Re: Kurt Hummel Spoiler Thread - part 16

[Delight]

From the comments, I gather that it would be better for my blood pressure if I forego listening to any of the Kurt duet snippets. Looks like they're determined to have Kurt's duet partner drown out his voice most of the time.

Tip for Glee PR: If you are going to run a promotion and put out multiple spoilers, make sure they are of decent quality. Otherwise, it's best to keep your level of suck under wraps. That way, maybe people will watch the episodes because they don't know any better.

 So, so true. Hah. And to think that the songs on Glee used to make people more inclined to watch the show...

[AnneNeville]

Jane Lynch on Season 5:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI-n7HKIh_U

Among the tidbits..

She is only temporary Principal

Sue  now wants Cheerios to be winners again and Glee to win another Nationals in order to ensure becoming permanent Principal  (ie  YE Season 3 again) 

Hence she is for now an "ally" of New Directions helping Will  for selfish reasons and will try to yield power over ND...

She has nothing to do with Kurt/Blaine and their storyline

Admits she doesn't work full time on Glee...

Wasn't Sue temporary principle in Season Two?

[AnneNeville]

The entire version of Yesterday sounds better, Lea still has a great voice, but that song is and should be simplicity. All the musical arrangement and harmonies are just too much. I am sorry that she had to sing it after Cory's death, but they could have given her a different song if it was too hard for her to handle. Also, once again, the songs screams: feel for me! I am emotional! Look, I am suffering! However, it is all bells and whistles once again.

Yeah. Even when my little high school singing group performed Yesterday we knew to sing it with simplicity. Our director made us do so . . .

[AnneNeville]

^Yes. If the snipbit we got from GTGYIML, of which we already know the full version, plus 'Yesterday' are an indication of how 'misdirected' those previews can be..... (really: featuring Blaine in all the songs he participates in: I still can't get over that, smh)..... the full versions might be different from what we imagine them now to be. And that better be the case, because the previews were awful.

Marie--I assume the full versions will be better, based on GTGYIML. However . . . the one thing I am worried about is that the "recording" we thought was good was actually a recording of the song in playback while they were filming. Considering the shape of the location (like an ampitheatre), I wondered whether the echoing of the recording could have actually given the sound more depth than the recording REALLY has, and once they put the real sound in, it might actually sound thinner and cheaper.

Is this possible?

[AnneNeville]

Just talked to a friend of mine. She doesn't watch, care nor is interested in Glee. Nada, zilch, zero! At all. Even she knows and read about the disaster of released songs. She started the conversation about the Beatles songs and asked for my opinion. Just as an information, this will hurt Glee for the long run.

Wow! Who did she hear about the songs from? How bad they are actually leaked from the fandom into the GA? Or she's friends with people on tumblr who are Glee fans?

[AnneNeville]

The entire version of Yesterday sounds better, Lea still has a great voice, but that song is and should be simplicity. All the musical arrangement and harmonies are just too much. I am sorry that she had to sing it after Cory's death, but they could have given her a different song if it was too hard for her to handle. Also, once again, the songs screams: feel for me! I am emotional! Look, I am suffering! However, it is all bells and whistles once again.

I totally agree. The full song is infinately better than the snippet, but it's still overdone. This is not a song that warrents Lea's Broadway style of singing and she needed to dial it back a lot more to keep from running roughshod over the melody. It's not an awful rendition, but it's very overdone and pales when I compare it to Chris's rendition of IWTHYH, or even Blackbird.

It's not totally Lea's fault. This is her style of singing and it's not easy for her to break the habits that have been trained into her for so long. But to pick such a gentle and spare number and give it to one of the most "showy" singers in the cast was a major miscalculation on the writers part.

I'm being fussy here, but I don't think that Lea's over-styled singing is "Broadway" singing. I think that's her own. Lots of Broadway singing is simple and not at all bombastic. I think this is Lea's own quirk.

[Lottie2303]

Wow! Who did she hear about the songs from? How bad they are actually leaked from the fandom into the GA? Or she's friends with people on tumblr who are Glee fans?

Honestly, no idea. She is on tumblr but I doubt she follows anyone with Glee knowledge except me. But usually she really doesn't care and I know she didn't read it from my dash yesterday. Apparently it was discussed somehwere on the internet.

Really, she doesn't care at all about Glee and usually just ignores it. She is not even part of the GA and heavily judges me to watching it  . I was astonished she mentioned it. It really is that bad!

