High School Musical 3: The End of Days
(Author's note: you don't have to watch all the videos, but they're there to help illustrate my point.)
The first High School Musical was produced on a budget of $4,200,000. In the film world, (especially if you're dealing with a corporate entertainment giant like Disney) that is not a lot of money. Some commercials are made with more than that, so this indicates to me that this helicopter wasn't expected to get very far off the ground. The thing that I find fascinating about High School Musical is the way that it somehow appeals to everybody. It's universally loved by sentimental people, and it's the universal guilty pleasure of cynics. It's this beacon of mid-2000's nostalgia that everyone can get behind, yet it is not a very good movie.
The appeal of High School Musical is that it's safe. You're not going to see the fallout of shootings, or drugs, or unplanned pregnancies if you watch High School Musical. Sure there's conflict, and people are manipulative pricks, but it's also out of touch with reality. While in the past I've made fun of this film saying that the 4th installment should be a jukebox musical about the characters struggling to reunite in the zombie apocalypse...
The first High School Musical was produced on a budget of $4,200,000. In the film world, (especially if you're dealing with a corporate entertainment giant like Disney) that is not a lot of money. Some commercials are made with more than that, so this indicates to me that this helicopter wasn't expected to get very far off the ground. The thing that I find fascinating about High School Musical is the way that it somehow appeals to everybody. It's universally loved by sentimental people, and it's the universal guilty pleasure of cynics. It's this beacon of mid-2000's nostalgia that everyone can get behind, yet it is not a very good movie.
The appeal of High School Musical is that it's safe. You're not going to see the fallout of shootings, or drugs, or unplanned pregnancies if you watch High School Musical. Sure there's conflict, and people are manipulative pricks, but it's also out of touch with reality. While in the past I've made fun of this film saying that the 4th installment should be a jukebox musical about the characters struggling to reunite in the zombie apocalypse...
it was also important to have something like High School Musical in the post 9/11 world. We needed to remember that we were at least kind of safe. It was a very comforting movie, and I think that's why it still resonates with people.
The second installment took a few more risks than the first one did. It's job as a sequel was to develop the story a bit more while giving us the same characters that we grew to like tackling a different challenge. While there's still no mention of any particularly heavy concepts, it does talk about the corruption that can come with acquiring power in a bit more detail than the first one. Meanwhile the B plot with Sharpay being upstaged by her brother's musical act was a hopeful message to people about the nature of making art in a group. The success of the first movie gave the creative team what they needed to allow the second one to have more of a point to it. If nothing else, the second movie indicated to me that these filmmakers knew what they were doing.
Until May 27th, 2015 at 10:26 Post-Meridian I had not seen the third and final installment. I had seen the first two High School Musicals more times than I had seen the sun, but all of the details of the 3rd installment were unknown. So what was I expecting? Obviously not Men, Women, and Children, but I was expecting to see, if not substance, some kind of stronger intellectual effort than the previous films had conveyed.
I feel remarkably disappointed, and most of my disappointment can be explained by this song:
The second installment took a few more risks than the first one did. It's job as a sequel was to develop the story a bit more while giving us the same characters that we grew to like tackling a different challenge. While there's still no mention of any particularly heavy concepts, it does talk about the corruption that can come with acquiring power in a bit more detail than the first one. Meanwhile the B plot with Sharpay being upstaged by her brother's musical act was a hopeful message to people about the nature of making art in a group. The success of the first movie gave the creative team what they needed to allow the second one to have more of a point to it. If nothing else, the second movie indicated to me that these filmmakers knew what they were doing.
Until May 27th, 2015 at 10:26 Post-Meridian I had not seen the third and final installment. I had seen the first two High School Musicals more times than I had seen the sun, but all of the details of the 3rd installment were unknown. So what was I expecting? Obviously not Men, Women, and Children, but I was expecting to see, if not substance, some kind of stronger intellectual effort than the previous films had conveyed.
I feel remarkably disappointed, and most of my disappointment can be explained by this song:
This was probably the most expensive scene to shoot in the movie. They had to totally redecorate and relight a gigantic set three times, do the same thing to a smaller set, construct a new set on a rotating gimble and a taxi cab that opens up, put together wardrobes for the ENTIRE ENSEMBLE CAST that couldn't be reused for any of the other scenes, make gigantic wooden cutouts of New York City buildings, marquees, and the statue of fluffy liberty, and get Oprah's permission to mention her name. This scene alone must have taken forever to shoot, and that time and money is on the screen.
