Okay but the new gbf event, literally going to cry. I stayed up to read it last night (er this morning at 3 am), bc I was excited about it being a sequel to Together In Song. I loved Together in Song, that event fucking crushed my hear (also shipping Elta with Caro). This new event was SO GOOD. I LOVE CANTATE. WHAT THE FCUK WHAT A BABY. HER PASSION AND ANGER AND FRUSTRATION AND STRUGGLE AND LOVE. What a wonderful character. I really wanted to start crying when she was so happily and excitedly info dumping about violins and Selfira was genuinely interested and enjoying listening. I need to ship this so bad. Like, I usually don’t go to hard for ships that seem mostly wholesome, but god. You can’t tell me not to hc Cantate as autistic, like there is no way I won’t. I want Selfira to meet Cantate again and for them to make music together and fall in love and ;ojlhkgjhfdghjhjgfdsfgh

more under the cut because i take issue with some of the ending of the event and started ranting about it lol

The only issue I had with the story was the ending with the “see the price is important so your instruments will be bought by professionals who can play well and bring joy to listeners.” Like whoa, I’m sorry lol, hold the fuck up. Please tell me why conflating wealth with skill (and talent as much as I hate the word talent, bc it’s often used to overlook the hard work people have put in to honing their skill lol) is a good and accurate idea. Like people who are poorer are incapable of being extremely skilled in music, what the fck gbf? Like I get the issue of don’t price your skill so slow because you put so much work into your ability. Your skill’s have value and unfortunately in a capitalistic society money is required to survive. It is her profession. In a perfect world it could just be a hobby and I think there should be zero issue letting her give instruments away for as cheap as possible. Let her do what she wants. And it was important for her to learn that letting someone thank you with materials things is not a bad thing, and it can be insulting or hurtful to refuse their gift (and explaining that there’s a cultural barrier here too that’s causing the conflict, which was great). I feel for Caro about not being sure if pushing her in the direction to leave the island and sell her instruments will make her happy. It did selfish to think of it like but all that waisted talent. Like cool, but maybe just let her do want she wants? I guess the idea was supposed to be like, well she wants to give more people a voice and doing that and helping her reach her goal means spreading her work beyond the island. I guess there was some level of, she also really needs to price higher for the sake of not being taken advantage of??? But the story insisted she was really good judge of character??? So like I guess in the end I think the only reasonable reason that I think should of been why she should price her instruments higher is that leaving the island means leaving her apprenticeship, means needing money to support herself, and the prices she was trying to charge before did not accurately reflect the hours of labor she was putting into each instrument. Like the island mentions that price of material sometimes affects the cost but did not say anything about the time that is put into making an item. I think the first part of the argument that she should value her ability more was a better argument than, you need to make your instruments more expensive so random people who cannot play them to their full potential don’t buy them all. Because professionals only care about the monetary value of an instrument. And also only professionals should play her instruments that’s literally not what she wanted. Idk that last bit came off really elitist/classist. Like let her make beautiful instruments for anybody who wants them, like fucking boo-hoo people who aren’t professional are playing them which means its a waist of such a good quality instrument, like fuck off with that. Low supply and high demand meaning only wealthy people get nice things is fucking messed up, lets not pretend it’s a good thing. Especially when the person suppling wants to let anyone be able to play. It’s fine to put value on the experiencing of listening to music but trying to gatekeep people out of playing via price is still shitty, you know. I’d rather we didn’t frame that as a “good” thing. So yeah, I agree that she should consider pricing higher because she needs desperately needs to value her own work more (and just value a lot of herself more, sob). But I don’t agree we should just pretend it’s totally good thing that society believes that high quality = most expensive and that the people who can afford them are the people that deserve them the most. :\\\\\ It’s a complicated subject and I think gbf fumbled on the end in that respect but I give them props for the, please value your work, bc there are a lot of young artists who underprice themselves because they don’t think about the amount of time they put into a piece and the amount of time they spent honing their craft. (obv the real solution lies in paying people more, a reasonable fucking wage, so people can fucking afford shit. and not letting .01% hoard money and not put it back into the fucking economy because they underpay their workers and [froths at the mouth]. anyways... it’s more complicated then that but I’m not here to have the discussion, it’s just relevant to mention with the topic of this event.)

[GBF] Unbound Asterism

I'm not sure where I'm going with this one. Like, some sort of a messy review, maybe?

First, how does GBF's creative team always manage to churn out topnotch, eye catching, and overall to-die-for character designs??? Saying GBF has a lot of characters is an understatement, because, well, if you're a player you'll just know what I'm talking about. The game has such massive casts. Despite that, there'll always be a new character that's unlike the previous ones.

How is it they have not run out of ideas yet, seriously.

Well, I suppose that's what makes GBF is a long-running game with loyal player base... One of the reason, at least. People enjoy playing it for different reasons. And while I do appreciate GBF's seemingly never-ending beauty of designs, nothing has made me stayed more than the story itself. Be it main story or event stories or personal stories (fate episodes), it always surprises me how engaging and believable they're written.

