On critics and criticism...

Nothing amuses me more than when actors get their hackles up at critics. I've seen tears and tantrums over the reviews handed out by critics. Inevitably these only occur when the review is a negative one or someone has been overlooked for awards nights.

I like to believe I am a reformed critic-basher. When I was younger (so much younger than today), I took pen to paper to write at what I felt was an unfair review of Mayfair's "Sweeney Todd" in DB Magazine. I thought I was so clever. I was wrong. The reviewer waited a fortnight to respond and when he did, he shot me down in flames. I'm sure the 15 people that read DB magazine got a huge laugh at my expense. He still writes reviews today (and has a penchant for quoting the entire works of Douglas Adams or Charles M. Shultz on their facebook page) and I learnt a valuable lesson. In the words of Tim Sexton "Don't argue with a critic- you'll never win".

What bought this up is a comment that sparked a massive debate on the Adelaide Theatre Collective FB group. From what I can gather, two "amateur" actors were nominated in a "professional" category and it raised the ire of some people. The initial comment was quite brutal in its assessment-

" Hmmm... Concerned that Santos "Exploitation Managers" earning over 150kpa have the gall to call themselves "theatre critics"! Such critics have become the "judges" of theatre companies and productions who often receive NO or LIMITED funding. Their criticism exhibits no practical or even theoretical expertise about theatre. At best it expresses personal opinion with an uber middle class view. At worst it simply shows up their own stupidity and ignorance. How would they like it if all us thespians turned up at Olympic Dam to tell them we didn't like the way the rock strata had formatted? Ignorant they would say... Well yes. My point exactly. Please, can we make our theatre critics credible? Could they at least know the difference between Ionesco and iron ore?"

That started a cavalcade of responses- 168 (at the time of writing) to be precise. You'll need to not only take a lunch break to read through it all but also bring a dictionary and have google on standby.

As I've gotten older, I've come to really understand critics. I've had good reviews and bad reviews. The funny thing is, when you step dispassionately away from the work you are presenting you realise that the critics are usually right. Yes, sometimes they can be as tactful as a sledgehammer to glass, but quite frankly all I can say is suck it in.

People whinge that there are far too many internet review sites (some even suggesting that they only exist so people can get free tickets- oh the outrage!), but here's some food for thought- barely any member of the general public reads them. The only critiques worth "bums on seats" are the ones written in print media and even then most people won't hinge their purchase of a ticket on a single opinion from one person- certainly not in Adelaide anyway. I have seen shows sell-out DESPITE bad reviews. I can't think of any shows where people have demanded refunds en-masse following a bad notice from the ATG or Barefoot Review websites.

Back when I was pilloried by this critic in DB, they stated the oft-used, well worn catch cry of the critic- "it's only one person's opinion"- and they are right. Maybe instead of whining about how under-qualified critics are, or how ignorant they are etc, maybe actors and producers need to look at their own product and take note of what they say. Look at the audience response and evaluate. Some theatre companies ask the audience for feedback (as if ticket sales were not an indication enough). The point is that critics voice one opinion and often they speak the truth on some level.

As for awards I can only say that it is incredibly frustrating when the show you've spent months on and poured blood, sweat and tears over is ignored nut then again, I don't believe we put on shows for the sole purpose of getting awards. It's wonderful when you get nominated but at the same time, rather than moping about who didn't get the nod why not celebrate the performances that did?

Critics are a necessary evil in the theatre world- they remind us of where we are and what we can do to be better. Do I agree with every review written? No. Do I think every critic that writes reviews is brilliant and should be allowed to continue? No. But I remind myself that I am in an industry that needs to come to terms with public scrutiny and criticism and that no matter how hard we try, we can always be better at what we do.

The outcome of the Facebook debate was a decision to have a forum to discuss the matters offline. Wow. I'm sure that will be riveting listening. Can I review that for an online site? It will not achieve anything except to molly-coddle a few actors with their noses out of joint. The other outcome was a post from the group's founder, Elena pleading for the debate to end and to remind us all of the reason the group was created- in other words "please critics, don't hang any negative crap on me- I didn't start it...they did!! (points finger furiously at the original poster)" If I sound a bit jaded on the matter then I guess I am. Publicly venting about critics always a dangerous game. I found out the hard way many years ago (and thankfully with few consequences)- maybe some actors need to learn from others past mistakes....

