#done with my essays i swear

[fist-of-vengeance]

thinking about how essentially every relationship john locke formed in the early seasons of lost has completely disintegrated by the time of his death.

of course there's his relationship with jack, which starts tense but manageable and culminates in jack pointing a gun at john's head and pulling the trigger. but even his smaller, less narratively prominent relationships either implode or drift apart. he bonds with walt in season one but then walt leaves the island, which is itself a severing of their bond since it was mainly based on being the only two people who wanted to stay. still, he goes and visits walt off the island so this is probably john's most successful relationship. I dont think i need to explain how he fucked up with boone, "the sacrifice that the island demanded." charlie viewed john as a mentor and claimed to trust him more than anyone on the island, but after the events of fire and water, that trust is destroyed and charlie despises him. at the same time we get john bonding with claire and having a pseudo-paternal dynamic with her, but their closeness basically drops off the face of the earth as he gets less and less involved with the other survivors.

his arc in the series is essentially a gradual distancing from everyone around him. it starts when he abandons hunting (providing for the others) in favor of trying to get the hatch open (it's extremely clear his primary motive isn't any survival applications but getting answers to the mystery). when they do open the hatch, he spends more and more time inside, underground, cut off from other people. he spends more and more time interacting with ben, a human mystery box that he's obsessed with cracking even if it gets him killed. he follows the proverbial white rabbit deeper down the hole and leaves his connection to humanity behind. the island and its mysteries become more important to john than anything or anyone else.

then in season three we get him claiming to go undercover with the others only to unceremoniously tell sawyer that he's actually going to join them. and it doesn't feel shocking, it feels inevitable. because john has spent the entire series becoming less and less connected with the people he arrived with. in that sense he actually makes a fascinating foil to juliet, who is introduced as one of the others and yet never really fits, she's increasingly sympathetic and kind in a way the rest of them aren't, her redemption arc feels so natural that she actually starts referring to her old people as "the others" like she's been one of the crash survivors from the beginning. her and john basically have inverse arcs, which is probably accidental but very neat.

in season five john tries to convince everyone to go back to the island, and fails spectacularly. and of course he does, because he was so consumed by obsession that he stopped maintaining his relationships, and in many cases actively alienated people (this is also basically what happened with helen) and now he can't wrap his head around why they're all so hostile to him. i am forever obsessed with the scene where he confronts kate and she brutally calls him out for wanting to return to the island because he doesn't love anyone. it actually struck me on rewatch how well the two of them got along in season one, and how badly their relationship has degraded by this point. john repeatedly casts aside interpersonal relationships in favor of his obsession with destiny, so when said destiny actually involves persuading the people he once shunned, he's at a loss. this is because john treats purpose as a supplement for connection, destiny as an alternative to love.

as an aside, this aspect of john's character kinda ties into my opinion that several lost characters can be read as allegorically neurdivergent under a certain lens. i know this was absolutely not intended, but as an adhd former gifted kid who struggles socially, there is something uncomfortably familiar about a character who allows their relationships to burn around them because of a single-minded obsession, especially as a result of being promised the fickle status of "special."

tl/dr: john locke is a doomed idiot and i love him

[vermillioncrown]

snippet of tpac ch 11

who wants to see bruce being bullied? doesn't matter, here you go

...

“—per my last missive, Sir: if you want this equation to exist, then the principles of linear algebra must necessarily exist.” Korvin waves a thin stack of ruled paper—covered with sprawling formulas, symbols, bullet lists, and patchwork paragraphs on both sides—like he’s trying to banish a demon. That demon, in this instance, is “Batman being stubborn.”

Bruce looks taken aback, like something is happening outside of his set parameters. From how Dick tried to explain it: apparently, Bruce and Korvin have a whole “pen pals” routine going on, and it’s still thriving despite them sharing the same living quarters for the past few months?

Do they actually waste stamps on this? Where do they hide the envelopes?

(Dick raised his hands in surrender at that line of questioning.)

Tim knows Bruce is a creature of habit and standards of operation—of which he completely respects because it’s efficient—but his staunch adherence to routine is next-level neurotic. Normally, he'd be furious about being sidetracked.

Yet, Korvin’s thrown caution to the wind and got so mad over math, like the fussy nerd that he tries to hide being, that he’s directly confronting Bruce—full “David vs Goliath” vibes here. And he's winning.

