Showing posts with label Compare and Contrast. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Compare and Contrast. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 20, 2020

A Tale of Two Brother Bands: The Impact and Evolution of One Direction and 5 Seconds of Summer

Introducing my quarantine passion project! I worked so hard on this all of these months since like April during self-isolation from the COVID-19 pandemic. I had a blast writing this and am extremely proud of it! It certainly kept me busy, productive, and happy. Some circumstances then took place, and I kept perfecting it and adding things, but now I finally finished it (I think LOL, unless/although I will probably/maybe continue to edit and revise it and add things while it's live lol). I wanted to wait for the best time to share it, so hopefully now should be good. I have to let it go at some point and I wanted to release it before the year ends lol. Plus, from the writer's standpoint, I'm kinda tired of looking at it now. Haha!

If you're in the mood to read something extremely lengthy about two of the best male bands of this generation, please enjoy! lol :)

Just so you know, this critique essay includes mentions of sex and profanity.

INTRODUCTION

Ever since I got into One Direction (1D), I have felt myself becoming interested in boy bands again.

But let's talk about 5 Seconds of Summer.

Saturday, October 31, 2015

Character Equivalents: A Look at Ryan Murphy's "Scream Queens" and "Glee"

I love "Scream Queens". :D

How fitting that my October blog post is about "Scream Queens", which is a new anthology series whose first season is about the Kappa Kappa Tau sorority of Wallace University being terrorized by the school's Red Devil mascot that keeps murdering a character or two every week.

It's so stupid and corny, but at the same time I love the show for that reason. It's the point of the show, parodying '80s and '90s slasher films. I also love mysteries and twists, and this show provides them. Every episode provides new clues to help us viewers figure out the Red Devil's identity. It's my new favorite show. I look forward to it every Tuesday night on FOX. I was looking forward to it since I first heard about it.

The more I watch it, the more I realize that it is EXACTLY like "Glee", which makes sense because it has the same creators: Ryan Murphy, Brad Falchuk, and Ian Brennan. It's literally the same humor with the same plot with the same characters. It's the same exact show! The only difference is that they replaced musical numbers with bloody murders. It seems to me that Murphy might be having some "Glee" withdrawals.

It's funny because "Glee" used to be the only primetime dramedy show I watched. The TV I normally usually watch is dance competition shows. I guess I just really like Ryan Murphy's stuff. I don't appreciate gore at all but for some reason the gore in this show isn't as severe or it just doesn't bother me much. I think the humor balances it out.

Do you ever notice that certain TV shows or movies tend to have the same character lineup, as if each show needs the same character structure? I do, so therefore "Character Equivalents" is now a new "Taking it One 'Stef' at a Time" series. :)

Comparing and contrasting "Scream Queens" and "Glee" is our first installment. I'm going to prove to you that this is the same exact show. Given that the shows have the same creators, the similarities are a bit understandable.

Yep. This is going to be one of my long analytical essays. I know you've missed them. ;)

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

The Parallels and Unnecessary Villainy Between StarKid's "Twisted" and Disney's "Frozen"

I am once again inspired to compare a StarKid production to a Disney one.

Back around Thanksgiving, Team StarKid released their latest musical, Twisted: The Untold Story of a Royal Vizier, on YouTube. It tells the story of Disney's Aladdin from Jafar's point of view with satire and it is brilliantly done.

I actually watched it for the first time last week today around this time, and the more I think about it, the more it bears a resemblance to Disney's Frozen, and that's not just because they were both released Thanksgiving 2013 weekend.

Unlike my Starship versus The Little Mermaid piece, this won't be a compare and contrast to see which is better considering one is an actual Disney film and the other is a parody of an actual Disney film and also of Wicked. These will just be some observations I have made.

Before I proceed, I will warn you that this will be spoiler heavy for both musicals, so read at your own risk. If you would like to watch Twisted before reading, check out the video I provided for you below. Normally they upload their musicals by scenes, but for this one they decided to upload the entire show in one video as well. Also, if you are a diehard Aladdin fan, be wary when you watch this. It made me look at the cartoon in a totally different way and I don't want to ruin the Disney magic for you. So once again, proceed with caution.

Twisted contains strong adult language.


You ready?

The Poor, Misunderstood, Isolated Main Characters: Jafar and Elsa

Jafar, played by Dylan Saunders, and Elsa, voiced by Idina Menzel

Both Jafar and Elsa are misunderstood individuals with tragic pasts. Even though they both have ties to the highest hierarchy of the kingdom, Elsa a queen and Jafar an adviser to the Sultan, they are also isolated by the commoners that they are so eager to protect.

