jeremysvoices

[jeremysvoices]

hey so in favor of being normal and kind about it, congrats to everyone who got tickets to the concert!!! if u got meet and greet passes i need u to personally ask about getting a two river script or proshot released somewhere ok. ok yes? yes thank you

[jeremysvoices]

HAD TO DO THIS WHILE TAKING A CUSTOMERS ORDER. GET ON MY LEVEL...

[jeremysvoices]

someone start playing modest mouse

float on

[jeremysvoices]

Saw a picture of Jeremy with really cool lighting, so did a little sketch, might finish later

One of my strong headcanons for jerm is that he had platinum blonde hair when younger and it gradually grew darker so now his hair is really dirty blonde... (not self projecting) <- (lie)

[jeremysvoices]

BACK TO FRIENDS - bmc edit

In celebration of the reunion concert announcement ^^

[begin video ID: an edit of Jeremy and Michael to the song “Back to friends” by sombr. The lines “how can we go back to being friends,” cycles through clips of Jeremy and Michael hanging out. The line “when we just,” is played over the clip of Michael grabbing Jeremy’s head in the bathroom when he was hidden in the tub. Then, the line “shared a bed,” shows over the scene of Jeremy leaving Michael in the bathroom. In the instrumental part, scenes of Jeremy throughout the first act of the musical play (starting with him at his desk, him and his dad, him and Christine, the squip’s entrance, Jeremy and the squip, and the part in upgrade where everyone is pushing him forward). The line “how can you,” shows Jeremy and Michael during their argument in the bathroom. The line “look at me and pretend” has a faux match shot of Michael running his hand through his hair in the first act and then in the second act (during Michael in the bathroom). Finally, the line “I’m someone you never met” is shown over the scene where Jeremy pushes past Michael to leave the bathroom (right before the song Michael in the bathroom starts). End ID]

[jeremysvoices]

MORE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA CROSSING OVER WITH BE MORE CHILL

this is HUGE

(I have a tattoo of phantom as well)

little stagedorks doodle

I've been listening to Phantom again and like he would. He would

[jeremysvoices]

A few mistakes were made in this post, below I discuss those.

Michael's sexuality is purposefully not stated.

The only characters sexuality that is stated is Rich. There is no purpose to discuss characters sexuality when there is no relevance to the plot. They don't discuss Jeremy's sexuality either. They do not discuss any other characters sexuality.

This is so anyone can headcanon him as what they want. This becomes a problem when they add the pride patch.

Hey, you know Joe Iconis did not write any character headcanons. That is a fandom based activity. Just like any other fanbase, you don't expect the writers to take a headcanon seriously. Michael having a pride patch does not inherently make him gay! Some people wear the pride patch as support for others! #AlliesExist

(as it was more commonly used than the gay flag at the time)

The MLM flag was originally made in 2016, yes, but it's important to note that the flag only grew in popularity in ~2020. The flag was not officially seen as a symbol of it around 2020.

Giving him the patch, but then calling him just an ally, despite knowing the intention of the patch originally and that everyone is automatically gonna assume it's because he's gay, is a huge slap to the face.

This is a moment where the fandom needs to realize: that while there were a lot of interactions with the fandom, that does not dictate the choices of the writers, costumers, and actors.

Then he also puts on this stereotypical gay accent in the Broadway version...

Okay, pause. What makes a gay accent? What makes you so sure this was a gay accent, what do you define gay accent as?

But then he addressed the common headcanon that Michael has a crush on Jeremy, and he said that he plays Michael in a way where Michael loves Jeremy like a brother????

Having read George's original tweet and your following perception of it, I think you're misinterpreting George's statements on both Michael's sexuality and his relationship with Jeremy. You state that he "said that he plays Michael in a way where Michael loves Jeremy like a brother", and you are interpreting this in a muuuuch more literal sense than what it actually means. George states that "I had many male friends growing up that I, as someone who grew up with two sisters, loved as if we were brothers. And that’s the case for MY version of Michael. He loves his friend. Case closed." This does not mean that Michael sees Jeremy as a literal brother, but as a close friend and comrade- family, who he can trust. This is a small-scale found family trope.