“I trust your work,” Bruce finally says, holding his hand out for the papers.

That only makes Korvin’s face twitch harder. “Sure. Why not. Everyone needs a bit of make-believe. Escapism in these trying times and shitass economy.”

“‘Shitass economy,’” Cass murmurs, of course latching onto the bit that everyone reacts to.

Babs sighs in disgust.

...

[batsplat]

Is there any evidence showing how the audience reacts to Jorge's celebrations? I'm wondering, like, what if Jorge and Vale swapped their celebrations, would the audience like it more just because Valentino did it? Is it actually about the celebration itself or more about the person doing it?

oh they sure would've liked it more if valentino had done it!! like, the answer is that it's about both those things: what the celebrations are and what performs them. and in 2007... the vibes were still broadly pro-jorge, but he did already have plenty of detractors, plenty of those who thought he was a cocky shit - if not as yet an actively hostile casual audience. still, he wasn't valentino. valentino was valentino, those celebrations would've of course been received differently from him

and yes, let's lead with the obvious here: becoming valentino's rival certainly didn't help his cause. in early 2008, the commentators have been talking up how he's finally winning the people over and he's had such a bright and promising start to the premier class... but then we have to put a bit of a pause on that while jorge more or less disappears for most of the rest of the season, spending most of his time licking various wounds. then you get 2009 and the title fight between the two of them... while jorge did have plenty of support, especially from his own country, and he wasn't necessarily hated yet by the casual audience.... well, going by his biography, he was a bit too aware of how he was perceived:

Jorge Lorenzo thought that he might come under fire for battling against Dani Pedrosa, the other rider fighting to be Spain's number one MotoGP favourite, rather than anything else. How wrong he was! On the Internet the majority of criticism has come from Rossi fans - even in his own country! It is definitely a subject that touches a nerve. Jorge is well aware of the discussions that take place on the Internet - he's a seasoned web surfer and he keeps m touch with what's going on on the forums, as well as interacting with his fans - so there have been plenty of occasions where his typing fingers have clenched into fists of frustration. 'It is amazing what you have to put up with in your own country. We have two guys winning races and fighting for the title, and still lots of people stand up for riders from other countries. Okay, I understand why they support Rossi, because he has won nine titles, he's an incredible rider and he has earned their respect - and mine. But there are these other scumbags - disrespectful and bad-mannered people - who are Rossi fanatics and get enjoyment out of insulting us. They almost want me dead! I hope I never have to hear any kind of abuse or insults towards another rider from a "Lorenzista". That would really sadden me.'

obviously, no athlete should read what people write about them on the internet, like that's just a fundamental case where somebody on his team should be telling him 'no, don't do that :)' and get him to practise some social media hygiene. but of course, it is interesting that it kinda makes him the first rider who was like... online... what does it change, if the rider themselves is up to date with the discourse

so. I have been known to peruse motogp forums myself. it's hard to get a great read of fan sentiment at various points in time beyond what the journalists and the commentators and the occasional relevant book can tell you. forums are obviously not particularly representative either BUT it's still kinda interesting to give yourself a sense of the discourse at the time, what talking points existed and so on. which brings me to my other point: while the rivalry with valentino inevitably exacerbated the situation, jorge already had some baggage with viewers going back to his 250cc days - where he was inarguably a lot. just to give you a taster, from april 2008:

a rich text!

so, to some extent, the narrative of jorge as 'the villain' was something that already existed in early 2008. it wasn't unrelated to emerging as a valentino rival, even then, but it was also not entirely about that. like, the main opponents jorge was linked to in people's minds back then were dovi and dani! (and john hopkins, apparently.) the other narrative you already find here that became quite common over the next few years: okay, jorge was 'the villain', but it's also good for a sport to have something like that. someone to root against. someone who comes across as a bit arrogant, a bit full of himself... even if he doesn't mean to be seen as that