This is probably the best scene in the movie. So why do I think this is also disappointing? This song comes at the beginning of our second act and sets up our antagonists' motivation. Sharpay and Ryan want everything. They are a machine of success and power eating up all that they see. What is their plan? Well, they're going to sabotage Troy and Vanessa Hudgens so that nobody can stand in their way. Bwah ha ha ha! After this, Vanessa Hudgens is going to disappear from the film for a little while because life is a bitch isn't she, but then she's going to get sucked back in, and Sharpay is going to get knocked down a couple of pegs.
Haven't we seen this twice already?
Yes.
In fact, we've heard this song two times before.
This is probably the best scene in the movie. So why do I think this is also disappointing? This song comes at the beginning of our second act and sets up our antagonists' motivation. Sharpay and Ryan want everything. They are a machine of success and power eating up all that they see. What is their plan? Well, they're going to sabotage Troy and Vanessa Hudgens so that nobody can stand in their way. Bwah ha ha ha! After this, Vanessa Hudgens is going to disappear from the film for a little while because life is a bitch isn't she, but then she's going to get sucked back in, and Sharpay is going to get knocked down a couple of pegs.
Haven't we seen this twice already?
Yes.
In fact, we've heard this song two times before.
This one from the first film is easily one of the most memorable moments of the film for how much energy and excitement it holds. This song comes towards the end of the movie, so it's function in the plot isn't quite as similar to I Want it All as it could be, but the song carries similar tones of greed and power-lust.
|
This song is easily the highlight of the second film if you aren't watching the extended addition (if you are it's probably Humuhumu). It comes in the story at almost the exact same place as I Want it All and serves the same function of establishing the character's motivation.
|
Then later in the story we see Troy and Vanessa Hudgen's relationship strained and broken, and one of them sings a song about it.
In the first film the song is sung by Vanessa Hudgens while walking around the school (also, this song is terrible).
|
The following two films have Troy sing the song, first while jumping around a golf course like a lunatic...
|
and then in school hallways again, albeit with a better set budget.
|
But before that, they needed to fall in love all over again, and they sing a song.
In the first one this plot point is arguably the first song in the movie, but I think this one in the middle has a stronger dramatic impact.
|
This one they sing at a piano again.
|
And this one is on a roof.
|
Of course, they get back together in the end, and they sing a song.
In the first one it is the audition for the musical (that they inevitably ace).
|
In the second one it is at the talent show.
|
And while in the third one there are 2 candidates for this song, I choose to ignore the one that doesn't have to do with the musical within the musical to illustrate my point.
|
Then Ryan has a subplot (at least in the last 2).
|
|
My point (if you haven't figured it out already) is that these movies adhere to a very strict formula that is rarely broken.
I'm not going to criticize a franchise for repetitiveness. James Bond has gotten away with using a Mad Lib as a script 27 times and I hold that series in the highest regards. Heck sitcoms do this all the time because they couldn't exist without hitting a specific set of plot points each episode. Repetition is not a problem if you keep it fresh. What is a problem is lack of originality.
Sure James Bond might save the world in every film, but he's always up against a different enemy, punching a different henchmen, foiling a different scheme, chasing a different car, and changing with the real world his films are watched in. They might all have the same story points, but they are clearly different movies.
Now there are clear differences between High School Musical and James Bond as artistic concepts. Mainly: one is about teenagers falling in love while being torn apart by society, and the other is about a British guy who shoots people in the face. But beyond that, they are simply fundamentally different.
James Bond is not a complicated character. You can throw him into almost any scenario and inevitably get something that holds an audiences attention, and that's exactly what they do with him. Similarly, Indiana Jones is not the world's most complex character either. They both work really well in action films because all you need to do is change the particulars of the story and throw in a couple of side characters and suddenly you have gold (except for Crystal Skull, and the Dalton Bonds, and... I'm off topic).
High School Musical is a much more character driven story with a large ensemble cast. It's less like Doctor Who and more like Game of Thrones with less sex. You can't just change the setting of High School Musical and have a different movie, you also need to change the ways the characters interact. You need to mix it up. Have Sarah Jane talk to Rose Tyler. Get people to work together that we haven't seen cooperate before. Spread the love around.
To their credit they did try to do this. Ryan's subplots in the 2nd and 3rd films show him interacting with The Black Guy and Kelsi respectively, and those films are both infinitely better for it, but this really wasn't enough. None of it would have been enough without some radical change to the story. What could that radical change be?
What if the 3 movies focused on different couples? The first one is the forbidden love of Troy and Gabriela as they struggle against the social order, but in the next two films they take a backseat to a different story involving different characters.
