This Kiss, this Kiss

So, over at Afterellen.com people are a-voting the best lesbian kiss in entertainment. Flipping through all the pix and amazingly wonderful characters that have also formed some of my most memorable tv and movie moments (I am not that much of a comic-fan), I not only voted my favorites I also thought about the kisses that I missed there, or the kisses that were especially important to me.

Yeah, I know, not really lesbian that one. But it actually was the thing that made me watch the show because it was the first thing I saw and I didn’t know that it was not a lesbian kiss. It ran hot and cold up and down my spine, and I mainly watched the next episode because I hoped it would be explained to me – both my reaction to a seemingly lesbian kiss and the kiss itself and whether it really was between two women… well, what can I say, I was 18 and a babe in the woods. But this kiss changed my life. It did not make me a lesbian, I also did not discover that I was one but it made me watch Xena: Warrior Princess. If nothing else, it made a fan-grrrl out of me. And I am eternally grateful for that.

I would say that the first lesbian kiss I remember seeing – it could be the first I saw but with all the stuff I saw on tv it’s rather unlikely that it really was – was the one between Kate Winslet and Melanie Lynskey in Heavenly Creatures. The film fascinated me on an obsessive level (not because I saw girls kissing, more because I saw girls killing), I became a heavenly creature (I did not kill anyone but to this day I am convinced there is a fourth dimension… I hope it’s where I go when I die – to spent eternity with Kate Winslet, mostly). The lesbianism in it is disturbing on more than one level (one of these levels is Freudian), it is distructive and clichéed and if you tell me you hate the movie because of it – that’s your prerogative. Still, it was important to me – these two girls made sense to me, their love, their friendship, yes, their madness, too. Let’s face it, sometimes it is maddening to be different, and I certainly knew how that felt.

Tara and Willow. It is strange because I must have actually missed their first kiss. I do know that I did not see every episode of season 5 – because it bored me to pieces. Since I have just watched the whole show (including season 7 which I have not watched before, so now at least I can rightfully jump onto the I-hate-Kennedy-bandwagon), I actually discovered that most of the things I thought happened in season 5 actually happened in season 4 – I must have completely zoned out when 5 was on. I remembered Tara getting brain-slurped by Glory and Buffy jumping to her death, that’s it. But it also held that marvellously disturbing kissing scene when Willow prepares for Joyce’s funeral. Very sensual if your girlfriend sobs into your face, snot and tears running everywhere, very classy. Okay, this was not one of the important kisses – as I said, I didn’t even remember it – but rewatching it, it makes sense: OMG, Willow and Tara-shippers want them to kiss! What are we gonna do?! I know… let them make out during a marvellously traumatic storyline… when someone died or something. We can sell it as a comfort scene, nobody will be the wiser – and thus it was done… RMB when creators of shows had to come up with rediculous storylines like that just to put in a lesbian kiss – crazypants.

But, of course, then there was that massive making-out/having sex scene just before they killed Tara off… putting it like this is not really giving this scene enough credit. But it was wonderfully acted out by both actresses (Alyson Hannigan and Amber Benson). It was important – and they kinda killed the importance along with Tara, implicating that evil lesbians must die and all that crap.

But let’s face it, if it wasn’t for these two and Xena and Gabrielle, Emily and Maya (and Emily and Paige and Emily and Somara) would probably not have happened – not in the way we can see them nowadays.

And kissing is so important, too. I mean, who doesn’t remember last Xmas when twitter was all aglow with lesbian rage when some writer of Glee actually insisted that Brittana had kissed… oh yeah, that kiss! What?! No, they never did. And they didn’t and now they have. I guess, you could say that the Glee-powers handled this badly. They told us these two had sex, these two were casual and then they gave them a lesbian story line and it all ended up being about THE KISS… The ultimate scene was well-handled, refusing to give THE KISS a big, dramatic moment with violins playing in the background. It made fun of the whole discussion surrounding it and then gave us the little peck that was the introduction to the Valentine’s kissing concert that was mostly well-acted by Naya Rivera and Heather Morris.