As for George's statements on Michael's sexuality, in no way does George purposefully omit what Michael's sexuality is meant to be. He says it better than I ever could: "Michael’s preference doesn’t affect the course of the play. It is irrelevant. ... I felt it would be premature to stick a label on him." This does not at all suggest that George, or anyone else on the BMC production cast, are being "purposefully misleading" about Michael's sexuality. The only character whose sexuality is ever explicitly stated is Rich's, and that's because his sexuality is relevant to his story and growth as a character. Michael's isn't.

Keep in mind also that George's portrayal of Michael is based on his own coming out- if we're to treat his word on Michael as law, we ought to respect the context he plays Michael from.

Michael Mell and Queerbaiting

Sigh. Okay, so I really want to address this..

So, I'm going to start this off by saying that Michael's sexuality is purposefully not stated. This is so anyone can headcanon him as what they want. This becomes a problem when they add the pride patch.

Michael's pride patch: Michael's patch originated from fanart. People drew the rainbow flag (as it was more commonly used than the gay flag at the time) to show that they headcanoned him as gay. Headcanoning sexualities is a fun way to represent queer audiences that don't normally get representation. It was a way to feel represented.

They added the pride patch to the show, hooray! Oh, wait.... They don't want Michael to have a canon sexuality. So... why the gay flag? It's been stated he has the flag because he is the "ultimate ally" to his two mothers. There isn't necessarily a problem with this on its own until you consider what the patch meant to the people who drew it. People gave Michael the patch because they saw him as gay. Giving him the patch, but then calling him just an ally, despite knowing the intention of the patch originally and that everyone is automatically gonna assume it's because he's gay, is a huge slap to the face.

George Salazars opinions on Michael: George has said in a tweet that he thinks Michael can be any sexuality from gay to straight. No problem with that really. But then he addressed the common headcanon that Michael has a crush on Jeremy, and he said that he plays Michael in a way where Michael loves Jeremy like a brother????

George Salazars depiction of Michael: If he really thought that. Then why does he play Michael the way he does? He makes choices. Like the delivery of "whatttt" after Mr. Heere asks Michael if he loves Jeremy. Which just makes it weirder??? Then he also puts on this stereotypical gay accent in the Broadway version that he doesn't have outside of the character and that feels icky. I'm aware George is gay and he can have whatever opinion on the character that he wants. It just feels mocking and purposefully misleading.

I just really don't like how BMC approached Michael's sexuality. They give all these moments as if to say, "See! He's gay!" And then when asked they're like, "Oh, he's an ally and just sees Jeremy as a brother" weird asf

I don't hate George or anything. So, please don't accuse me of that. And I love BMC. I just think this is weird. If I made any mistakes in my information, please politely let me know.

[jeremysvoices]

the white streak is everything to me

the expression is also everything to me

dude this design is amazing. running away with it into the sunset

im finally contributing something to the fandom!!!

[jeremysvoices]

what they cut out of the book/musical/play

trust this happened. he shows up to school with glowing skin. smelling vaguely like some apple scent.

skincare

[jeremysvoices]

yes, this is everything actually

alright guys crossover ti-

is this anything

[jeremysvoices]

no bc adaptation wise? def not great. and if people really wanted to learn something, then the book is the way to go. musically wise? fun wise? GOOD GOD DOES IT GET IN YOUR HEAD LIKE AN EARWORM.

not even just michael in the bathroom, all OF IT. all of it.

you're based for your opinions dw

i will always always always say that be more chill is a very mediocre musical and horrible adaptation that completely misses every lesson and narrative choice in the original book and waters down any one it doesn't and the lyrics are really awkward and its flawed in pretty much every major avenue. that being said i think i deeply miss jeremy heere and michael mell... i miss being into bmc when i was because i think theyre always going to be comfort characters to me

[jeremysvoices]

MORE SUITS. MORE SUITS. I LOVE HIM IN SUITS CHAT.

