Donna Reviews Stuff: American Idiot

All right, so I was wondering if I should do reviews on this blog, and then I realized, fuck it: It's my blog. So I'm going to review something.

A friend of mine and I decided that we were going to see American Idiot. He's a Broadway kid, and I'm a fan of Broadway productions, but definitely a Green Day fan. A lot of people seem to need to disclaimer what kind of fan of Green Day they are at this point, but to be honest, I love Green Day. Dookie-era, Warning-era, American Idiot-era, I really don't care. I like the sound, I like their aesthetic, I like that they've grown up and while they sound hasn't necessarily, their content definitely has. I'm seeing them in August, and I'm super excited, along with AFI, which is my favorite band ever, and it's just exciting to be me right now, obviously.

Anyway, keep it in mind that this whole experience, when a Green Day fan, is ten times different from a kid that just wants to see a Broadway show and maybe knows a few Green Day songs.

American Idiot is playing at St. James Theatre. It's a very old school-looking theatre, but they made sure to add a punk rock feel to it. The walls in the entrance are covered in words and the doors are spray painted. The bar has ST. JIMMY written across it and when you look at the copious amounts of merch for Green Day being sold, you realize you're in a combination of a rock concert and a Broadway musical. Which is definitely what it is.



When the show starts, it's loud and abrasive. My friend winced, but I smiled. As "American Idiot" started, the cast was screaming the lyrics, while harmonizing at times. I loved it. These lyrics are not pretty. The music is arranged very similar to the original Green Day songs, and the band itself is mostly lead by a guitar, drum, and bass. There's occasional string instruments, but in terms of the music, it's definitely a rock show.

The story itself is very much like the album- a guy goes into the city trying to find something, he falls into the trap of sex, drugs, and rock 'n' roll, and eventually grows up to be like everyone else. However, they decided to split the lead into three roles of sorts- Johnny, who flees into the city and goes through the temptation of St. Jimmy, a very hot, androgynous embodiment of heroin addiction, Will, a guy that decides to stay home and falls into entire ennui with his girlfriend Heather, and Tunny, a guy that escapes into the city with Johnny only to enlist into the army. While it was sad, and very true to life, to see how these three options in life do lead you back home, and possibly a little broken, I do wonder if Will's storyline was needed. His relationship with Heather is constant throughout the story, but we honestly don't know anything about the two of them. Most of their scenes are pantomimed over the music and only really becomes relevant when Will sings "Nobody Likes You." Tunny's storyline is very similar to a Hair-type storyline of boy tries to be part of counterculture, boy ends up taking conventional route, boy ends up conflicted, however, it does remind the general audience of the constant war that is going on, even though it's not on the home turf. However, his relationship with The Extraordinary Girl and his dream sequence to the song that is her namesake is a total wtf moment with a princess Jazmine costume.


Seriously, costume designers, there ain't anything punk rock about this outfit.

Once again, for whatever reason, this storyline isn't explained very well, either, in terms of the relationship between the two characters. Why is she such an extraordinary girl, aside from the fact that she's in love with a soldier? What's the image she wants to sell to anyone willing to buy?

Johnny's storyline is naturally more thought out, and the lack of connection between him and Whatsername makes more sense. He's in a constant haze of heroin during most of the production, and does not realize how awesome she is until she's gone. But when a very sexy, willowy guy you're imagining named St. Jimmy is dancing around who can blame you? Uh, hello? I have never seen Tony Vincent in my life, but I will totally own up that I want to do indecent things to him with his asymmetrical hair and killer vocals. He hits an Adam Lambert glory note during it and just. Wow.

The rest of the class is very talented. Their vocals are great, and they definitely took a note from Green Day in the way they sang. The choreography is not great, but it's very headbang-y, and people throwing themselves into the music. There are some notes taken from Green Day when they perform, as well. When Johnny makes the sign of the cross during the lyrics of "To a hymn called faith and misery" during "Holiday" I smiled a little, remembering Billie Joe doing it multiple times before. Of course, because of these references, and notes in choreography, this is definitely not a show that you want to want to see unless you're a fan of Green Day circa American Idiot. The plot is not the greatest thing in the world. They definitely could have detailed certain things better, and maybe even considered adding more conversation, or taking away plot lines when writing it for stage. Of course, with being a fan of American Idiot with a runaway imagination, you may sit there and go "But I thought this song meant this D:!" But hey, it's totally worth it. Plus, with a lottery for tickets only 27 dollars, and then partial view seats for 37 dollars, it's very easy to see this show for cheap.

