Spoilers and Discussion

[Higgs]

Brett Easton Ellis.., God his novels are such pretentious hokum.

While never having read Ellis' novels, I quote him because he's a very successful author and screenwriter commenting from the perspective of a gay man on the treatment of gays in TV dramas, among many other things. Agree with his views (as I do regarding what Glee has devolved into) or not, he can't be accused of being stupid, ignorant, or dull. But be that as it may, a careful deconstruction of that part of my previous post ought to reveal yet another gratuitous derogatory comment regarding Chris Colfer. Edited April 8, 2014 by Higgs

[bravelittletoaster]

Ugh, I hate Bret Easton Ellis. Please don't put me in the uncomfortable position of feeling like I have to defend this terrible show because that overrated misogynist douchebag criticized it.

[caracas1914]

While never having read Ellis' novels

 

Consider yourself lucky, they're a piece of crap.  Those novels are both stupid and dull.

Edited April 8, 2014 by caracas1914

[Higgs]

Consider yourself lucky, they're a piece of crap. Those novels are both stupid and dull.

That may be, but just as a stopped clock is right twice a day, so too can someone who's wrong a hundred times get it right the 101st, and analogously for someone who's usually right. I try to consider arguments independent of their proponents, and I should add that I came across the linked article on a favorite, extraordinarily eclectic site (http://dish.andrewsullivan.com) run by one of the most widely respected and read bloggers in the country - a gay, Catholic, Obama/Thatcher-loving, Maher/Colbert guesting, traditional British conservative, who generally agreed with Ellis' sentiments on this occasion. Edited April 8, 2014 by Higgs

[bravelittletoaster]

Did he agree with Ellis when he said Matthew Bomer was "too gay" to be believable in Fifty Shades of Grey?  

Sorry, I don't know what any of this has to do with spoilers, so I'll stop.  But one could probably find less execrable people to make one's points about Glee.

[tom87]

Real spoiler ... Lea, Chris, Darren, Naya, Amber, Jenna and Chord shot  for a gay bar scene probably episode 17.     What that has to do with the Funny Gilr opening who knows?     So far very little info about the actual Opening Night.   TBH I was expecting a little more fanfare for something that has been teased for 103 episodes.  Sort of surprised it wasn't the season finale at least.

Edited April 8, 2014 by tom87

[Higgs]

Sort of surprised it ["Opening Night"] wasn't the season finale at least.

Not as surprised as I was, from when it started to dawn on me with FG auditions in S4, that it wasn't going to be the SERIES finale. In fact, given that all its best songs have been sung, and Ioan (Nicky) isn't on the cast list, "Opening Night" may not be about opening night, but about the star's anxiety attacks after she has already performed the role about 80 times (per the average 2 months on the road plus three weeks of previews) to critical and public acclaim. (Well, I suppose that's progress of some sort compared to forgetting the lyrics of DROMP.) Which again raises raises the troubling question: ignoring even justified ad hominem attacks, can Glee be fairly called "a dumb kids show", and if not in whole, at least in some significant part such as, for example, ignoring the understandable anxieties Rachel might have had about a complete FG restaging (per the town-car-rewarding producer) in favor of some contrived psycho BS that teaches her a valuable lesson about something or other and makes her a better person (until her next relapse).

[caracas1914]

Real spoiler ... Lea, Chris, Darren, Naya, Amber, Jenna and Chord shot  for a gay bar scene probably episode 17.

 

Yes, an actual spoiler!  I'm going to guess they go out on the town after the Opening Night of Funny Girl.  Not want to get my hopes too high they show them having fun since "Party all the Time" in "100" part 2 was literally a few seconds snipped of the characters. However there is hopefully no Paltrow at the gay bar.

Edited April 8, 2014 by caracas1914

[tom87]

All I can say is why Blaine????
 

http://tvline.com/2014/04/08/shirley-maclaine-glee-season-5-blaine-cast/

TVLine has learned exclusively that Shirley MacLaine is set to appear in multiple episodes of the Fox musical-dramedy — and her character has big plans for Darren Criss’ Blaine.

MacLaine... will portray a powerful New York socialite intent on turning recent Big Apple transplant Blaine into a superstar

 

[indeed]

Ugh. At least we might get some fun banter between Kurt and SM's character (please!). If she's in CC's episode, the dialogue could be interesting.

[Higgs]

Here's what you missed on Glee:

As the curtain came down on the reprise of DROMP, the audience (which included many celebrities and showbiz movers and shakers hand-picked by the producers) rose as one to cheer the new Princess of Broadway, who was revealed again as the curtain came back up, alone on stage under a spot, hand on heart, smiling three different smiles in rapid succession. Following the curtain calls, castmates, director, producers, investors, and hangers-on gathered around to congratulate Rachel and each other on a triumph sure to produce money and prestige for all involved. As they made their way to the after-party to celebrate and get drunk while anxiously awaiting The New York Times review, Rachel showed her true down-to-earth humility and gratitude for a badly needed lesson and career-saving rescue by taking off with her friends from high school to gay-bar hop. They were having so much fun that none of them noticed that Blaine had slipped away to, as he would one day relate to his assigned ghost autobiographer who had gotten a six-figure advance, crash the cast party and catch the eye of a powerful New York socialite who had bet her friends she could turn even a height-challenged mediocrity into a superstar. And the rest is history.

Edited April 8, 2014 by Higgs

[truthaboutluv]

Best part of this site, it includes an ignore option. A function that sadly TWOP doesn't. I really don't have much of an opinion on that Blaine humor because it's so kind of random. But honestly, I just want to know if it will be funny because after tonight I feel like Glee being funny is like a once in a blue moon occurrence. 

