5,159 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Sept 17, 2021 11:45:57 GMT
It wouldn't do to be late for my own premiere, so I've just arrived at the world-famous Crucible Theatre. There's a pink carpet, and everything!
BBC Radio Sheffield has a two hour special later this afternoon, available on all good platforms. My good friend Paulette goes live from 5. She'll probably want to talk to me, in some depth, about *that* shirt. 🙂
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2021 17:05:11 GMT
So I have just watched the movie.
The best things about the stage show were John McCrea and Josie Walker.
The subject matter is still a bit dodgy for me. I don't think children should be aspiring to be "drag queens" or "instafamous".
Max Harwood is lovely, his voice is unpretentious and calm.
The music sounds beautiful compared to being played live, which isn't surprising considering the composer of this show is used to writing for playback rather than orchestras and the adjustments to the score throughout are very much welcomed.
The toilet scene is still very odd and "Work of Art" is so strange. Why on earth wasn't it just taken out?
Mimi's first performance is fun.
The football game scene is very unrealistic and dramatic.
The way that the teacher is painted as an awful person is totally wrong. She is just doing her job and enforcing rules, children like Jamie need to learn to fall in line. Jamie is not a likeable character at all. He is a self-absorbed, attention seeking leftie type but then again, most high school children are these days. The idea that we are supposed to be supportive of Jamie is too hard to stomach. He shows very little remorse and when he does, it feels disingenuous. Max Harwood does the very best he can with such an awful character!
Whilst it is still not an amazing musical, it works so much better as a movie. How on earth the stage show made it into the West End will always be beyond me. Now the movie is out there, there's no need to have the stage show as well. Get it closed!
|
|
2,859 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by couldileaveyou on Sept 17, 2021 17:15:22 GMT
The way that the teacher is painted as an awful person is totally wrong. She is just doing her job and enforcing rules, children like Jamie need to learn to fall in line. isn't there a song in Matilda about this |
|
7,189 posts
|
Post by Jon on Sept 17, 2021 17:33:40 GMT
So I have just watched the movie. The best things about the stage show were John McCrea and Josie Walker. The subject matter is still a bit dodgy for me. I don't think children should be aspiring to be "drag queens" or "instafamous". Max Harwood is lovely, his voice is unpretentious and calm. The music sounds beautiful compared to being played live, which isn't surprising considering the composer of this show is used to writing for playback rather than orchestras and the adjustments to the score throughout are very much welcomed. The toilet scene is still very odd and "Work of Art" is so strange. Why on earth wasn't it just taken out? Mimi's first performance is fun. The football game scene is very unrealistic and dramatic. The way that the teacher is painted as an awful person is totally wrong. She is just doing her job and enforcing rules, children like Jamie need to learn to fall in line. Jamie is not a likeable character at all. He is a self-absorbed, attention seeking leftie type but then again, most high school children are these days. The idea that we are supposed to be supportive of Jamie is too hard to stomach. He shows very little remorse and when he does, it feels disingenuous. Max Harwood does the very best he can with such an awful character! Whilst it is still not an amazing musical, it works so much better as a movie. How on earth the stage show made it into the West End will always be beyond me. Now the movie is out there, there's no need to have the stage show as well. Get it closed! I get the feeling you probably sympathies more with Jamie's dad than his mum! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2021 17:47:11 GMT