and yes, this stuff does definitely get worse in 2009, which is how you get jorge reading stuff along these lines about himself online - including from his compatriots. he didn't think he'd be unpopular for fighting valentino! he thought it'd be about dani! and the thing is, jorge isn't happy whatsoever with this tag of 'villain' that had followed him since his 250cc days. it's something that comes through a lot in the biography as well as his 2010 title winning season documentary: he feels misunderstood, he wants people to get what he's really all about. he spends so much time worrying about how people will perceive him, attempting to figure out how to better communicate with them... but in reality, a lot of people had already seen all they needed to see. fighting valentino wasn't the starting point for that, and it's likely jorge would have always ended up in a bit of a heel role anyway - but obviously, being valentino's teammate didn't help

then 2010 came, the relationship between the pair of them finally deteriorated publicly, and after valentino's injuries jorge was dominating his way towards his first title. this is when things really begin to change for him. he still had the early season celebrations, drowning himself in jerez and the yellow chair of le mans, plus of course the title celebrations - but, well. I think at a certain point, if you're jorge, you can worry about what people online are saying as much as you want... but you have to figure out what's more important to you: being popular or winning. because maybe, it's just not going to be possible for you to have both. maybe, however much you want to find out a way to connect with the people, to charm them, to bring them on your side with your joyous and creative celebrations, to get them to love you the way you feel you deserve to be loved... maybe they've already made up their minds. maybe, there's only so much you can do... the dorna-produced documentary may be defiant, but it is also frustrated. jorge knows people don't see him how he wants to be seen, and he has run out of things to try to change that

to give an example of how warped perception of him had become by end of 2010:

So at Sepang, Lorenzo was the object of intense scrutiny, his every action dissected and discussed like a presidential candidate's acceptance address. And naturally, when Lorenzo pulled over on the cool down lap after finally securing the championship that had been his life-long goal, the fact that he missed Ben Spies' hand offered in congratulation was jumped upon by the voracious pack and imbued with a significance normally reserved for the actions of mystics and gurus. It was a Deliberate Act, said those whom Lorenzo had angered by stealing Rossi's crown, a Snub. It was aimed at Establishing the Pecking Order in the Yamaha garage for next year, the conspiracists insisted, kicking off the 2011 season within seconds of the 2010 season being settled. Lorenzo, the angry mob proclaimed, deliberately ignored Spies to show him who was boss. Watching the video in isolation, you might even be persuaded that the conspiracists had a point. Spies pulls up next to Lorenzo, tries to shake his hand, which Lorenzo does not respond to, then Spies rides off shaking his head. Proof positive that it was a deliberate and malicious act, say the conspiracists. Like all conspiracy theorists, those who say Lorenzo deliberately snubbed Spies overlook one major factor, however: Human nature. When Spies pulled over to congratulate Lorenzo, the Spaniard was in a daze. Members of his fan club had started the preparations for the complex and impenetrable celebration they had planned before the race, and Lorenzo was clearly struggling to remember what it was he was supposed to be doing. He had marshalls, photographers and his friends all around him, all slapping him on the back, poking him in the gut and touching his arms. There was a lot going on. Most of all, though, this was the moment that it all started to sink in for Lorenzo. After a tough race in stifling tropical conditions - the race had been shortened by one lap at the request of the riders, because the Sepang race is so physically demanding in the heat and humidity - Lorenzo had finally crossed the line in one piece, and with enough points to win the title. He had achieved a lifelong dream, a goal he had dedicated himself to for at least the past 15 years. A goal that he had sacrificed his relationship with his family, his relationship with his manager, and even his relationship with the only girl he ever loved to achieve. Finally, for the first time in his life, he was MotoGP World Champion. He had gone through several harrowing weeks before finally reaching this goal: He had lost points to Dani Pedrosa three races in a row, putting Pedrosa back in with a chance. After Pedrosa injured himself at Motegi, and Lorenzo could have wrapped up the title, he was surprised to be given a good old-fashioned smackdown by his teammate, reminding him that the title is never certain until it's officially in the bag. Those fairing-banging passes between Rossi and Lorenzo reminded the Spaniard of his vulnerability, that a simple mistake can cause a serious injury, and undo all the hard work of a season in a fraction of a second. Finally it was over, and the title was in the bag. At last, after weeks of pressure, Lorenzo could relax. As he pulled over, the emotions washed over him, elation, relief, exhaustion. Within seconds, he had fans around him starting on the Spaniard's meticulously planned celebration. He had barely gathered his thoughts to start dealing with the complexities of that celebration when Spies pulled up beside him, tried to shake Lorenzo's hand, then rode off shaking his head, probably in bemusement at the state of Lorenzo, a reminder of his own emotions at winning the World Superbike title last year. By the time Hiroshi Aoyama shook Lorenzo's hand (the third rider to do so), he had recovered enough of his composure to act as expected, and acknowledge the gesture appropriately.