Case in point: Unbound Asterism

At the moment of writing this, the event has just started (August 29, 2023) but I've finished reading all available chapters. It's a sequel to Marionette Stars, a new series that tells about the Horoscopes.

My impression is... nothing. Nothing I can put into words I mean. So much things run through my head at once.

To begin with, Marionette Stars isn't a series I had included in my top 3 when I wrote a list of my favourite stories back then. This is not to say that they're not enjoyable, but GBF has so much to offer that I just picked whatever was more enjoyable than the Horoscopes series at that time. The same can be said about the characters of the series. I like Troue, Manamel, Cupitan, etc. but not on the same level as Sandalphon, Lucifer, or Belial from the Archangel series.

But with the addition of Unbound Asterism to the series... my god, I really don't know what to say. It's intense, fast-paced but perfectly-executed, intriguing, just simply what I'd describe as experiencing all emotions at once. The sheer complexity of events, characters, settings and how they interact to make an intricate plot, while at the same time being easy to follow/read, is nothing short of perfection to me. It's delivered in a way that keeps me on edge, always want for more.

By the end of Unbound Asterism, I've come to get attached to all of the casts, despite being indifferent prior. Ragazzo, Ferdinand, Lavirita... they all taught me so much on how to write a believable and villain. Tikoh, Fiorito, Feather, Randall, Kokulu, Manamel, and everyone really, I go from knowing them by name only to knowing all of their back stories now.

And Cupitan... oh god... For what purpose it is the writer team went so hard with her and Tristette's scene. This is not a complaint, just to be clear. But I... really can't believe something of such a scale occurring in a regular event rather than an anniversary. The overall delivery is as impactful, if not more, as 000 (third installment of Archangel series) or ... And You (9th anniversary event). And personally, I find Unbound Asterism way, way, way more impactful than Home Sweet Home (7th anniversary) or Created by the Stars, Loved by the Skies (8th anniversary).

⬆ The gravity of this particular scene blew my mind ⬆

Lastly, well, not so important points. I just took screenshots because it's funny (on Feather's part) and it reminds me how GBF seamlessly weave philosophical subtext every now and then into its plot without making the whole story suffocating.

I am losing my mind a little bc I can't believe Joker's (JP) VA is fucking VYN from tears of themis. I was like "oh I've never heard their JP voices before, lemme go look-- VYN????"

ahah FukuJun power

FukuJun is also in gbf in a more regular role: he's Feower.

likewise, Yusuke is played by Tomokazu Sugita who also plays Drang in gbf. (also best known for his role as Gintoki in Gintama)

of course Mamuro Miyano comes without presentation, Nana Mizuki is also a pretty famous and prolific VA, and Ikue Otani is Pikachu's voice actress to start with.

Stacked cast.

(btw not mentioned here but fun to mention, Maruki’s va is Satoshi Hino. OUR Satoshi Hino. A3!Guy’s VA. The more u know.)

But yeah FukuJun has a massive grip on people, i'm always hyperaware of him because i have a friend who doesn't care about seiyuu, who showed me a lot of anime, going "look at this guy he's my fav" and i always had to look at him in the eyes going "do you know he's also voiced by FukuJun." It's been his nightmare to watch anything with me ever since.

Soyeah he's everywhere, and well, if it's an appealing point, that's one reason to start working on the Eternals for the rebellious kitty boy

the more you know <3

‘always and forever, lara jean’: a bungled mess of my thoughts while watching the movie

Alright, cards on the table: I never finished reading the book. I got bored a couple of pages in, so I just read up the summary on Wikipedia and called it a day.

Not gonna lie, I expected better from the movies. I loved the first movie; it was cute, it was fun, it hit all the right places. The second movie was… eh. Jordan Fisher is cute, so that’s a plus.

And then we got the third movie; the final in the To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before trilogy.

And it was somehow even worse.

Maybe I’m exaggerating. Despite its shortcomings in the plot and character development-related departments (the fact that Lara Jean wrote addresses for letters she never meant to send is something that will bother me on my deathbed), the movies have their merits. They’re cutesy and charming and enjoyable, overall; movie-LJ is sweet and unashamedly a girly-girl, which is a refreshing change from the #NotLikeOtherGirls, pick-me girls and bruh girls we had in loads of other YA movies growing up. Peter’s pretty cute, too; he’s not a possessive freak like so many other love interests (The Kissing Booth, After, Anna and the French Kiss), and his and Lara Jean’s dynamic is cute, too. Not to mention- we finally have an Asian lead whose Asian-ness isn’t the whole focus of the story!

Again, maybe I’m being extra with all this. The series is, at its core, solely for entertainment purposes. Not every piece of media has to have an underlying message and you shouldn’t need to read between every goddamn line to find something worthy of enjoying. They’re certainly helpful for whiling away a couple of hours; perfect for bingeing with a pint of ice cream in hand, and all of this is in good fun.