A kiss is still a kiss – but this one blew every other kiss right out of the water. And I guess it will win since Glee seems to take all the awards these days. Is it my winner? No. I am way beyond my teenage years and it would probably have rocked my world if I had seen it when I was a teenager. I liked it but my favorites are these:

Because these days, it’s all about them… and even months after All My Children ended I am still rewatching Minx-vids.

This movie always depresses me – I cannot fathom how real it feels to me and how lonely I feel when it is over… but I keep rewatching it because it also makes me incredibly, stupidly happy. Just believing there is love like that – yeah, and that kiss.

And, of course, this (yeah, yeah, I know, not an actual kiss, just life-saving measures… but ROC sure got into it pretty good):

Advertisements

Harry Potter 7.2

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 (2011) by David Yates

This is where Potter continues – and ends. And it is as many have said: an era ends. We have all grown up or older with him and his friends and it is sad to see them all go. But if you have to go, go in a blast of fire and rubble and don’t look back, I guess.

First of all, the movie was dark. Those who have thought it was darkest last, have come to know an even darker dark. But it was magnificently shot – just think of that early shot of Snape standing in that window, it was fantastic. The dark figure, the grey backdrop… fantastic.

Finally, we got to see all of Snape’s (Alan Rickman) story and it is a bitter one. Having been in love with Harry’s mom, Lilly, from an early age, he had to watch her falling for that no-good Potter guy. Don’t tell me, you did not feel for him there, it was so sad. And, of course, he was an almost good guy in the way he protected Harry and even killed Dumbledore (Michael Gambon). Well, I was one of those who always thought that the headmaster’s faith in him was not misplaced, so there.

And another one got part of the action: Neville Longbottom (Matthew Lewis). And he is the secret hero of the whole showdown – as he was also in the book. I love the scene where he walks into the middle of the baddies and says: “I am Neville Longbottom.” and everybody laughs but he certainly raises the spirit. Another thing I love with the Harry Potter-franchise is, that I think all actors stuck to it (I think Dumbledore was the only main character who was played by more than one actor – due to Richard Harris’s death). To see those boys and girls grow up. Remember Ginny (Bonnie Wright) from the first movie? I do. And Neville has grown into a man before our eyes – he was always brave but he finally got to be the hero.

While I loved most things about the last installment, there are some things… well, what happened to Hermione Granger (Emma Watson), people? Suddenly, she grows all soft on us and just drools over Ron and tells him how awesome he is? WTF? You know, Hermione is my favorite character (Bellatrix Lestrange is a close second – go figure), and she has always been quite the heroine, someone little girls can look up to. And then she kisses Ron and is turned into his lapdog? Wrong move all together. Because it feels like girls have to be sweet and doleful to get a guy, because Hermione did not get much from Ron when she was always better at everything… it just feels wrong, is all.

I have already mentioned the difficulties I had with taking Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes) seriously. That still holds. Bellatrix (Helena Bonham Carter) was such a great villain, she was so mean, so… evil. And Voldemort never got his s**t together. I mean, he couldn’t even be called evil because he failed at every attempt at it. His minions were always more successful at spreading terror than him. Maybe next time we just need a strong female adversary for our superhero (or preferably superheroine) and not some dude without nose and strange manerisms. Just saying.

All in all, though… it is hard to believe that Harry’s (Daniel Radcliffe) gone, that Hermione’s gone (and a wife and mother – I did not like the ending in the book or in the movie… it’s too heteronormative, and altogether disturbing…), that Ron’s (Rupert Grint) gone. We’ll miss ’em. We will even miss Draco (Tom Felton) and his weirdly colored hair… another thing I would have liked to see (again in the book and the movie): a coming out of the wizarding world. I mean, there has been much that happened in the muggle world that was related to the war between good and evil wizards and you, Joanne K. Rowling, are telling us that after the final battle we have all gone back to normal? Pity that, ’cause how great would it have been if the Hogwarts Train in the end had left from platform 7, instead of 9 3/4?

