2010
09/20
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Literature
TAGS

Leave a comment

The Taming of the Shrew- Week 3

Alas fair audience, I have found a Shakespeare play that I am not in love with.

Shakespeare has the wonderful ability to make these intricate characters who are multidimensional. You can either love them (like Juliet Capulet) or you can hate them (like Richard III). I fully understand Shakespeare’s need to make these nasty characters who are just despicable, but for once it’s just not working for me.

Richard III was a slimy, malicious, evil man, yet his clever cunning nature made him enjoyable. The need for these characters is essential in tradegies. You need a villain, duh. But I don’t enjoy seeing them in comedies.

The character of Petruchio is appalling. While I”m not done with the play, and I’m hoping Shakespeare will reform this miscreant, as of Act III I despise him. As Gremio says, “Why, he’s a devil, a devil, a mighty fiend,” (Act III scene 2 line 153).

Petruchio doesn’t respect women. He treats them as if they are pets. The title of the play become much too true as Petruchio sets out to “tame the shrew.” He forces her to marry him (for money), shows up to her wedding dressed like bum on a dying horse, ruins her wedding, forces her to leave, and refers to her as property. “I will be the mater of what is mine own,” (Act III scene ii line 229).

Shakespeare has never led me wrong in the past. His villains, while mean, are still somewhat lovable. While I know that seeing the play would change my mind, as of now I’m not enjoying it. Only reading about Petruchio, Shakespeare makes the character seem too harsh and crude. I’m sure seeing the play would change my mind. An over exaggerated actor might make this character less crude.

I’m hoping this miserable brute Petruchio cleans up his act or I might have found the first Shakespeare play that I don’t like.

2010
09/14
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Literature
TAGS

Leave a comment

Richard III- Week 2

What sets Richard apart from most? He’s ruthless, he doesn’t care what he has to do to get his way, he has no conscience, it’s like he’s an animal. An animal who has huge scary teeth, and isn’t afraid to sink them into anyone. It’s like he’s a hellhound, or perhaps a dog… “From forth the kennel of thy womb hath crept/ A hellhound that doth hunt us all to death: That dog , that had his teeth before his eyes,” (IV. iv. 57-49).

Richard was born with a full set of teeth. Does that seem weird to anyone? “Marry, they say my uncle grew so fast/ That he could gnaw a crust at two hours old,” (II. iv. 27-28).

Teeth signify the hunter. Richard III is the alpha male climbing his way to the top. In Act IV, Scene ii. they discuss how Richard slowly developed, and since he did so slowly, he should be like a flower and not like a weed. It’s interesting to note that people believe he grew up so slowly, rotting from the inside and out. Yet he had fully developed mouthful. Even York suggests that he, himself, didn’t start growing teeth for a full two years. So, Richard developed slowly on one hand, yet fast in other aspects. This goes to show us that maybe Richard wasn’t all human. Maybe in comparison to human standards Richard grew slowly, but in a hunter sense Richard had advantage.

He was evolved before everyone else was and that turned into a merciless hunter. He grew up deformed. One can even argue that Richard is better alpha male than most because he had so many obstacles to overcome. I think his development speaks miles. His biting nature grew quickly and strong, but his heart and soul developed slowly or maybe not even at all.

Yet in the end, after Richard is visited by the ghosts and gets a good old-fashioned scare, his hellhound persona melts away and he becomes a poor little puppy dog with his tale between his legs.

2010
09/07
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Literature
TAGS

Leave a comment

Richard III- Week 1

Richard III is a complete villain. He wants power and he does not care what wretched things he has to do to get it. While reading Richard III it was interesting to note the other characters reactions to him. People suspect him of the true evil he is but nobody does anything about it. An obvious example of this is act 1 scene 2 where Lady Anne mourns the death of members of her family, who Richard kills, then she somewhat agrees to marrying him. Richard has a power over people and it overflows so much people don’t try to put a stop to him. Instead of refusing Richard’s advances, or even killing him when given the chance, Anne just does what he wants. It shows the audience the immensity of Richard’s power.

The examples throughout the book are most noticeable when people catch on to Richard’s plan. Everyone simply mourns and realizes there’s nothing to stop the malicious man. One particular example is in act 3 scene 4. Lord Hastings believes nothing will actually come of Stanley’s dream. After seeing Richard, he notes how happy he seems claiming he always knows when Richard’s getting his way. “There’s some conceit or others like him well, when he bids good marrow with such spirit,” (Lines 49-50).  After Richard orders Hasting’s execution, all there is left to do is lament. All the characters play into his plot, and once they find out their a pawn in his game there’s nothing left for them to do.

It came to strike me as odd that no character tried to fight back or work together to put a stop to this man. All the scenes come to show the true power Richard had. To think of how much blood he had on his hands makes it clear that he is capable of anything. When you can take the hand of the woman who’s husband you killed, you know that you’ve really got power.

2010
08/30
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Literature
TAGS

Leave a comment

My Love Affair with William Shakespeare

Freshman year of high school we were to start a Shakespeare unit, of course being met with the usual groans from the class. Well I had never had any experience with the writer but I was open minded.

The first play we were to read was Romeo and Juliet. Afterward we would watch the film versions Romeo and Juliet (1968), and Romeo + Juliet (1996). Our teacher said that 1996 version was a modern take on the story, but all the dialogue was the same. I found that extremely intriguing, and while I was reading the book I could not see how they could pull it off, and was impatient, so I rented it.

The first time I watched it I was blown away. It was so creative and well done. I kept renting it and renting it, and finally just bought it. To this day, it’s still my favorite movie.

I loved Romeo and Juliet, it was beautifully written and rang true to me. After we were done with that play, we read Midsummer Night’s Dream. Another amazing play. So I always had a little room for Shakespeare in my heart.

But it wasn’t until I got to college and read Hamlet for my Intro to Theater class did my love blossom.

Shakespeare’s writing is marvelous. He finds ways to say this simplest phrase and turn into something truly amazing. He captures feelings and emotions like no one else does. I laugh out loud when I read his comedies.

I’m no genius either. I struggle when reading his plays. I have to Sparknotes every act to know whats going on, and if want to really dissect a line I look up the modern English translation on No Fear Shakespeare. It takes me a considerable amount time but it’s soo worth it. He’s clever and quick witted. He’s the master of insults, and cunning comments. His stories are so complex and interesting. He creates these characters that are still figures in the modern world. Romeo, Juliet, Hamlet, Othello… Hundreds of years later his plays are still relevant to every day life.  Whole classes are devoted to this one author. Which gets me to the point of this blog.

Finally, I’m taking Shakespeare for Non Majors. A whole entire semester where my homework is to go home and read my favorite author. What could be better?

Along with reading our teacher wants us to blog about our thoughts. So I thought I would preface my assignment with an explanation of my love of this man. William Shakespeare, you speak to my soul, you make me laugh, you make me cry, you give me hope. You’re so talented, my hats off to you sir.

2010
08/29
POSTED BY
CATEGORY
Literature
TAGS



Leave a comment