Edited April 9, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[indeed]

S05.E18 Extended Summary

With Funny Girl a bonafide hit and Rachel’s star clearly on the rise, she enjoys the fruits of her labors, including signing with a powerful New York talent agent who seems to have a wholly different take on her career path than she does. Just as the monotony of constantly performing the same show over and over again starts taking its toll on her, Rachel is approached by a Hollywood executive who presents the young star with a potentially once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that – while too tempting to refuse – requires her to take a calculated risk. At NYADA, Kurt gets a valuable opportunity to perform for a wealthy socialite who is known for fostering and launching the careers of many burgeoning artists. Thrilled with the chance to make a lasting impression, Kurt – committed to the idea that he and Blaine should always share their career boons together - recruits his fiancée to sing with him. Blaine finds himself put in a difficult position when the socialite takes more of a liking to him than to Kurt. Meanwhile, as Mercedes struggles to complete her latest single in time to meet her release deadline, she turns to Santana for help with finding a “new sound,” and ends up putting her own career on the line for the sake of her friend.

CONCEPT: Rachel is presented with a unique opportunity which could either take her career to the next level, or possibly kill it entirely. Meanwhile, Mercedes asks for Santana’s help finding a “new sound” for her latest single, and a wealthy New York socialite takes Blaine under her wing.

SPECIAL GUESTS:

Mercedes Jones AMBER RILEY

Sidney Greene MICHAEL LERNER

PRODUCTION CREDITS:

Written by: ROBERTO AGUIRRE-SACASA

Directed by: IAN BRENNAN

Shirley, Shirley, Shirley...seriously???

Edited April 10, 2014 by indeed

[tom87]

Worse yet Shirley with Blaine.   Not to  mention another time we are suppose to beleive Blaine is more interesting than Kurt.

Edited April 10, 2014 by tom87

[truthaboutluv]

Kurt – committed to the idea that he and Blaine should always share their career boons together - recruits his fiancée to sing with him.

 

And this alone right there is just proof positive of how much the writers of this show just plain don't give a shit and just throw crap out there hoping something sticks or at least the few people still watching just go with it. So Kurt who just a few episodes ago felt so claustrophobic and stifled by his fiance that they ultimately decided that they couldn't even live in the same apartment suddenly feels that he must share all his career opportunities with this fiance and cannot do a performance that's supposed to be about his career, without said fiance. Of course it's all for the purpose of this woman liking Blaine more and therefore conflict in the relationship. Like do the writers even watch the show they themselves are writing, do they even actually give a shit about what happens in a previous episode and ANY kind of consistency at all? Don't answer that, it's a rhetorical question, I already know the answer. 

And this is exactly why when many kept complaining about "noobs, noobs" and putting everything on that and stating how a move to NY, focus on the characters viewers actually care about, I maintained that that would only be scratching the surface of the MASSIVE issues on this show. I knew a move to NY wouldn't guarantee anything got better because the fact is there are many shows that keep their same cast and still go downhill and become shitty because the writing falls apart. Actors can only do so much. And I knew that no matter how amazing some believe Lea, Chris, etc. were, if the writing remained the utter shit it's been for more than two seasons now, a move to NY wouldn't make a damn bit of difference. 

And I already anticipated the worse when RIB started talking about their adult reality bullshit with regards to the move to NY. So far there's very little humor in the show, the characters are mostly unpleasant or just boring and annoying, the episodes are badly paced and it's just a mess. I know this may be sacrilegious to say but I almost miss the high school nonsense and Sue. Because at least it was reminiscent of an actual comedy. I don't know what to call what Glee is doing right now. Meanwhile, you know the writers have all but given up on trying when they're just basically writing an actor's real life as a storyline. So Rachel is a hit on Broadway, gets an agent while on Broadway who suggests a move to Hollywood. Hmm, gee I wonder whose life that could be based on.  Meanwhile, what am I supposed to care about with regards to Rachel's story? Within a year and a half of graduating from high school she lands on Broadway, is a hit, is so successful a Hollywood exec is interested in her. Why should I still care about her story exactly? 

Edited April 10, 2014 by truthaboutluv

[bravelittletoaster]

Thrilled with the chance to make a lasting impression, Kurt – committed to the idea that he and Blaine should always share their career boons together - recruits his fiancée to sing with him. Blaine finds himself put in a difficult position when the socialite takes more of a liking to him than to Kurt.

It sort of feels like they're trolling fandom at this point.  

["At this point...?"]

[Coxfires]

So Kurt who just a few episodes ago felt so claustrophobic and stifled by his fiance that they ultimately decided that they couldn't even live in the same apartment suddenly feels that he must share all his career opportunities with this fiance and cannot do a performance that's supposed to be about his career, without said fiance.

 

Were you looking for any kind of contnuity/consistency from Glee? There is no point in doing that, better to leave your braincells at the door when watching Glee, an act that only relies on the audience's masochistic kink.

And I knew that no matter how amazing some believe Lea, Chris, etc. were, if the writing remained the utter shit it's been for more than two seasons now, a move to NY wouldn't make a damn bit of difference.

 

I'd say that it makes a difference in the sense that, if I hate-watch crap/crappy writing, I'd rather watch it for character I kinda care (cared?) about and actors whose performance I can at least appreciate on screen, whereas, with the Noobs, there were I had none of those conditions fulfilled. The writers proved the only thing they could do was re-write the same storylines over, and over, and over again, worsening each time. Not sure re-re-re-re-writing the same stuff with the Noobs, who already felt like pale 2.0 copies would have been better. 

At this point, killing Glee by the end of S3 would have been the best solution: free the actors, free the audience, and stop these writers from dousing people with utter cowpat. 

