State Of Mind: "'Smash': Its Rocky First Season And Its Bright Future"

State Of Mind: "'Smash': Its Rocky First Season And Its Bright Future"

"Fade in on a girl with a hunger for fame and a face and a name to remember." So begins one of the most thrilling show tunes in recent memory. Interestingly enough, it's not from a musical, at least not one on Broadway. It's from "Smash", one of the best shows to premiere in recent memory.

"Smash" is about "Marilyn: The Musical", a fictional Broadway musical about the life and hardships of legendary actress and sex symbol Marilyn Monroe. More specifically, the show details the production end of the musical, from its inception to its casting to rehearsals to its premiere in Boston. The two main characters are Ivy Lynn, a veteran Broadway actress who's ready to sink her teeth into a leading role, and Karen Cartwright, a newcomer who the production team believes may have the chops to star in the show despite her inexperience. Other leads include Julia Houston and Tom Levitt, the show's book writer and composer, Derek Wills, the show's director, and Eileen Rand, the show's producer. The show follows these characters and their hardships as they try to cobble together a show in a unusually short amount of time.

The show's pilot was one of the most critically-acclaimed premieres for a show that I've ever seen, but critical and fan opinion of the show turned sour unbelievably quickly. People thought that the show became too focused on the personal lives of the characters as opposed to on the show. They also thought that the show was too reliant on viewers feeling a certain way and attaching themselves to certain characters. Many people jumped ship as the show decreased in quality. Why do I still watch it then? Why did it get so "bad"? How can they fix it for the now guaranteed second season?

I love this show, even if the pilot was the best episode thus far. The critics are right, though, it is at its best when it's focusing on the musical and its production. Anyone who read my ramblings on "Glee" know that I thought the first thirteen episodes were near perfection, while the rest of the first season was very good, but not quite as good. For "Smash", the first two episodes were "Glee"'s first thirteen, while the first seasons of these two shows as a whole matched up pretty well. The first two episodes of "Smash" focused on the casting of Marilyn Monroe in the musical and made clear the show's focus before it got muddled in personal stories and unimportant side characters. Ivy's cover of "Crazy Dreams" was the perfect capstone to that perfect little arc, with Ivy' s years as a chorus girl paying off and Karen realizing that she still has a ways to go before she gets her chance to shine. It was a fitting end, so what happened?

I was hyped about the third episode. However, that was when the show started getting kinda soap opera-y. New love interests and affairs came rapidly into play. No couple was safe, no matter how stable they had been up to that point. As the season went on, I began to wonder if I had accidentally switched to "Desperate Housewives" with musical numbers. Ironically, plot lines like these are exactly the reason that I've never watched "Desperate Housewives" and shows like it. Therefore, there must have been something special there that kept me watching despite the increasingly ridiculous story lines. I think I can pinpoint, at least for me, the reasons why I kept watching.

The first is the premise. I love Broadway, particularly musicals. To see a show that was this knowledgeable and true to its Broadway roots was like a dream come true.  It was like "Glee" before it sold out and began doing hit songs almost exclusively. It was completely and unabashedly about Broadway, and it consistently contained show tunes (both original and well-known), Broadway actors, and theater references. I love the world that "Smash" puts a spotlight on.

The second is, interestingly enough, the characters. As much as people say that the characters are random and inconsistent, I've found the characters (or at least the performances of the actors portraying them) to be engaging. It's rare that shows elicit as much of a reaction from me as this show does, and I believe that the characters and their actions play a large part in that. Ivy Lynn, no matter what the writers make her do, will always be my favorite character on the show. I think she really does make the better Marilyn, and Megan Hilty deserves an Emmy nomination (at least) for her amazing performance. On the other hand, there's Karen, played by Katherine McPhee. I've liked her a lot more than I thought she would. Even if her character isn't as complex as Ivy, she's still talented and a surprisingly good Marilyn, even if her incorrect body type and pop voice kind of kill the image for me. I love Tom (Christian Borle), Julia (Debra Messing), and their relationship, even if I could do without the intense focus on Julia's love affairs and home life. I even love Derek and Eileen, despite their opposing personalities and apparent divisiveness among the fanbase.