Elsa actually isn't isolated by the kingdom as much as she isolates herself from them per advice from the magic expert Trolls and her parents. It isn't until she reveals her ice powers and runs away herself that the kingdom starts to fear her and her lack of control.

As for Jafar, there is no clear reason why the kingdom hates him so much. He doesn't do anything bad but rather think realistically about the state of the kingdom and wanting reform. Everyone else is too idealistic and believe that wishing and dreaming is the only step you need to take to succeed, whereas Jafar does not. The only thing he is truly guilty of is disagreeing with everyone else.

There are actually articles I have read briefly that try to argue the claim that Frozen is an allegory for Christianity and that Anna, Elsa's younger sister, represents Jesus Christ. Well, I see this more with Twisted. Not that Jafar represents Jesus necessarily, but more so any other biblical figure, like Noah, Jonah, or Moses. Twisted actually reminds me a lot of a Sight and Sound Theatres production. I've seen shows at their Lancaster, Pennsylvania location and Twisted's characters, costumes, and makeup greatly resemble theirs, especially during the "Golden Rule (Reprise)". The whole Middle Eastern setting and time period concept is similar and Jafar is similar to biblical figures in the way that he tries to help others change for good, but there are certain people who just want none of it and brush away his pleas.

The Innocent Disney Princess Eager to Make Change: The Princess and Anna

The Princess, played by Rachael Soglin, and Anna, voiced by Kristen Bell

Ah, the naivety of Disney Princesses. Isn't it cute?

The Princess (who is never referred to as Jasmine for some odd reason but let's be honest she looks exactly like her) and Anna are two innocent yet determined young girls who think that they have it all figured out but in reality they know nothing. They believe they understand the ways of the world and that they have what it takes to make informed decisions and make change, but they are both just too sheltered up until the musical begins to fully comprehend things.

Something else the two have in common is the rocky relationships they have with the main characters that become more heartwarming and close as the musicals draw to a close.

Both princesses break out of their constraints, and after their respected adventures mature them, are eventually taken seriously. Like with Elsa's queenship and Anna's leadership in Frozen, nobody in Twisted objects to being governed by a woman when The Princess takes over. One of her decrees is that everyone is from then on a princess and even when she doesn't refer to Jafar's main henchman as one, he replies with a "Don't you mean, 'princess?'"

However, during the course of their stories, it is because of their innocence and naivety that they end up falling for the manipulations of...

The Hot Guy that Turns Out to be the Villain Through an Elaborate Reveal: Aladdin and Hans

Aladdin, played by Jeff Blim, and Hans, voiced by Santino Fontana

Hear that? Aladdin is a villain now.

I wanted to write a whole post about the unanswered questions Frozen posed, but decided that this was a better place to acknowledge my opinion...

I absolutely HATE what the writers did with the Hans character. Everybody else is all like, "What a great twist!" or "I saw that coming. Cool."

No. Stop it. It's too cliche and you know it. The writers totally messed him up.

Okay, so what happens is that since Elsa accidentally struck her heart with her powers, Anna needs a "true love's kiss" to save her from being completely "frozen." So naturally, she runs to her fiance Hans for help. But then, *GASP* Hans reveals to her that he never loved her and just wanted to marry her to become King of Arendelle. He then goes into this whole cliche speech. You know, the one where the bad guy has the hero (or in this case, heroine) vulnerable in his evil clutches as he details his most evil plan. Mwahahahaha!

See, the whole time we think that The Duke of Weselton is the bad guy, and although this guy isn't altogether good, sending his men to kill Elsa because he thinks she is dangerous, it was really Hans all along! Unless they were trying to play with the idea of how the Prince is always the expected hero and now a prince is the bad guy...

Frozen already has a conflict and it consists of Elsa controlling her lifelong struggles to end the eternal winter she had struck on Arendelle and Anna trying to bring her sister back home and forge a relationship with her. Hans is such a great character at the beginning. He develops this goofy friendship with Anna, trusts her, takes orders from her, and runs Arendelle in her absence. Making him this guy with bad intentions and have him try to put both sisters to death in order to gain the crown doesn't add anything at all. And the intention of him wanting to take over the kingdom is literally the OLDEST been there, done that story!

At least StarKid has the decency to be original. In their version, Aladdin is a psychopath murderer with a split personality that killed his parents. Also, he's 33 years old. Seriously. They dedicated a whole song to this.

Holy crap.