Oh, one last word to Maggie Smith: KAZOOM, lady, KAZOOM!

X-Men: First Class – a coming-out story

X-Men: First Class (2011) by Matthew Vaughn

It has probably the worst title addition ever (surprisingly enough the additional title of First Class and the German one, Erste Entscheidung, are equally silly, that is a first… usually the German title and addition are much worse than the English ones), but that is no reason not to watch it. I think in my life there is actually only one reason I would not watch a film for: if I don’t like any actor/acress in it. What can I say, I am a judgemental bitch (I actually would like to propose boycots on some actors but that would call for actual active and political engagement on my part and I am not that interested, really).

Luckily for me, you don’t need much background information. Since I had watched the first two movies and the Wolverine-movie, I had some of that which means, I remembered Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen’s characters and that was enough preparation (for those, who hope for an in-depth comparison of comic and film or anything like it: sorry, haven’t read the comics, never will).

Well, it is not a new story: there are mutants, they are different, they are hiding but then the world needs them to prevent a nuclear war (same old, same old). After they have done that the former allies turn on the mutants because they are different. They want to destroy them but that backfires, because… hello!.. THEY ARE MUTANTS! So much for the plot.

Yeah, okay, I oversimplified because there are actually bad mutants and good mutants and there’s also another fight going on between them but, hey, I am a simple kinda… person. So, what with all that hiding and being discriminated against-stuff that is going on, people have suggested that X-Men is really a coming-out story. And, yeah, I mean, great metaphor and all. Do I believe that the mutants are actually all gay? No, but wouldn’t it be fun if they were? Also, I do believe that homos are more evolved than heteros (you just have to look at hetero couples on the street to know that)… we are the next step, people, no wonder everybody is freaking out. So, this part of the story hit home.

Am I being a little sarcastic, here? Yes, so put the stakes away again. I don’t think that any human being is particularly evolved. We are all f**ked up. But I do think that we should all have the same opportunities and rights – but that is just not happening, so it is nice to IMAGINE that we could be better than y’all folks…

And I do think that Emma Frost would be a wonderful addition to our team… Kevin Bacon, well, I love his wife but that’s another story. In all, there is not much to talk about. It is not extraordinary movie-making we are meeting here. I enjoyed the movie, yes, but it falls in line with other forgettable movies. In fact, I have already moved on from watching it last week and can hardly remember anything now. What I remember, is this: it looked good! I love the 60s look of the whole thing and that we get to experience on different continents and to different nationalities. Very nice. Yet, with the 60s looks comes the 60s sexism and no matter how evolved even mutants indulge in that one. Ouch!

Then, I remember the silliest one gesture that a character has accomplished since Picard:

And… Rose Byrne. I don’t even remember where I know her from but has she ever been this hot before?

Also, the German that was being spoken was without grammatical errors which is a rare occasion but everybody supposedly German had a thick accent of some kind… in their German. Just cast German actors next time, maybe?

Scream 4 – Still standing!

Scream 4 (2011) by Wes Craven

(I will not reveal who is behind the mask, you have to find that out for yourself.)

The first time I heard about Scream 4, I was actually excited. And that is surprising because generally I think that enough is enough already, leave well enough alone, stop while you’re ahead. In other words, sequels don’t give me the thrills. Why is Scream different? Well, for once it’s part of the horror genre and for me that means: there are no rules. I came to the genre at the age of ten (when I read my first Stephen King novel), but didn’t know that I was actually beginning to love a genre. I thought, I just liked that author… so I discovered pretty late that I loved horror movies and Scream was one of the reasons I did. I never watched a Scream-movie at the movies only on dvd, so this was also an opportunity to have the Scream-experience.

