Ohjelmistovalinnoista
1 year ago
Friday, 28 October 2011
The fine line between brilliance and silliness
Valentino's Valentina perfume ad featuring Freja Beha Erichsen.
Lancôme Trésor's Midnight Rose perfume ad featuring Emma Watson.
Yes, I spend sursprisingly a lot of time analysing ads. Perfume ads (along with car ads) are usually the ones that play on aspiration and 'artsy feel' so much that they end up just being silly. However I have to admit that, every now they turn out to be absolutely brilliant. Which is which?
Saturday, 22 October 2011
Sometimes I wonder
Sometimes I wonder if it's all worth it. You know with school, university and getting a degree.
If you haven't gone through university, I'm afraid you can't possibly understand the incredible internal struggle it puts you through. There's not only the physical efforts such as setting aside time and effort to study but the psychological efforts you have to exert just to be able to deal with everything that comes with higher learning.
Believe me, making yourself sit down and study for exams is just one little fraction of that cerebral civil war which constantly goes on in your head.
Not only do you have to exert a ridiculously high amount of (in my case) physiological efforts to be sociable to fellow students and/or colleagues, you also have to battle with constant pressure to do extra curricular activities to boost your worthless CV. What's most psychologically demanding is however coming to terms with having to deal and produce coursework and exams which demand things you're light years away from being capable to deliver.
The overwhelmingness and feelings of insufficiency (not to mention during a long period of time) beats your brain up. It simply drains you. It drains the hell out of you.
People who don't have a degree survive, right? Despite their obvious disadvantages, they still live on, don't they? Yes, I have the opportunity to get a much better job than they do. But enduring three years of intense psychological battles (which probably will leave me slightly mentally disturbed) to gain a degree from an university that's - let's just say - neither Oxford or Cambridge, just to get this 'opportunity', is it really worth it?
If you haven't gone through university, I'm afraid you can't possibly understand the incredible internal struggle it puts you through. There's not only the physical efforts such as setting aside time and effort to study but the psychological efforts you have to exert just to be able to deal with everything that comes with higher learning.
Believe me, making yourself sit down and study for exams is just one little fraction of that cerebral civil war which constantly goes on in your head.
Not only do you have to exert a ridiculously high amount of (in my case) physiological efforts to be sociable to fellow students and/or colleagues, you also have to battle with constant pressure to do extra curricular activities to boost your worthless CV. What's most psychologically demanding is however coming to terms with having to deal and produce coursework and exams which demand things you're light years away from being capable to deliver.
The overwhelmingness and feelings of insufficiency (not to mention during a long period of time) beats your brain up. It simply drains you. It drains the hell out of you.
People who don't have a degree survive, right? Despite their obvious disadvantages, they still live on, don't they? Yes, I have the opportunity to get a much better job than they do. But enduring three years of intense psychological battles (which probably will leave me slightly mentally disturbed) to gain a degree from an university that's - let's just say - neither Oxford or Cambridge, just to get this 'opportunity', is it really worth it?
Thursday, 6 October 2011
Off mode
The first week back at Uni is almost over (only have the longest day to look forward to tomorrow) and what's the verdict? I have none because I've been too busy studying. Really, I've been studying everyday of this week. To be honest it was a pretty difficult to get back to the studying again (euphemisn for trying to make myself stop being on Tumblr 12hrs a day), but I did what I have to do.
So I was writing a review of the 25th Anniversary concert of Phantom of The Opera from Sunday. You know the glacial pace I work on these things but my plan was to have it done by Tuesday. But then out of nowhere my Reporting and Journalism teacher just threw us out on the street to find a story, write it and send to him before the end of the day. So that totally screwed up my plan, and with the review being outdated now, should I even bother?
So I was writing a review of the 25th Anniversary concert of Phantom of The Opera from Sunday. You know the glacial pace I work on these things but my plan was to have it done by Tuesday. But then out of nowhere my Reporting and Journalism teacher just threw us out on the street to find a story, write it and send to him before the end of the day. So that totally screwed up my plan, and with the review being outdated now, should I even bother?
Thursday, 29 September 2011
The longest Les Mis write up ever seen
For you Les Mis fans out there, here's a more elaborate analysis (probably very long one) of the Malmö production. So if you don't have all day, here's the shorter review.