So I have just watched the movie. The best things about the stage show were John McCrea and Josie Walker. The subject matter is still a bit dodgy for me. I don't think children should be aspiring to be "drag queens" or "instafamous". Max Harwood is lovely, his voice is unpretentious and calm. The music sounds beautiful compared to being played live, which isn't surprising considering the composer of this show is used to writing for playback rather than orchestras and the adjustments to the score throughout are very much welcomed. The toilet scene is still very odd and "Work of Art" is so strange. Why on earth wasn't it just taken out? Mimi's first performance is fun. The football game scene is very unrealistic and dramatic. The way that the teacher is painted as an awful person is totally wrong. She is just doing her job and enforcing rules, children like Jamie need to learn to fall in line. Jamie is not a likeable character at all. He is a self-absorbed, attention seeking leftie type but then again, most high school children are these days. The idea that we are supposed to be supportive of Jamie is too hard to stomach. He shows very little remorse and when he does, it feels disingenuous. Max Harwood does the very best he can with such an awful character! Whilst it is still not an amazing musical, it works so much better as a movie. How on earth the stage show made it into the West End will always be beyond me. Now the movie is out there, there's no need to have the stage show as well. Get it closed! I get the feeling you probably sympathies more with Jamie's dad than his mum! Well, we don't see any background about Jamie's dad so it's not all that clear as to why he feels the way he does. Homophobia has no place in this world. But a lot of people like to say something or someone is homophobic when it isn't or without giving them chance to come around. Lefties are very much "their way or no way" and the world just doesn't work that way, thankfully. Jamie's mum is a bit of a pushover and an enabler. It is lovely that she is supportive of him and that's how it should be but she's guarded Jamie from the people in the world that aren't going to like him. I don't sympathise with any of the character's, the characters aren't deep enough for any of that. Also Jamie's dad does not make any homophobic remarks at all at any point in the film. In fact, there's even a slight glint that he might be starting to come around at one point. So, maybe sympathising with him wouldn't be so bad. I see a man who is struggling. Struggling to come to terms that his child is different, not every parent is immediately accepting and some take a more measured and defensive approach. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2021 18:01:41 GMT
I watched it this afternoon and it was all a bit meh. Some good and even moving moments but also quite forgettable. It's no Billy elliot.
I have to agree a bit on Jamie as a character, although he starts likeable, he suddenly becomes a selfish attention seeker and then suddenly gets a slight redemption at the end. I also agree the teacher seems to be put in a hard light when she is just trying to do her job and Jamie is obnoxious to her and that seems swept under the rug. A bit like dear Evan Hanson, there is a lack of taking responsibility for poor behaviour. I think this could all be down to the script and lack of development though. It's all a bit black and white without any depth.
Priti I thought was great, and Sarah Lancashire is really strong as the mum and I also thought them ensemble of pupils were great. Oh and Richard e grant was excellent as ever.
Music wise it didn't really grab me, might even have been better as a straight film without songs
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2021 18:26:54 GMT
I watched it this afternoon and it was all a bit meh. Some good and even moving moments but also quite forgettable. It's no Billy elliot. I have to agree a bit on Jamie as a character, although he starts likeable, he suddenly becomes a selfish attention seeker and then suddenly gets a slight redemption at the end. I also agree the teacher seems to be put in a hard light when she is just trying to do her job and Jamie is obnoxious to her and that seems swept under the rug. A bit like dear Evan Hanson, there is a lack of taking responsibility for poor behaviour. I think this could all be down to the script and lack of development though. It's all a bit black and white without any depth. Priti I thought was great, and Sarah Lancashire is really strong as the mum and I also thought them ensemble of pupils were great. Oh and Richard e grant was excellent as ever. Music wise it didn't really grab me, might even have been better as a straight film without songs Careful now, you might get accused of sympathising with Jamie's dad! - I agree with you, good points made. |
|
855 posts
|
Post by stuartmcd on Sept 17, 2021 18:55:56 GMT
Can someone explain to me why it’s ok for Richard E Grant to play a gay character but when James Corden did it it caused unbelievable outrage??