I confess that I did not expect much of this movie. I was excited, yes, but I knew it could go either way: awesome or horrible, and the many possibilities in-between. I was not disappointed, though. I liked it. It was like meeting an old friend after a decade has gone by and you find out that you could still talk to one another for hours on end and even if you were never to meet again, the meeting was not for nothing.

 So, Sidney Prescott is back in Woodsboro, and so is Ghost Face. A lot of people get killed, film theory gets another chapter, and we wonder for roughly 111 minutes who is behind the mask – and where Dewey’s pronounced limp has gone.

This is the first time I realized how many female characters inhabit the Scream-series (I might write a blog post just about that but I think I would have to watch the other movies again before I do) and especially this installment. Of course, we have Neve Campbell and Courtney Cox reprising their roles of the classic trilogy. But then we have Emma Roberts, Hayden Panettiere, Marley Shelton, and Alison Brie. And they are great in their respective roles (though none is as absolutely awesome as Hayden Panettiere as Kirby… and I think Kirby is gay, I don’t care that she almost made out with a Culkin, she was drunk… what, other girls get drunk and kiss girls, she gets drunk and kisses guys, I think that says it all, also she so checked out Sidney!).

I was also thrilled to see Neve Campbell and Courtney Cox again. Of course, Courtney Cox is doing that rather annoying sitcom (surprisingly enough I am not talking about Friends, though I would have used the same terminology for it), but who’s honestly watching that? But what has Neve Campbell been up to since “The Company”? (Nothing worth mentioning, unfortunatelty, I just looked it up.)

You can say now that I am easily pleased and maybe I am, but I am a nostalgic person. And seeing a franchise revived without it being totally ruined is pleasing to me. And I love how Ghost Face always gets smacked around by everyone. I have just read that there are talks about Scream 5 and I already know that I will be totally there, even if just for the fun of having made film theory made cool.

Red Riding Hood – she’s not little anymore

Red Riding Hood (2011) by Catherine Hardwicke

That’s what I watched last night and am not even sure why (my movie habits are out of control these days probably because I am waiting for “Scream 4” – which opens today, finally). The trailer looked okay and I am always interested in how old legends/myths/fairy tales are being reproduced in out time and age. I guess that is a good reason.

What almost kept me from watching this was “From the director of Twilight.” I watched it, I didn’t like it. On the other hand, had the poster said “From the director of Thirteen” it would have been another story entirely and Catherine Hardwicke has made both these movies.

The original story has been changed: the wolf is now a werewolf and it terrorizes a whole village. The village in which Valerie (Amanda Seyfried) lives with her parents (Billy Burke, Virginia Madsen) and sister. Said sister is promptly the first victim in the movie. Valerie is devastated and the village people set out to kill the wolf. They kill something, too, unfortunately it is not the werewolf they had aimed for but just a common wolf. They are informed of this by Father Solomon (Gary Oldman), a self-proclaimed expert who has killed a werewolf who then turned out to have been his wife. He has come to the village to help but turns out to be a despotic nuisance who spreads paranoia among the villagers and finally claims that Valerie is a witch because she can talk to the wolf. The wolf wants Valerie to come with him, which narrows the suspects down to Val’s two suitors – the man she loves, Peter (Shiloh Fernandez), and the man she is supposed to marry, Henry (Max Irons).

Solomon sets a trap but things get jumbled and he is bitten by the beast which leads to his death as one of his men kills him, using the same reasoning Solomon has used as he killed the man’s brother, “A man bitten is a man cursed.”

Valerie meanwhile sets out to her grandmother’s (Julie Christie) to find out who the real beast is and kills him in the end. Only, her love is bitten by the werewolf in the final battle and becomes a werewolf. So, no happy ending.