[bravelittletoaster]

Aside from a few exceptions though, IMO the writing on this show's always been pretty shitty.  Nevertheless I loved the first three [yes, ok, fine, I'll include season 3] years because as utterly crappy as that writing was all my faves were on it and they did often manage to spin shit into gold.  But then they broke them all up and the writing somehow got even worse.  I assumed if all the originals were finally back together I would find this show tolerable again, but the fact is they're not.  Puck, Quinn, Mike...none of those people were my faves, but they were all part of the recipe.  Baking soda and eggs are not my favorite part of a chocolate chip cookie, but if you take them out it's going to fuck some shit up.

I think at this point it's unsalvageable.  

Edited April 10, 2014 by bravelittletoaster

[Higgs]

So Rachel is a hit on Broadway, gets an agent while on Broadway who suggests a move to Hollywood.

Rachel ain't goin' anywhere. If she didn't get the hell out of Bushwick (AND NYADA AND waitressing AND Kurt's band) to avoid two hours a day of subway commutes from the start of all-consuming FG rehearsals, just so she could be shown in the company of the same people she knew in high school, she certainly isn't headed for the left coast. They do, however, have to get her out of FG at any cost, because as bored as she might understandably become with the eight-a-week grind, the audience would be even more so. As I've said before, Rachel's path to stardom was made easy because her real adult story is about what happens next.

Klaine? Even more unstable than a teen-age engagement is engagement when in school to someone in the same field, especially when that field is the arts.

Humor? Sorry, no can do. Different genre, different show.

[truthaboutluv]

IMO what the writers should have done was make S3-S4 one school year which focused on graduation for some. Jake, Kitty and Unique (not Marley. She is and always was annoying and definitely not that Ryder kid) should have been introduced during this time period to get the viewers used to them while the familiar faces were still around. There were many story possibilities for Jake and Puck for example, being brothers who didn't really know each other and in the club together. All but three people should not have graduated. Puck, Quinn, Santana, Rachel, Finn and Kurt should have graduated, leaving Mercedes, Mike, Artie, Tina, Brittany, Sam. Blaine is iffy to me because I think de-aging him ruined the character even more but I did see the benefits of separating him and Kurt and giving them their own storylines.

Unfortunately the writing was shit and those individual storylines never manifested in anything but a horrible cheating storyline, a half-assed new love interest for Kurt and a ridiculously overused friendship with Sam for Blaine complete with homerotic jokes because those are just always so clever and cute. And when they committed to that split narrative they needed to commit to it. Not have only 5 minutes of NY and all the rest in McKinley. And they needed to find a balance with the tone. NY imo was always a little too boring and I really didn't enjoy Kurt or Rachel much once they got there and McKinley became almost cartoonish in its humor so it always felt like watching two different shows. But of course all that is irrelevant now. Like I said once, in years to come, case studies will be written about Glee and RIB, titled "How To Epicly Fuck Up Your Hit Show". 

[Glorfindel]

The real strength of this show and why it took off so rapidly has always been the original cast imo. Sure, the show was new, fresh and the writing in the beginning was exciting, even though it already had its problems from the start. But a lot of people fell in love with the cast, some at first sight and others a little while into the first season(s). That's why most early Glee fans consider the first 2 seasons as good and (more importantly in this case) the 3rd season as tolerable.
As soon as they let most of the old cast members go and broke up their chemistry, without slowly integrating the new characters and actors, but instead dumping them all at the same time into the void, this show was doomed to fall. Putting 2nd and 3rd tier actors up front made that fall even faster, imo.
Now they're bringing a lot of the old cast back, but it's too little too late.
 

It sort of feels like they're trolling fandom at this point. 

["At this point...?"]

Sometimes I'm still convinced they are using Glee as this giant, global social study on how long it will take them to alienate and infuriate even their most loyal fans. It's like they keep scoreboards for several parts of the fandom: which fandom got screwed over when and how often, how many fans are still left after the latest clusterf*ck, and how many will they get back if they steal something from their fanfictions to use in the show next.

And don't forget the meta. Ugh.

Edited April 10, 2014 by Glorfindel

[heyerchick]

Also, despite having a fondness of Darren Criss and Blaine I'm looking forward to the plotline where Kurt is rightfully shown as the guy who's on top (mind the pun)...

Honey, you are doomed to disappointment. Blaine might feel fat for all of five minutes (and won't that get waaaaaaaay more screentime than Kurt's fractured skull) but not to worry. A wealthy socialite will be right along to judge him and Kurt side by side, and choose Blaine as her Bestest In Show, and rush him off to make him a Superstar. Kurt is NEVER going to be shown as the guy on top. He is always going to be Second Choice and Second Best.

[indeed]

At least Rachel thinks Kurt is the most talented person she knows. Maybe she'll be such a hit we can look forward to her turning Kurt into her special project. That's probably season 6...

[heyerchick]

RE: those deliciously inventive, funny-as-hell blind items... Just for information, the site both censors the contents of comments (the comment I submitted was NOT the comment posted, literally reversing it from critical of the item and the site, to positive) and censors comments in their entirety. 

Looking at Glee, and storylines like Blaine's wealthy socialite pushing to Superstardom, it's pretty clear where the favouritism lies. 

Also: fat suits?  It's Glee. They simply have his ass busting out of his capri pants. Subtlety, thy name is not fucking Glee.

[Glorfindel]

Ever since season 1 people have been telling Kurt (or about Kurt) that he was one of a kind, that noone could do what he could do, that he was needed in ND, that he was as talented as Rachel and Mercedes, etc. but so far all that praise has gotten him practically squat when it comes to actual performances and career success. It sure didn't help him get a decent solo part in ND, as the only one of the original group. All it got him was a place at NYADA, after being rejected twice, while his bf got in without even lifting an eyebrow.