[Ranwing]

I didn't necessarily mean that Lea was singing in a Broadway style (which I know covers a lot of ground). Just that because most of her formative years as a performer were on Broadway stages that it colored how she approaches her vocal performances. There's always that element of being a bit OTT so that it can communicate with an audience from the stage. This doesn't translate as well to television and recordings where even a dialed back performance (by her standards) comes across as being "too much".

[coxfire]

I'm being fussy here, but I don't think that Lea's over-styled singing is "Broadway" singing. I think that's her own. Lots of Broadway singing is simple and not at all bombastic. I think this is Lea's own quirk.

I get what you mean, but I think that it is our best way to express how we feel the song has been changed. I know Broadway songs can be simple, but they are more often "theatralistic" than other songs, like indies' artist ones, which is understandable I think, since to me musicals are a form of theater.
 
Now I know that Lea has her style, but she isn't the only one involved here: she "just" sings. The melody, the arrangement, the tempo, the production of the songs are not dictated by it's singer only. And for Yesterday, if we could extract her voice only, I'm sure I would prefer it to the final product we have (even if indeed, the entire song is 10 times better than the snippet). So I would say that I feel like it's more a fail from the music producers rather than Lea.
 
should we say "theatralized" instead of "Broadway-fied"?

[brisallie]

I can't belive this  Blaine stans can't just be happy with the numerous songs he has in the next episodes and stop asking for more. They just got six new songs not even 24 hours ago and there already is a discussion why Katy Perry's "Roar" would be perfect for Blaine to sing. Whys? Why would it be perfect for him? Can you give me one reason why this song will be suitable for his storyline besides "He sang Teenage dream and it sold well"?

I give you one: You mentioned in a previous post and is that all Katy Perry's songs belong to Blaine. I've no idea if it written in a paper or blood, but that how blainers see it.

As I've a friend who is a huge fan of the Beatles, I've been wondering what has been their opinion? I know my friend isn't a gleek, and she couldn't believe how Glee sold so much singles. So I have the feeling she will faint.

[AnneNeville]

I'm being fussy here, but I don't think that Lea's over-styled singing is "Broadway" singing. I think that's her own. Lots of Broadway singing is simple and not at all bombastic. I think this is Lea's own quirk.

I get what you mean, but I think that it is our best way to express how we feel the song has been changed. I know Broadway songs can be simple, but they are more often "theatralistic" than other songs, like indies' artist ones, which is understandable I think, since to me musicals are a form of theater.
 
Now I know that Lea has her style, but she isn't the only one involved here: she "just" sings. The melody, the arrangement, the tempo, the production of the songs are not dictated by it's singer only. And for Yesterday, if we could extract her voice only, I'm sure I would prefer it to the final product we have (even if indeed, the entire song is 10 times better than the snippet). So I would say that I feel like it's more a fail from the music producers rather than Lea.
 
should we say "theatralized" instead of "Broadway-fied"?

I'd just say "over the top" rather than theatricalized or Broadway-fied. While there are OTT Broadway performances, I think Lea's gone beyond many into using rather lazy vocal tricks and blatant overacting. I tend to think of Chris's style of singing/performing (Being Alive, Bring Him Home) as being the more contemporary style of theatrical acting. Much more subtle--much more in line with the modern Sondheim school (and the really good musical theatre/operas).

[Buenos]

I happen to like Lea a lot as an actress and as a singer. The full "Yesterday" version may not be to everyone's taste, which is fine, but as a singer I don't think she comes across as having to be propped up by arrangements , autotune, etc and her vocal heft shines through.

While she may strike some as " more is more" at least there is more there. cooois There is a reason even among an ensemble cast she is a star and lead, like Chris, she has genuine star power.

Of course it's all subjective I just find her singing voice very attractive.

I'm willing to give 'Get Back" another chance because the small clip we got spilled very little.

[Buenos]

there’s actually a maturing of sue sylvester. she can still be petty and stupid — i have some really funny lines this season. but her mission is a little bigger. it’s a little more compassionate right now. she really does want to be principal. she really does want to be taken seriously. she really does want to make this school a special place and make it thrive and be a winner. so i think we’re going to see her working with people a little more. she’s not so against people. but she does want winners. she wants the glee club to win, she wants the cheerios to win, she wants the av department to win. she wants everybody to be winners at this school and i think, although will be reigning with an iron fist, she’ll be a little more compassionate.