Unlike Hans, Aladdin is pretty much a jerk throughout the whole thing based on his selfishness and how he likes to screw with Jafar. Like the original Aladdin, he's a sweet talking, lying, immature street rat thief, but in Twisted his main goal is to ultimately have sex with Jasmine. 

Oh, sorry. I mean, "The Princess."

So already he is a decent antagonist. During the climax, The Princess puts up a front after a whole musical two hours worth of ignoring his advances and Aladdin's patience reaches a breaking point. He tries to kidnap her as Jafar intervenes, which brings us to the great reveal.

This is pretty much the best scene of the whole thing for me. Everything about it is just so perfect. Jeff Blim's facial expressions and portrayal of two different people having a psychotic conversation, the audience's reactions, the timing, the lighting, the creepy background music, the closeups, Dylan Saunders's perfectly timed Jafar reaction at the end, and what transpires thereafter. The only criticism I have about it is at times Blim bounces out of the frame, but to me it's one of the best scenes StarKid has ever done. Matt and Nick Lang and Eric Kahn Gale perfectly wrote it and Brian Holden excellently directed it.

Too bad it wasn't needed.

Much like how the villainy of Hans wasn't necessary, neither was this. Like in Frozen, Twisted already has its conflicts for Jafar to solve. Aladdin is already a problem without showing this weird side to him. This musical is full of twists as well as references to twists, the title being appropriate, but the greatest twist of all is that it turns out that The Princess is Jafar's daughter

So therefore, Aladdin is this 33-year-old promiscuous lowlife trying to bang Jafar's 16-year-old only little girl. For a father, that's enough motivation right there!

But it's just so entertaining and it brings out StarKid's creativity to put their own spin on a classic story that I can't say that it shouldn't be in there at all.

The Need for People to Take Off Their Clothes

In Twisted there are times where Aladdin constantly indirectly says to the The Princess, "Take off your clothes," which to me is an homage to the apparent very subliminal message in Disney's Aladdin. Clever. 

Another thing I wanted to point out in my questioning Frozen post is the scene where Kristoff takes Anna, Olaf, and Sven to see his Troll family. I feel like I'm the only one who noticed this part, because my friend Abby, who saw the film with me, didn't stir. At one point, one of the Trolls tells Kristoff to take off his clothes as she tries to undress him...

Nobody else seems to have noticed this line or the oddness of this request for one family member to command of another! It happens so quickly, so maybe that's why. Kristoff himself even shrugs it off. Why are they so eager for Kristoff to take his clothes off? More importantly, why is DISNEY? Why was this one line included anyway? Is not wearing clothes a normal thing for the Troll family or is it the same as a mother telling her kid to take off his or her coat and shoes upon entering the house? Or, is this a play on Aladdin's supposed subliminal message? Either way, it is something both Disney films have in common and StarKid has its own fun with it.

Anyway, enough of Disney's desire for nudity. Let's get back to the stories...

The Conflicts of Everyday Life

This section is actually what inspired this whole blog post.

Not every tale needs that one singular villain that the heroes need to defeat. Sometimes the villain is life itself, which is something to which everybody can relate.

In my heart Hans and Aladdin aren't bad guys. A part of me wants to ignore the fact that Hans's revelation scene is even in the film. If anything, they could've done something different with him to spice up the story's conclusion. And as for Aladdin, apart from his evil personality, he's just a lazy grown man that just wants to get laid. I mean, I'm willing to bet that there are some men out there like that, meaning that he's kind of normal. In that respect, anyway.

Jafar and Elsa are both a "victim of circumstance," as quoted by The Princess in reference to Aladdin. Their lives and struggles in themselves are what they have to overcome and throwing a villain into that is just adding a random extra annoyance to an already severe problem. They are placed into these situations and sometimes cannot help their circumstances right away because they must deal with the uncooperative people and problems around them. 

But then again a lot of stories involve the protagonist suffering from some kind of everyday troubles and then must deal with a villain antagonist on top of that. It makes the story more complex and interesting I guess, and normally without that villain causing conflict you wouldn't have a story. But just because that kind of plot exists it doesn't mean that every story needs it. Sometimes the archetype is overdone.

I like how Twisted came out right when Aladdin is the most recent Disney production to come to Broadway. Also, Frozen is coming to Broadway as well! It's just another thing they all have in common.

One thing I wish StarKid acknowledged is those scenes in Aladdin where, you know, Jasmine is held prisoner by Jafar as his slave and is dressed in chains and this sexy red outfit and then starts flirting and making out with him to distract him from Aladdin. According to them, she's his daughter, remember? 

We're not going to talk about that? You're not going to explain that one?

