Jan. 15th, 2009

Hairspray

Jan. 15th, 2009 11:22 am
jack: (Default)
I recently watched Hairspray, the film of the musical where Tracy Turnblad becomes a dancer on Baltimore's Corny Collins Show against the odds, and becomes emroiled in a drive for black/white integration.

Initially I wasn't very drawn in, but by the end I loved it.

It was fairly gentle. (Apparently the musical was slightly less gentle: eg. we do see Tracy and the others in Jail. And also may have more weird humour.) Despite dire warnings that Tracy would never be on TV again if she got involved in the protest, and everyone being exposed to brutal arrest, you don't get the feeling that's actually likely. (In contrast to the last musical I saw: Chicago.) But it was very uplifting. And I may be slow, but there was at least one twist I didn't anticipate.

It's the only film I can recall seeing where I actually had to get up and dance to it!

I liked the attitudes of the characters. A couple are fired with righteousness, a couple are nasty bad eggs, but most people exemplify "well, I'm generally in favour of righteousness, but I'll just keep my head down and go along with things until I see the wind's definitely blowing the other way", and it felt realistic that there was a spectrum, with most people willing but too shy to do anything about it.

Indeed, I liked the attitude of the teenagers to each other as well. In many films, cool-love-interest and cool-antagonist are in love, and then something dramatic happens, and cool-love-interest and uncool-hero fall in love, etc, etc and it feels cliched and fake and not how people actually behave. Here it felt realistic that cool-love-interest became increasingly dissatisfied with cool-antagonist, and increasingly intrigued with hero, directly after hero did interesting and awesome things.

I liked Tracy. She was overweight, but they didn't slap a pair of glasses on Sandra Bullock and rely on other characters' attitudes to her to convey that she was "supposed to be ugly", and remove the glasses at the appropriate point. Instead, she was actually bulkier than average, and the change from dorky to beautiful was conveyed entirely by her body language.
jack: (Default)
Several friends have been reading their way through various religious books recently. Recently reading some stuff on wikipedia impelled me to skip ahead and start skimming through the gospels. Last time I opened a bible, I didn't even know the basics (Mark probably earliest, Matthew aimed at Jewish Christians, etc,) which I checked out on wikipedia, and having a vague background framework made it easy to at least skim all the way through.

Below is a vague summary of Mark.

* Jesus is a preacher
* Jesus is compared to Elijah and other prophets
* Jesus casts evil spirits out of people
* Jesus performs various other miracles, leading people to say "wow, who is this guy?"
* Jesus commands his disciples to cast evil spirits out of people
* Jesus says sins are forgiven (but so does John?)
* Jesus reaches out to the poor and sinners
* Jesus hints God is on the way, and we need to get our act together
Read more... )
jack: (Default)
I won't try and summarise the background, for it would be too simplified and provoke much correction. If you're as ignorant of early Christian History as I am, you can do worse than starting at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels and reading articles linked from there (though you can presumably do better too).

Just about every combination of relationship between Mark, Matthew, and Luke has been proposed by scholars at some point. (Someone even had an enumeration.) For what it's worth, when I was reading, I bore in mind Matthew and Luke being based on Mark and something else (either both on X, or Luke on Matthew, or some combination).

Small observations:

* Mark presents a generally simple and consistent story, although it lacks a lot of the more detailed accounts of the other gospels. It's very consistent with the idea of Jesus as a wandering preacher like John the Baptist.

Read more... )

Active Recent Entries