and here:

There is no question that Lorenzo's actions are open to interpretation. The video only shows men whose faces are hidden by helmets, and whose intentions are therefore much more difficult to interpret. It is entirely possible to read the entire event as a deliberate snub to Spies, and a warning for the future. Occam's razor, however, suggests a simpler explanation: that Lorenzo was overwhelmed, and not completely aware of what was going on. Later, once Valentino Rossi arrived to congratulate the Spaniard, Lorenzo had fully recovered his composure. He accepted the Italian's congratulations in the spirit in which they were offered: begrudgingly and half-heartedly. Once in parc ferme, the childish rivalry continued, with Lorenzo trying to hog the limelight after winning the title, and Rossi trying to steal it after winning his 46th race for Yamaha. They both may ride the same bike and bear the same colors, but Rossi and Lorenzo are still a very long way from being teammates. The rivalry between Lorenzo and Rossi is much of the fuel feeding the conspiracies about Lorenzo's behavior. With such a fierce rivalry between the current teammates, surely this must continue into next year, when Ben Spies takes the place of Rossi in the factory Yamaha garage? That is surely the driving force behind Lorenzo's behavior in those few seconds, the conspiracists ask. Lorenzo himself today responded to questions on the issue on Twitter, posting the following response to the many people who had asked him if he had deliberately ignored Spies at Sepang: "I had some messages asking me why I didn't pay attention to Spies when he wanted to congratulate me. I have to say that I didn't see... ...And feel he was there at that the moment of our celebration. I just told this to him. He is a good guy and we have a good relationship."

it started before valentino, it became worse as a result of valentino, it extends beyond valentino. but, as ever, valentino is inescapable - and in the end he is so to jorge even around the time of jorge's greatest and sweetest success. to jorge there are two wars going on during that time period: one for the title and one for the hearts of the people. he has won one of them, but he keeps finding himself frustrated in the other. still. he might not have openly admitted as much in as many words, but there was one war that was always going to be more important than the other. if given the choice, he was going to win

so then. after that, jorge settles for his defiance, becomes a hardier, steely version of himself as the rest of the alien era unfolds. it is an era of motogp that is deeply unpopular at the time - and so, increasingly, is he. it is not universal dislike, of course it isn't. but it is definitely a feature of motogp during those years. he becomes readier to lean into that role, over time, prepared to play the heel if that is the role he has been cast to play. but the desire to be understood never entirely went away... there aren't many riders who have studied valentino so closely, certainly few who are so fascinated by the secrets by valentino's enduring charisma and popularity. perhaps none who were so determined to capture some of that magic for themselves. if anyone on this planet was aware, then, of how much better any of these celebrations would have been received coming from valentino - well, it would most certainly have been jorge himself

[zatna]

zatna voice claims except it's not just one. they're also all correct.

[mishkakagehishka]

I may have spent all my life until this moment wasting both mine and God's time, but from tomorrow on, for sure, i swear it, i will change my ways and be better. And it'll be different from all the other times i said the same thing🧎���♀️

[im-still-watching-anime]

i am officially, FINALLY all caught up again in both the manga and the anime for bsd and OH BOY there are thoughts and opinions but also WHO CARES because my tags are finally FREE to be unfiltered

[hella1975]

'why are you smiling' because i have beautiful mutuals and we all love each other. go back to your sports romance you heinous bitch

[teabutmakeitazure]

can we just skip to the part where i get a malewife and we live happily ever after

[randomsufff]

Here’s the “Why The Great Gatsby Musical is a bad Musical Adaptation” essay no one asked for-

(For the record- I haven’t researched anything or re-read the Great Gatsby in years so apologies if I get things wrong this is just me going off the dome with other people’s video essays [Sideways fans where y’all at] and the two Adaptations in Media courses I took in college)

(Also seems like I accidentally posted this before I finished so to those of yall who saw this before I was done- no you didn’t)

First things first- we gotta establish the core story/ moral lesson that the musical is trying to say.