Overall, it's a decent show. If you like Green Day, you should check it out. If you're not, I'm not really sure you should get in on it. But hey, if you're ready for a punk rock show on Broadway, go for it. Just be ready for a rock show that's better than Tommy, with a lot of kids not afraid to use fuck.


Now if you excuse me, I'm going to go listen to Green Day and party like it's 2003. I'm seeing Adam Lambert on Saturday, so if people like me reviewing stuff, I may end up doing one for that show. Let me know what you think of this show if you've seen this, of course!

An open letter to Glee:

Dear Glee,

Hey, I see you're doing really, really well. Your ratings are crazy right now, and you're making yourself into a real brand. You've sold out concerts on your tour and you've been able to decimate the iTunes charts every week when you release new covers of various pop tunes that American Idol can only dream of getting the rights to- "Bad Romance?" Hells yeah. "Don't Stop Believing?" More like don't stop playing that song on my iPod. "Somebody to Love?" Way to prove me wrong with the whole "No one can cover Queen ever!" viewpoint.

Then why is it that half the time I'm watching you, I want to personally smack all the writers on the show? Why is it that every week I tune in, only to want to kick you in the mouth? Is it because Mercedes had an eating disorder for half an episode? Or maybe because the plotholes about Quinn's living situation were wider than her maternity clothes? Or maybe because Finn constantly teeters between decent human being, to airhead, to insensitive jackass, to guy strutting in Lady GaGa-esqueware over the course of one episode?

While these are all obviously issues with you as a show, I realized the real issue I have with you is a member of your cast, Kurt.



Sure, Kurt has his moments of epicosity, mostly featuring his dad. I was sniveling like a baby when his father not only gave Finn a verbal smackdown in the last episode, but remembered to compliment Kurt on his fabulous room designing skills. When Kurt sang his heart out with his name behind him in lights, I swooned. I even happy danced when I found out insider scoop about Kurt eventually acquiring a boyfriend sometime down the line, but there's something about Kurt that just pisses me off.

Maybe it's because you're falling into the Degrassi Trap. For people that don't know, Degrassi: The Next Generation is a Canadian import that was fall of awesome up until the characters graduated from high school and they tried to replace it with new kids that I can't stand. In its earlier seasons, it was pretty much amazing and handled serious topics- from self mutilation, to school shootings, to STDs-with a weird sense of realism and a little humor here and there.

It had a primary character that was gay, as well, named Marco. Marco was pretty all right for the most part. His storylines were interesting and epitomized a gay boy coming of age in high school. However, the issue with Marco was that all of his storylines went back to him being gay. Oh, Marco is trying to run for class president, but oh God! The girl that eventually ends up being a lesbian is threatening to out him! Marco likes a boy, but he's just recently realized he's gay, what should he do? Marco wants to come out to his family, but he's scared! Eventually, the plot lines petered out into nothing. Kurt's storylines are already beginning to have the gay undertones. Mercedes has a crush on Kurt, but Kurt comes out as gay! Kurt is harassed at school, because he's gay! Kurt has an issue with Finn, because Finn calls things faggy and Kurt is offended!



While Marco's storyline eventually crashed and burned, one thing that Degrassi seemed to do right was that Marco's sexuality was never confused with his gender. Marco liked guys. He was a guy. Sure, he was fashionable, but he was always a guy and referred to himself as such. He was able to be a great connector to the entire cast, hanging out and getting along with pretty much everyone, from my favorite goth girl Ellie, to queen bee Paige, to go-to guitar player Craig, however, no one doubted that he was a guy doing all this connecting. In you, Glee, there seems to be this constant flipping between Kurt being a resident girl or a gay- particularly when the show constantly needs to split the club into boys vs. girl competitions. For example, in the Madonna episode, Kurt proclaimed that he was the girl of the group when the guys were brainstorming ideas. However, in the GaGa episode, he joins the girls as an army of little monsters, which results in Schuester telling the boys to ~express themselves in their own way, by performing in Kiss makeup. Because, obviously, that's the way to counteract the GaGa infecting the Glee club. What gives, Glee? Kurt's a boy. If anything, shouldn't he be using his penis for the greater good and telling the boys to get over their fear of GaGa and embrace her kookiness? Maybe I just really, really wanted to see Puck wearing a thunderbolt over his eye or something, but I feel as though the need to have the girls and Kurt vs. the boys a little ridiculous.



Of course, we need to point out that you're not the second coming. You're a silly show that has a lot of elements of a fucking musical, for God's sake. However, it can't be denied that your fanbase is rampant. And while that's good for your ratings, it makes it nearly impossible for you to be dissected sometimes. No one is sitting down to wonder why Kurt is just not making sense sometimes, nor is anyone allowing other people to voice their opinion about it. And while I do understand that you're not supposed to be a showcase in queer theory, you have to realize that you have a lot of power over your fans and you can't make stupid plot decisions because of it.