[Glorfindel]

Marie--I assume the full versions will be better, based on GTGYIML. However . . . the one thing I am worried about is that the "recording" we thought was good was actually a recording of the song in playback while they were filming. Considering the shape of the location (like an ampitheatre), I wondered whether the echoing of the recording could have actually given the sound more depth than the recording REALLY has, and once they put the real sound in, it might actually sound thinner and cheaper.

Is this possible?

Yes, quite possible. The audio being 're-recorded' from an outside environment on a mobile phone and then posted as an mp4 on youtube probably changed the sound. The iTunes result can be just as tinny and karaoke-bar bad as the rest of the songs.  

But regardless of how bad it might be edited and tweeked in the studio before or even after shooting the scene: we already know that Chris sings quite a lot of solo lines, and even if they can cut most of them out of the episode (which doesn't seem likely due to the scene already filmed) there's still the iTunes version to enjoy.
And luckily they kept the Klaine harmonizing to a minimum in the song. The preview really was the worst snipbit they could have taken from it.  

I'm being fussy here, but I don't think that Lea's over-styled singing is "Broadway" singing. I think that's her own. Lots of Broadway singing is simple and not at all bombastic. I think this is Lea's own quirk.

I get what you mean, but I think that it is our best way to express how we feel the song has been changed. I know Broadway songs can be simple, but they are more often "theatralistic" than other songs, like indies' artist ones, which is understandable I think, since to me musicals are a form of theater.
 
Now I know that Lea has her style, but she isn't the only one involved here: she "just" sings. The melody, the arrangement, the tempo, the production of the songs are not dictated by it's singer only. And for Yesterday, if we could extract her voice only, I'm sure I would prefer it to the final product we have (even if indeed, the entire song is 10 times better than the snippet). So I would say that I feel like it's more a fail from the music producers rather than Lea.
 
should we say "theatralized" instead of "Broadway-fied"?

I think we should say 'Barbra'-fied', with a large helping of Lea/Rachel dramatics.

[Ranwing]

I'm being fussy here, but I don't think that Lea's over-styled singing is "Broadway" singing. I think that's her own. Lots of Broadway singing is simple and not at all bombastic. I think this is Lea's own quirk.

I get what you mean, but I think that it is our best way to express how we feel the song has been changed. I know Broadway songs can be simple, but they are more often "theatralistic" than other songs, like indies' artist ones, which is understandable I think, since to me musicals are a form of theater.
 
Now I know that Lea has her style, but she isn't the only one involved here: she "just" sings. The melody, the arrangement, the tempo, the production of the songs are not dictated by it's singer only. And for Yesterday, if we could extract her voice only, I'm sure I would prefer it to the final product we have (even if indeed, the entire song is 10 times better than the snippet). So I would say that I feel like it's more a fail from the music producers rather than Lea.
 
should we say "theatralized" instead of "Broadway-fied"?

I'd just say "over the top" rather than theatricalized or Broadway-fied. While there are OTT Broadway performances, I think Lea's gone beyond many into using rather lazy vocal tricks and blatant overacting. I tend to think of Chris's style of singing/performing (Being Alive, Bring Him Home) as being the more contemporary style of theatrical acting. Much more subtle--much more in line with the modern Sondheim school (and the really good musical theatre/operas).

Fair enough. I think you phrased it far better than I could.

Lea's singing has bugged me for awhile because she is capable of giving those intimate performances where she doesn't steamroll over the material. The duet she did with Diana for I Feel Pretty/Unpretty was gorgeous because they let the damn song breathe and it wasn't beaten into submission. Because Lea was dueting with someone who can't match her for power, she was forced to really pull it back in a way that we haven't seen before or since and it made for a lovely performance. And I don't think it deminished Lea's performance because we got the purity of her voice (which is magnificent) without all the vocal gymnastics. I know that Lea is capable of just singing without resorting to the tricks and overplaying the emotion of the number. She just chooses not to.

This is what frustrates me most about her as a singer. There are no surprises with her. No matter what the number is, she won't change her style and you know exactly what you're going to get. I look back on one of my favorite singers in the big, showy style, Adam Lambert, and consider what made his run on American Idol so exceptional. He always changed things up and just when the audience thought they had him pegged as the rocker with the big voice with the wails that could make Robert Plant jealous, he switched gears and took everyone (audience & judges) totally by surprise. Same singer, two totally different singing styles. And he did this all season so that people admitted that whether or not they liked Adam, they were genuinely interested in what he'd be singing because you never knew what you were going to get.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGtn2m1Zy-A

[Buenos]

And he did this all season so that people admitted that whether or not they liked Adam, they were genuinely interested in what he'd be singing because you never knew what you were going to get.

