I can occasionally be a classy lady
Jun. 17th, 2011 11:46 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trinityvixenIt's Friday. I so rarely get the weekend itch, but today I have it. I stayed up all of half an hour later than my usual last night, and I'm paying for it today. I almost called in sick because that's how alluring my bed was. Now that I'm at work, I'm going through my tissues like mad because something's in the air. I should probably go get some Claritin or whatever. Stupid trees, stop having sex!
I saw Anything Goes last night. Had a great time. I'm a huge fan of the music, though, er, I completely forgot how the musical itself resolved. (It's a little bit racist.) I had the hardest time not tapping and bopping along, so I gave up trying to stop myself and just focused on not singing. You can get away with that at Mamma Mia! but not at the newly-Tony-Award-minted musical of the year. Also, Reno Sweeney's costumes are TO DIE. I though Sutton Foster's energy was great, as was her delivery on the comedic bits, but I actually found her voice a little lacking. A lot of the singing was stylized to accentuate the comedy. There are some roles for which that is perfectly fine, but Reno sings the best songs in the entire musical, from "I Get a Kick Out of You" to "Blow Gabriel Blow," and there are several doozies in the middle. (It amazed me how many I still knew all the words to.) So the less bombastic singing on her part was a little disappointing, but more so with Erma's song, "Buddie Beware." I auditioned for the one role I've ever had in my life with that song, and if you don't belt it out, you lose half of what's so freakin' awesome about it. Not that Erma wasn't funny, but she can still be funny and sexy.
Overall, I just need to go out to more theater. My roommates were kind of astonished at how poorly educated I am on plays. I couldn't name one I'd seen performed live that wasn't Shakespeare. My exposure to plays is kind of limited to what I read in high school (most of which were Shakespeare) and ones that have been made into movies. (Oh, Arsenic and Old Lace, I love you.) And I haven't even seen that many movies based on plays. I'll work on that. In another two weeks, I'm going to see War Horse. I'm kind of deliriously excited about that because the puppetry looks amazing in photographs. It's supposed to be unreal when you see it perform.
I should note that my marked interest in theater correlates, possibly, to my dread of the next few weeks of cinematic releases. I'm bang-on for completing my New Year's resolution to see a movie-a-week, but the next three weekends' movies? Green Lantern always looked horrible. There was one second of my life, though, where, after seeing X-Men: First Class and having it not suck despite the marketing department doing everything it could to make me think it would, where I thought the same could be true of Green Lantern. Yes, the trailers were THAT BAD. The CGI was THAT BAD. But X-Men: First Class was not a total loss, so maybe...
Then I passed exactly one poster for Green Lantern and came to my goddamn senses, as the early reviews confirm my worst suspicions. One interesting line at The A.V. Club's review struck me as a brilliant summation of what's wrong with the movie and why the DC properties aren't experiencing the phenomenal revival the Marvel ones are:
"Green Lantern tries to make a case of human exceptionalism: Out of the thousand-plus species comprising the Green Lantern Corps, only Hal, the newcomer, has the humanity that can save the universe"
I watched this TED Talk that blamed this sort of narrative laziness--who needs hard work and team effort if you have "the chosen one"--for inciting cynicism, particularly about politics, but it applies to all sorts of things. If you have media replete with fictional narratives about problems being solved by the divinely appointed, you not only discourage engagement with an issue among the peons, you alienate people who live lives where they none of them know any of these chosen. I think that's a laaaaaarge part of DC's problem translating its heroes to movies. I said before that it was that Marvel's heroes come off as more realistic because they're often flawed. That's part of it. But they're also not chosen, not in the same way, that many of DC's heroes are.
This is no knock on the DC heroes who work goddamned hard to get what they have. But it's one thing to be, say, a Tony Stark whose genius builds him wealth with which he can support being Iron Man, and it's another to be Bruce Wayne, who inherits the money that makes it possible for him to be Batman. I mean, Batman is probably the best example of a self-made hero DC has, and he's still incredibly privileged in ways that aren't addressed. Contrast this also with X-Men: First Class. I still cannot work out if X-Men: First Class knew how privileged Xavier was or if they didn't defend his point of view because they thought it was obvious that everyone should think it was correct. But since absolutely everyone with two brain cells to rub together got the message that Xavier's privilege is a poor substitute for real logic or passion, I must concede the film probably had some idea that privilege was at play. And it did not support the people who benefited from it. Watch that movie and tell me you're not on Magneto's side. Go on, I dare you.