The third, and possibly the most important, is the moments of sheer imagination and awesomeness that shine through the occasional murkiness. The original musical numbers are almost always bright spots, with songs like "Let Me Be Your Star", "Let's Be Bad", "The 20th Century Fox Mambo", "On Lexington and 52nd Street", "Second Hand White Baby Grand", and "Don't Forget Me" being constantly repeated on my iPod. There are also character moments and rehearsal and production scenes that prove that this show has the potential to be the most compelling thing on TV. The show is just too bogged down with the relationships and the personal lives of the characters.

I think the main problem with the show are these personal stories. I understand that personal stories are important and that most of the character dimension and development coming from these subplots, but it was getting kind of ridiculous. I also get some people may want to see what happens in the personal lives of these characters. That's fine, and I admit that I did find myself becoming invested in some of these subplots. It's just that the show got  bit carried away. As the side stories became more and more outlandish, I found myself caring less and less. The show's supposed to be a realistic backstage drama, so realism is key. I don't mind the personal stuff, but they just need to bring it back down to Earth a bit. There is a such thing as a stable relationship, and not everybody sleeps with everybody else.

The show was written and filmed before the first episode aired, so the writers couldn't change anything based on fan reactions and backlash. Therefore, the writers were writing based on assumptions about what viewers would want to see and which characters they would like or be interested in. Ellis was obviously written as the villain viewers would love to hate, but everyone just ended up loathing every second he was on the screen. The writers also assumed that the we would be more interested in Julia's home life than "Bombshell" itself.

Possibly the most egregious error they made, though, was assuming that everyone would be on Karen's side. While it is true that a large portion of viewers did side with Karen for various reasons, a huge part of the fanbase was immovably in Ivy's corner, myself included. This wouldn't have been so bad if the writers had been a bit more subtle, but it was clear from the very beginning that the writer's loved Karen and didn't care much for Ivy. This left viewers with scenes full of characters applauding Karen's unbelievable talent and perfection while Ivy became crazier and more cartoonishly evil with every passing episode. I think the writers actually ended up achieving that exact opposite of what they set out to do. By giving Ivy the short end of the stick in almost every situation, she quickly became a Woobie, and people began feeling sorry for her instead of hating her. Here's a woman who's struggled for her entire life to get where she is today. She's been overshadowed by other, and she has an overbearing mother. Here comes her one chance at the starring role she's waited her entire career for. She even gets the part at first, only to have it ripped away from her by the total newbie who hasn't paid her dues in the business yet. Now, don't get me wrong. I like Katherine McPhee. She has an amazing voice, and she's very pretty. However, I know that even some of her fans admit that she's just not right for Marilyn. She's too tall and thin, and her voice is too "pop". She'd do better in either a different musical or as a pop star. I want success for Karen; I just don't think this musical is a good fit for her.

The news recently came out that certain characters, including Ellis, Frank (Julia's husband), Dev (Karen's boyfriend), and Michael (Julia's lover), will not be returning next season. Personally, I think this is a good omen. Hopefully, this means that the writers are listening to the fans and that there will be more "Bombshell" and fewer personal stories next season. I know that I'll be watching this show until it gets cancelled, even if the second season still has its flaws.

"Smash", you already are my star.

Great Songs From Great Musicals: "How Glory Goes"

Once again, the title of this segment is tested. I've never actually seen "Floyd Collins", the show that this song is from. I haven't even listened to all of the songs (despite the fact that I have the entire soundtrack on my iPod). However, I've heard that the show is great, and, if the rest of it is nearly as good as this song, I'm inclined to agree. 

The musical tells the story of Floyd Collins (crazy, I know), an explorer who gets caught in a narrow crawlway while inside a cave in 1925. His entrapment and the efforts to rescue him become a media frenzy. After a few days during which he can get food and water from the people outside, the cave collapses, leaving him nothing but voice contact from the outside world. This is the final song of the show, sung by Collins as he prepares for his imminent death. It involves him asking God what happens next, what heaven is like, and if there even is a heaven. This song is absolutely beautiful, and it perfectly marks how people would actually react if they realized that they were going to die soon. The song is composed almost completely of questions. Floyd starts out shyly before becoming more agitated near the middle of the song. It's clear that his rapidly approaching demise is beginning to sink in. Near the end, however, he realizes some of the good things that might be waiting for him in heaven, such as his mother. What started out as a series of existential questions becomes a calm acceptance of his fate, and one might even say that Floyd's penchant for exploration excites him even now as he prepares to venture into the unknown. I literally have no criticisms for this song. Performed correctly, this just might be the perfect song. It's sad, triumphant, insightful, emotional, simple, and gorgeous. I almost cry every time I listen to it, and, for those who know me or have read my opinions on the Oscars, that's saying something. What makes this even more moving is that the story of Floyd Collins is real. He really existed, and all of these things really happened to him. That's what makes this song perfect. I can completely imagine exactly this going through his head as he died. When a song can illustrate thought processes and complex emotions as well as this one does, that song deserves all of my praise. My one issue is that the version used in the recording is not the best version that I've heard. While opinions will differ, I just don't like the way the actor on the CD sings it. I prefer this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCYQ3ewIpUs. The orchestration are magnificent, and his voice is just the right mixture of country and showtune. I could go on forever about how much I absolutely adore this song. It's one of those songs that you listen to, and, as soon as it's over, you want to start it over. I try not to listen to it too much because there's no way to spoil something great than by overindulging in it. I'm going to end this now because, at this point, the song can't possibly live up to my praise. Either way, prepare to be incredibly saddened yet compelled to listen to it several times.