Can't argue with you there. I remember in AI for Disco Night ? he did a cover of "If I can't have you" the old Evonne Elliman disco song from SNF and he blew me away his slow, emotional version of the song.

With Lea, I love your example of "Pretty/Unpretty" because it shows the purity of her voice without ice or fizz thrown in. I did think that her version of Katey Perrys "Fire Works" was such a nice blend of her power in a showy way yet which fit the type of song she was singing. Plus it was a pop song that many claim is not in her wheelhouse. "Without you" in S3 I always thought was amazing.

I guess while there will always be different opinions on any singer's style on Glee, what bugs me more is that the show has sort of stalled Rachel's character development by stripping it down to Rachel gets triumph after triumph after triumph. I would love to see Rachel in S5 actually struggle, but alas, with the loss of Finn/Cory I dont' know if the writers will have the gumption to do that now. PLus I hate the mock/fake humility lessons they make Rachel go through only to hand her the prize in the end.

Since I think Lea has amazing chemistry with Chris, I just wish the show would show them having adventures together in NY or NYADA, but they just bungle that potential it's jaw dropping. Oh well, still looking forward to them singing together this year.

[coxfire]

My question is: how much of it is Lea's décision? I know Chris himself had to ask in his lower register for BA, don't you think the producers are not incitating lea to go OTT?

[Buenos]

My question is: how much of it is Lea's décision? I know Chris himself had to ask in his lower register for BA, don't you think the producers are not incitating lea to go OTT?

Chris who probably uses hyperbole like the rest of us, said he had to "beg" to sing in a lower key for "Being Alive".

Anders do have specific ideas how they think a song should go so I would say Lea follows song director instructions like every one else. Her non Glee singing, has anyone seen her youtube cuts of singing in small NY jazz clubs in her Spring Awakening days ? can be different. I do think Lea has a take on Rachel and this affects even how Rachel sings onscreen.

Her upcoming album and singing role in that animated OZ movie will give us a better clue if Rachel is just Lea or a separate creation. I don't think the "DROMYP" a couple of years ago in the Tony Awards is a fair measure because it was sort of the whole Funny Girl/Barbara/Glee mix all rolled into one. I would love for Lea to do some intimate concerts in small jazz settings these days just to compare.

[Lottie2303]

My question is: how much of it is Lea's décision? I know Chris himself had to ask in his lower register for BA, don't you think the producers are not incitating lea to go OTT?

Okay, all of you know I am not a Lea fan and may be very likely biased. But I do believe she heavily influences the storylines and her songs. Based on interviews, I actually believe she wants Rachel to succeed quickly and easily. Professionally as well as romantically. Her interview for the S4 DVD comes to mind where she states that Rachel being on BW is the natural progression. I am sorry to say that, but who really believes it is natural progression to be cast and be part of a BW show after being in NYC for half a year and with no prior experience? It is odd, I am very sorry, to say at least.

I also believe she likes those major whistle and bells numbers and likes to have showstoppers. That it is hurting her character, as those numbers do not always fit her style or the storyline. Sadly it doesn't really seem to bother the music supervisors as well as FOX. Chris interfered already quite a few times when he didn't agree with a certain song decision, so I can only assume Lea has the same power. Also that Chris (and everyone else) many times had to adapt to Lea's singing voice most certainly shows her songs are utmost priority. As she is the lead, that is understandable, but it still bothers me.

Creep and Yesterday really come to mind, as I don't think those songs suit her voice at all. For me it feels like they are major fan favorites, so obviously Rachel gets them. Yes, they suit her storyline, but they are still not the show stoppers as they intend to be. Still, Lea has an amazing voice and especially love her BW songs. But Rachel's current storyline as well as her song allocation are not helping me to like her character.

[AnneNeville]

My question is: how much of it is Lea's décision? I know Chris himself had to ask in his lower register for BA, don't you think the producers are not incitating lea to go OTT?

It is hard to know.

I would think that a singer would have more choice in terms of their vocal styling than they do in terms of song pick.

I sort of suspect that at some point Lea made the choice that "this is how Rachel sings" and she got stuck with that particular "vocal tic." It's an easy way of being Rachel. And I have to say, as a basic choice it's good--it's a very clear, character-defining choice. However, no choice is good when it's the only way you do something. At some point, the choice stops being meaningful or impactful. People get tired of hearing the same tone over and over again.

Deciding that the basic tone of your character can be good, but if you don't shift away from that default choice, it becomes less effective.