For once I would like to have a real victory for Kurt, not only a moral one: placing him above his peers for a moment without him having to immediately go comfort either his bff or bf, or something similar. I think technically him winning the Midnight Madness diva-off was a real victory, but in the end it was Rachel who got a call-back for 'Funny Girl', not Kurt (even when she wouldn't even have auditioned if Kurt hadn't stopped basking in his well-earned glory right away after seeing her upset and got them the last 2 slots).

So on the one hand I'm looking forward to the next episode which will have Kurt's star rising at NYADA, but otoh I fear it will once again not be about him but about the character who, if only for a brief moment, has to stand in his shadow, and Kurt will probably have to do the comforting again and maybe even dismiss his own talent and achievements in the process. And then 2 episodes later everything will be flipped on the other side again, so Glee universe's pecking order is restored.

Edited April 10, 2014 by Glorfindel

[heyerchick]

I thought for sure that Funny Girl would tank, not because of any failure of talent on Rachel's part (the show never goes there) but because a business model based on the audience rubbernecking a totally unknown mid-western teen was never going to be a success. So I'm grappling unsuccessfully with the notion that she's so fucking fabulous the show is a sell-out and she's already too big for Broadway, just a few weeks into her first role and the dream of her entire life to this point, with talent agencies and Hollywood beckoning. Lea didn't make it overnight: she was being brilliant on Broadway for a very long time, and she was told she was too "ethnic" for TV. So I sort of wonder if she's going to drop Funny Girl, make a Hollywood run, and the show pilfer that part of Lea's own story to set her back on her heels. They've borrowed from it before, for example when she wanted to get her nose job. Otherwise...I'm at a loss. Her story, and the effects on her character, are becoming not only less rootable, but barely relateable.

Edited April 10, 2014 by heyerchick

[tom87]

Funny thing as much as they borrow from Lea they also kind of denouce her career choices.    Rachel's ambtition is often shown as being wrong and always kicks her in the ass with her freinds, while Lea embraces her ambiton.   Rachel is told education is the foundation of her career while Lea deffered college and ultimaly decided to stick with SA.   Rachel is slut slammed for wanting to do a topless scene and Lea of course did and was applauding as  brave.

Rachel fans are annoyed too fyi. But now I don't want to see her flop that would be horrible too.  She doesn't deserve to flop, even though many would jump for joy at that.   I know people want her to stuggle but why not show her stressed and stuggling at work, that the producers are putting so much on her shoulders, but she still can be succesful.  

Season 4 they had Rachel acting all ooc and never explained why, same this year she is ott with the fighting and we get no real reason except it is Rachel.     Why can't it be something more, some reason . 

I feel we are just getting sruface story for Rachel and not substance.   Which I can't decide if that is more or less frustrating then not getting a  story at all.

Edited April 10, 2014 by tom87

[camussie]

They could have had the show tank for a myriad of other reasons besides Rachel's talent.  Broadway shows are a risky business and very few are huge successes.  Why not have it be one of those reasons and because Rachel was the face of Funny Girl it is a career set back?.  If they had done that and had handled the NYADA/FG conflict a lot more realistically then we could reset Rachel's story to where it should have been all along - someone who is working her way up to Broadway success.

This all goes back to how they botched Rachel's story starting with the second chance Carmen gave her for an audition.  That would have worked much better if Carmen just happened to be in the audience, scouting up and coming potential NYADA students and she saw Rachel's performance and decided to take a chance on her.  Then they botched it more by making Cassandra a borderline psychotic whose valid criticisms on Rachel's dance ability could be routinely ignored and proved that with Rachel winning showcase thus validating that all she needs is her voice.  Then the final botch was giving her FG this early.  Early seasons of Glee seemed to set up Rachel debuting as Fanny on Broadway, with all of New Directions watching from the audience, as the pinnacle of her story.  As the moment that would end the show.  They seemed to change that trajectory even before Cory passed, since FG was set up late last season.

Rachel is told education is the foundation of her career while Lea deferred college and ultimately decided to stick with SA.

Except Carmen will be proven to be wrong and Rachel right.  Rachel won't need the foundation that NYADA has to offer. She is a big star after all.

As for the rest of that summary it seems that Santana is back.  Any guesses on how they address where Brittany is?  They seemed to give them their end game in 512/513.  Are they going to break them up again?  Do long distance? If so seems really dumb to give their reunion as much focus as they did. The only explanation I can come up with is something went on behind the scenes around the time 512/513 was filming and it looked like Naya might never be back so they gave Santan a possible end game.  Cooler heads prevailed and now she is back and they have to find a way to write around the big Santana/Brittany reunion.

Edited April 10, 2014 by camussie

[heyerchick]

I feel we are just getting sruface story for Rachel and not substance.   Which I can't decide if that is more or less frustrating then not getting a  story at all.

I think the same is very true for Kurt. Which makes me doubly fucked, as Kurt and Rachel are my favourites. I don't expect them to have success after success after success, but actual storytelling for them? Now that should be a MUST. Rachel does a bit better, because she IS Glee's leading lady after all, but Kurt is only a badly sketched afterthought most of the time these days.

[tom87]

They could have had the show tank for a myriad of other reasons besides Rachel's talent.  Broadway shows are a risky business and very few are huge successes.  Why not have it be one of those reasons and because Rachel was the face of Funny Girl it is a career set back?.  If they had done that and had handled the NYADA/FG conflict a lot more realistically then we could reset Rachel's story to where it should have been all along - someone who is working her way up to Broadway success.