How can you fix this? Well, how about you stop making every episode be guys vs. girls. While gender is obviously an important part of life, you really need to ease up on it most of the time. And how about you make Kurt be a guy. Hopefully, the fact you're giving him a boyfriend will help, provided you don't make him the "girl" of the relationship, whatever that means. Also, could you please, please, please not have all of Kurt's issues be related to being gay? He's a boy and he's going through awful high school things, he just so happens to be fashionable and like boys. He can obviously like men and state it, I'm not saying that's wrong, but I am saying that all his plots shouldn't focus on his sexuality. He's got so much potential, and it's obvious that it's being wasted on coming out plotlines/trying to be straight plot lines/Finn's "faggy blanket" incident. I won't say I have faith in you Glee, but I'd love to see if you could prove me wrong.

Some love,
Donna

PS: I'm totally watching you when you go up on Hulu. I will admit to that.

PPS: I'd love to hear your comments about Kurt, Glee, or about how season four of Degrassi: The Next Generation was the best thing everrr.

The Miseducation of Adam Lambert

Ladies and gentlemen, we are witnessing the end of an era.

American Idol is officially losing its vice grip on pop culture. Their ratings are slipping to a point that Dancing With the Stars is taking over the number one spot in terms of viewers (or at least viewers with those weird scanner boxes.

Obviously, the producers are trying to save the sinking ship. It's very logical. They're getting mentors that, while people may hate them, are relatively current- Miley Cyrus and Usher come to mind-and now they're going to get Adam Lambert.

Of course, if you haven't heard me fangirl about this guy already, Adam Lambert is last season's runner up and one of the few contestants that has been able to be a game changer. His performances always resulted in hitting notes people didn't know were possible, stylistic approaches that resulted in him owning the song, and being able to have fun with it. Of course, his high notes and his theatrics did polarize the crowd- some people said that he wailed too obnoxiously, others said that he was a big flaming homo that should not be on a family program, whatever. He made it to the finals and as hard as I tried to vote for the first and only time in my life, he didn't win. Adam sort of got the last laugh, for lack of better terms: He got the cover of Rolling Stone, and Details, as well as an album that debuted at number three on the Billboard charts. He's planning a summer tour and has number one singles in Japan, Canada, and all over Europe. He isn't quite taking over the world just yet, but hey, neither did Kelly Clarkson the first album.



Of course, when news got out that he was the mentor, a lot of people were pissed. American Idol has never had a mentor be one of its past contestants, even though some of them are doing very well in the music industry (Carrie Underwood, Daughtry, and yeah, Kelly Clarkson come to mind). Having a mentor that hasn't had a number one single yet, when they do have a small group of talented contestants to mentor instead, does seem a little odd. A lot of people jumped to conclusions- They assumed that American Idol didn't ask past contestants to possibly mentor, or whatever. No one has details on what went down in terms of getting Adam to mentor. However, a brief run through the situation proves that minus Kelly Clarkson's strained relationship with Idol, the other people were most likely too busy to do the gig, should they have been asked. That and Adam is currently in LA taking some down time before he goes on tour in the summer. He also has a remix EP that has come out this week (get it on iTunes, if only for the song "Voodoo", a super sexy, slick b-side). So the idea of Adam being a mentor is convenient for everyone involved.

While this would be simple enough if it was any other musician, it just isn't. I'm kind of shocked I have gone as far as I have minus the album cover saying anything that pertained to his sexuality. In the long run, it shouldn't matter, however, it sort of means everything in the pop music world.

Adam Lambert, in case you have lived under a very large rock, is gay. He was on the American Music Awards in November and did a super sexual performance that resulted in people complaining to ABC and a pseudo ban from the station. A lot of backlash still lurks because of it. It's not even about the fact that he hit bum notes (which is what I personally had an issue with), but the whole "Adam Lambert did something wrong on TV. Think of the children. His homosexuality is way too much." The whole situation was so messed up, GLAAD didn't even take his side (but then they did... and then they kinda didn't? But then they did again and got him as a performer for their award show so I guess we're all right? Why is my relationship with watchdog groups like I'm in high school?).