It reminds me of the fabulous John Barton RSC recording of Patrick Stewart and David Suchet performing the same scene in Merchant of Venice.

-- See 23:40 if the start point didn't transfer.

Patrick Stewart isn't out and out bad, but he doesn't have enough vocal variety. I doubt that it was his intention, but he fell back into the generalized "tone" rather than staying in the moment. I think that is what has happened with Lea. Bombastic is the shorthand for Rachel. It's an easy way to perform her, and she probably falls into it unless she is specifically called out.

[AnneNeville]

So basically IMHO, Chris is David Suchet and Lea is Patrick Stewart.

Actually, it's a pretty good example of their current performance styles.

[Buenos]

My question is: how much of it is Lea's décision? I know Chris himself had to ask in his lower register for BA, don't you think the producers are not incitating lea to go OTT?

Okay, all of you know I am not a Lea fan and may be very likely biased. But I do believe she heavily influences the storylines and her songs. Based on interviews, I actually believe she wants Rachel to succeed quickly and easily.  Professionally as well as romantically. Her interview for the S4 DVD comes to mind where she states that Rachel being on BW is the natural progression.  I am sorry to say that, but who really believes it is natural progression to be cast and be part of a BW show after being in NYC for half a year and with no prior experience? It is odd, I am very sorry, to say at least.

I also believe she likes those major whistle and bells numbers and likes to have showstoppers. That it is hurting her character, as those numbers do not always fit her style or the storyline. Sadly it doesn't really seem to bother the music supervisors as well as FOX. Chris interfered already quite a few times when he didn't agree with a certain song decision, so I can only assume Lea has the same power. Also that Chris (and everyone else) many times had to adapt to Lea's singing voice most certainly shows her songs are utmost priority. As she is the lead, that is understandable, but it still bothers me.

Creep and Yesterday really come to mind, as I don't think those songs suit her voice at all. For me it feels like they are major fan favorites, so obviously Rachel gets them. Yes, they suit her storyline, but they are still not the show stoppers as they intend to be. Still, Lea has an amazing voice and especially love her BW songs. But Rachel's current storyline as well as her song allocation are not helping me to like her character.

Well I am a Lea fan and also very likely biased the other way but I'm not bothered by your analysis, I think it's interesting coming from a non fan's perspective of Lea.   Lea grew up around Broadway, if IIRC she went to a friend's audition as a child for Les Miz and got the role of young Cossette in the production.   Ricky Martin was Maurious at the time.

She was in "Ragtime" on BW  and by the time she was in high school as a Senior she was one of the daughters in a revival of "Fiddler on a Roof"  and of course we all know by her early 20's she was from workshops until it opened for several years in "Spring Awakening."  Lea literally grew up on BW.

So Not disputing what you said about Lea, but just opining that per her personal experience she thinks that BW is a natural progression for  Rachel.  Lea had a seemingly "easy" path on BW  (of course the reality could be much different and involved a lot of hard work) so I'm not surprised she thinks her character can triumph quickly.  It's tricky because in canon the Rachel character IS suppose to this huge, "one in a million" talent, so the character succeeding is not out of left field, but the bigger question is if that is necessarily better for the character.  I agree with you that I don't think it is.

[Ranwing]

Even if you take into account that being successful on Broadway takes an enormous amount of hard work (and I don't doubt that Lea worked very hard to get where she is), she still had a relatively easy trip and was able to make that jump from child to adult actor (something that most performers never manage). And she worked very steadily so Lea had the good fortune to be both talented and lucky. Lea's story, however, is not typical and I'm tired of so much actor bleed coloring the show.

Rachel might be modeled somewhat on Lea (as Kurt is on Chris) but she is a very different creature. She didn't grow up on stage - she grew up taking lessons. Lots of lessons, but very little real practical experience performing (per canon). She never acted as a child or a teen, never got any of the community theater roles she auditioned for and outside of school performances (both recitals and her work with ND and in WSS) had no real stage experience. She's taking a very, very different path than Lea took and how her journey progresses needs to reflect that she's far further back in her career than Lea was by the same age. And working hard doesn't necessarily translate into success as the theater world is filled with actors who work brutally hard, hit every audition possible and do whatever they can to achieve their goals, but never get that big break in their career. To say that Lea's perspective on what makes sense for Rachel's journey is not realistic would be a vast understatement.