Also, it goes without saying, but: spoilers ahead.

The film beings with Lara Jean scribbling a postcard to Peter while she’s in Korea with her family. The inclusion of that little snapshot of Asian culture made me so happy- seriously, fuck everyone who says diversity in media doesn’t matter. I’m not even Korean, and I was overjoyed at seeing a couple of scenes just from the same continent I’m on. The K-pop music in the background was a fun touch, too (although all Korean music isn’t K-pop, but that’s a rant for another day).

(Also: Blackpink has so many more suitable songs than Pretty Savage that go with the theme of the movies. Kill This Love in the second movie while Lara Jean is getting ready to go to her boyfriend’s match is bad enough- they’re supposed to be in love in that scene, goddammit.)

One thing that bothered me throughout the movies is how obviously non-Korean Lara Jean and Margot look. It’s like whoever chose the cast went for any random Asian- Lana’s Vietnamese and Janel Parrish is half-Chinese, and it’s so obvious. You seriously couldn’t find two Korean-Americans who even vaguely resembled each other so they could pass for sisters? The actresses do a stunning job and I don’t want to shit on them, but I just wish they didn’t go with the ‘all Asians look the same, what’s the difference?’ mindset.

Also, a nitpicky thing I’ve noticed in movies with characters who read a lot: no one holds their books up while they’re reading. Your arms start to cramp, which is why you keep your book in your lap while you’re reading, or you rest on your belly and hold the book in front of you. My spine and shoulders didn’t suffer years of torture as a chronic reader for you to include characters who hold their books up while reading.

A major gripe I have with Always and Forever, Lara Jean is how the characters are almost jarringly out of character- not from the books, but from the two previous movies, too. Lara Jean didn’t have much of a character to begin with, so I can’t say much about her (she dissed Oasis at one point; it’s okay for me to be mean to her), but the rest of them are either caricatures of themselves or just totally different people.

Movie Peter >>> Book Peter. He’s almost too perfect (except for the fact that he unironically loves The Fast and the Furious, which… ew), almost too much of the ideal boyfriend. Not that my perpetually single arse would know. How do boyfriends even work? I wouldn’t know the first thing to do with one; how often should you feed it? Do you need to take it on walks?

(In the notes I’ve written towards the end of the film, I’ve complained about Peter being immature and making Lara Jean feel bad about following her dream to go to NYU. He confuses me.)

Not to mention how distractingly adorable Noah Centineo is from some angles and under certain lighting conditions (other times, he reminds me of the human version of Shrek and that bothered me). King of weird Tweets and Instagram captions though he may be, he’s got a really nice smile, and his gravelly voice is both parts sexy and disturbing.

But I digress.

I’ll never forgive the directors for what they did to Kitty and Chris- two of my favorite characters, from both the books and the movies. Kitty’s annoying to the point of being borderline unlikeable- gone is the occasionally snarky comic relief we all came to love; in her place is an annoying brat whose every line comes out forced. Also, making soap is fun; fuck you, Kitty.

Chris is essentially Dixie D’Amelio’s character from that TikToker Grey’s Anatomy ripoff; the main character in One Direction fanfiction from 2012 who doesn’t want to go to the concert but her best friend gets a ticket for her so she can’t bail but Harry Styles sees her in the crowd and falls in love at first sight and 50k of mutual pining and misunderstandings late, they get together. She’s cynical and snarky and hates capitalism and consumerism and prom (because of course she does), but secretly, she’s into it (because of course she is). My guess is that she’s there to appease all the arseholes (including myself) who accused the characters of being too one-dimensional, but it seems too out of place in a movie that doesn’t have much plot to begin with.

I really, really hate how Lucas was done dirty- throughout every single movie. Of course, it’s Lara Jean’s story so not every side character has to be fully fleshed out- but you’d think three. entire. movies. would be enough to give Lucas a bigger role than the GBF and the token black guy for the diversity brownie points. Every single time Lucas shows up, it’s to push Lara Jean and Peter’s story forward. I would’ve liked to see a romance for him pushed forward instead one for Chris- especially because he says, at one point in a previous movie, that it’s hard to find other gay boys, so it would’ve been sweet to see him find love- and Chris’s character arc could’ve been focused on reconciling with Genevieve. Instead, we see the OG Reggie from Riverdale be the one to show Chris the bright side of monogamy, and Lucas gets a date to prom as an afterthought (another darkskin black dude, so no one thinks the film is racist).

Genevieve’s character in this movie gives me whiplash. Look, I’m all for girls supporting girls- healthy female relationships are something way too many YA movies lack- but she goes from bitch queen extraordinaire to friendly the moment the next scene calls for it. Her character isn’t consistent. A redemption arc should be executed cleanly and believably; you can’t have a character be a total prick one moment and then suddenly be, “Hey, if you get into NYU, let me know,” the next.