Okay.

Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Why John Tucker Must Die is Better Than Mean Girls

Yes, I understand that I am making a very strong claim.

And yes, I am going to prove my claim correct.

A lot of people would probably disagree with me on this considering Means Girls (2004) is pretty much the cult classic of my generation and has plenty of quotable lines, but I finally watched John Tucker Must Die (2006) in its entirety on TV like around a month or two ago and it actually is a favorite film of mine now. I even like it more than Mean Girls, which was never entirely up there among my favorite films to begin with, but I do still like that movie as well.

As I watched it, I noticed that it bears a strong resemblance to Mean Girls. Both films portray modern day drama in a cliche high school setting, making me believe that these kinds of films deserve their own genre since there are so many of them out there, but what else do these two films have in common? Without further to do, here is a compare and contrast of Means Girls and John Tucker Must Die.

The Leading Ladies

Lindsay Lohan as "Cady Heron" from Mean Girls and Brittany Snow as "Kate" from John Tucker Must Die

First of all, isn't it kind of ironic how both girls pretty much have the same first name? When I write a screenplay like these, I know what to call my lead girl now. (Sarah, of course.) Maybe that's why the spelling and pronunciation of Cady's name is a running gag throughout her movie. It's poking fun at how common this name is among lead female characters. Though I'm not entirely sure how often this name is used in film in this way...

When we first meet our leading ladies in their voice over opening scenes (Yes, they both have one), both girls are socially awkward and outsiders, though one reason is more understandable than the other. Cady's awkwardness comes from living with her family and being homeschooled in Africa and because of this isn't used to the social setting of high school drama and is sometimes taken advantage of because of it. Kate, on the other hand, throughout her film claims she is "invisible," though we don't really know why or how this happened. Unlike Cady, she is used to the high school setting. According to her hot mama, played by Jenny McCarthy, she chose to be invisible. In fact, a good reason for her invisibility is that she is often hidden in her mother's shadow, considering how attractive her mom is, and the fact that they often move to another location after her single mom breaks up with yet another one of her loser boyfriends, so that could explain why Kate never formed any friendship with others. But still, just how does a teenage girl become invisible to her peers in the first place? We're told that she is in the prologue, but are never given an exact reason. Both Cady and Kate end up befriending the popular students and get more and more invested in the plots these students invent as their respective movies progress, up to the point where their personalities and styles change and they ultimately become the popular, somewhat mean girls themselves.

What's interesting here too is the relationships these girls have with their mothers. Cady's mother is hardly involved and has no idea what antics her daughter is up to half the time. We rarely see her in the film. Kate's mother is more involved with her daughter because she is fully aware of the master plan Kate and her new friends are putting into motion and even tries to talk her daughter out of it at one point. She knows all of this because the girls mainly hang out at Kate's house whereas in Mean Girls the girls mainly hang out at Regina's house.

Cady's and Kate's motivations for actually getting involved differ as well. Cady gets involved mainly because she does not know what else to do when her new friend Janis vows vengeance against Regina because of an eighth grade fallout between the two of them. She just goes along with everything because she is not fully aware of how things work in, as she puts it, "girl world," and she just goes along with things. Cady gets deeply upset when Regina steals Aaron Samuels, Regina's ex-boyfriend, back from Cady and Janis uses Cady's sadness and naivety of being a new girl straight from Africa to her own advantage and Cady becomes her pawn, not necessarily realizing it right away, for she feels that Janis is doing this to help her. Kate, however, throws herself right into the action and implants the idea of getting back at John into the minds of his girlfriends, knowing exactly what she is doing. In a way, Kate is more like Janis because she is the one kind of using the other girls to get back at John because John's actions remind her so much of what her mother's boyfriends would do to her mother, so the motivation for Kate is a lot more personal than it is for Cady. Kate gets involved to avenge her mother's numerous heartbreaks, lashing out at John to do so, and quite possibly to make herself more visible by mingling with the popular girls. Like Janis, these popular girls also use Kate, who is also the new girl in her film, as well. Another difference between Cady and Kate is that Kate normally looks like she's having fun throughout her movie whereas Cady often looks irritated with her agenda.

The Target

Rachel McAdams as "Regina George" from Mean Girls and Jesse Metcalfe as "John Tucker" from John Tucker Must Die

A distinct and very important difference here is gender. Regina George is the ultimate mean girl of her film and she fits her archetype well. She's blonde, she's frightening, she runs the place, she's popular, but nobody really truly likes her. She's the type of girl that makes the lives of those beneath her on the social ladder not so pleasant, so therefore she must be taken down a peg or a million. She represents the typical storyline about how girls have a tendency to clash with one another.