Perhaps none of that matters. Perhaps Green Lantern is just a shitty movie and Warner Brothers has just had uneven luck in bringing DC's properties to life and Marvel has had astonishingly good luck. Maybe it's not about the fundamental differences between the two comic giants' philosophies on heroism and it's just a question of talent and trust. But I don't think so. For starters, the WB has thrown so much money and recruited plenty of talented folk for its movies. And they only have The Dark Knight going for them. (Granted, a $1Bn movie isn't such a bad thing to have going for you.) There's got to be something there, right?
I saw Anything Goes last night. Had a great time. I'm a huge fan of the music, though, er, I completely forgot how the musical itself resolved. (It's a little bit racist.) I had the hardest time not tapping and bopping along, so I gave up trying to stop myself and just focused on not singing. You can get away with that at Mamma Mia! but not at the newly-Tony-Award-minted musical of the year. Also, Reno Sweeney's costumes are TO DIE. I though Sutton Foster's energy was great, as was her delivery on the comedic bits, but I actually found her voice a little lacking. A lot of the singing was stylized to accentuate the comedy. There are some roles for which that is perfectly fine, but Reno sings the best songs in the entire musical, from "I Get a Kick Out of You" to "Blow Gabriel Blow," and there are several doozies in the middle. (It amazed me how many I still knew all the words to.) So the less bombastic singing on her part was a little disappointing, but more so with Erma's song, "Buddie Beware." I auditioned for the one role I've ever had in my life with that song, and if you don't belt it out, you lose half of what's so freakin' awesome about it. Not that Erma wasn't funny, but she can still be funny and sexy.
Overall, I just need to go out to more theater. My roommates were kind of astonished at how poorly educated I am on plays. I couldn't name one I'd seen performed live that wasn't Shakespeare. My exposure to plays is kind of limited to what I read in high school (most of which were Shakespeare) and ones that have been made into movies. (Oh, Arsenic and Old Lace, I love you.) And I haven't even seen that many movies based on plays. I'll work on that. In another two weeks, I'm going to see War Horse. I'm kind of deliriously excited about that because the puppetry looks amazing in photographs. It's supposed to be unreal when you see it perform.
I should note that my marked interest in theater correlates, possibly, to my dread of the next few weeks of cinematic releases. I'm bang-on for completing my New Year's resolution to see a movie-a-week, but the next three weekends' movies? Green Lantern always looked horrible. There was one second of my life, though, where, after seeing X-Men: First Class and having it not suck despite the marketing department doing everything it could to make me think it would, where I thought the same could be true of Green Lantern. Yes, the trailers were THAT BAD. The CGI was THAT BAD. But X-Men: First Class was not a total loss, so maybe...
Then I passed exactly one poster for Green Lantern and came to my goddamn senses, as the early reviews confirm my worst suspicions. One interesting line at The A.V. Club's review struck me as a brilliant summation of what's wrong with the movie and why the DC properties aren't experiencing the phenomenal revival the Marvel ones are:
"Green Lantern tries to make a case of human exceptionalism: Out of the thousand-plus species comprising the Green Lantern Corps, only Hal, the newcomer, has the humanity that can save the universe"
I watched this TED Talk that blamed this sort of narrative laziness--who needs hard work and team effort if you have "the chosen one"--for inciting cynicism, particularly about politics, but it applies to all sorts of things. If you have media replete with fictional narratives about problems being solved by the divinely appointed, you not only discourage engagement with an issue among the peons, you alienate people who live lives where they none of them know any of these chosen. I think that's a laaaaaarge part of DC's problem translating its heroes to movies. I said before that it was that Marvel's heroes come off as more realistic because they're often flawed. That's part of it. But they're also not chosen, not in the same way, that many of DC's heroes are.