And Genevieve’s still an arsehole to Chris; at one point, in NYC, while they’re at the NYU campus grounds (I knew that Lara Jean was going to go to NYU the moment she saw all the banners; I fucking called it), Genevieve tells Chris, “University is for people who actually have a future,” and I recoiled. I’m not the nicest of people and yet that was going too far. Chris doesn’t hesitate to shoot back a, “You peaked in high school,”, but still. Y i k e s. You can’t convince me someone’s turned over a new leaf when they say something like that.

Lara Jean’s dad (forgot his name; gonna call him Dr. Covey) is as unremarkable as ever, and his new wife (forgot her name, too… Trisha? Trina? Eh, something like that) is… unsettling. I mean, I get that they’re all loved up and twitterpatted, but there’s something about all the smiling they’ve got going on that chills me to the bone.

Also, Trisha/Trina kinda looks like TikTok’s ThatVeganTeacher and it bothers me.

Another huge problem with this movie even being made is that the series never had enough plot to continue onto a trilogy. Lara Jean’s letters are what the plots of the first and second movies revolve around; the third only mentions them in passing. The final love letter from Peter was a cute callback, but there’s a massive continuity issue with the first two movies and this last one- both character and plot-wise.

Maybe I’m not articulating this clearly enough, so I’ll use an example: take Harry Potter, for example. Harry’s main goal throughout the series is defeating Voldemort. And it takes all seven books for him to get there, to finally achieve this.

Lara Jean’s goal in the first movie changes midway; from keeping up the façade with Peter so she can avoid the crap with the rest of the letters getting out, to making her fake relationship real. It forms a bridge with the second movie; the letter that went out to John Ambrose, and her dithering between Peter and perfection (I’m not sorry). But what does the third movie have to do with any of this?

There were way too many music montages. You couldn’t go five minutes without a random pop song playing in the background, and it was annoying as hell. Don’t Look Back in Anger was w a s t e d on this stupid film. The artsy scenery shots were even worse- no, I don’t give a fuck about the New York skyline or a bird’s eye view of whatever vehicle Lara Jean is in. A few shots of Seoul would’ve sufficed; the rest was overkill. This movie is way too damn long already (almost 2 entire hours!!!); cut out a couple of those. No one cares.

I thought they’d pull the whole Aladdin trope with character-A-keeps-trying-to-tell-character-B-the-truth-about-a-lie-B-believes-in-about-A-but-B-keeps-interrupting, but Lara Jean (typing her name out is annoying, why couldn’t she have a single name, like both of her sisters?) comes clean earlier than I expected. Peter’s reaction about LJ not getting into Stanford is… uncharacteristically mature? No “Why did you lie to me?”, no accusations, not an ounce of betrayal. Which I did not expect from a guy who’s a little bitch for the greater part of book one (I really don’t like Book Peter, in case you couldn’t tell). I know fuck-all about book three’s Peter, so I can’t tell if he really did adopt this mature, well-adjusted persona, or the movie did it to make Peter seem like less of a dick (like they did it with the sextape-that-wasn’t-a-sextape in the first installment).

On a sidenote, how do these main characters in YA books get into really good colleges with zero to no visible effort? These arseholes fuck around for the entirety of the story and have way too much going on to actually do schoolwork, but they waltz into Ivy Leagues at the end. And apparently, I’m not the only one bothered by this.

There’s something to be said about how the movies don’t really sexualize minors (characters who are minors, to be fair. None of the MCs look anything like teenagers), though. It’s almost weird to see them not getting drunk and partying and having sex all the time. Maybe that’s why Lara Jean trying to get her hand on Peter’s dick felt so stilted and awkward (I cringed so hard when she kept trying to touch him and he kept pushing her hand away, holy shit).

And the kissing. It’s to be expected from a romance film, but there was so. Much. Kissing.

The amount of product placements (… actually, I could count only two: Apple and a pair of Beats headphones Lara Jean puts on at one point, but the movie shoved so many iPhones in my face that I’m obligated to exaggerate) would’ve made anti-capitalist Chris mad.

I’m guessing this all takes place in a parallel universe, sans the coronavirus. Still, being in quarantine this past year and being socially awkward for every other one, it was agonizing seeing everyone so close together in NYC. When Peter kissed the ball (lol) (I have the sense of humor of a straight boy in middle school, don’t judge me) when him and Lara Jean go bowling, I had a visceral reaction. And what are the odds of Peter meeting his estranged dad at the very same bowling alley?

Speaking of Peter’s daddy issues (I’ve written “Hardin but diluted” in my notes; I watched this movie at, like, 1 AM; I’m not entirely sure what was going through my head at that point)- I hated how they guilt-tripped Peter into giving his father another chance. In the wise words of Hannah Montana, everybody makes mistakes- but leaving your wife and two kids for another woman is pretty far from a little oopsie on Mr. Kavinsky’s part. I don’t blame Peter for hating him, and I’m not in a place to judge whether Mr. Kavinsky (does he get a first name?) should be forgiven or not, but I feel like they let him off too easy and made Peter seem like a misunderstood teenager with anger issues for not accepting Mr. Kavinsky’s (crappy) apology at once.