Cause if this was a normal one to one adaptation of the book- I’d say the musical did a fucking shit job.

Cause adaptation are taking a story and changing it to fit a new medium. AKA- you don’t change the main story or elements that make that story… THAT STORY or else it’s not an adaptation- that’s just something else entirely with the same characters and such. You can ADD or REMOVE to the storyline or characters- but you can’t CHANGE them or else it’s not true to the original source material [and you get a lot of pissed fans as we’ve seen time and time again]

(Side rant- Which is why musicals like “Groundhog Day” and “Legally Blonde” are so praised. [ok maybe just me who likes the Groundhog Day musical but it’s really the perfect movie to musical adaptation]. They don’t change the story but rather ADD ON to what is already there to make it better. While Phils break comes from his own contentment in where he is rather then his love for Rita, this change ADDS ON to reasons why Rita falls for him, and they flesh out Rita as a character and her dynamic with Phil WAY more. Elle has a more fleshed out and deeper relationship with Warner which wasn’t seen in the film)

When you “adapt” a piece of media, and don’t stick or keep the IDEA of that media that makes it so likable- fans are gonna be pissed when you try to pass this off as the thing they like without all the heart. (Hence all the HBO Velma/ Scooby Doo adaptations in general hate, or Into the Woods/Heathers/ Dear Even Hansen/ etc. movie vs musical debate)

SO WHEN THIS MUSICAL SHIFTS THE ENTIRE CONCEPT OF THE STORY FROM A COMMENTARY OF OLD VS NEW MONEY AND HOW MONEY CORRUPTS TO A FUCKING LOVE STORY- CAN YOU BLAME PEOPLE WHO LIKED THE BOOK ABOUT BEING OUTRAGED. But I’m getting ahead of myself

I’ll give this musical the benefit of the doubt. People defend this musical by saying it’s an INTERPRETATION of the book. And I can’t argue with that so let’s look at how the musical failed as a musical (in my eyes) without pointing out the glaring difference in theme. (Even though I’m still pissed about it)

Which brings us to finding the core of THIS musical. What makes this story unique to this musical. Think back to every musical you know- I’d say most, if not all, of them have some moral or message they say at the end. And even if not- they at least tell a narrative. Something the main character LEARNS and/or TEACHES to others to make them a changed person from the beginning (very similar to typical narrative structures because that’s basically what a musical is- a story with music in it)

So what is The Great Gatsby’s core narrative?

And I KNOW the theme isn’t about Old vs New money cause they NEVER SHOW OTHERWISE except the ONE LINE at the very end. And they RUSH PAST all the consequences of all the rich peoples actions so it doesn’t seem like much was at stake. At least in the book Daisy is shown to value Old Money more and is more flaky around Gatsby- using him more obviously. BUT IF YOU CHANGE THE STORY SO THEY’RE BOTH INFATUATED WITH EACH OTHER- that selfishness and value on old money DOSENT HIT. Even NICK doesn’t know the lesson that “money makes people suck” in the musical until apparently the last 10 minutes??? Though it’s never shown his gradually trying to learn this lesson???

So that makes us turn to “is it a love story/ tragedy about Gatsby and Daisy”? And even then I’d say no! Or at least I’m not sure- because they honestly don’t show much of their relationship other than what’s in the surface.

Be so for real- ignoring that it’s Eva Noblezada and Jeremy Jorden singing- what do we ACTUALLY KNOW about Daisy and Jays relationship via lyrics??? That Jay went to war- they danced at a ball, Daisy liked him but thought he would die at war and moved on, and got married to Tom for security. There is NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE HERE. WHY did they fall in love? WHAT did Daisy like about Jay? WHAT DID JAY LIKE ABOUT DAISY?

There’s NOTHING HERE for the audience to feel and root for this couple. In literally any other (good) musical you’d have a grand ol song or spectacle about what the two love interests see in each other, which you BUILD UP over multiple interactions and dialogue. All they do whenever they’re on stage or singing is talk about how much they’re in love with each other- but not really why??? It’s so surface level- “we love each other so so so much and I’ll die without you”- but not actually showing, I guess, evidence of this? If that makes sense??? WHAT DO THEY SEE IN EACH OTHER THAT THEY CANT GET ANYWHERE ELSE? I didn’t feel anything when they got together, and I felt nothing when they got separated.