The music
Although most of it had the orchestration from the Stockholm 1990 recording and to a greater extent also the original London recording, there are also a few snippets of newer settings. So if you're a fan of the original interval in Sörjande Kvinnor (Turning) and the longer version of Little people (which nowadays are limited to 2 lines), then this is going to be very much to your pleasing. As I’m a (frantic) fan of the 25th anniversary orchestrations, I wasn’t too crazy about the settings.
Having prepped myself with the lyrics from the Stockholm recording, I wasn’t exactly over the moon when I realised they had changed about half of them. Why they did so on the other hand is questionable. Changing “Sången om unga arga män” to “Sången om arga unga män” (in Folkets sång/Do You Hear..) or ”Fast jag vet, jag vet att han är blind” to ”Fast jag ser, jag ser att han är blind” (in För Mig Själv/On My Own), don’t make any difference in my opinion.
The Malmö prod. is four times more choreographed than the West End production. Every scene with the ensemble is meticulously choreographed, often with the ensemble moving in unison to the beat. This is especially stunning in a segment in Se Ner (Look Down), in which the ensemble squeezes tightly together and slowly stretches out their arms in different directions to symbolise their miserable begging.
While most of it is visually stunning, the choreographed moves limit the acting a great deal. For example, I love watching the Master of the House scene in the WE prod. because it’s interesting watching what each guest is doing as well as all the scams Thénardier are pulling on their customers. All of this is almost gone in the scene in the Malmö prod. because the cast follows a choreography.
The costumes
Historical correctness is a foreign concept here. Forget the crepes, cravats and high neck shirts and say hello to leather corset dresses, wine-red floor sweeping coats, bare arms and 18th century wigs. Still, the periodically incorrectness and gothic costumes works well in the musical, as it accentuate the modernisation of the musical - and frankly they’re just so darn beautiful.
The music
Although most of it had the orchestration from the Stockholm 1990 recording and to a greater extent also the original London recording, there are also a few snippets of newer settings. So if you're a fan of the original interval in Sörjande Kvinnor (Turning) and the longer version of Little people (which nowadays are limited to 2 lines), then this is going to be very much to your pleasing. As I’m a (frantic) fan of the 25th anniversary orchestrations, I wasn’t too crazy about the settings.
Having prepped myself with the lyrics from the Stockholm recording, I wasn’t exactly over the moon when I realised they had changed about half of them. Why they did so on the other hand is questionable. Changing “Sången om unga arga män” to “Sången om arga unga män” (in Folkets sång/Do You Hear..) or ”Fast jag vet, jag vet att han är blind” to ”Fast jag ser, jag ser att han är blind” (in För Mig Själv/On My Own), don’t make any difference in my opinion.
The choreography
 |
| Se Ner Photo: Malin Arnesson |
While most of it is visually stunning, the choreographed moves limit the acting a great deal. For example, I love watching the Master of the House scene in the WE prod. because it’s interesting watching what each guest is doing as well as all the scams Thénardier are pulling on their customers. All of this is almost gone in the scene in the Malmö prod. because the cast follows a choreography.
 |
| Leathers galore Photo: Malin Arnesson |
Historical correctness is a foreign concept here. Forget the crepes, cravats and high neck shirts and say hello to leather corset dresses, wine-red floor sweeping coats, bare arms and 18th century wigs. Still, the periodically incorrectness and gothic costumes works well in the musical, as it accentuate the modernisation of the musical - and frankly they’re just so darn beautiful.
Besides the white baby doll dresses for the prostitutes, there is another major costume arrangement blunder. Imagine a 70s punk rocker; the green fitted jacket (with pins on the collar), the tulle skirt, the combat boots and as a cherry on the top add a giant green bow on the head. That is Éponine my friend, yes Éponine.
The scenes
The scene that bothers me most is Sköna Damer (Lovely ladies). I’m not a big fan of Lovely Ladies in general but I really don’t like how they’ve changed the whole tone of the scene in this production. Instead of having the prostitutes sing the song (which is really the whole point of the song), it's the madams/pimpettes (plus the occasional nuns who acts as pimpettes-confusing yes), the pimp and (correct me if I'm wrong) the buyers who sings it. With the graphic poses, ruthless buyers, the madams tugging on their prostitutes and their empty facial expressions, the scene accentuates on how miserable and forced the prostitutes are, making the whole scene very raw and sinister. While this may be more accurate to the real situation, I miss the sassy and confident lovely ladies in the WE production (but perhaps it's just my prude talking).