And it adds nothing to the story at all; Mr. Kavinsky peaces out after having one (01) coffee with his firstborn, and he’s never seen again. If you’re going to introduce a subplot, make it tie into the main storyline- the very least you could do is make it an important enough part of the story to have more than 10 minutes of the run time. It makes no sense as to why they’d bring up Peter’s dad in this last film, when he’s already gone through two perfectly fine. I guess it was a ‘tying everything up’ part… even though no one cared.

Lara Jean’s handwriting is surprisingly ugly for someone who’s written that many love letters. And her styling took a definite nosedive; her outfits in the first movie were so effing cute, but now they’re just… meh.

There are so many conversations and lines that the writers must’ve thought sounded good enough for someone to type out the quote in curly font and slap it on a screenshot from the movie to post on Instagram, but when it comes to the actual delivery, they just sounded… weird.

Peter says one time near the beginning of the film, “You know what I’m looking forward to the most in college? Never having to say goodnight,” because he expects him and Lara Jean to get into the same college.

But I guess the word they should’ve used was ‘good-bye’, because this just makes him sound stupid.

At one point, Lara Jean asks Kitty how much Kitty’s gonna miss her when she goes off to college, and Kitty says, “A four.” Later on, she confesses, “I’m gonna miss you a twelve, Lara Jean,” and all I could think was, “But we’re endgame, Archie!”

(In hindsight, I probably shouldn’t let people know I’ve watched Riverdale; it lessons my credibility.)

Still, there remains some good to be found: all the baked goods looked very delicious and made me crave chocolate chip cookies. Peter wearing the socks Lara Jean gifted him at the beginning of the movie was a cute gesture, and Lara Jean giving Peter her teal hatbox? The one she kept her love letters in? Was so? Cute? Help?

And hey, it’s a cliché that’s been done to death, but I’m always a sucker for that part in movies where the girl walks down the stairs in a pretty dress with her hand on the banister and the boy turns around and his mouth falls open and all he can say is, “Wow,”- and this film did not disappoint! Not to mention how cute both Lara Jean’s and Chris’s prom dresses were.

Dr. Covey and Trisha/Trina’s wedding was cute, too- I struggled to decide whether Kitty wearing a necklace that says ‘feminist’ and a tux is a bit too on-the-nose, but I’ve decided that it’s nothing to get my knickers all in a twist about (for clarification: it’s not the necklace or the crossdressing that made me debate this; I just wish they didn’t make a big deal out of it- I wish they didn’t have Kitty and Lara Jean get into an argument about her not wearing a dress, if that makes sense?).

And the final letter- the one from Peter to Lara Jean- I ate that shit up; it was so, so, so cute.

In conclusion (why is it so easy for me to crank out 3k about my thoughts on a Netflix movie and yet when it comes to English Lit. at school, I’d stare at a blank sheet of foolscap for ages?), did I enjoy the movie? Not really. There were parts of it that I liked, but it was overall too boring and I kept wishing I’d watched the new SKZ Code episode instead every few minutes.

But that doesn’t mean that it was bad. I kinda feel a little sad, actually, now that Lara Jean and Peter’s story has come to a close; To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before, the first movie, is one of my favorites, and bitch though I might about them, the kinda grew on me… like an innocent plant, at first, but then like a fungus. Not a parasitic fungus, just not mutualistic, either… kind of like a commensal.

Maybe I should stop with the biology similes.

Tony Awards 2018: After ‘Game of Thrones,’ Diana Rigg Makes a Celebrated Return to Broadway (Exclusive)

Diana Rigg, nominated for playing Mrs. Higgins in My Fair Lady, is one of ET’s Standout Performances on Broadway.  

The celebrated stage and screen actress Dame Diana Rigg last appeared on Broadway nearly a quarter century ago, earning a 1994 Tony Award for the title role of Medea. The part that brought her back this past season -- to everyone’s delight -- is a very different type of mother: the elegant and wise Mrs. Higgins in Lincoln Center Theater’s revival of My Fair Lady, which is up for a total of 10 Tonys, including one for Rigg for Best Performance by an Actress in a Featured Role in a Musical.

The source material for this beloved Lerner and Loewe musical, George Bernard Shaw’s play Pygmalion, is familiar turf for Rigg, who during her long career has played both Mrs. Higgins and Eliza Dolittle -- the feisty flower seller that Professor Henry Higgins tries to mold into a proper lady in 1914 England -- in different productions of the play. “When I played Eliza years ago, I had a Mrs. Higgins who actually knew Shaw, and had worked with him,” Rigg notes. “That’s something I absolutely love about theater -- that passing off of the baton.”

Of choosing My Fair Lady for her return to the New York stage, Rigg says, with characteristic modesty, “It’s the only offer I had. Let’s be truthful about this.” In the past, she adds, “I’ve had the great honor of carrying plays, of serving plays in that capacity. I’m no longer interested in that.” Additionally, this featured role did not demand a certain skill associated with musical theater: “I was grateful I wouldn’t have to sing,” Rigg quips, “and the audience should be, too.”