But anyway, according to the media for the most part, people were over the AMA performance. Well, so we thought. When news of his mentoring came out, many people turned it to "What has Adam done lately? Did controversial shit at an award show and red carper appearances?" Which is kind of silly. He's appeared on TV a lot for various performances, from The Early Show, to the talk show circuit, to Dancing With the Stars (which was live, so suck on that, media). The only reason why he was kind of MIA in the US was because he's been overseas promoting and getting number one singles like a boss. Of course Europe and Japan likes our gay singer import. What people seem to forget is that Adam is a theatre kid, and a damn good one at that. He knows how to give stage presence and how to be well known, whether it's for good things or not... something that this season full of very quiet singer songwriters need on American Idol, a type of musician that may be pretty safe (see Kris Allen), does not necessarily mean that they're the most successful as American Idol winners (While his single is still living like it's dying, his album sales aren't). Disclaimer: I like Kris Allen. Please don't crucify me for my last statement.

However, this whole entire incident, which should be simple (American Idol needs a mentor that isn't Quentin Tarentino, oh hey, Adam's available), isn't. Enter a quick interview on Entertainment Weekly with American Idol's executive producer Ken Warwick. When asked by the interviewer Do you think having Adam Lambert come in this week is going to shake things up and infuse the show with that added bit of drama that he generally manages to bring to the screen?, Warwick replied with this little gem:

I sincerely hope so. Because the guy is an incredible talent, and he had an incredible following. And it kind of upsets me that at the moment he’s not doing quite as well… [Pauses.] I don’t know what possessed him to do what he did at the AMAs, but he’s still struggling to live it down. And everybody says to me every week, ‘When are you gonna bring back Adam?’ They want to see him as he was. And hopefully we’re gonna do that for him this week, and we can start putting him back firmly where he belongs, as a major star. Because the guy is an incredible talent. He genuinely is. And it kind of breaks my heart to see someone with that much talent struggle a bit. So hopefully we can do back for him as he can do for us.

Okay, I'll take off my cray cray Adam Stan goggles for a second. I will admit that Adam's not ~taking over the world by storm. He's nowhere near as close to the level of sales and presence that Carrie and Kelly have, but at the same time, this theory is sort of irrelevant. While all three come from the same show, they are not the same in terms of fanbase and where they stand in the industry. It's like comparing three kids that go to the same school. Sure, they have the same classes, but one of them might be a cheerleader, another might by a video game nerd, and the other might be a theatre kid. Actually, when you break them down to their genres, Kelly is a poppy girl with a little rock infused sometimes, Carrie is country, and Adam is glam and dance music. Those three genres are not exactly the most similar genres, which result in different fanbases and different types of record sales. Plus, you have to point out that while we live in the twenty-first century: Adam's a gay man. Not only is he a gay man, but he's one of the first musicians to be on a major record label and from the start be open about it. Sure, Elton John is gay. We all know that. But like hell he was out about it at first. While there are a lot of rumors about Kelly Clarkson's sexuality, she sings about guys. She sings heteronormal, safe, music that the general public likes. Adam's lyrical content, though mostly safe, is definitely not about girls, once directly refers to a guy, and another time is very cheeky about the whole thing (Please see "Sure Fire Winners" lyric "And all the girls in the club wanna know/Where did all their pretty boys go?").

However, in terms of Warwick saying that Adam is "struggling" sounds silly and implies that he's trying to do Adam a favor, while saying that fans are requesting for him to make an appearance. So what does this mean, Warwick? Is it Adam that's struggling or is it your show that is?

Another issue I have with this statement has got to be the "firmly putting him back in his place" part. Okay, we all want to see Adam succeed. But with the disdain toward his behavior on the AMA performance, the implication of Adam being in whatever place that Warwick wants him to be is unsettling. The implication that Adam has to change and fit whatever standards Warwick has for him is slightly unnerving. Statements and comparisons have proved over and over again if a girl did a performance such as the AMA performance, she wouldn't have gotten in very much trouble at all (and maybe-gasp!-even got reprimanded for the real issue with the performance, the vocalization of the whole thing). Adam is a combo breaker, and because of it, even the show that brought him to TV screens everywhere doesn't know what to do with him.

Will Adam become an international superstar? He probably has a better chance at it everywhere else, but his home country. The fact that the US does not know how to handle Adam and his presence in the music world proves that while he is very talented, and people know that, it is hard to market an openly gay singer in a world in which propositions taking away his section of the population's rights away. And as for him being a mentor? He will probably do well. No, I don't think he's going to tear someone apart and make them cry, but I honestly believe that if Miley Cyrus could do it, fuck it, so can Adam. It's just disheartening how a TV show, which is supposed to be about, well. Fun, I guess, has become a social commentary for the world and its views toward nonconformist behavior in the music industry and society in general.