Although I was hugely disappointed with Herre I Sitt Hus (Master of the House), since it's one of my favourite scenes in the WE production, there are some additions to the scene that I liked. I love how they've given young Éponine's a bigger role. She's the ginger ball of frizz among the dozens of grey drunkards (all looking like they're in a zombie version of Cats). Being present in the entire scene I keep eyeing back to her and love seeing her play with her doll, be repulsed by a guest offering her wine and so on.
A scene in the Malmö prod. that I prefer over the WE one, yes hold on to your hat, is the Sewer scene. Adding Madame Thénardier to the scene and having her picking the pockets of the dead students makes Thénardier's Hund Äter Hund (Dog Eats Dog) more eventful and less dull. I absolutely love her playing dead when Valjean approaches with Marius on his back. The interaction between the Thénadiers in the scene is simply golden.
The characters
Éponine - Despite her disastrous new attire (it's difficult to take her seriously because of it), I do like the character changes they've made. She's more like brick-Nancy Sullivan-Éponine; carefree, radiant and bratty. I like that she helps the Thénardiers to beg in The Robbery and how she messes with Marius' hair and thinks (sings) he's peculiar.
For me, it's a logical development of her character, I don't like the Disneyfied and silly Éponine you see so often nowadays. (Yes,the whole love triangle is very sweet and touching, but is there no way to have both?). Still I don't think Ida Högberg delivered this Éponine very well, I never really felt that she was in love with Marius which in turn takes away all the sentimentality from A Little Fall of Rain.
Marius - I extremely disliked Philip Jalmelid's Marius when I first saw this production, because he's practically the opposite of brick Marius (whom I'm very fond of). He's easygoing, playful and very expressive (I'm talking about spinning around out of joy). However in the last show (I saw) I started to think he was quite charming and he does the awkward part quite well (the awkward wave to Cosette is precious!).
There's no reason why a character who's nothing like its brick-self can't be brilliant and I'm sure that Philip will become more and more convincing the more shows he does. (He doesn't have an understudy so he ought to)
Enjolras - I said in my review that I liked Anders Gjönnes as Enjolras, but after 2 more shows I'm not sure anymore. The Malmö prod's Enjolras is very different from the WE one who's very idealistic, serious and inspirational. Enjolras is now a wild and vulnerable character who, during the the battles, seem to enjoy the fighting, perhaps a bit too much. He doesn't come across as someone who's burning for liberty and freedom of the people, just someone who wants to stuck up his nose to the bourgeois.
Not only are the students reduced in number but also in clothing (the whole bunch of them run around bare armed and with very tight revealing pants). Together with lack of passion, you simply don't believe in them and it's clearer than ever that they're going to lose the battle even before it has started.
Grantaire - Having been introduced to Gleen Daniel Nilsson (played Marius in the Finnish-Swedish production in Åbo), I had an extra eye on him during the whole show (his foreman is perfectly sleazy and cruel). Out of all the characters portrayed in this prod. he's a close first to Fred Johanson's Javert, very close!
His Grantaire has no interest in the revolution whatsoever, he even crinkles a flyer Courfeyrac hands him. It's clear that he's there for one purpose and one purpose only-Enjolras. Seeing him admire (I'd like to use the word 'fangir'l but that would seem a unprofessional), on the brink of squealing, Enjolras in Folkets Sång (Do You Hear..), put a huge smile on my face. He's adorable! I like that he's less of "the drinker" and more of "the disbeliever" in this prod. I also love his relationship with Gavroche and that he's the one catching Gavroche when he dies.
Thénardier- Peter Harrysson as I said is rather worthless as Thénardier. However his understudy David Lindquist is GOLDEN (notice the caps)! He does the comedic character absolutely spot on. Being the opposite to Harrysson, Lindquist is all over the place; dancing, standing on chairs, waving with his arms etc. I like the fact that he actually hears Madame Thénardier telling (singing) her part in Herre i Sitt Hus (Master of The House) and becomes upset but disregard it as soon as the guests sings "his tune" again. He's without a doubt the funniest Thénardier I've seen.