This all goes back to how they botched Rachel's story starting with the second chance Carmen gave her for an audition.  That would have worked much better if Carmen just happened to be in the audience, scouting up and coming potential NYADA students and she saw Rachel's performance and decided to take a chance on her.  Then they botched it more by making Cassandra a borderline psychotic whose valid criticisms on Rachel's dance ability could be routinely ignored and proved that with Rachel winning showcase thus validating that all she needs is her voice.  Then the final botch was giving her FG this early.  Early seasons of Glee seemed to set up Rachel debuting as Fanny on Broadway, with all of New Directions watching from the audience, as the pinnacle of her story.  As the moment that would end the show.  They seemed to change that trajectory even before Cory passed, since FG was set up late last season.

Except Carmen will be proven to be wrong and Rachel right.  Rachel won't need the foundation that NYADA has to offer. She is a big star after all.

As for the rest of that summary it seems that Santana is back.  Any guesses on how they address where Brittany is?  They seemed to give them their end game in 512/513.  Are they going to break them up again?  If so seems kind of dumb to reunite them.

I think most people would have liked a whole different stoyline for Rachel since she got to NY.    In season 4 it had nothing to do with career really and we only  heard what they were doing in NY. Now they fast tracked everything.  I will always mourne the lack of Rachel trying out for anything and everthing possible only to be shot down for stupid  and crazy reasons.  And Rachel smiling politey and then cussing the director out the whole way home on the subway.   But that didn't happen.

But no matter what Rachel already has acheived success earley and that can't be taken back, even if Funny Girl  flops now.    Even if she has to start over  it won't take long for her to be back on top casue there is only one season left.

So why not have her have inside career stuggles or even stuggle with success instead of her gettging a big head again. 

Edited April 10, 2014 by tom87

[caracas1914]

Yea, I don't get why Glee can't seem to give Kurt any actual focus for a whole fucking episode.   Like a storyline with a beginning, middle and end.  I thought we were done with both  in NY making Kurt suffer for being gay and being compared unfavorably to his boyfriend, but I guess Glee still has a year and a quarter to go to mine that ore.

As to Rachel, if the spoilers pan out, she's a huge success as Fanny and other offers beckon. That has some potential if it's navigating being a young star but if it's just deciding whether to go for a Tony versus an Oscar I'm stumped how Glee can make that compelling.  Rachel as a STAR has always been there since day one, but the journey was always accompanied by the huge insecurities and baggage that she carried with her, so to me it would make sense if Rachel discovers (at this point) achieving what you seemingly wanted isn't quite nearly  enough , and No I don't mean having a man to share it with.   But I don't write this shit.

The one thing NY had going was the chemistry and banter between HummelberryLopez  and in on fell swoop they got rid of it.  It's awe inspiring how quickly they mucked things up.

Edited April 10, 2014 by caracas1914

[tom87]

Yea, I don't get why Glee can't seem to give Kurt any actual focus for a whole fucking episode.   Like a storyline with a beginning, middle and end.  I thought we were done with both  in NY making Kurt suffer for being gay and being compared unfavorably to his boyfriend, but I guess Glee still has a year and a quarter to go to mine that ore.

As to Rachel, if the spoilers pan out, she's a huge success as Fanny and other offers beckon. That has some potential if it's navigating being a young star but if it's just deciding whether to go for a Tony versus an Oscar I'm stumped how Glee can make that compelling.  Rachel as a STAR has always been there since day one, but the journey was always accompanied by the huge insecurities and baggage that she carried with her, so to me it would make sense if Rachel discovers (at this point) achieving what you seemingly wanted isn't quite nearly  enough , and No I don't mean having a man to share it with.   But I don't write this shit.

yeah but that scares me to in that I am afrraid they may go back  the horrible ending they had before but this time Rachel as the caoch in Lima.

[tom87]

I’m The Greatest Star, cantada por Rachel Berry - Canção original do musical Funny Girl.

Meh Rachel is doing I am the greatest star... why cause glee did not think it through when they decied to have her star in Funny Girl.

Why not wait to do People  or I'd even rather see Funny Girl  the song again or Second Hand Rose.

Edited April 10, 2014 by tom87

[whack-a-mole]

So why not have her have inside career stuggles or even stuggle with success instead of her gettging a big head again. 

Because they can't stop telling the exact same story over and over and over again. Rachel's gonna get a big head, have her comeuppance because bitches be crazy and she'll learn the true value of friendship until next week when we do it all again.

[Higgs]

Rachel's gonna get a big head, have her comeuppance because bitches be crazy...

Crazy as a fox. All is not as it may seem at first glance, and the irony here is that it's Carmen and Kurt who, we already have been told, will turn out to be the crazy bitches when it comes to career advice. (If I'm Carmen, I'm in that dressing room after the opening night curtain calls with a heartfelt apology, lest that "little girl" be talkin' up NYADA's "lunatic" staff and snotty, intransigent deans in any of the myriad interviews she'll be giving, and never be donatin' to dear old alma mater.)

Fortunately, all of this implausible nonsense will be quickly forgotten as soon as "Back-up Plan", when the repetitive grind of a Broadway run bugs Rachel as much as it would the audience, and her real story begins in earnest, as she is scheduled to explain with these words: http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/avicii/wakemeup.html

Edited April 12, 2014 by Higgs

[bravelittletoaster]

Goddamnit, Brittany is in the finale which means I'm going to have to watch this stupid show again.  