This is no knock on the DC heroes who work goddamned hard to get what they have. But it's one thing to be, say, a Tony Stark whose genius builds him wealth with which he can support being Iron Man, and it's another to be Bruce Wayne, who inherits the money that makes it possible for him to be Batman. I mean, Batman is probably the best example of a self-made hero DC has, and he's still incredibly privileged in ways that aren't addressed. Contrast this also with X-Men: First Class. I still cannot work out if X-Men: First Class knew how privileged Xavier was or if they didn't defend his point of view because they thought it was obvious that everyone should think it was correct. But since absolutely everyone with two brain cells to rub together got the message that Xavier's privilege is a poor substitute for real logic or passion, I must concede the film probably had some idea that privilege was at play. And it did not support the people who benefited from it. Watch that movie and tell me you're not on Magneto's side. Go on, I dare you.
We're not ready to give up "chosen one" narratives, of course, not by a long shot. Despite all that J.K. Rowling did to stress that choices make the person, etc. etc., the Harry Potter books are fundamentally a "chosen one" story. Whatever "choice" may affect, it does not change the fact that Voldemort and Harry Potter are destined to determine the fate of the wizarding world. That Harry Potter alone stands between our world and rule by Voldemort. It's hard for something like Green Lantern, where the very ability to be a Lantern depends upon one being chosen, to escape this sort of lazy destiny narrative. It's certainly not easy to then relate to the hero who must be, as the receipt of the ring proves, a paragon of virtue.
Perhaps none of that matters. Perhaps Green Lantern is just a shitty movie and Warner Brothers has just had uneven luck in bringing DC's properties to life and Marvel has had astonishingly good luck. Maybe it's not about the fundamental differences between the two comic giants' philosophies on heroism and it's just a question of talent and trust. But I don't think so. For starters, the WB has thrown so much money and recruited plenty of talented folk for its movies. And they only have The Dark Knight going for them. (Granted, a $1Bn movie isn't such a bad thing to have going for you.) There's got to be something there, right?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 05:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 06:06 pm (UTC)That just leaves Green Lantern. Way to drop the ball, WB. I held out hope that I would be wrong about that through at least the first two trailers. No longer.
no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 07:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 07:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 07:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 07:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 07:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 09:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 11:32 pm (UTC)No, this is a generalized frustration that the characters and stories that I actually loved will never get made into good movies, and aren't even going to feature in comics any more. Kyle is Green Latern--he's a schmoe chosen at random in a world full of gods and he rises to the challenge. Wally is the Flash--he's a former sidekick smacked by real life and growing with bumps and bruises along the way. Except that the DC creative team is stuck in 1970, where Hal and Barry had no personalities beyond being unlucky with their only girlfriends, and that's always what we'll fall back to.
Oh, and in the battle of Marvel vs. DC, Marvel always wins. Because apparently DC characters are so iconic, no one on any creative team can fucking agree how to write them.
no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 11:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 11:50 pm (UTC)I think you, in what seems to be a fit of either cynicism or pissiness (hard to read over the internet) about my generalizations, have actually come closer than I have to nailing this down. I think you're exactly right. I generalized again about DC heroes being too perfect, but that's how they seem to one on the outside, whose interaction with them is mostly through the decidedly innocent and frequently shallow medium of TV. Whatever their actual characterization, DC characters are too iconic to adapt a lot of the time. You either do it like Donner did, or Nolan, or you give up.
It's kind of funny, then, that the most successful of the adapted works has been Smallville, for a given definition of successful. But the show was on for ten years, and it was definitely different, although they did make Clark Kent out to be some annoyingly perfect being a lot of the time (despite the fact that he was too frequently stupid unto the point of forgetting how to breathe).
I pity poor Superman, actually. Zack Snyder has the next crack at his story...
no subject
Date: 2011-06-17 11:55 pm (UTC)They had a real chance to prove that the DC universe can be more than just the binary of Batman-Superman, and they totally blew it. Will we even get to a Flash movie? Or Wonder Woman? Why can't they get their act together?