What Lea might want is likely to be interesting to her because she naturally only wants to see good things for Rachel, but it would make very boring television. Unlike Chris, Lea is not a storyteller and doesn't see the show through the eye of a writer. She is caught up in the fantasy that they turned Rachel's storyline into. We are not the only ones who've been critical of how easily Rachel achieves all of her goals, or how events must be warped and twisted so that Rachel can get her wins. For Rachel to get this huge role now, with no real experience and not even a year out of high school is really stretching the bounds of believability.

[AnneNeville]

Even if you take into account that being successful on Broadway takes an enormous amount of hard work (and I don't doubt that Lea worked very hard to get where she is), she still had a relatively easy trip and was able to make that jump from child to adult actor (something that most performers never manage). And she worked very steadily so Lea had the good fortune to be both talented and lucky. Lea's story, however, is not typical and I'm tired of so much actor bleed coloring the show.

Rachel might be modeled somewhat on Lea (as Kurt is on Chris) but she is a very different creature. She didn't grow up on stage - she grew up taking lessons. Lots of lessons, but very little real practical experience performing (per canon). She never acted as a child or a teen, never got any of the community theater roles she auditioned for and outside of school performances (both recitals and her work with ND and in WSS) had no real stage experience. She's taking a very, very different path than Lea took and how her journey progresses needs to reflect that she's far further back in her career than Lea was by the same age. And working hard doesn't necessarily translate into success as the theater world is filled with actors who work brutally hard, hit every audition possible and do whatever they can to achieve their goals, but never get that big break in their career. To say that Lea's perspective on what makes sense for Rachel's journey is not realistic would be a vast understatement.

Frankly, the show made a mistake when they didn't let Rachel have ANY roles in community theatre that she auditioned for. With a voice like hers, there would have to be something VERY wanting in her or her behavior that would keep her from getting cast in amateur theatre in Lima, Ohio. I cannot but take that into account when people gush about how brilliant she is. The pre-teens and teens in my city of 100,000 who got roles in the local Lort-D theatre were quite average.

What Lea might want is likely to be interesting to her because she naturally only wants to see good things for Rachel, but it would make very boring television. Unlike Chris, Lea is not a storyteller and doesn't see the show through the eye of a writer. She is caught up in the fantasy that they turned Rachel's storyline into. We are not the only ones who've been critical of how easily Rachel achieves all of her goals, or how events must be warped and twisted so that Rachel can get her wins. For Rachel to get this huge role now, with no real experience and not even a year out of high school is really stretching the bounds of believability.

Let's not forget that with the Glee "Funny Girl" plot, the talk of doing a real Broadway Funny Girl revival with Lea has come back. There is a producer talking about mounting a production FOR her. It's again in Lea's interest to blur the lines between Lea and Rachel.

[Buenos]

What Lea might want is likely to be interesting to her because she naturally only wants to see good things for Rachel, but it would make very boring television. Unlike Chris, Lea is not a storyteller and doesn't see the show through the eye of a writer. She is caught up in the fantasy that they turned Rachel's storyline into. We are not the only ones who've been critical of how easily Rachel achieves all of her goals, or how events must be warped and twisted so that Rachel can get her wins. For Rachel to get this huge role now, with no real experience and not even a year out of high school is really stretching the bounds of believability.

To be fair, Lea has never said specifically that Rachel needs to triumph now in "Funny Girl", only that it is a natural progression for Rachel to triumph on Broadway.   I have no doubt the writers have told Lea what Rachel's endgame is, and I think we all can guess that pretty easily.

BTW, Broadway legend is littered with several out of nowhere success stories on Broadway.  Betty Buckley landed a broadway role in her first audition ever IIRC in her first  week in New York in "1776" with Zero experience on Broadway.  A leading role.

Glee is a fantasy so to be honest, I think as fans we all are go back and forth as to how realistic we want Glee to be in.

I think Glee has to be "realistic" or "believable" within it's own universe, and there is where it has always struggled with inconsistencies and narrative WTF twists. Rachel's triumph in "Dont rain on my parade" back in S1 would work only if the audience believe this HS kid had star power.   It's not so much that Rachel succeeding in Broadway is believable or not, it's making that an interesting SL is the question.   Potentially it could be, but the bigger problem is that Glee writers have a hard time writing any SL's with a satisfying conclusion. I'd rather have Rachel triumphing on Broadway a SL than yet another catfishing  story or eating disorder SL's  back in McKinley with colorless, boring Noobs who have little charisma and charm and star wattage, if we have to pick the lesser of our evils.

As much as I love Chris, I don't know if his instincts as a writer make him more qualified to determine the path of Kurt either.

[Sponsored content]