On the other hand, John Tucker is well loved by everyone in his school and never really gives any of the characters reason to hate him except for when his girlfriends Heather, Beth, and Carrie realize he is dating all of them at once unbeknownst to them. One of the reasons why I like John Tucker Must Die is because the concept is different and has never been done before. Normally in this situation the girls would always fight each other and never include the guy on the battlefield to let him play a part. Even in Mean Girls Cady and Regina fight over the same guy, but the guy is never involved with the actual impact. Here, John is, and he's not just involved in the fight. He's the enemy. Not the other women. Him. What we have here is somewhat a battle of the sexes whereas in Mean Girls the battle is one-sided, within one gender. However, the difference between him and Regina is that Regina is a rotten female we love to hate whereas John is a guy we just love to mock and watch suffer, and under the tactics of women no less. There's just something about guys getting the brunt of attacks that makes it a lot more hilarious than girls getting it. Maybe it's because we as a society associate goofiness and hilarity with men more than women. Kate and the other girls may look like they are having more fun with their antics in their film because men are a lot more fun to mess with whereas there is more anxiety involved with messing with girls. Guys are more laid back whereas girls are more vicious. It's always fun to watch an arrogant guy get his just desserts but arrogant girls have a tendency to just be annoying.

Their offenders target them out of revenge to ruin their lives and ironically both films use voice overs dictating warfare terminology to describe their techniques of defeating their enemy. Some of these techniques somewhat resemble each other between films, the offenders continuously coming up with more and more material to incorporate into their plan.

Stereotypes...Or Not...

Some of the many stereotypical and not-so-stereotypical characters of Mean Girls and John Tucker Must Die

First, let's look at Janis and Damian, Cady's first friends when she goes to high school. They are the outsiders of their high school setting and stereotyped as such. One is a chubby homosexual guy and the other is an emo-styled girl whose sexuality is actually questioned. In addition to them, all of the students of the Mean Girls high school are stereotyped from the beginning of the film. They are literally introduced that way. Perhaps this is a ploy to show that Mean Girls is not necessarily meant to be taken seriously but rather is a parody of most high school scenarios, so this is the film's way of mocking how people are automatically labeled.

Now let's look at some black characters from John Tucker Must Die. Normally, when there is a black character among white characters, that black character is mainly there to serve the black person stereotype. The same goes for a white character in an all black character setting. However, Heather from John Tucker Must Die, played by singer Ashanti, doesn't exactly do this. First of all, she's the cheerleader captain for the school. When was the last time we saw a black cheerleader captain in a high school drama or comedy? Normally when one thinks about the popular cheerleader captains, we think of someone that resembles Regina George. Not in this case and it is very refreshing.

The thing with Heather is that she doesn't stand out as the token black girl but rather meshes in well with the white girls. Now, it can be argued that this isn't necessarily a good thing because black people have a tendency to feel like they have to mold themselves to fit the white person persona in order to be accepted into society, but I don't really think that is what they are trying to prove here.

Another black character from John Tucker Must Die is John's friend Tommy, who is on the basketball team as a water boy I believe. Not only is Tommy black, but he is chubby as well. Now John Tucker is THE top jock at the high school. He is a young, attractive, well built, white teenage guy who is popular with everyone. He is what one would expect him to be as the "Don Juan" character. The only difference is he's not a jerk, which is another trait these types of guys normally showcase, but he is actually a pretty friendly guy. Well, he does do certain things to anger the girls, but this is the point I am trying to make: He still associates himself with a chubby black guy like Tommy all the time. You never really see that in film or TV, especially with a character like him.

The Popular Girls

"Gretchen Wieners" and "Karen Smith" from Mean Girls and "Heather," "Beth," and "Carrie" from John Tucker Must Die

There's this ongoing stereotype that women aren't funny. Mean Girls and John Tucker Must Die prove this theory wrong. However, both sets of female characters are funny in different ways and the ladies of John Tucker Must Die are a tad bit funnier.

Karen and Gretchen are two of the crowd pleasers of Mean Girls due to their funny one liners and wit. Interestingly, even though they are members of "The Plastics" along with Regina, neither of them are very mean, which is something I realized when I watched the movie for the first time. Even if they do say mean things, their comments aren't meant to intentionally hurt, unlike Regina's. These two fit the stereotype of the tag-along dumb white girls in a typical high school mean girl clique. Sure they're funny, but they're funny because they are the stereotypical tag-along dumb white girls in a high school mean girl clique. We've seen these characters before and they for some reason have always been funny so therefore Gretchen and Karen are funny. Whenever they or Regina utter an insult, it's funny because it is so offensive and mean and audiences laugh out of shock. Mean Girls makes this funny on purpose because it is a parody of the mean high school girl lifestyle. We laugh because we know girls can be very cruel. It's all too real for us. Gretchen and Karen are there to serve the dumb clique white girl stereotype, but yet they are also there to make fun of this stereotype.