Steely Dan & Steve Winwood- Entertainment Center, Adelaide- Oct 30

By the time Steely Dan finished their two hour set alongside Winwood (singing "Roll With It") the Adelaide audience leapt to its feet having realised what a special night they had encountered. For fans of the popular acts it was a dream come true.

Four hours earlier and Winwood took to the stage with his little ensemble. Starting with and ending his set with Spencer Davis Group classics "I'm A Man" and "Gimme Some Lovin'" got the audience clapping but the vast majority of the set left the fans scratching their head. Whilst I must confess to not being a huge Winwood fan, I appreciated his musicianship and that of his small but effective ensemble. It's also obvious that the years have taken nothing off his voice. But for the bulk of his 90-minute set people simply didn't know what he was singing. Winwood rarely spoke to the audience which I always have felt is a bit of a sin- an audience will be forgiving of you if you hold their hand a little and tell them what's going on. It was well into the set before he finally struck arguably his biggest hit- "Higher Love" which finally elicited a response from the crowd.

When Steely Dan took to the stage there was a rousing cheer. Launching into the title track of their classic "Aja" album, the Dan let it be known that they were here to entertain and thrill their audience. Songs like "Deacon Blues", "Do it Again" and "Josie" were left off the setlist in favour of bigger hits like "Rikki Don't Lose That Number" and "Reeling In The Years" (The latter bringing the main set to a rousing close). Along the way both Donald Fagen and Walter Becker engaged with the audience with jokes about their age whilst keeping the great music pumping. There is no doubting that the Dan has one of the finest backing bands on the planet- a point made by the long, self-indulgent jam session that took over ten minutes (one of the few lowpoints in proceedings) but when it came to doing their job (ie- playing backup) they did it with style and panache. Personally, I would have liked to have heard more numbers from their comeback albums of 2000 and 2003 (we only got the title track from 2000's "Two Against Nature") but the audience didn't seem to care by and large.

Both acts were helped by great sound and Steely Dan were also helped out by some pinpoint lighting work. But as many people starting leaving they were in for in for one final treat as Winwood came out and jammed with Steely Dan for the last two songs to bring the great evening to a close.

This was a night for the people who enjoy their music un-protooled and clean and musically delicious. There will never be another band like Steely Dan and it was great to worship at their altar.

Dusty- Arts Theatre, The Met

The Met continue to break new ground for themselves with this jukebox bio-musical based on the life of Dusty Springfield. The same creative team that gave us "Shout!" have cobbled together the hits of Ms. Springfield within a script that is better than its predecessor but still not stellar.

Like the previous musical, you need a strong lead-one that can pretty much hold the show together. Fortunately The Met has come up trumps with Emma Gordon-Smith. Blessed with a gorgeous figure, killer smile and an amazingly free voice, she commands the stage when singing. Her acting is also more than up to the challenge and she makes the most of the often patchy dialogue she is given. She is also doubly blessed to be dressed in the professional costumes originally created for the show's original star, Tamsin Carroll. Her backstage dressers must be commended for the lightning quick changes they have to do.

Gordon-Smith is joined onstage by a strong band of actors. Belinda Price is wonderful as Mary O'Brien (the young Dusty), Adam Harrison and Fiona Aitken make a great comedy duo as Dusty's best friends Rodney and Peg and it's wonderful to hear Kaye Hamlyn sing again onstage in the role of Dusty's mother, Kay O'Brien. Max Rayner defies some atrocious wigs to bring several characters to life as well. Alisa James as Dusty's lover, Reno, does struggle with the meatier aspects of her character. She sings up a storm, but there seems little connect between herself and the character she portrays.

Jo Hunt has, once again, done outstanding work with her chorus- especially Dusty's backup singers. Her orchestra is generally well balanced but the brass struggled towards the end of the night and intonation got flatter and flatter.

Rebecca Stanley has provided some wonderful choreography to match the various moods of the show.

Director Amanda Rowe has done a great deal of work here and it shows, I hope The Met use her skills again.