The movie looked a little like The Brothers Grimm meets Twilight but that is not necessarily a bad thing since they are visually quite interesting. Unfortunately, the story did not make it into that realm since Hardwicke gave away the identity of the werewolf too early, at least if you’re observant you find out quite easily. The references to the old fairy tale are amusing and the changes thought through quite well. Yet, what remains of the fairy tale is the partriarchal narrative of men’s angst of female sexuality and thus Valerie remains a virgin. Marriage does not turn out to be all it promised and the killing is set into motion by infidelity. I came out of the movie a little confused and a little disappointed because on the surface it is a good movie, if you look closer the story is quite disturbing in it’s old-fashioned views and thus reminded me of the whole Twilight-franchise. It values the same hidden messages: no sex before marriage, man is beast, woman best remains a virgin, blah blah. I know that this is classic fairy tale narrative but we live in the year 2011. Would it have hurt to put in a little self-empowerment for women? Would it have hurt to not put in any lesbian titillation – that was as that totally out of place AND character? And would it have hurt to integrate people of color and not have them pose as “the other”?

There’s no doubt the movie has some good acting in it. Especially Julie Christie as grandmother is fantastic – a little new age but at that time and place with the underlying promise of witchcraft. Unfortunately, that does not make the underlying messages any less dangerous and old-fashioned.

Book vs. Film – The Wives of Bath vs. Lost and Delirious

The Wives of Bath (1993) by Susan Swan

Lost and Delirious (2001) by Léa Pool

I love films but, incidentally, literature has always been my more cherished first love. If there is a way to combine these two passions of mine, I am always already hooked to the idea. I am not sure when I first saw Lost and Delirious. Have I read about it somewhere and ordered the dvd hoping it was good? Have I accidently come across it on tv? Was it something somebody told me to watch? I don’t remember but I certainly do remember that the first time I watched it I read that it was based on the book The Wives of Bath – and yes, I am one of those weird people that read the credits, opening and closing. And I am saying “based on” here because the film says it is “based on” not “inspired by,” which would probably have been the better description. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves here.

(that is the German dvd-cover, by the way, I like it)

I love the movie. Yes, I know it is not so easy to work through like a good lesbian comedy, but I still think it is worth our while. It tells the story of a shakespearean love, passionate love, a love lost becomes delirious. Strangely enought the narrator of the story is not one of the two lovers. It is Mouse Bedford (Mischa Barton), who has been shipped off to boarding school by her evil step-mother and rooms with Paulie (Piper Parabo) and Tori (Jessica Paré). Paulie and Tori are in love (they are not lesbians, they just love each other).

When some younger students, among them Tori’s little sister, surprise Tori and Paulie in bed with each other, Tori tells her sister that Paulie slipped into bed with her without her knowing and that Paulie has a crush on her but that she herself is totally into guys. She breaks up with Paulie and Paulie snaps. In the end we have another dead lesbian and the dignity of outrageous rightousness on our side, a bitter sweet ending that once again confirms that life is not fair.

(there is actually a different book by the same title out there, so make sure you get a copy of the book by Susan Swan)

The book is another matter. Mouse Bradford (yes, the movie makers changed the last names of the three main characters, although the German dvd-cover actually says Mary Bradford, not Bedford – probably just to say that we also know the book and not just the movie, we are snobbish that way) is shipped off to boarding school by her step-mother, but she is not evil, nor is her father quite the touchy kind that he is in the movie. And it is mostly her relationship to her father – or lack thereof – we are told of (the movie puts more emphasize on the mother-daughter relationship of both Mouse and Paulie). Morley is a doctor who works too much and Mouse worries about him but not enough as it turns out that Morley later dies of a heart attack.

Although Paulie and Tori do have a relationship, Paulie disguizes herself as Paulie’s brother Lewis to be with her beloved and it is not quite clear if Tori knows that Paulie and Lewis are the same person (I would argue that she knew but that it really did not matter to her much). The case of Paulie is more complicated as Paulie sees herself as a boy – and the fact that Lewis is working on the school’s premises as a caretaker proves that she is very good at passing. Tori’s brother Rick raises suspicion that Lewis might not be a boy and in order to prove that he is, Paulie kills the caretaker Sergeant to get his genitals. She is declared insane in court.