Even though Heather blends in with the white girls in her movie, she is still an individual because the white girls are individuals as well. Unlike Gretchen and Karen, who sometimes blend in together from time to time and more or less serve the same function, these girls each stand out because they have such differing personality traits and these are all brought to the table for their mission to succeed. Beth is an activist and Carrie is a broadcaster, and their distinct personalities play throughout the film and even set up a few jokes. Remember what I said about men being goofier than women? Well, there is this stereotype that guys are always in trouble as they try to pull off their plans so the women wouldn't find out and we laugh at their mishaps and women are the straight characters who are always the voice of reason that ultimately catch the men in the act. Watch TV. This practically happens in every comedy. In John Tucker Must Die, however, the girls are the ones always in trouble and enduring mishaps as they try to pull off their plans. Heather, Beth, and Carrie prove that women too can also be a little immature and goofy.

The best thing about the girls in John Tucker Must Die is that they aren't very mean. To each other, I mean. You think they are possibly going to be a problem for Kate eventually but this never really occurs. Well, they start off mean to each other and Kate because they are all in different cliques that oppose each other, unlike Regina who gives Cady a false sense of security at first. In Mean Girls, the girls automatically turn on each other because of a guy and that sets off the fireworks for the rest of the film, but in John Tucker Must Die, after some brief typical cattiness, the girls band together towards the beginning of the film and turn on the true problem: John Tucker. They actually form a friendship over their animosity towards this guy. They bond together as strong women instead of being divided because of a guy, which is what often happens in fiction and in real life. You never see a bond like this in any love triangle in TV or film where the women are fighting over the men, so that is why I feel like John Tucker Must Die took this idea and made it fresh and new, making it a feminist film. I'll even go as far as saying that Kate, Heather, Beth, and Carrie using their skills to defeat John Tucker (and for Kate, her mother's boyfriends as well) is symbolic of how women should come together instead of being catty towards one another in order to smash patriarchy.

Well, you can say that Mean Girls echoes this sentiment in the scenes where the female students are given pep talks in the gym and participate in improvement exercises, but these scenes don't really seem to solve anything and are done because their male principal had enough of their shenanigans. They are lectured here to be better women whereas in John Tucker Must Die the girls do their thing because they see how men sometimes mistreat women and want to put a stop to it. To put it simply, like most activists, they see an injustice and want to change things, their actions somewhat protesting tactics. In Mean Girls they don't necessarily see the problem of how women mistreat one another and have to be told that there is one.

It seems as though Mean Girls is a representation of girl warfare meant to expose both this concept and cliche film technique, whereas John Tucker Must Die takes itself more seriously with the points it tries to get across and the fact that it is different.

Friday, July 6, 2012

Starkid's Starship and Disney's The Little Mermaid: Similar Stories, But Which is Better?

Let me start off by saying that I am a big fan of Team Starkid. I am a recent fan considering that I am not a huge fan of Harry Potter and they began their franchise with their first ever musical A Very Potter Musical, so I didn't watch it when it first came out. I was inspired to watch it this past summer of 2011 because I was very into "Glee" and Darren Criss, who started off with Starkid, is now a cast member of "Glee," and I was YouTubing "Glee" the same night the final Harry Potter film was premiering, so I figured I'd watch it to see what the hype is all about. I must say I am very impressed with their talents and pleasantly surprised. As someone who did not necessarily grow up with the Harry Potter series like the rest of my generation, I find myself able to enjoy it regardless.

For those of you who don't know who they are, Team Starkid is a theater troupe consisting of a bunch of theater students who attended the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan, Darren being one of them. They come up with their own original pieces and eventually perform them and put them on their YouTube channel. They have all graduated now but still continue their Team Starkid franchise together. They actually just recently completed their S.P.A.C.E. Tour this past November and their Apocalyptour this past June. I definitely consider them an inspiration to aspiring performers everywhere because of their creativity and passion.

A recent Starkid staged musical is Starship, which is what I am going to focus on in this post. Starship has been compared to the story of The Little Mermaid by the Starkids themselves in this video. I've noticed similarities as well, now that they mention it. So which is better? My vote is for Starship. Here is a nice compare and contrast piece of Starship and The Little Mermaid.