Kudos must also be given to David Lampard for his set which is practical and colourful and to the cast who move the furniture around seamlessly, silently and effortlessly so that the action doesn't drop.

All up, this is a wonderful show with an enormous number of highlights- especially if you're a fan of Dusty Springfield.

Casting matters

Podcasting has been around for a while I must admit, but I came into it fairly recently. About two years ago I received a little tweet from one of my favourite comedians, Wil Anderson, that he was starting a podcast with his mate Charlie Clausen called Thirty Odd Foot Of Pod. 55 episodes later and it is one of the must listen things I do every week.

The great thing about podcasts is that they are usually free and easy to access via itunes or a podcatcher program on your laptop. After a few episodes you really feel you know the hosts and their foibles well. There are many sorts of podcasts but my top three are all Australian and all hosted by comics. They make me laugh a lot and they also get you thinking. Here are my three favourite podcasts-

TOFOP- http://tofop.com/

The above-mentioned podcast is an amazing clash of minds. Wil Anderson is a sharp, edgy comic and has the ability to pull a gag out of every orifice in his being. Far from being a "straight man", Charlie Clausen also proves his abilities as a comic, even though he isn't one. These two are kindred spirits and frequently surprise each other with their observations. Over the course of their show they have a number of topics ranging from the political to the downright weird. My favourite discussions have involved Kathy Bates and a time machine, the demise of the Black-Eyed Peas, the argument that ensues when Charlie admits to never having heard Radiohead's "OK Computer" Album and anytime that Justin Hamilton has been on the show. It can get crude often so it's not recommended for the faint at heart (John Deeks warns of such a thing at the start of the podcast in more recent times).

The Little Dum Dum Club- http://www.dumdumclub.libsyn.com/

Comedians Karl Chandler and Tommy Dassalo may not be household names like Wil, but they are an amazing double act. Every week (mostly) they are joined by fellow comics and they carve out a brilliant podcast that threatens to go anywhere- and usually does. Like with TOFOP, there is a real sense of friendship here and it shines through. I discovered these guys when I was in desperate need of a serious laugh and in many ways they, along with the other podcasts, shook me out of a really bad place. My favourite episodes include Shaun Micallef, Robyn Butler & Wayne Hope, Anyone For Tennis?, Bart Freebairn and Kate McLennan. Their two episodes where they have no guests are also priceless. Not as rude as TOFOP but can still get down and dirty when needed.

Can You Take This Photo Please?- http://canyoutakethisphoto.com/

One of Australia's funniest men, Justin Hamilton, doesn't just flex his comedic muscle on this podcast but proves himself to be a wonderful interviewer in the style of Denton and Michael Parkinson. His partner in crime, Bron Robinson, often has no choice but to sit back and laugh- a lot- and it's so infectous a laugh that you smile regardless of what is being said. Like Dum Dum Club, Hamilton brings in a guest every week and discusses life with them. Mostly these are comics but every now and then he throws in some other people. Actress Hannah Norris appears twice and each time it is an acting masterclass. A young actress talking about her process of preparing roles is a rarity these days and I recommend any aspiring young actor hear these podcasts (plus you get a lot of penis jokes thrown in for good measure). Guests like Rove and Tim Ferguson absolutely shine in this format. I walked away from the chats with Wil Anderson and Charlie Clausen with an even deeper understanding of them then I did listening to TOFOP. Also listen out to Tony Martin's interview (all done to piano accompaniment in the background) about life in the D-Generation and the Late Show.

I would love to know which podcasts you guys listen to as well!

Buddy- Arts Theatre, Marie Clark Musical Theatre Company

Marie Clark has a tough act to follow after its astounding production of "Miss Saigon" earlier in the year. It's fair to say that this little company has worked hard, very hard, to try and punch above its own weight for a number of years now. "Buddy" has some great positives and a few negatives.

The cast give it their absolute best. The show has many wonderful performances, headlined by the brilliant Dominic Hodges as the iconic rocker Buddy Holly. Hodges looks the part and does a pretty good impression of the man's unique voice. His accent is consistent and his charisma on the stage is pretty good as well. He may be lacking the absolute final polish on his concert persona but for the most part it is an outstanding performance.