Another factor was the opportunity to work with director Bartlett Sher, also a 2018 Tony nominee and a past winner for LCT’s 2008 production of South Pacific. While she hadn’t seen any of Sher’s previous work, she knew of his “extraordinary reputation, and that I would learn something from working with him. And I knew that Bart would do justice to the play [Pygmalion], which is the lynchpin. The music is sublime, but it’s sort of the icing on the cake, as it were.”

Neither Sher nor Rigg knew when they signed on for My Fair Lady that the revival would premiere in the wake of the #MeToo and Time’s Up movements, making Eliza’s journey to self-actualization -- how she eventually stands up to a man who considers himself her superior and mentor -- seem especially timely to critics and audiences. “But I think we’re in a more reflective mood now, and the show reflects that,” Rigg says. “I think it’s measured.”

Having first become famous in the U.S. for playing Emma Peel on the 1960s TV series The Avengers, Rigg acquired a new generation of fans in recent years as Olenna Tyrell on Game of Thrones.

Rigg had not seen Thrones before joining the cast, but became aware of its massive popularity. “A program as far-reaching as this one, in terms of its audience -- it’s got to be good,” she reasons. “For me the priority is theater, but I don’t take the view, as some people do, that television is a sort of poorer cousin. If anything I do outside of theater feeds interest in the theater, then hooray.”

Awards, similarly, are “a welcome recognition of good work,” Rigg says, but mostly valuable “if they can put bums in the seats in theater. I’m all for anything that does that.”

As for her plans after My Fair Lady ends its run, the 79-year-old actress says, “I’ll tell you what I’m anticipating: being reunited with my grandson. He was born a year ago in March, and we’ve been separated such a long time. We do use Skype and wave at each other, but I’m missing his first steps, all those things. So that’s what I’m really looking forward to.”

The 2018 Tony Awards hosted by Josh Groban and Sara Bareilles will be handed out live at Radio City Music Hall in New York City on Sunday, June 10, starting at 8 p.m. ET on CBS.

 STANDOUT PERFORMANCES ON BROADWAY:

Tonys 2018: The Silent Rise of ‘Children of a Lesser God’ Actress Lauren Ridloff (Exclusive)

Tonys 2018: Taylor Louderman Becomes the Queen Bee of Broadway (Exclusive)

Tonys 2018: The Crossroads That Led Nathan Lane to ‘Angels in America’ (Exclusive)

Tonys 2018: Ethan Slater on Bringing SpongeBob to Life on Broadway (Exclusive)

Tonys 2018: Andrew Garfield on the Gift of Performing ‘Angels in America’ (Exclusive)

Tonys 2018: Noma Dumezweni Breaks Stereotypes in ‘Harry Potter and the Cursed Child’ (Exclusive)

Tonys 2018: How Grey Henson Made Damian More Than a GBF in ‘Mean Girls’ (Exclusive)

Raw (17, B), American Fable (17, C+), and Personal Shopper (17, C)

In my quest to review every 2017 release I see, I’ve decided to cramp down on some films that I’m sort of enthused by that could’ve been better versions of themselves. The Spooky Lady-Led Trio, you could call it. All of these films have something to offer to prospective viewers, and elements I’d happily endorse, as well as things I’d readily change about them. Either way, here they are!

Raw

As an advertising hook, a film with the idea of relating to cannibalism as just one of those things kids do in college while exploring themselves was a pretty great lure to get me into the theater. A French film with a breakout female director that won a Cannes prize with every review thumbnail featuring its heroine covered in blood? This smelled like the perfect mix of art house horror and gross-out horror. And it frequently was that, particularly in the mysterious opening scene and a later one explaining it, the eating of an accidentally mislaid finger, the worst seven minutes in heaven - all the sex scenes are actually sort of terrifying, - and a scene near the end that redefines the term “leg day”. The beginning hazing and party scenes are all pretty effective, as are the more mundane frights of being accused of cheating on an exam and walking in or your roommate having sex. We the audience all made an agreement with each other as that finger was being eaten that hey, if this is a lot for you, feel free to freak the fuck out. It’s easy to see the argument director Julia Ducournau is trying to make with this film, but too often she undercuts herself in the film’s most stylized gestures. Lights flare red and pink as protagonist Justine (played by newcomer Garance Miller) is prowling parties for men to sink her teeth into, and it’s simply not as effective as seeing her carnivorously oggle her gay roommate as he plays soccer, sexually taunting an opposing team member as her nose bleeds. A dream sequence sees a horse running forever strapped in a treadmill-type machine, another one sees a dissected dog rise from its metal table, still hidden under its plastic sheet. For a film with the objective of trying to portray cannibalistic impulses as just another thing kids do in college, it regularly struggles playing things as casually with Justine as does with her roommate’s promiscuity, the general partygoing/hazing rituals of her classmates, or the cannibalism her own sister partakes in.