*Beware of Spoilers.*

Bug, played by Joey Richter
The Story
The story of Starship follows a human sized insect, appropriately named "Bug," living on a planet called "Bug World," whose greatest dream is to become a Starship Ranger. He gets inspiration from hanging out in an abandoned starship on his planet and watching the old starship footage he finds there. However, he cannot achieve his dreams because the rest of his bug colony gets in the way. They all, including his best friend Roach, try to convince him that becoming a starship ranger is way beyond his reach and that each bug is supposed to do his or her part for the hive, which is where all of the bugs live (Except for one. We'll get to him soon enough.) The Overqueen, an insect who is the ruler of the hive and looks like a vagina (I just found out as I write this that I'm not the only one who thinks this lol), is the one who dictates what each bug does for a living, though also takes into consideration what the bugs want where reasonable. Bug, unsatisfied with the job the Overqueen gives him, comes across February, a human Starship Ranger who has been captured while doing some inspection of the planet by the bugs to implant eggs inside of her. Her eyes are also covered with bug slime, so when Bug talks to her, she doesn't realize he is an insect as well and thinks he is a Starship Ranger like herself. Bug, seeing that February is just as misunderstood as he, feels that they have a connection and instantly falls in love with her. He then rescues her.

At this point we can make connections to The Little Mermaid. Ariel is a small mermaid, the youngest in her family and the daughter of King Triton. Her greatest wish is to live on land. However, though she has this interest towards the beginning of the film as well, this interest is further instigated by rescuing Eric, a sailor with whom she falls in love, from shipwreck during a storm. Then is the only time we truly see her wish to live on land deepen so much whereas Bug's wish to be a Starship Ranger is strong as soon as we meet him. I feel that meeting February did nothing to trigger a greater urge in Bug. His urge is great from the beginning. Bug's inspiration is falling in love with a career and Ariel's inspiration is falling in love with a man. Though he does fall in love with February, and this does have something to do with it, he was convinced he would become a Starship Ranger one day whereas Ariel's wish to become a human and live on land seems more like a curiosity, though she does have this hope to become a human from the beginning as well.

As I am writing this, I'm noticing that Bug and Ariel aren't as much different as I thought.

The Bad Guys
You know what's really awesome about the villains from both Starship and The Little Mermaid? They are all so devilish. Sometimes you have a corny bad guy with useless henchmen and an even more useless plot, but Ursula and Pincer work their way into the minds of the protagonists to get what they want, showcasing some awesome villain strategies that only Satan himself could influence. They both convince the protagonists that they wish to help them whereas they are just in it for themselves. Plus, they both also have two of the best "bad guy songs" of all time:


What I really find interesting is how both sets of lyrics incorporate the villain coercing the protagonist to "make a choice." Another observation I've made is how both characters have long extensions that float around. Pincer has his claws and Ursula has her tentacles.

The only thing I don't like about these villains is that I feel like they are both poorly developed. Their agendas don't seem too clear. For example, Pincer makes it known that he wants to devour the humans, but he also says later on that he does what he does because he is simply a bad guy. Ursula is pretty much just known as the underwater witch and wants to take over the ocean, so therefore she fits the villain description perfectly. I just keep wondering "What is in it for them? Why are they like this? Why are they outcasts? Why are they defiant? Where is there motivation?" I just don't accept the idea of them simply being themselves as their only motive.

However, I really like how huge Pincer is when he enters the stage. When I first saw him, I was in shock with both fear and awe. When I was a youngster at Disney World, I saw the "Voyage of The Little Mermaid," which is a live action stage production of the movie incorporating with some movie clips in it as well, much like what Starship does. When Ursula came onstage, she had the same affect on me. She literally took up the whole height of the stage. She was both frightening and amazing to look at.

The one thing that's different in regards to bad guys is that in Starship, we also have a human bad guy who eventually teams up with Pincer. His name is Junior. He is originally a Starship Ranger whose father is the captain of the starship. He has his own agenda, which is to use what he finds on Bug-World to get a profit to buy some weed. This is actually another pretty weak motive for a villain, but I really enjoy how Brian Holden plays him.

What the Protagonists Do For Love
Okay so now that we have two such persuading bad guys, what exactly do they persuade the protagonists to do? Well, Ursula makes Ariel trade in her voice for legs and Pincer makes Bug trade in his physical appearance for a human body. They use this machine to transfer Bug's mind into the body of a lifeless Starship Ranger Pincer came across. So the question I pose, which was my initial reason for writing this piece, is, what is worse: giving up your voice or giving up your original looks?