It doesn’t help that this musical tries to tell too many storylines at once. Yup I’m talking about the useless Jordan and Nick plot. WHAT is the purpose here? It just talks up time away from the main romance (if that was the core story) and ends too abruptly to convey the “Money corrupts” angle (if that’s what they were going for???? I literally can’t tell)

So right off that bat I have no idea what this musical wants out of me or want to achieve. Is it making a capitalist commentary? A feminist one? Is this a love story? Between who??? Nick and Jordan or Jay and Daisy? I think the musical WANTS to achieve all of these at once, but it doesn’t and CAN’T work.

Sure, musicals can have multiple lessons or storylines, but usually, there’s ONE MAIN ONE that the rest stem off or build upon, making it layered. I feel like this musical wanted to equally showcase all these points, which made it feel like nothing was said cause they tried to give every point an equal amount of stage time.

If the main story is supposed to be about the Romeo and Juliet type tragedy between Jay and Daisy, why did they not show more conflict between the two? Why did they completely omit them fully reuniting and the moments before and after Daisy hit Myrtle???? That’s like their main breaking point and yall not even gonna show that????

If it’s between Nick and Jorden why do they not have a meaningful ending to their relationship? Why was Jorden so down bad for MARRYING Nick?

They then could have layered on the different messages, through side plots or dialogue or whatever to convey the other points

Ok so now that that’s finally out of the way let’s get into the res gif it real quick.

Nicks the main character but he dosent seem to learn anything or change at all until the last 10 minutes, and even then, it’s not THAT fleshed out. He just seems to be going through the story and has like such little impact despite literally being one of the main characters.

And yeah- he didn’t do much in the novel either but you were reading all this shit through HIS EYES. You got to hear HIS thoughts and how HE described situations, so you were still connected to he guy and knew his deal mostly.

In the musical, the only times he truly narrates is the begging, the song “The Met”, and the end. And after meeting Jordan, anytime he’s on stage, he mostly doing something with her. He never feels INVOLVED with Gatsby and Daisy’s plot after they get together. He kinda like, fucks off and does his own thing for like the rest of the show. It’s so weird- just invoke your main narrator more. ALSO JUST HAVE HIM NARRATE? Not sure why they made him stop narrating beyond the beginning and end but I think it would have been fun if Nick addressed the audience and had asides with his thoughts and such through the show.

Finally- though it’s not a huge huge nitpick- the songs.

I just felt like- they say a whole lot of nothing. Like half of the songs don’t add much in terms of character or plot, at least, nothing that couldn’t be easily said in a line of dialogue.

I’m not sure if this is true for ALL musicals, but I’d say generally, sons in (good) musicals have to either move to plot forward, or provide deeper insight to a characters feelings.

First example that comes to my mind is Tim Minchins Groundhog Day Musical (cause I really really love that musical). Literally every song in that musical either moves the plot forward, or provides a deeper view to a character that you’d literally never hear otherwise cause they’d never say that shit outloud.

When I look at this musical- only about half of the songs achieve this. Songs like “Absolute Rose” or “Second Hand Suit” and even “One Way Road” are great at proving a look beyond a surface level at the characters. But songs like “For Her” or “My Green Light” felt redundant cause they said what we already saw for 3 minutes. I already said this, but it would have been better if they used these songs to delve into WHY Daisy and Jay are so infatuated with each other. What about the other made Jay want to go after her for like 10 years or Daisy want to have an affair with him.

And the song “The Met” was GREAT for actively pushing forward the plot. Like it moved THROUGH the scene if that makes sense. Unlike other songs which kind felt crammed in as the plot moves around the song.

Cause that’s the thing about this musicals songs is that half of them don’t feel INTEGRATED into the plot. The story doesn’t continue throughout the song, you’re just kinda stuck in the scene with the character until they’re done singing. Of course there are the few exceptions (“Shady”, “Second Hand Suit” and “The Met” and of course) but almost every other song you don’t see the plot move forward WITH the song. And of course not every song in every musical HAS to move through the story, but if you’re going to have a musical with 23 songs, you need to use some of them to continue the plot forward.