Played with a lived-in, grubby casualness by Ella Rumpf that’s fascinating to watch even before we learn she also eats people, Alexia’s relationship with Justine becomes an even richer mystery than the women’s shared cannibalism as Alexia continuously fluctuates between taking her sister under her wing and leaving her out to dry, particularly in a vicious fight after Justine sees a video of what Alexia got drunk Justine to do, only for it to end in a moment of unity and bonding between the sisters, perhaps the most connected they’ve been the whole film. Her own nonplussed attitude as she peels back the layers of her own depravity while trying to coax her sister down the same hole is portrayed with the offhanded tone the film should’ve stayed in, instead of the flashes of stylized lighting and odd, seemingly unrelated visual imagery. A final-frame reveal that could’ve been a whole other chunk of the film, tying back to an earlier scene where Justine is shocked to learn that *her* parents would’ve been game for her vet school’s hazing, could’ve easily been a whole narrative of the film for Ducournau to explore for both sisters had she not essentially reduced it to a jump scare. I’ve seen critics try and assign social commentary to Justine’s relationship with the gay roommate portrayed by Rabah Naït Ouffela she and Alexia both contemplate going after, in different but not ways, as taking to task the ways that straight women use and abuse GBFs, but I haven’t read the take that would make me agree with that idea completely. There’s a lot in Raw I wish were better, even though it worked plenty of times just fine and Rumpf nails every one of her scenes. Given the rise of cannibalism as a topic in film, television, and pop culture in general, I hope there’ll be a take like this that goes further and achieves the rich goals it sets for itself. But if the chance to see Raw comes your way, take it. Even if it doesn’t hit all its marks, its successes are still as terrifying and inspired as the best horror movies around, with sections so tense and horrific you and all your friends will lose all feeling in their fingers at the same time. A fun, unifying experience for the whole squad.

American Fable

I’ll give American Fable credit for probably fulfilling all of its ambitions, but the success is marred by an odd directorial hawk and some too inevitably realized arcs, particularly the doomed neighbor and the escalating antagonism of the brother. Plenty had been said about the film’s stylistic and tonal debts to Terrence Malick, but I wonder how well this actually served the film. True, in a long dream sequence, director Anne Hamilton crafts a woozy, elaborately out-of-body experience that feels like an actual dream using Malick’s new-age style. Hell, actress Marci Miller, cast here as the protagonist’s mother, seems like a composite of Sissy Spacek and Jessica Chastain, while lead Peyton Kennedy is as close to Linda Menz as I’m sure Hamilton could find. However, I’d say the Malick inspirations are something of a limitation to the story, lending it a kind of fantastical or grand air that just doesn’t suit the subject matter. Why make such an event carry the kind of majesty connotations that that style implies, when something a little darker or less florid would’ve been a more apt treatment of the script. That subject matter by the way, is about a young girl who discovers that her father has agreed to imprison a land developer in an abandoned silo on behalf of a Mysterious Woman in exchange for enough money to keep their farm afloat. And that young girl, named Gitty, discovers that man around the same time her father falls into a coma, forcing this Mysterious Woman to share what she had commissioned The Father to do with His Wife and Their Son Martin, who gladly steps up to take his father’s place and falls easily to the words of encouragement this strange lady provides. She also bears a great likeness to a woman wearing armor with ram horns on the helmet and riding a black horse, who always shows up when shit gets fucked up. This woman also bears no real impact on the narrative despite being a semi-interesting figure, and it’s debatable that the actual Mystery Woman does either.

Gitty’s relationship with the Mystery Man, played with such panicked gentleness, faux benevolence, and earnest caring by Richard Schiff - what a good summer for The West Wing’s men! - is easier the most affecting part of the film. Even if it’s as easy to see coming as her relationship with her brother, Schiff and Kennedy manage to create a real bond of unclear fragility as Gitty begins grappling with what his being there means, and what she can do to help. The last shot rewards her and our faith in Schiff’s character, and if the movie around them feels somewhat under-realized, I’m still glad I got to see that relationship unfold. In fact, the film ends with more unanswered questions and loose ends than it started with, which doesn’t really do right by the parents or the ultimate payoffs, literal or otherwise, with the Mystery Woman’s request. Again, I think Martin’s arc becomes more or less predictable once he threatens the life of Gitty’s beloved pet chicken, but at no point do we see what his parents’ reaction is to where he’s left. I don’t regret seeing it, but looking back on it, there’s surprisingly little to parse over, especially in the areas it so successfully advertised as being about. A lot of that stuff - the wondrous stylization, potential supernatural elements, some kind of folkloric entity - all feel extraneous, underused, or ill-serving to the film, some parts more than others, but still. There’s bits of magic all over the place, but even more so are there missed opportunities.