|
|
1,046 posts
|
Post by jgblunners on Sept 17, 2021 18:56:55 GMT
Can someone explain to me why it’s ok for Richard E Grant to play a gay character but when James Corden did it it caused unbelievable outrage?? I haven’t seen the movie yet but I presume that Richard E Grant’s performance is much more nuanced and genuine than Corden’s horrific display. |
|
855 posts
|
Post by stuartmcd on Sept 17, 2021 19:01:19 GMT
Can someone explain to me why it’s ok for Richard E Grant to play a gay character but when James Corden did it it caused unbelievable outrage?? I haven’t seen the movie yet but I presume that Richard E Grant’s performance is much more nuanced and genuine than Corden’s horrific display. Oh yes don’t get me wrong Richard E Grant is a great actor and is great in the film but a lot of the conversation around James Corden was “gay parts should be played by gay actors” and now it seems like nobody cares anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2021 19:10:34 GMT
I haven’t seen the movie yet but I presume that Richard E Grant’s performance is much more nuanced and genuine than Corden’s horrific display. Oh yes don’t get me wrong Richard E Grant is a great actor and is great in the film but a lot of the conversation around James Corden was “gay parts should be played by gay actors” and now it seems like nobody cares anymore. Nobody cares about gay parts being played by gay actors, at least not sensible people with their heads screwed on. Acting is acting. The thing about James Corden is that when he plays a gay character, he acts like he's taking the P and wanting to be insulting. Rather than someone like Richard E Grant or Stanley Tucci, who have played gay roles without coming across like a-holes. |
|
4,988 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Sept 17, 2021 19:24:29 GMT
I loved Sarah Lancashire but to me the piece is still a bit meh. For me it worked best as a concept album.
|
|
|
|
Post by forevercolours on Sept 17, 2021 20:54:25 GMT
Reminder that you can dislike a show without wishing for its closure which will put dozens of performers and creatives out of a job yet again. (and yes I know this is ‘temporary’ closing next week but the point still stands)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2021 21:36:47 GMT
Reminder that you can dislike a show without wishing for its closure which will put dozens of performers and creatives out of a job yet again. (and yes I know this is ‘temporary’ closing next week but the point still stands) Reminder that I can say I want it to close if I want to. I can dislike a show and want it to close and want something else better to move in. It's called freedom of speech. In this industry, everyone is replaceable. |
|
1,933 posts
|
Post by LaLuPone on Sept 17, 2021 22:19:24 GMT
Would love to know how Jamie is a “self-absorbed, attention seeking leftie” for wanting to wear a dress to prom? If the girls can, then why can’t the boys? It’s really not that deep!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2021 23:16:18 GMT
Would love to know how Jamie is a “self-absorbed, attention seeking leftie” for wanting to wear a dress to prom? If the girls can, then why can’t the boys? It’s really not that deep! I don't think that is exactly what I said. You have inferred something to fit your narrative. Anyway. It doesn't really matter how "deep" it is. If a school has rules, then the rules are the rules. Point blank. I don't know how you can argue that. Jamie wanting to wear a dress after being told not to is arrogant and attention seeking. Thinking he can do what he like as if the rules don't apply to him. |
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Sept 17, 2021 23:51:41 GMT
[quote author="@stuckattheback
Jamie wanting to wear a dress after being told not to is arrogant and attention seeking. Thinking he can do what he like as if the rules don't apply to him.
[/quote]
Is that actually a school rule - Jamie has already pointed out the loophole? It looks like an arbitrary decision made by a teacher, who clearly has problems with self-expression.