[camussie]

Fortunately, all of this implausible nonsense will be quickly forgotten as soon as "Back-up Plan", when the repetitive grind of a Broadway run bugs Rachel as much as it would the audience, and her real story begins in earnest, as she is scheduled to explain with these words

 

 

Too bad they spent the first three years of the show telling us Rachel's road to broadway was the story and then preceded to skip over all of the interesting aspects of that journey.  Given how tedious Rachel's epic professional winning streak has been so far I don't see why I should believe "her real story beginning in earnest" is going to be any more interesting.  So she conquers other entertainment mediums with ease (since she is already being handed offers) just like she did the great white way?  Sounds like a big yawn especially because the more they tell me Rachel is the most talented person ever the less I buy into it.  Sure she is talented but she isn't the only talented person in the universe.  

You know what would have not made the grind of Broadway repetitive - if they had given Rachel an actual journey to get there.  They didn't and from that episode description they aren't giving her a journey to make it in Hollywood either.  She is already being handed her next big opportunity.  

Edited April 13, 2014 by camussie

[Higgs]

I don't see why I should believe "her real story beginning in earnest" is going to be any more interesting.

Here's why. FG was chosen as her first triumph because it would fulfill her dreams and be an unsurpassable pinnacle, making any following conventional artistic success an undramatic anticlimax. The FG SL had to be done hastily because, with the choir room still in play, Rachel wasn't going to be given that much screen time, and S6 was already known to be the last. So FG auditions began in S4, allowing opening night to be accomplished in S5, leaving S6 as the last act of Rachel's journey to her spiritual "home". Now, with Finn gone, I have no idea where or what that will be, but I (foolishly?) expect it to be about something other than fame or fortune. Post an unfulfilling stardom, Rachel will be asking how she should live her life, and that's the most interesting and profound question of all. Edited April 13, 2014 by Higgs

[camussie]

Post an unfulfilling stardom, Rachel will be asking how she should live her life, and that's the most interesting and profound question of all.

 

Or it will just be an exercise is telling us again and again that Rachel is the most talented person ever.  I am betting on that.  Even if it is what you say I think that is a crap repetitive story that is antithesis of the story they set up in season 1.  I loathe the idea of Rachel achieving her dreams and being unfulfilled by that. If it goes down that way, it would seem like an exercise in getting Rachel back to Lima so RM can end the show on his precious choir room.  The one good thing that would come out of that ending would be RM validating my theory that Rachel returning to Lima and Finn staying in Lima was never about them as characters as much as it was about RM's fixation on the choir room being the "heart of the show."

And no the FG story did not have to be done hastily.  They chose to do it hastily all to build up to the "I'm home"/ the choir room uber alles ending (that sucked for both Rachel and Finn) and by choosing to do it in fast forward they skipped over the most interesting parts of the story and made Rachel a damn near unrootable character.   Frankly I don't want to see some girl who achieves her long held dreams within 2 years out of high school and then spends the last season of the show whining about how unfulfilled she is.  That is the very definition of a boring first world problems and certainly not "most interesting and profound question of all."

Finally Rachel's dreams were never simply about fame or fortune.  Fame was  small part of it but mostly it was about the drive she had to perform and share her talent with the world.  It would be a huge disservice to the character to boil down her dreams to simply wanting fame and once she achieved it she found that it wasn't all that it was cracked up to be especially since, no doubt, it would be used as a plot device to get her back to Lima.  

Edited April 13, 2014 by camussie

[Cranberry]

They should never have jumped straight to Funny Girl. Whatever they do now, they're screwed. If they make Rachel succeed in a major way, it's unbelievable, and it's also anticlimactic because we haven't seen her work for it; it feels like this is all just being handed to her. If they have her fail, they'll ruin her because that would be one of her biggest dreams crushed right off the bat -- she would have blown her shot; she could never do Funny Girl again.

What they really should have done was have her get a small part in a terrible show and rise above the crap material enough to be noticed and cast in a better show. Funny Girl should have been saved for near the end of the series. But of course we can't have that; RIB needed to fast-track her success so that she could realize she really belonged in Lima with Finn or whatever. Ugh. They can't do that anymore, but I've resigned myself to the fact that no matter what they do, the Glee finale will be terrible.

[tom87]

Two horrible choices could play out if Rachel goes back to Mck.  1. they have to neuter her totally which a melancholy Rachel is boring or 2. they have to have her fight for dominance over Sue which has been done just by different people.  The only thing about that is Rachel would fight dirtier then Will or FInn ever did.

[Higgs]

...spends the last season of the show whining about how unfulfilled she is...

There need be little or no whining, just a search for an answer that will ultimately be found. RM's first notion was to send Finn to NYC in a spin-off. Keeping him in Lima and the choir room was necessitated only by the last resort of a split narrative, so neither has to figure in Rachel's new "home". Rejoining Finn, regardless of the location, never had to mean abandoning her career.

If they make Rachel succeed in a major way, it's unbelievable, and it's also anticlimactic because we haven't seen her work for it...

Rachel has been shown to have worked harder and for longer than all other characters on the show combined. What many find difficult to swallow is how quickly and easily she ascended to stardom. I have no such problem. It's what real life prodigies do, and they have always existed. An adolescent who could sing like Lea Michele would be just such a person. Would she stand a chance at getting Fanny? The floor is open to nominations of real women who would be competitive with Lea/Rachel for the role at the present time, accompanied by YouTube links to their live performances. I actually know of one (coded hint: JMASCK), but will defer naming her so as not to rob anyone of the chance of doing so. Edited April 13, 2014 by Higgs

[Myrna123]

RIB have done such a shoddy job getting Rachel and friends to this point in the story, I don't think there's any chance that suddenly with 6, 13 or even 22 more episodes left, they'll be, like, "Oh, hey, let's actually put a little effort into this."