State Of Mind: "Film Unoriginality"

I've begun to notice more and more that there are almost no truly original movies coming out right now. Everything is a sequel, remake, or just formulaic.

I understand that there are only so many concretely original storylines in existence and that everything we see as original is really just a riff on a previously done storyline. If that's the case, why are one movie great and another movie terrible if they are both riffs on the same basic story? There are a lot of factors in that, but the most important is presentation. For example, let's take the movies "Avatar" and "Pocahontas". People berated "Avatar" for being "Pocahontas" with blue aliens in space. That may be true, but there are tons of stories like that. Stories of one man entering a new culture and messing with their way of life have been around forever. People seem to immediately deem a somewhat unoriginal idea or storyline as automatically inferior to its predecessor. However, a quick trip to Rotten Tomatoes reveals that "Avatar" got significantly better reviews than "Pocahontas". This may be due, in part, to our nostalgia filters blinding us to the flaws in one of the movies of our childhood. We need to realize that similar doesn't automatically mean worse. Personally, I don't think the story was what "Avatar" was really meant to be about. It was meant to be an experience that brought you to a completely new world. In that respect, I think it succeeded. I saw the movie in 3D IMAX, and I was completely blown away the visuals. Yes, once you look past that the story is silly and the characters are pretty flat, but I still believe that the movie succeeded in what it set out to do. I'd also like to note that, when looked at in the right light, "Finding Nemo" and "Taken" can be viewed in a similar way.

My main issue lies with the remakes and sequels that are made as nothing more than cash-ins on certain properties. The films that continue or retell stories that were fine the first time. Did we really need a new Freddy Krueger or Jason Voorhees? Do we really need to see an old movie again in 3D? Do we really need another "Transformers" movie? And yet, we continue going to these movies for one reason or another. I don't really understand the attraction. I get excited when I see fresh and new ideas being explored on the big screen in new ways. That's one reason why I love Pixar. They can always be counted on to present an original idea in a fresh way. For example, "Up" is about an old man who uses a horde of balloons to fly himself, his house, and a boy scout to Venezuela in order to set the house in the exact spot where his deceased wife would have wanted it. There are also subplots involving the man's childhood hero and his talking dogs and a giant bird's attempts to escape capture. This movie covers themes such as loss, going on without loved ones, and life going on even in old age. These themes have all been done before, but never like this. Name one movie that has a plot synopsis similar to the one I just gave for this movie. The writing, characters, and animation are all beautiful. This movies shows exactly what a creative spin on an old idea can do. It wasn't the second animated film nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars for nothing.

What I'm trying to say is that unoriginality has its good and bad parts. We shouldn't snub a movie just because it's similar to one we've already seen. It's all in the presentation and execution. "Friends With Benefits" was way better than "No Strings Attached", and they're basically the same movie. It's incongruities like that that prove that movies made based on the same idea can have radically different results. I just think that we need to stop supporting all of the terrible sequels and remakes that are coming out that are trying to cash in on our childhoods and don't deserve our money.

After seeing the Hobbit, who is your favourite dwarf?

Thorin is kind of a given, considering that he's such a huge part of the story. The friend that I went with and I had a soft spot for Ori by the end, though. He can be so derpy sometimes that it's really endearing.

Hi. So. I know we've never really talked or anything but I wanted to tell you how much I enjoy reading all of your reviews. Keep doing what you're doing, man!

Thanks so much! That means a lot to me. I'm glad people are enjoying my ramblings. lol