|
|
1,933 posts
|
Post by LaLuPone on Sept 17, 2021 23:53:47 GMT
Would love to know how Jamie is a “self-absorbed, attention seeking leftie” for wanting to wear a dress to prom? If the girls can, then why can’t the boys? It’s really not that deep! I don't think that is exactly what I said. You have inferred something to fit your narrative. Anyway. It doesn't really matter how "deep" it is. If a school has rules, then the rules are the rules. Point blank. I don't know how you can argue that. Jamie wanting to wear a dress after being told not to is arrogant and attention seeking. Thinking he can do what he like as if the rules don't apply to him. Ah ok then, so the rules set out in Nazi germany to discriminate against Jewish people, Romani people, gay people, disabled people etc. were fine because rules are rules I guess?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2021 0:29:52 GMT
[quote author="@stuckattheback Jamie wanting to wear a dress after being told not to is arrogant and attention seeking. Thinking he can do what he like as if the rules don't apply to him. Is that actually a school rule - Jamie has already pointed out the loophole? It looks like an arbitrary decision made by a teacher, who clearly has problems with self-expression. [/quote] Where's the loophole? Jeez. This is turning into something out of nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2021 0:33:07 GMT
I don't think that is exactly what I said. You have inferred something to fit your narrative. Anyway. It doesn't really matter how "deep" it is. If a school has rules, then the rules are the rules. Point blank. I don't know how you can argue that. Jamie wanting to wear a dress after being told not to is arrogant and attention seeking. Thinking he can do what he like as if the rules don't apply to him. Ah ok then, so the rules set out in Nazi germany to discriminate against Jewish people, Romani people, gay people, disabled people etc. were fine because rules are rules I guess? You're being dramatic now. These situations are clearly very different. Jamie not being allowed to wear a dress to prom is nothing like the discrimination that prisoners faced in concentration camps. Jesus Christ! - my point still stands. You just don't like it and that's fine. |
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Sept 18, 2021 0:48:51 GMT
[quote author="@stuckattheback Jamie wanting to wear a dress after being told not to is arrogant and attention seeking. Thinking he can do what he like as if the rules don't apply to him. Is that actually a school rule - Jamie has already pointed out the loophole? It looks like an arbitrary decision made by a teacher, who clearly has problems with self-expression. Where's the loophole? Jeez. This is turning into something out of nothing.[/quote] Perhaps, but it's a distinction that seemed obvious, the rule is around dress code and make-up for female students, not male students. Miss Hedge, then, comes up with the attention-seeking/arrogance excuse, afterwards, and that seems to be driven by something other than school rules. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2021 0:54:16 GMT
Is that actually a school rule - Jamie has already pointed out the loophole? It looks like an arbitrary decision made by a teacher, who clearly has problems with self-expression. Where's the loophole? Jeez. This is turning into something out of nothing. Perhaps, but it's a distinction that seemed obvious, the rule is around dress code and make-up for female students, not male students. Miss Hedge, then, comes up with the attention-seeking/arrogance excuse, afterwards, and that seems to be driven by something other than school rules.[/quote] I disagree completely and that's fine. She definitely let her feelings out when maybe she should have kept them to herself but that still doesn't change the fact that Jamie broke the school rules and we are still supposed to cheer him on as if he is some trailblazer. He should have been turned away. |
|
|
|
Post by jaffe on Sept 18, 2021 1:01:34 GMT
Where's the loophole? Jeez. This is turning into something out of nothing. Perhaps, but it's a distinction that seemed obvious, the rule is around dress code and make-up for female students, not male students. Miss Hedge, then, comes up with the attention-seeking/arrogance excuse, afterwards, and that seems to be driven by something other than school rules. I disagree completely and that's fine. She definitely let her feelings out when maybe she should have kept them to herself but that still doesn't change the fact that Jamie broke the school rules and we are still supposed to cheer him on as if he is some trailblazer. He should have been turned away.[/quote] And he was going to do so, despite the obvious unfairness, it's his fellow prom-goers that make her drop her arbitrary ban. |
|
|
|
Post by fiyerorocher on Sept 18, 2021 1:06:35 GMT
Historically, rules and even laws have been used to quash people's expression of their gender and sexual identities. Women used to get arrested for not wearing enough items of 'female' clothing. Men were arrested for wearing dresses and makeup. ETaJ makes the perfectly valid point that gender-segregated clothing policies are just lingering manifestations of this past. There is no justifiable reason a boy cannot wear a dress to a school prom if he wants. Any rule that says otherwise deserves to be challenged and changed. There was the same backlash when women started wearing trousers, but I think we've all survived perfectly well as a society despite the fact women wearing jeans is now, obviously quite rightly, a non-issue. ETaJ have it exactly right: let boys and men, let ALL people, wear whatever the hell they feel comfortable in.
|
|
7,189 posts
|
Post by Jon on Sept 18, 2021 1:12:25 GMT
I'm still confused about how Jamie is considered a leftie for wanting to express himself, the show, the character and the real Jamie are not political in the slightest.
I dread to think what @stuckattheback thinks about shows like Priscilla and Kinky Boots as well as RuPaul's Drag Race which feature drag queens and cross dressing if they frowned at Jamie.
|
|