And lastly, if anyone gets the symbolism behind the Wolf, please let me know!
Although I was hugely disappointed with Herre I Sitt Hus (Master of the House), since it's one of my favourite scenes in the WE production, there are some additions to the scene that I liked. I love how they've given young Éponine's a bigger role. She's the ginger ball of frizz among the dozens of grey drunkards (all looking like they're in a zombie version of Cats). Being present in the entire scene I keep eyeing back to her and love seeing her play with her doll, be repulsed by a guest offering her wine and so on.
A scene in the Malmö prod. that I prefer over the WE one, yes hold on to your hat, is the Sewer scene. Adding Madame Thénardier to the scene and having her picking the pockets of the dead students makes Thénardier's Hund Äter Hund (Dog Eats Dog) more eventful and less dull. I absolutely love her playing dead when Valjean approaches with Marius on his back. The interaction between the Thénadiers in the scene is simply golden.
The characters
 |
| (Left) Ida Högberg, Mathilda Ahnell, Philip Jalmelid Photo: Malin Arnesson |
For me, it's a logical development of her character, I don't like the Disneyfied and silly Éponine you see so often nowadays. (Yes,the whole love triangle is very sweet and touching, but is there no way to have both?). Still I don't think Ida Högberg delivered this Éponine very well, I never really felt that she was in love with Marius which in turn takes away all the sentimentality from A Little Fall of Rain.
Marius - I extremely disliked Philip Jalmelid's Marius when I first saw this production, because he's practically the opposite of brick Marius (whom I'm very fond of). He's easygoing, playful and very expressive (I'm talking about spinning around out of joy). However in the last show (I saw) I started to think he was quite charming and he does the awkward part quite well (the awkward wave to Cosette is precious!).
There's no reason why a character who's nothing like its brick-self can't be brilliant and I'm sure that Philip will become more and more convincing the more shows he does. (He doesn't have an understudy so he ought to)
Enjolras - I said in my review that I liked Anders Gjönnes as Enjolras, but after 2 more shows I'm not sure anymore. The Malmö prod's Enjolras is very different from the WE one who's very idealistic, serious and inspirational. Enjolras is now a wild and vulnerable character who, during the the battles, seem to enjoy the fighting, perhaps a bit too much. He doesn't come across as someone who's burning for liberty and freedom of the people, just someone who wants to stuck up his nose to the bourgeois.
Not only are the students reduced in number but also in clothing (the whole bunch of them run around bare armed and with very tight revealing pants). Together with lack of passion, you simply don't believe in them and it's clearer than ever that they're going to lose the battle even before it has started.
Grantaire - Having been introduced to Gleen Daniel Nilsson (played Marius in the Finnish-Swedish production in Åbo), I had an extra eye on him during the whole show (his foreman is perfectly sleazy and cruel). Out of all the characters portrayed in this prod. he's a close first to Fred Johanson's Javert, very close!
His Grantaire has no interest in the revolution whatsoever, he even crinkles a flyer Courfeyrac hands him. It's clear that he's there for one purpose and one purpose only-Enjolras. Seeing him admire (I'd like to use the word 'fangir'l but that would seem a unprofessional), on the brink of squealing, Enjolras in Folkets Sång (Do You Hear..), put a huge smile on my face. He's adorable! I like that he's less of "the drinker" and more of "the disbeliever" in this prod. I also love his relationship with Gavroche and that he's the one catching Gavroche when he dies.
Thénardier- Peter Harrysson as I said is rather worthless as Thénardier. However his understudy David Lindquist is GOLDEN (notice the caps)! He does the comedic character absolutely spot on. Being the opposite to Harrysson, Lindquist is all over the place; dancing, standing on chairs, waving with his arms etc. I like the fact that he actually hears Madame Thénardier telling (singing) her part in Herre i Sitt Hus (Master of The House) and becomes upset but disregard it as soon as the guests sings "his tune" again. He's without a doubt the funniest Thénardier I've seen.
And lastly, if anyone gets the symbolism behind the Wolf, please let me know!
Tuesday, 27 September 2011
Going back day
 |
| Goodbye Malmö. Photo: Me |
Toodles, see you all back in Londonland!