The rest of the cast ably back him. Sophie Hamilton absolutely shines as Holly's wife, Maria Elena. Blessed with gorgeous looks and charisma, she makes a joy out of, what is, a fairly minor role in the show. Sadly, we are only granted a small hint at her amazing vocal skills. Brendon Liley does a brilliant job recapturing the vibe of The Big Bopper whilst Travis Rae delivers two solid performances as both producer Norman Petty and Ritchie Valens. Cara Brown, Jessica Knights, Kristin Stefanoff, Shay Aitken and Angus Smith all provide memorable highlights in their various roles throughout the night.

Victoria Beal has provided some catchy choreography while Emma Knights has an amazing little ensemble at her command (including Brody Green and Milush Piochaud who double as The Crickets extremely well). Greg Donhardt directs the show admirably for his first outing as director.

The biggest let down of this show is the show itself. One of the first jukebox musicals, it suffers from a lack of plot, poor dialogue and small scenes that mean a lot of blackouts and scene changes, especially in act one. It ruins the momentum that the actors develop and as a consequence drags the show to about 15 minutes longer than it needs to be. Also the creators felt that the only way to present Holly's songs onstage was to either show him recording them or performing them in concert. In a way it's more realistic, but it also limits where and when these wonderful songs can be heard. It's also true that the stage crew were a little slow with their changes which doesn't help things either. It's really the only thing that brings the evening down.

If you are a fan of Holly, or of 50's music in general (as most of the audience were on the night I was there) then you'll enjoy this retelling immensely.

Heeeeeeyyyyy Abbooooooooooott!!!!

Well it certainly has been a long time between drinks for this baton waver. A lot has gone down since we last spoke and I will fill you in on all that in the next few days. Suffice it to say that many things have changed for me and, as always, I have opinions on the world at large that need airing.

But today I want to talk about a string of events that occurred a couple weeks back. My friend, colleague and one of my inspirations, Graham Abbott, left Facebook. I know. The day it happened I'm sure the stocks in Facebook fell, planes dropped out of the sky and Justin Bieber miraculously developed talent. Graham was a prolific user of FB. Almost everyday he was posting either a status or a news article or responding to other people's messages. To me, he proved that you actually CAN have a busy life AND waste time on FB. YAY! But when those nasty boys at FB decided to tell him and everyone else what they wanted him to see well that was the final straw for him. He announced he was quitting the site and it quite literally sent people insane. In hindsight, I'm not actually sure why. As far as I know, Graham is in pretty good health, he still has a phone and email not to mention his own blog. It's not like he's becoming a hermit in the snowy peaks of Tibet. Even I wasn't immune to the shock. I think it was because it happened so suddenly. The change occurred and in less than 24 hours he had decided to pack up his bat and ball and go home. It all seems so ridiculous now when I think about it.

I have long said that you get out of FB what you put into it. In many ways, it has helped me keep in contact with many people I wouldn't normally be able to. It allows me to feel like I'm there with friends. I share their joys, achievements and their misery. I've probably gotten to know people more on FB than I could have in real life (and I suspect many people feel that way about me). Some don't like sharing stuff about their lives and they tend to use FB as a kind of window into the world of others only reaching out when needed. I have set myself my own boundaries. Whilst I occasionally check in at places I'm visiting (like theatres) I simply refuse to check in at home. I'm also pretty sure people don't need to know what food I've just eaten or what colour socks I have on today. More importantly I've decided that my political thoughts and religious thoughts (by and large) will remain my own. Picking a fight over FB seems incredibly cowardly to me. In some ways I admire Graham's guts to leave FB the way he did.

There have been times when I've wondered why I've devoted so much effort into my little corner of the web. But ultimately I'm happy with the people I have as friends and I try and keep things chugging along. The new layout doesn't bother me like it did Graham and that's ok.

Facebook is a slightly less intelligent space now that Graham has gone (at least for me). I didn't agree with everything he said or posted, but that's the thing about friends. You admire them despite the differences. How lonely life would be if we only had friends who agreed with us on everything.

I confess....

I have a confession to make...

I am a Christian. And proud of it.