It feels like the composers only used about half the potential that songs in musicals can do, cause they mostly only used it for like, romantic or big emotional moments and they don’t do much while they do.

In contrast, in the (here I go again) Groundhog Day Musical, in one song “One Day” (the Act 1 Finale) we 1) learn Rita’s reasoning why she keeps rejecting Phil and her personal thoughts on love and relationships. 2) See Phil repeatedly try to date Rita and keep failing. 3) See Phil’s thoughts and dive into depression as the luster of the loops wear off. And 4) Set up the other townies problems to the audience that Phil to help with in the middle of Act Two. 5) Pushes home the moral of the story (the townies always saying “one day, in the future, I’ll get all this shit done”) FIVE SEPARATE POINTS. All wrapped up in a montage as the audience get to see Phil become more and more demotivated as the loops go on.

Granted it is like 7 minutes long, but even compared to The Great Gatsby’s 5 minute “Roaring On”- I can only think of the song 1) Introducing how cryptic Gatsby is 2) Very brief backstory on Nick. 3) The set up of party goers always looking for the next party. And even then, “One Day” has a literal montage of failed dates by Phil, then has all the Townies stand fragmented as they say their problems, then shows him literally go through his day BACKWARDS to highlight how fucked up time is for him and how everything blurs together (and it genius because it uses core poses and people they established and hammered into your brain since the beginning of the show to make it so you can recognize the scene just by one person doing one thing- AGH I can go on forever about this show)

What does “Roaring On” have going for it? Nothing. Just dancers dancing and Nick standing there singing

“Oh, but it’s not that fair to compare an Act 1 Finale to the opening number…” Alright let compare the Great Gatsby’s Finale to other musicals shall we.

First off, “My Green Light” really does not have much going for it. No offense if you like the song, but what do we learn through this song? That Daisy also missed Gatsby but moved on for her own good and that they want the other “save” them. For Daisy, I can understand Gatsby maybe “saving” her from Tom, but what does Gatsby need saving from? Loneliness? Again, WHY HER?

Now again, I’ll try to be fair since there are act one closers that aren’t big spectacles (Looking at you Book of Mormon). Off the top of my head, “Our Love is God” from Heathers is similar in concept to what TGG is trying to do. They’re both love songs involving the main characters that they sing to the other. But what makes “Our Love is God” stand out is that it’s also the point where JD reveals his true colors, and both the audience and Veronica learn how obsessive his love is for her. It starts out as a sweet love song, sung in a loving tone, but by the end he uses the exact same words in a more sinister and possessive tone and you get to see Veronica kinda realize what she’s gotten herself into. “My Green Light” has nothing like that. It’s actually kind of a mundane place to end act one, cause there’s literally nothing going on that they could by have just said at some point. I mean even if you take it out and don’t replace it with anything, there’s nothing in there that’s you couldn’t infer or just get via the rest of the show. They could have shifted everything so that landed at their reconnection over tea at Nicks so it would be more plot relevant. Or even shifted it to when she comes to one of Gatsby’s party for the first time.

Dear Even Hansen has an emotional Act One Closer, but even that is directly connected to the plot. “You Will be Found” IS literally the thing that kick starts the downfall of Evan, and the message of the song is one that can apply to anyone in the audience.

I don’t know, if I remember correctly, I was kinda surprised when they went to curtain cause it was such a boring place for Act One to end, I expected there to be more.

Anyways, I think that’s basically it. So The Great Gatsby could have been a great musical if they actually chose a MAIN storyline to completely follow through on, and utilized songs to their full potential in musical theater rather. 👍

[bluarlequinno]

Homura Akemi

That's it, that's the post

[iridescentis]

sickening that i have to think about studying rather than 50 different fic ideas floating in my head tomorrow this should be considered a crime

[twogoliathbeetles]

handed in my essay within my extension time 😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎😎 <- has slept less than 5 hours since waking up on tuesday

[mirqmarq428]

Trying out Nyxt (lisp web browser) again. Flatpak this time. Some internal things are broken but that includes the *Messages* buffer so I can't work out what.

[t4tstarvingdog]

i feel like i’m losing my mind

[falconcoast]

guys never take AP lang

[junko-jinko]

rereading a 13k salmon spawning pwp for the 10th time (I think? I've lost count tbh) just so I can draw the most accurate fanart for it like a normal person