Although the names of the characters are quite consistent, the book and the film tell two completely different stories. The characters themselves are very different. Mary “Mouse,” for example, has a hump in the book, while Mary “Mouse” in the film is merely a little younger and very shy. The imagery is also completely different. While movie maker Léa Pool works with images of Shakespearean gallantry and nativism, which finally reasolves in Paulie’s rebirth as animal/bird, the book’s central image is the mighty “King Kong” and Tori substitutes for the white woman. Susan Swan paints the picture of a transgendered FTM, and in Mouse’s flashbacks to the trial she defies Freudian theory of penis envy and declares that one does not have to have a penis to make a woman happy, that only man think one has to have one. Swan does not merely draw a picture of a lesbian love that cannot survive heteronormative conventions but a picture of plurality within “lesbian” experience – or maybe “queer” would be the better word here.

The times the stories play out in are also completely different. The book takes place around the event of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, while the film seems to be located cosily in the 1990s. The disparity is great. But both book and movie are worth reading and re-reading, watching and re-watching.

Back to tv: South of Nowhere

You may not know this but I loved South of Nowhere – or as little of it as I was able to download from the net. I have only watched the first season but it was a great show that unfortunately only made it through three seasons.

This was a show that never made it to the German tv screens and it really is a shame because as far as drama goes, and teenage struggles, and sexuality among teenagers, it was really good. The good news is, they want to make a movie out of the show and they (cast and crew) want you to watch these two videos – that is, 100.000 of you until April 27 (thank you to afterellen.com).

So, here you go, watch:

and:

Well, I hope the movie will come, this all looks really good (I can’t fathom how much I missed those characters – except for Glenn, of course).

Never Let Me Go

Never Let Me Go (2010) by Mark Romanek

Unexpectedly, I watched a really good movie this week. Why unexpectedly? Because I watch movies for the strangest of reasons. For Never Let Me Go the reason was that the novel it was based on was written by Kazuo Ishiguro and I remembered that he had also written The Remains of the Day. Not that I have read either novel but I do believe that some novelists write perfect stories for movies and I guess Ishiguro is one of them – all based on the fact that I love The Remains of the Day.

I did not read the short synopsis for the film so I was utterly unprepared for what was to come. The movie catapults us into a strange ultimate universe – without telling us so, after all everything looks just like good ol’ Britain to me – where clones are bred as inventories for human spare parts. The kids that grow up to be donors live in special homes out in the country without interaction with the outside world.

The story follows three of these kids, Kathy (Carey Mulligan), Ruth (Keira Knightley), and Tommy (Andrew Garfield), whose lives are interwoven as they befriend and fall in love with each other. Ruth turns out to be rather selfish in that love since she pretty much steals Tommy away from Kathy out of – as she later confesses – jealousy. Though she states that she was jealous of the love that grew between Kathy and Tommy there are also indications that she may have been in love with Kathy (I don’t know what the novel says about this but I may yet find out…).

As they grow up their paths devide but will ultimately reunite the three. Ruth makes her confession and Kathy and Tommy try to recapture what they had. But their time is short as they are heading toward their conclusion – which is just a nicer way to say: death.

The story is captivating, the idea of a world where humans breed clones for spare parts is scary but is never really moralized over within the movie, the spectator is to draw their own conclusions as to the question: do clones have souls?

The acting is great. Besides the wonderful three leads (and also the very talented younger selfs – Isobel Meikle-Small, Ella Purnell, Charlie Rowe) we have Charlotte Rampling as Miss Emily who leads the home the three live in, and Sally Hawkins as Miss Lucy, a teacher who critiques the system a little bit too audibly. And let me tell you, Keira Knightley can be quite scary!

This is a great movie and finally an innovative story. Hollywood does not do innovative that much these days so maybe we have to turn to Brititsh movie making to see something good these days…

RMB: Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Back in the days I have probably watched each Buffy-episode only once… except for the sixth season which I have on cds (yes, cds). Now I have just watched the first season and man, how much one forgets. For example, that you can get addicted to a show like Buffy.