I have never thrust my religion upon anyone. If a person wants to know about what it is like to be Christian, they will ask someone, go to a church or read some testimonials on the net. To me, shoving religion down someones throat is like a non-smoker going to a smoker and saying "You know those things will kill you don't you?".

I've seen a trend in probably the last ten to fifteen years whereby atheists have become more and more aggressive to us. It's now at a point where, apparently, it's ok to take pot shots at us in order to market a play. Oh yes. This was posted a couple weeks ago on Facebook...

you could spend Easter in church thanking Jesus for the Easter Eggs and listening to the same old same old that rolls around ever year - OR - you could get yourself down to [insert name of show] ! It's what Jesus would do...

I don't quite know where to start with this. The complete ignorance of this ad really astounds me. Clearly this person has never been in a church before or studied the easter message. We don't "thank Jesus for the easter eggs". Rather the opposite in fact. Easter is the most important event on the Christian calendar (even more important than Christmas) and to make light of it in this way to market a freaking show is stupid. And no, seeing a play is NOT what Jesus would do. I'm pretty certain of that.

"Dude, it's only a joke," I hear the author cry, "get a sense of humor!". Hmmm. Ok. So if I chose to market my next show with a status reading "Sick of seeing your home and computers invaded by poofs who want to get married? Then come and see my show and get your mind off of it for a few hours. It's what decent people would do" I'm sure you won't take the smallest bit of offense at the comment at all because "Dude, it's only a joke" (Just for the record, I only use that as an example, I in no way endorse that sentiment).

The fact is that we as Christians have become an atheists punching bag. Maybe because we don't react the same way that Muslims react when their religion is targeted (of course, I noted that the status wasn't aimed at THAT particular faith). I don't deny that there has been a lot of blood shed and a lot of atrocities committed under the banner of our faith. It's shameful. I'm ashamed of it. But my faith has defined me as a person.

I was born and raised a Lutheran. My faith has helped me through a number of tough times in my life. Not in the hollywood way- you know, where you walk into a church and suddenly a beam of light hits you and angels start singing- but in the knowledge that I am guided by a force that I cannot possibly comprehend or understand. I realise that logically or scientifically what I say makes no sense. I don't honestly care. Sometimes it is my faith that keeps me going when I feel like throwing it all in. I wish I could express it a little more eloquently than that but it's how I feel. Faith is not something you suddenly get, it's built up. Like the faith in a friend, or a family member. I am very much at peace with my beliefs and my faith. I also accept that other people do not. I don't mock them nor do I pray for them. They must find their own path and live it.

I'm not trying to convert anyone here. I'm unlikely to convince a single person with this blog, and that's fine. I realise there are extreme Christians who take the message of the bible and twist it to their own ends. They are not the Christians I support. Just like Muslim extremists, they are pretty much shunned by other Christians.

I guess if I have any point to this blog it's to politely ask you to not vilify all for the actions of a few. Similarly, I don't think every atheist is a Christian basher either (indeed many of my atheist friends are wonderful, dear people who really couldn't give a toss about my faith). It angers me when people think that being a Christian makes them somehow less of a person. Judge me by the acts I do, not the faith I follow please.

Peace.

Mahler, Walking and the Leader Of The Pack

This fitness kick I'm on has been really helpful. I can't believe that after a solid fortnight I'm still sticking at it. Mind you, not only did I have to buy a $190 pair of sneakers but a $30 pair of socks to make sure my walks didn't end in agony every time.

Tonight though was something special. I started walking as the sun went down and my iPhone was playing the opening strain of Mahler's Ninth Symphony. I walked along a straight stretch of road that I have walked a few times before. As the first movement gave way to the second I suddenly realised that I had been so immersed in the world of Mahler that I had not noticed that the sun had gone down and I was now walking in darkness. I started heading home. I didn't care about the dogs barking or the sound of the traffic and as the second movement gave way to the third I decided to walk until the end of the movement bringing my walking time to around an hour. I didn't feel tired at all. To be honest, I could have probably walked for the entire symphony but sense prevailed. During that third movement I looked up at the sky and saw the stars for the first time since I started walking- with Mahler's glorious end of the universe soundtrack playing I actually stopped to take in a big lung full of air. Just one of those moments when you sense something bigger out there. There's an endgame in here somewhere, I can just sense it.