Whatever they decide to do, it will be done with little sense, next to no continuity for anything that's happened before and with absolutely no interest in building to anything if they can just tell us it happened.

My feel is that viewers still hanging on are doing so because they have a beloved character they're following (with gritted teeth and one hand over their eyes), and they want to see that character say some words and maybe sing a song.

The only interesting or profound questions Glee can answer have to do with how colossally they can screw up yet another character, storyline, or idea.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Myrna123

[camussie]

Rachel has been shown to have worked harder and for longer than all other characters on the show combined.

 

That is what the show tells us but I don't think they have shown us that.  For example, when faced with very legitimate criticisms about her dance ability she chose to ignore them, considering the source, and instead decided her voice was all she needed and. of course, had that decision validated by winning showcase.  And she certainly didn't work hard enough to deserve the improbable second chances she got to get into NYADA and then to get Fanny Brice after she blew her first auditions for each.  Really there is no who could work hard enough to get those second chances (and that includes Mercedes who also got a improbable second chance).  

As for comparing Rachel to Lea, Lea didn't have that easy of a road to success.  She was cast as young Cosette in a long running show in her first audition (which while substantial is not a lead part).  Then she had supporting parts in two other productions - Ragtime and Fiddler on the Roof and then she finally got the lead part in Spring Awakening.  She certainly did not start off as lead in a production.

There need be little or no whining, just a search for an answer that will ultimately be found.

From that description there already is whining.  Poor poor Rachel.  The grind of being lead in a well received show is getting to her and she is considering making a calculated risk (breaking her contract?) to do something different.  Just reading that I said shut up Rachel.  You should be damn thankful you are where you are considering how you blew both your NYADA and FG first auditions and considering how young and inexperienced you are.   

If they have her fail, they'll ruin her because that would be one of her biggest dreams crushed right off the bat -- she would have blown her shot; she could never do Funny Girl again.

Well the good news he she doesn't fail at Funny Girl.  She is such a raging success that she has a Hollywood offer being thrown at her.  I guess the next step is her struggling on whether she should answer the siren call of Hollywood.  Oh heavy is her burden.  

But of course we can't have that; RIB needed to fast-track her success so that she could realize she really belonged in Lima with Finn or whatever.

 

They can stick her in Lima without Finn which would be a way for RM to get his "the choir room is the heart of the show" ending.  sure it would make even less sense than Rachel giving it all up and returning to Lima to be with Finn (which made precious little sense in the first place) but RM has a fixation on the choir room so what can you say?

Edited April 13, 2014 by camussie

[Higgs]

And she certainly didn't work hard enough to deserve the improbable second chances she got to get into NYADA and then to get Fanny Brice after she blew her first auditions for each.

Auditions are not oral exams; they are opportunities to display talent, a winnowing process in which callbacks are given only to those who are still in contention. OTOH, sending Rachel to NYADA was terrible mistake; she needed to stop being a schoolgirl and start pounding the pavement.

EVERY SINGLE FG AUDITION WAS A HUGE SUCCESS, and no matter how often the false "second chances" charge is made, it will never make it true. The producers would have known from the resume she handed in at her first audition (DSB) that she had had zero professional experience, and therefore presented an enormous risk. (Can she take direction? Will she get along with castmates? Does she have the vocal stamina? Will she withstand the pressure, exposure, and inevitable attacks?) For them to have given her a callback at that early point meant they saw a talent-based "fit" at least equal to any other competitor. (I would argue she was so good they were terrified they would have to hire her, which led to the "Miley Cyrus' people" desperation.) The second audition ("To Love You More") was better still, better than Celine. The third audition, for which Cassandra caught her rehearsing lines, went unseen and unremarked. The fourth, the "chemistry" audition, was meant to be the final stage, and would not have even been held if she had not already proven to be the most talented, and by a margin wide enough to make up for the entailed risk she presented. Its purpose was to answer a simple question: Would a Broadway audience believe Nicky would want to fuck Fanny? It only took a minute for the question to be answered in the affirmative - "She's charming and she looks the part". (An even briefer audition for a Broadway play took place on "Mad Men", when Megan Draper walked into a room with 3 men seated on a couch, was told to turn around, and then immediately dismissed without having spoken a word.) But the risk remained, and thus the desperation of "Claire Danes' people". Pointedly, however, she wasn't told she wouldn't get the part. The final, and impromptu, audition was in the diner, when Rachel's Brice-level chutzpah overcame the director's (legitimate) fears and sealed the deal.

As for comparing Rachel to Lea, Lea didn't have that easy of a road to success.

Precisely. Rachel is a true prodigy; Lea never was. That's why Rachel can become Fanny at a much younger age than Lea will. (Streisand, a genuine prodigy with a ton of experience, did Fanny at 22.) And regardless of talent, there's always the huge factor of the right place at the right time. Just consider the incredible, unforseeable coincidence that some producer would want to revive FG for the first time ever on Broadway at almost the exact moment that Rachel Berry arrived in NYC. Some girls have all the luck. Edited April 13, 2014 by Higgs

[Cranberry]

I guess the issue is that watching the story of a true prodigy, if that's indeed what Rachel's meant to be, is boring. I like Rachel. She's one of my favorite characters on the show and has been since the very beginning, even though I've found her more and more unlikable as the series has gone on. I do want her to succeed. But I don't want her to succeed this easily and then complain about her success. I want to watch her work hard for it, to suffer setbacks, and to ultimately rise up and prove anyone who ever doubted her wrong. Currently, Rachel is acting like a spoiled brat who refuses to play by the rules (and apparently doesn't have to because she's just that talented and will achieve everything she ever wanted -- and then some -- almost immediately). How is that a good story?

[Myrna123]

How is that a good story?

