god-i-love-theatre
When you win a Tony, I’ve never won one, but I would assume that when you win a Tony, you want it to be for the thing that you feel really took the most heart from you. And that doesn’t happen all the time, but I think a person who loves the craft of this business, the craft of this work, would want to win for something that felt the most rewarding. And I look at something like Nice Work If You Can Get It and of course I would have loved to have won, but it was such a silly, fun, easy role. And here you have Audra McDonald pouring her heart out onstage and acting out a rape scene in Porgy and Bess and you think to yourself, ‘If I won singing ‘Someone to Watch Over Me’ holding a rifle getting laughs, if I won over Audra McDonald singing opera falling on the ground being raped, would that be fair? Would that be, like, artistically fair?’ and you say, ‘No. I’m a smart person, no.’ I did South Pacific, I loved South Pacific. I’m not gonna say that it’s really light fare because I had to journey through some subject matters that were very dark. But that up against, say, Patti LuPone playing Mama Rose where she’s ripping her heart out every night and singing, ‘Everything’s coming up—’ you think, well, no, that’s not it either. It’s not balanced, it’s not weighted. I remember someone like Victoria Clark winning for Light in the Piazza because she had ripped her heart in two every night. So if I ever win a Tony, I want it to be because it feels like I deserved it.
Kelli O’Hara (via norbertleosbutt)
chopsticksandmusic

barrylyga:

andrewstuntpilot:

Shakespeare’s Deaths and Murders infographic, by Caitlin Griffin at Drown My Books.

This was sent to me this afternoon by my former English Lit. tutor. File under: classroom wall displays. 

I was always told that a Shakespearean tragedy basically boils down to “Everyone stab the person to your left.” This is a little more precise.

hannicannibalism

Okay, okay, I’m going to tell you what Hermione sees in Ron.

A trio is a balancing act, right? They’re equalizers of each other. Harry’s like the action, Hermione’s the brains, Ron’s the heart. Hermione has been assassinated in these movies, and I mean that genuinely—by giving her every single positive character trait that Ron has, they have assassinated her character in the movies. She’s been harmed by being made to be less human, because everything good Ron has, she’s been given.

So, for instance: “If you want to kill Harry, you’re going to have to kill me too”—RON, leg is broken, he’s in pain, gets up and stands in front of Harry and says this. Who gets that line in the movie? Hermione.

“Fear of a name increases the fear of the thing itself.” Hermione doesn’t say Voldemort’s name until well into the books—that’s Dumbledore’s line. When does Hermione say it in the movies? Beginning of Movie 2.

When the Devil’s Snare is curling itself around everybody, Hermione panics, and Ron is the one who keeps his head and says “Are you a witch or not?” In the movie, everybody else panics and Hermione keeps her head and does the biggest, brightest flare of sunlight spell there ever was.

So, Hermione—all her flaws were shaved away in the films. And that sounds like you’re making a kick-ass, amazing character, and what you’re doing is dehumanizing her. And it pisses me off. It really does.

In the books, they balance each other out, because where Hermione gets frazzled and maybe her rationality overtakes some of her instinct, Ron has that to back it up; Ron has a kind of emotional grounding that can keep Hermione’s hyper-rationalness in check. Sometimes Hermione’s super-logical nature grates Harry and bothers him, and isn’t the thing he needs even if it’s the right thing, like when she says “You have a saving people thing.” That is the thing that Harry needed to hear, she’s a hundred percent right, but the way she does it is wrong. That’s the classic “she’s super logical, she’s super brilliant, but she doesn’t know how to handle people emotionally,” at least Harry.

So in the books they are this balanced group, and in the movies, in the movies—hell, not even Harry is good enough for Hermione in the movies. No one’s good enough for Hermione in the movies—God isn’t good enough for Hermione in the movies! Hermione is everybody’s everything in the movies.

Harry’s idea to jump on the dragon in the books, who gets it in the movies? Hermione, who hates to fly. Hermione, who overcomes her withering fear of flying to take over Harry’s big idea to get out of the—like, why does Hermione get all these moments?

[John: Because we need to market the movie to girls.]

I think girls like the books, period. And like the Hermione in the books, and like the Hermione in the books just fine before Hollywood made her idealized and perfect. And if they would have trusted that, they would have been just fine.

Would the movies have been bad if she was as awesome as she was in the books, and as human as she was in the books? Would the movies get worse?

She IS a strong girl character. This is the thing that pisses me off. They are equating “strong” with superhuman. To me, the Hermione in the book is twelve times stronger than the completely unreachable ideal of Hermione in the movies. Give me the Hermione in the book who’s human and has flaws any single day of the week.

Here’s a classic example: When Snape in the first book yells at Hermione for being an insufferable know-it-all, do you want to know what Ron says in the book? “Well, you’re asking the questions, and she has to answer. Why ask if you don’t want to be told?” What does he say in the movie? “He’s got a point, you know.” Ron? Would never do that. Would NEVER do that, even before he liked Hermione. Ron would never do that.

Melissa Anelli THROWS IT DOWN about the way Ron and Hermione have been adapted in the movies on the latest episode of PotterCast. Listen here. This glorious rant starts at about 49:00.  (via emilyisobsessed)
anonimaxoxo

imreallybad:

repeat after me: 

  • virginity is a social construct 
  • you don’t lose your virginity 
  • there’s nothing valuable or precious about virginity, it’s an imaginary concept 
  • virginity is inherently heterocentric 
  • your worth is not defined by whether or not you’ve had a dick inside you
  • what you define as sex is up to you, you get to decide how many people you’ve had sex with 
  • the end