I have also been trialling contact lenses again. I had tried them about 15 years ago and found them really uncomfortable but the pair I have in now are nothing short of amazing. After a while you actually forget they are in there. I could definitely get used to wearing these more often.

====================================================================

I must say I am having a huge ball playing for "Leader Of The Pack" for Northern. It's a great and friendly cast with some old and some new faces amongst them. Always a pleasure to work with people like Michelle Brow, Gus Smith, Mel Smith and Kate Dempsey and to be conducted by the wonderful Kim Clark is an added bonus. It's a great little band, too. We have three performances this week and three next week. If you are up Elizabeth way then go and see it.

The Quirks Of The Universe..... and Glee

I must be a sheep. I have as much wool around my skin as one and I tend to follow what my friends are doing. So two of my friends have updated their blog, another one has started one, so guess what this sheep has decided to do. Baaaaaa...

OK, so the last time we spoke in a non-review way I mentioned a move to Melbourne. That was the plan. The universe, however, seems determined to keep me here. After applying to Melbourne Uni for a Masters In Music (Conducting) course I auditioned for the course (with the help of a few friends) via a dvd. I sent it registered express post. It got there on December 2nd. After that I heard nothing. Not even a notification they got it. That's ok, I thought they have to sift through the many applications they have for all their courses. It will take time, probably not until the new year. I quit my teaching jobs thinking I would be in Melbourne (or close to leaving) by this time. January rolled on. Still nothing. Emails were sent. nothing. Phone calls (up to 4 different numbers in one day) were made and messages left. Friends tried to eke out of them some kind of timetable. Nothing. How does a Uni get away with this? Do they not realise people have PUT THEIR LIFE ON HOLD for this?? I figured if I didn't get in I would find out soon enough to consider other options including schools etc. January turned into February. School came back. Still nothing. I sent an email to the Professor in charge of the course- he replied that he was amazed that I hadn't heard as my application had been discussed weeks ago. He told me he would take it up with the proper people so I could "find out through the proper channels". Stuff the proper channels. I WANT TO KNOW NOW!!! Silence ensued. Finally, on February 25th (my birthday of all days!) I finally got what I had predicted I would get- the rejection letter. This was the email that came attached to the letter-

Dear Rodney,

Please accept my sincere apologies for the delay in notifying you of the outcome of your Master of Music (Music Performance) application. We experienced some difficulties receiving communication from the external assessor overseeing your application.

You will find details in the letter attached, which I have also sent via post so that you will be in receipt of a hard copy.

Again, my apologies for the time it has taken to respond – I understand the need to resolve your plans for the year ahead.

With best wishes...

What a crock of crap. "Difficulties receiving communications"? Give me a break. It's 2011. Not 1991. People have mobile phones, smart phones, laptops, emails, text messages, internet cafes etc. I find it hard to believe that anyone who helps assess masters applications can be difficult to reach unless they decided to spend a month with some order of Monks in the Himalayas or trek around Ahmish country. And don't even get me started with the disingenuous last sentence. If they were that concerned about my "plans for the year ahead" they might have considered an email "Dear Rodney, your application results have been delayed until etc...." I can't begin to tell you the burning rage I feel at this moment. It increased as I found myself- for the first time EVER- going to Centrelink and asking for help. I have joined the ranks of the unemployed for now. It sucks to me right now.

Having basically said my goodbyes I had decided to go to Melbourne anyway and try my luck there. Funny how the universe then throws you another twist- I got an offer from State Opera to sing in "Moby Dick". It's a well paid gig that will require me to get into shape (and possibly wear contacts). If I was in Melbourne I would turn it down- but I'm here. It would be stupid to waste this opportunity. So it looks like Adelaide will have to put up with me for a while longer. In the meantime it's about finding some work to cover the bills and get off Centrelink. Sigh.

It's times like this I wonder what some of my less talkative friends would say. I envisage Josh Penley would give me a dose of tough love- something like "Suck it up- don't be a victim, take your destiny into your own hands". Maggie Wood would say something beautiful, profound and totally moving (although being Scottish she may just as easily tell me to get my off my arse and stop whining like a donkey). I have many wonderful friends who, despite my flaws, still remain friends with me and I know they will be here to support me and help me. maybe I can get that concert back on track?