Personal Shopper

So early into the year, I’m not sure this was necessarily the project I was most looking forward to, but it was definitely high up on the list. Kristen Stewart had been practically perfect in Olivier Assayas’s Clouds of Sils Maria two US released years ago, the story itself sounded so entrancing, and reviews from several critics I trusted had been rapturous. On the other hand, plenty of friends and people I talk to online (or both) weren’t that hyped on the film or Stewart, and the Best Director Cannes prize Assayas shared with Cristian Mungui for Graduation wasn’t exactly a saving grace for what many considered to be a lackluster set of awards that managed to ignore much better films almost completely. I for sure haven’t seen all or even most of the Competition films from 2016, but Aquarius and Elle already pose more ambitiously realized projects than Personal Shopper does, not to mention Loving’s lowkey achievements and the madness of The Handmaiden.

Hindsight being 20/20 and all, it seems almost inevitable that I’d be as unmoved about this film as I am now. Like Clouds, Personal Shopper seems to have fashioned a showcase vehicle for its leading lady without giving her a whole lot to play beyond material firmly within her comfort zone. Juliette Binoche got who knows how many monologues about the price women in Hollywood must pay to stay relevant, a sentiment that might’ve had a little more power or variance had Assayas cast an actress who could really relate to that character instead of an actress who’s stint with American movies was sort of a phase in the middle of all those French movies she was and has been making, building a massive amount of acclaim and goodwill in Europe along with winning numerous prizes in France and Europe in general. In a similar vein, Assayas casting Stewart as a woman forced to withhold herself emotional seems like perfect casting but really isn’t, constraining the actress to give the kind of laconic, uninteresting performance many had accused her charismatic, lowkey style of actually perpetrating in previous films (no, I don’t remember Twilight). I felt bad that my interest in her performance got higher as she got emotional, even though I never believed she’d actually die. I wish I felt more active restraint in her performance, trying to keep a grip on her hope and fear and curiosity at all times rather than seemingly not feeling anything except in the scripted moments to let that gas valve leak. Post-film, I kept wondering who would fit better in the lead role of Maureen. Lea Seydoux, perhaps? who gave such a restrained performance in Farewell, My Queen that was nevertheless tinged with palpable thoughts and emotions at all times and could’ve just let the film be in French. Ellen Page, maybe? not for any particular reason but if he’s gonna cast an American actress he might as well do another outside-the-box choice that could pay off big time. Taissa Farmiga, who’s been so great at doing the same kind of grounding that Stewart has been in horror films across tones and genres while being able to play perfectly with the ratio between ridiculous and earnest of each project. Fuck it, why not Julianne Moore?

I don’t mean this to rag on KStew herself, who I’d have happily handed an Oscar to for her work in Clouds, but this feels like miscasting disguised as no-brainer casting. Between Clouds and Certain Women, her particular style seems best as a kind of supporting seasoning, or at least not perfectly aligned with the tone of the film itself. Part of what made her so special in both projects is that she managed to carve a space in both films to accommodate her own persona while fitting her style into the film’s. Personal Shopper fails her by trying to tailor itself to what Assayas may think are her strong suits, which just ends up making Maureen unreadable in an uninteresting way. The plot itself doesn’t really help her, given how thin it ultimately is. Opening and closing with Maureen working in France until she finds out that her recently deceased twin brother had moved on and that there is an afterlife, the large middle of it is occupied with an unknown number texting Maureen, pretending to be and not be her dead brother and whose identity I guessed almost as soon as the first messages popped up on Maureen’s screen. There’s barely more here than Clouds, and it’s marginally better given the spooky subject matter - the few scenes of Maureen performing a seance or following her pen pal’s orders are appropriately tense - but it’s still alarmingly little for the film to work with.

Would a different director entirely have solved this trick. One person I follow on Twitter, Kyle Turner (who’s super great, go follow him, it’s @tylekurner) suggested Mia Hansen-Løve should’ve been given this project, and I firmly agree. Admittedly I’ve only seen Things to Come, one of 2016’s most perfect movies, but if that’s essentially the kind of film Hansen-Løve would’ve made Personal Shopper into, it’s an idea I fully support. That kind of observational style would’ve been a lovely prism to examine Maureen’s griefs and hopes for the afterlife, for her brother, and for her own life as she waits for a sign and puts off flying to her boyfriend in Wherever. It may also have been a fine match for Stewart’s brand of quiet charismatic performance, allowing it to flourish within her keenly observational style instead of subsuming it. Most, if not all of my thoughts on Personal Shopper are about how to make it a better movie, something I feel a little bad about given how well others have received it - David Ehrlich was practically rapturous, saying the film evoked his grief at the death of his father so potently, and his review was the best encouragement I had to see this - and I do hope people see this. It’s an ambitious project made by artists I’ve fans of outside this particular film with plenty more projects of theirs I’m actively searching for, and I respond to raves about Personal Shopper better than other positive reviews for projects I was equally meh on. See it for yourself. Maybe your opinions about it will make themselves known by smashing a glass or tearing wallpaper, or just manifesting physically and vomiting ecoplasm in your general direction. Either way, it’s an interesting project with a singular, spooky tone that’s trying more than plenty other films.