It's not a good story, that's for sure. 

It is; however, the story a 9 or 10 year old would tell.  I don't know if RIB or Fox decided to go all-in for a new demographic somewhere between Season 1 and 2, but whoever made the decision, they jumped in and embraced the tween market with everything they had. 

Rachel may get dumped on for a second, but then she gets the quarterback (who's going to marry her!!!), she gets into the school of her choice even though she botched the audition (but she really really wanted in so it shouldn't matter that she botched the first audition!!!  Probably everyone who botched their first audition got a second chance!!!), she gets the role of a lifetime--oh gosh, wait, don't forget to make her prom queen first!  And let's make sure to put dreamy Sam and Blaine front and center because they're so dreamy!  And really, most 9 year olds can't even remember what they had that morning for breakfast, so no need to remember what's happened from one season to the next; one episode to the next; or really one scene to the next.

And the really annoying thing is, the tween market (or the market that was a tween three seasons ago) has already skipped off to Onedirectionville or some other shiny new delight, and I'm the one who's still here!  Maddening!

Edited April 13, 2014 by Myrna123

[camussie]

The final, and impromptu, audition was in the diner, when Rachel's Brice-level chutzpah overcame the director's (legitimate) fears and sealed the deal.

 

Which is bunk because her "chuzpah" should have just underscored their concerns about how green she was, not allayed them.  I like Rachel and have always wanted to see her achieve her dreams but her pulling crap like that (which was pretty much a repeat of how she harassed Carmen into giving her a second chance) and being rewarded for it  does not make her rootable, it makes her entitled with no reason to modify that behavior because everyone who counts in her business indulges her.

As far as her chemistry audition sealing the deal on her "talent." if they wanted me to believe Rachel was right for the part and not just aping Barbara they should have  directed Lea to play that scene differently (and I have no doubts she could have so why the episode director chose that route is strange) because from where I sat that audition was a disaster due to it being  a mimic that belonged in a Las Vegas "tribute" show not in an original Broadway production.  Frankly that is what I thought they meant about her being green but no it was because they didn't think she had the maturity to carry the show and some how a tantrum she threw in her place of employment (via song) proved them wrong.  Kind of like how the show tried to tell me that "Gangham Style" would have won them sectionals had it not been for Marley fainting.  Neither one was believable yet they expected me to buy both lock, stock and barrel.

And regardless of talent, there's always the huge factor of the right place at the right time. Just consider the incredible, unforseeable coincidence that some producer would want to revive FG for the first time ever on Broadway at almost the exact moment that Rachel Berry arrived in NYC.ome girls have all the luck.

 

Amazing how it is everyone (save maybe Kurt although he got an improbable internship at Vogue.com that a Parson's student would shank someone for and his band was booked at the "it" Brooklyn club of the moment because the one person who could make it happen just happened to be the one person who attended their debut) who have all the luck.  Well if amazing = more boring than watching paint dry.  And from that episode description we get to move to an even more boring part of the story (who knew that was even possible).  

Rachel and Mercedes, who have been handed chance after chance, taking those chances for granted instead of realizing that, no matter how talented they are, there is such a thing as paying your dues.  Nope one is considering ditching her show and going to Hollywood and the other is changing her sound despite being given a record contract based on her current sound.  That would be like Madonna jumping right into her cowgirl phase before she gained the fame and the clout that came with her huge early successes. 

It is; however, the story a 9 or 10 year old would tell.  I don't know if RIB or Fox decided to go all-in for a new demographic somewhere between Season 1 and 2, but whoever made the decision, they jumped in and embraced the tween market with everything they had.

 

I think this show has always been marketed and geared towards a pre-teen/teen audience.  That is why the fall of the first season there was a mall tour and interview after interview on top 40 stations.  I also think RM had the attention span of a gnat so instead of telling a story in season 2 he started telling plot points,  Plot points where he weirdly worked out some lingering issues from his high school experience which is why this show is all the arts or bust (even getting into MIT is a bad bad thing) and why gay bullying seems to be treated as worse than any other form of bullying.  Not to mention plot points that feature his character crushes of the moment.  

We saw early signs of this creative ADD with how bad the follow through was on the pregnancy lies, in particular the Quinn/Puck lie, but it came out in full force in season 2 with the godawful Quinn/Finn with a side of Rachel pining story, a story that torpedoed the characterizations for all three of them and also a story that RM and team couldn't explain their reasoning behind when asked about it.  

Edited April 13, 2014 by camussie

[BizBuzz]

Myna123, I am so glad you brought up the demographic thing. I have been following this topic since I got here, and although I think the story lines are quite unrealistic, this is MUST SEE TV for my 14 year old and her friends. I deal because I happen to like music and love singing to the songs I know, but I do roll my eyes quite a bit at the story lines. To me it's just a musical show that has to wrap stories around music themes.

To them however (my kids and her friends) it's fun for them, and like all teenie bopper stuff that I have to sit through, I don't get some of it. But hey, it makes them laugh and cry, and it does have some merit sometimes. They seem to catch the things they are supposed to and it leads to some interesting discussions between us ... Like I said, I deal cause I think most of them are great performers.

[bravelittletoaster]

It is; however, the story a 9 or 10 year old would tell.  I don't know if RIB or Fox decided to go all-in for a new demographic somewhere between Season 1 and 2, but whoever made the decision, they jumped in and embraced the tween market with everything they had.

It's also the story a lazy and only slightly talented storyteller would tell, more to the point here, IMO.

My feel is that viewers still hanging on are doing so because they have a beloved character they're following (with gritted teeth and one hand over their eyes), and they want to see that character say some words and maybe sing a song.

gpoy.