My life is like a roulette wheel at the moment and it's making me dizzy.

===============================================================

In the meantime I've been catching up on "Glee". To be honest I had started to go off it after a very lacklustre start to the season. I slowly ground my way to episode 5 of Season 2 (The one based on Rocky Horror) and then stopped. All of my fellow Gleeks kept telling me that it got better. By the time I had started watching again I had a further episodes saved. I now only have two. Why haven't I been as enamoured with Glee this season? And what has made me keep watching??

Let's start off with the good things. The bully storyline. It hits (pardon the pun) so very close to home. Kurt (for the uninitiated) is a member of the Glee club who is openly gay and he starts to get harrassed by one boy in the school. What the producers did was start it out like the regular taunts of the school (including regular slushie dunkings) but then they ramped it up. At one point Kurt is told by another gay boy from a different school that he needs to confront them and show them he won't be a victim. It's one of those scenes where, as a victim of bullying myself, I get shivers down my spine. He runs into the locker room and starts confronting him at which point the bully kisses him. So this big, hulking boy is gay! The very next time we see him he threatens to kill Kurt if he ever tells anybody. Kurt is forced to change schools. For a show in a kid-friendly timeslot it's an amazing storyline and very confrontational. Many organisations in America have praised it for the shows handling of it. As I said, the whole scenario hits a little too close to home for me (being overweight is almost as much of a target for bullies as being gay it seems). Kudos for the producers for going down that path and sticking to it and especially to Chris Colfer who plays Kurt for delivering such a believable performance.

Actually I think most of the casting is still very good. I loved Idina Menzel as Rachel's mum and Kristin Chenowith as a drunken ex-school friend of Mr. Schuster. Also hard to look past Neil Patrick-Harris and this season we had Gwyneth Paltrow playing one of the best roles of her career. Clearly the producers are using celebrities well most of the time. Also the choice of songs, by and large, seems a good mix. It's true I don't like every single song they do but they seem to fit the situation right. One of my favourite moments was when Kurt realised he had been trying to do everything to please his dad and when he shrugs him Kurt turns to the camera and the end of "Roses Turn" from Gypsy starts. It's a perfect moment. The whole storyline had been working towards it. What was even better was that the scene following the song played out almost word for word like it does in the show.

But why is the show not quite grabbing em the way it used to? I suppose I have to suspend a lot of disbelief but there a couple of things that I feel push that a little too far even for me.

For example, why is the piano guy ALWAYS there? Doesn't he have a home? Does he skulk around the school all the time waiting for the next Glee member to break into a song (which of course he knows)? Do the kids actually study any other subject? Do they do homework? When do the band rehearse (you know the band that, like the piano player, seem to always be around when it needs to be?)? Who does all the arrangements so fast? It's like Rachel will walk into a room and say "I've just decided to sing this song" and the music starts. Even professional bands (let alone ones from high school) would struggle under those circumstances. Also, why do they have to use autotune on all the kids?? It's clear these people can sing, seems really fake to me- also the harmonies seem to be the choir setting on a keyboard rather than actual harmonies sung from real vocal chords.

Then there's Sue Sylvester. Don't get me wrong, I understand that she's a mean old thing (played expertly by Jane Lynch) but at what point does Principal Figgins fire her? (he did at the end of season one but then she was rehired). She fires a student out of a cannon!! A CANNON!!! Even if Figgins doesn't have the backbone to do it (and if that is the case how does he become a Principal anyway?) then surely the school board does... Also, how does she get by having a retarded girl as a secretary? How does a gym teacher even GET a secretary?? And how exactly does the Glee club (who have to resort to kissing booths to raise money apparently) afford all the lights and costumes for their numbers... bloody hell, Rachel and Gwyneth Paltrow did the final number from Chicago complete with dazzling light display and all!! Am I missing the point? And does it really matter? Glee is a fun show that has, at times, succumbed to it's own hype (like the Britney Spears or Madonna episodes) which in my books is a shame. It has the potential to be so much more.

Have I said too much? There's nothing more I can think of to say to you...