Even with all this hair (there’s really a lot of hair in those first twelve eps) it is a great show. Sure, it is pretty much “demon of the week” mentality but the legendary one-liners (each and every one you could print on a t-shirt), the chemistry, the nerdiness… and rewatching I even like Angel (a little).

I never liked Angel – or Cordelia for that matter – and I was actually relieved when he got his own show which I never watched. And when he took Cordelia and that weird Windham-Price (was that even his name?) with him I was really glad.

But back to Buffy. I spent the last few days watching the first season and it was great – I said that already. But what really got to me was the chemistry between Buffy and Willow. I actually see some subtext there… weird since every time they talk to each other it’s about “boys.” Maybe it’s about the way Willow pronounces “boys” – is she trying to convince herself that this topic might interest her? Then again knowing Willow’s way this kind of thinking is probably not surprising.

Well, this is also the first time I am watching the first season in English and I am as always amazed at how much better it is to the German dubbing (not that it was bad in this case, it is actually okay other than with Xena which was mainly horrible – the translation was, the voices were okay). With Buffy there are so many popcultural references and you don’t get all of them in the German translation.

I am looking forward to watching the whole show again although that won’t be for some time since money is always a factor (I hate it when they not only make the dvd boxes expensive but on top of that make two boxes out of one season – I am not sure they do this elsewhere but they do it in Germany, it sucks.

I am looking forward to meeting Faith again, and Tara… some of the greatest stories already come back to haunt me and I would like to watch them all right now… and then there is always season 7 which I have yet to watch. Did I mention that I never watched season 7 (except for the first three episodes)? Well, Whedon killed off Tara in season 6 and so I lost interest. I am loyal like that and it was not like anybody except Buffy ever came back from the dead (okay, many others did come back but it was usually as vampires and that did not make them quite immortal with Buffy around, if you know what I mean)… Tara was my favorite at the time, I had already lost Faith…

Well, it is good reminiscing every once in a while. Now I am going back to my paper. It’s Sunday, a good day to going back to something you have once loved, whether just remembering it, or maybe re-watching it. Sometimes it is also good to remember that tv did not always suck (pun intended).

Back to TV: Glee

It has been some time since  I first wrote about Glee and I may not be as undevidedly positive about it anymore. But I still like it a lot and I especially liked it today (living in Germany has its drawbacks especially when it comes to TV, let me tell you). I like how tv can emotionally drain you and Tuesday’s episode of “Glee” did just that: it drained me. Or more acurately this face

broke my heart.

Y’know, I never liked Santana much. Sure, she is hot, and her story line with Brittany was always a lesbian highlight, still… Santana, too bitchy, too typically bi-curious. And then she came out as “don’t put a label on me” and it just got to me.

Two weeks ago I had a blog entry about “Glee” planned. It was entirely Rachel’s fault, seeing her in flannel made me think about her sexuality and on how gay she really is. So I thought about how gay the show was and how gay every single one of the characters was and I actually made a gay-meter (no, I do not have any other hobbies, I fill my time with thinking about how gay tv show characters are… not really, only when I cannot sleep). And guess what, Santana actually scored lower than Rachel while Brittany was just topped by Kurt (I did not include Blaine since he’s not at McKinley). Well, I guess I was wrong about Santana…

Several times after having watched the episode this morning I have thought back on that heartbroken face and it actually made me incredibly sad. I never thought Santana could do that to me but I guess it is a credit to Naya Rivera’s acting skills and in moments like this I appreciate acting and the significance it has within culture – and that culture as thus has value in my life.

Glee is a great show. Maybe I am going to come back to it and write about it’s sociological value as comment on today’s (American) society but today I just want to say that it made me feel – as trivial as that may sound – and I am grateful to be able to hold on and cherish this (I get so sappy sometimes but I am sure you know what I am talking about).