[jeremysvoices]

me with the voices in my head. that songs makes me cry especially when they all go nananana..nana...

A completely true story about picking music to listen to at work yesterday

be normal about this stupid musical challenge: impossible

[jeremysvoices]

THEM THEM THEM-

they play roblox. i know trust me. trust me

THE QUALITY IS GONE!!! Also why does Christine have the roblox woman face.... anyways I think I'm done

[jeremysvoices]

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

Mkay we getting somewhere but I'm too tired to do more tonight lmaooo

[jeremysvoices]

he has homophobia in his eyes...

so bmc is coming back, ex-bmc artists RISE UP ONCE MORE

[jeremysvoices]

yeah this. there's such potential with the song. and i agree with the additional lyrics and your takes entirely. if you do a cover DO post that, trust, i will love it infinitely better. also someone go throw money to will c to sing the song. please.

okay, tangent about broadway time. this is just rambling, but others are free to toss their opinion in. or ignore me. this is just late night fueled and about 6 years late. (even though when I first heard it when it came out, I still disliked the things I dislike now.)

specifically, i need to talk about loser, geek, whatever (and by extension pitiful children). i need to clarify right now that personally, i loved the potential of the song. it had such genuine potential, and more of an insight into jeremy's mental state in the musical itself (debatable truly if we NEED this, but for the 2019 musical era. yeah i understand). but, within the first couple seconds, it drops the ball. it tries to copy some of the end of original upgrade, which is the transition into the song itself. but. it's not going to hit the same because the instrumentals and vocals are nothing like what they need to be. maybe i'm just too much of a will roland hater, but the song is way too upbeat for a song that's supposed to be declaring what he's declaring. (seriously bandwidth does not mean what they think it means) the whole mood itself just feels so... misplaced? why does he need to sing "wooaah uh huh! uh huh!" like what??

and then you get the to line "the problem has always been me!" that was great. it was genuinely great. but christ out of the whole entire song, and only enjoying that one part is?? questionable?? imo if the song had to be kept, start near the second half. they had a whole story shoved into this song and i will never understand why. AND EVEN THEN WAS IT REALLY EVEN SUNG, HE SPEAKS LIKE HALF THE FUCKING LYRICS—

honestly. they were trying too hard to recreate a michael in the bathroom moment for jeremy. wayyyy too hard. and i am well aware people wanted this, actually, and there being a lot of talk of how cutting michael off seemed so out of place and how this song helped people etc. totally valid, but at the same time, we see jeremys mental state and build up just fine without out. with michael, we literally do not. which is why when michael in the bathroom comes around and takes a swing, IT HITS. this was just dragging out a tense and spur of the moment decision to get another song.

but okay great! (debatably) depressing song. amazing. all for those. SO WHY DID WE CHANGE THE LYRICS FOR PITIFUL CHILDREN, HUH? I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING GUT WRENCHING. WHERES THE "YOU WERE ALWAYS QUITE THE LOSER, JEREMY" ??

WHY IS THIS FOCUSED ON CHRISTINE?? WHY IS THERE DIALOGUE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT THAT. LIKE. THROWS THE WHOLE SONG OFF. (YES I KNOW THATS THE ORIGINAL DIALOGUE, BUT HELL ITS DIALOGUE FOR A REASON NOT—)

JASON TAM WHY ARE YOU SAYING "SQUIPSQUIPSQUIP" WE KNOW WHAT YOU ARE???

I have minor issues with Broadway Pitiful Children.

anyways, yeah. and then well, we can all agree jeremy in broadway is just a completely different character from like. any other media. he gets treated as a baby too much. but. that's discourse for another day.