Having a voice is very important, so this is poor decision-making on Ariel's part. A person should be able to have the freedom to speak his or her mind in whichever form. At least Bug has the ability to communicate with others considering he keeps his voice and is able to speak both English and his native bug language. Outward appearances don't necessarily matter when it comes to voicing opinions. Well, okay, that's kind of a lie considering how looks get people's attention in the first place, but I think you know what I mean.

My friend Kelly posted this photo on my Facebook wall awhile ago.
This photo is the inspiration for this blog post.
The Moral of the Story 
When we finally meet the Starship Rangers, we find that they have a lot of issues, especially with robots and insects. At the end, Bug becomes the connection between the humans and the insects, helping them all live in peace and coexist with each other. The lesson I personally learn from this part of the story is to not judge based on rumors and initial perceptions. I'm even going to go deeper and suggest that the moral is to not judge through stereotype and racism.

With The Little Mermaid, I feel there are no morals to learn. For one thing, I'm under the impression that the humans in this movie have no problems with the undersea creatures. In fact, they seem to go after them more than flee from them. Ariel's union with Eric doesn't seem to solve any issue between two groups like it does in Starship with Bug and February's union. The lesson I get from it is that you must change yourself for a man and once you get the man you must leave your family forever to be with him. This is my friend Kelly's favorite Disney princess and film and she feels that these morals are realistic to everyday life. Though I agree with her to an extent, I still find it anti-feminist and unrealistic.

It may seem like I am praising Starship and constantly knocking The Little Mermaid, but there are two different ideas in Starship that I strongly dislike, which I will share with you now.        

Two Minor Details That Annoy Me About Starship
I understand that Starship is a parody of science fiction films much like the other Starkid production are parodies, so perhaps I shouldn't take anything about it too seriously, but I really cringe every time they refer to God as the "dead god." Being a Catholic, I believe in Jesus Christ dying for my sins and rising from the dead and gaining eternal life, and I feel like this is Team Starkid's way of mocking my religious beliefs. We don't believe that He necessarily "died." His spirit was always alive. In other words, there's no such thing as a "dead god." God is never dead.  

Starship is a story about science fiction. Religious beliefs have nothing to do with this. In fact, we constantly have this debate going about evolution (science) versus the Genesis Creation Story (religion). The two are never really connected so I don't understand why this is used at all. They say it often too. I can see if they want an interjection to use, but the "dead god?" I also have been hearing that a handful of the Starkids are Jewish, those who believe in God but not Jesus Christ, the man who "died." I'm not sure if there is any truth to their Judaism, but if there is and they used Starship to poke fun at my Christianity and Catholicism, that doesn't sit too well with me.

Then there's something else about Starship that hits me on a personal level. My aunt passed away four years ago from breast cancer, leaving behind a six-year-old son. Since then my uncle has remarried a woman he met online. She is very good to my cousin, don't get me wrong, but it is still a depressing situation for my family. Starship takes this whole concept and makes it a joke. I think it partially explains why Junior is the way he is. Junior's father, Dr. Space-Claw, has a tendency to keep Junior on his toes throughout the musical. We see them converse only once, via webcam, though we don't see Dr. Space-Claw's face. Dr. Space-Claw nonchalantly reveals to Junior that his mother died right after he left for his starship mission. We then cut to Junior's new stepmother and the back to Dr. Space-Claw, who tells Junior he met her online. There is random laughter throughout this scene. The scene plays from 2:07 to 3:11:


I'm sorry, but this hits too close to home for me! There are certain things you just don't joke about, and this is one of them. This scene isn't necessarily needed either. The only reason for it I can think of is to give Junior another reason to go off the deep end, but he is evil to begin with anyway. Just like my issue with rape scenes, people need to take into consideration who their audiences are, for there is a good chance there is someone who lived the exact same scenario you are portraying. It should be done tastefully. There are times I refuse to watch this scene because I find it so offensive and inconsiderate.

However, to conclude this piece on a positive note, the bottom line is, Starship is a very well put together retelling of The Little Mermaid with a happy ending, produced creatively by young people who are just starting out in the business. I think what makes it better too is the fact that it was performed in front of a live audience as opposed to being a cartoon film. Theater is different from film in the way that every show is always live as opposed to film which is watching the same material over and over again. This, and the fact that it was theatrically performed by upcoming artists somewhat straight out of college. That is just very impressive to me and from what I see, we'll be seeing a lot more from them!