Film 2 can still take place at the country club, but now we focus on the black people. Chad and Taylor were kind of a thing in the last movie, but I saw a friendship and not a romance. In the second film, their relationship turns even less romantic because Taylor is kind of Chad's boss. The moral of this film could be that the love of your life can be one of your best friends. Again Troy and Gabriella can still be in this, but now Troy will function the same way Chad did in the last movie.
Then film 3 can take a bigger risk, and the story will be about Ryan and Kelsi. They develop a thing, but the relationship doesn't last. Ryan's eccentric extrovert and Kelsi's social anxiety don't mesh together properly. It starts out fine, but then Ryan pushes her too far. He wants her to do things she's uncomfortable with. It gets a little scary while still being PG, and she calls it off. Ryan gets sad. Then in a more subdued ending then we've had before, he asks for her back, and the story in the end is about needing to accept boundaries.
I'd watch those movies. But moving away from the idea of turning it into some artistic statement, the least they could do is follow a continuity.
Something that really pissed me off about the movie 3 was how it just kind of totally ignored the ending of movie 2. If you recall, I interpreted the ending of High School Musical 2 as Sharpay's fall from grace. In fact at the beginning of the movie when asked what the theme of the talent show should be, Sharpay replies "redemption." Everything falls apart around her. Her plan fails, her brother betrays her, she recognizes her own flaws and mortality, and in an attempt to redeem herself she gifts the man she's thrown under the bus since the beginning the reward he deserves.
This change of heart has no echo. There is no consequence for this action in movie 3. I think that sucks. I think the second film is the best one purely because the antagonist has an arc, and then it just gets swept under the rug. What?
Things like that would have helped the series. Little changes in characters, little moments where they get a chance to act, a little bit of humanity. This is what's truly missing from all 3 of these movies. I'm not saying this is terrible. The core engagement of these films is the music. They don't need to create a story full of meaning and relevance because, well, it's all about the songs.
There's nothing wrong with that, but we could have had both.
I'm not going to criticize a franchise for repetitiveness. James Bond has gotten away with using a Mad Lib as a script 27 times and I hold that series in the highest regards. Heck sitcoms do this all the time because they couldn't exist without hitting a specific set of plot points each episode. Repetition is not a problem if you keep it fresh. What is a problem is lack of originality.
Sure James Bond might save the world in every film, but he's always up against a different enemy, punching a different henchmen, foiling a different scheme, chasing a different car, and changing with the real world his films are watched in. They might all have the same story points, but they are clearly different movies.
Now there are clear differences between High School Musical and James Bond as artistic concepts. Mainly: one is about teenagers falling in love while being torn apart by society, and the other is about a British guy who shoots people in the face. But beyond that, they are simply fundamentally different.
James Bond is not a complicated character. You can throw him into almost any scenario and inevitably get something that holds an audiences attention, and that's exactly what they do with him. Similarly, Indiana Jones is not the world's most complex character either. They both work really well in action films because all you need to do is change the particulars of the story and throw in a couple of side characters and suddenly you have gold (except for Crystal Skull, and the Dalton Bonds, and... I'm off topic).
High School Musical is a much more character driven story with a large ensemble cast. It's less like Doctor Who and more like Game of Thrones with less sex. You can't just change the setting of High School Musical and have a different movie, you also need to change the ways the characters interact. You need to mix it up. Have Sarah Jane talk to Rose Tyler. Get people to work together that we haven't seen cooperate before. Spread the love around.
To their credit they did try to do this. Ryan's subplots in the 2nd and 3rd films show him interacting with The Black Guy and Kelsi respectively, and those films are both infinitely better for it, but this really wasn't enough. None of it would have been enough without some radical change to the story. What could that radical change be?
What if the 3 movies focused on different couples? The first one is the forbidden love of Troy and Gabriela as they struggle against the social order, but in the next two films they take a backseat to a different story involving different characters.
Film 2 can still take place at the country club, but now we focus on the black people. Chad and Taylor were kind of a thing in the last movie, but I saw a friendship and not a romance. In the second film, their relationship turns even less romantic because Taylor is kind of Chad's boss. The moral of this film could be that the love of your life can be one of your best friends. Again Troy and Gabriella can still be in this, but now Troy will function the same way Chad did in the last movie.
Then film 3 can take a bigger risk, and the story will be about Ryan and Kelsi. They develop a thing, but the relationship doesn't last. Ryan's eccentric extrovert and Kelsi's social anxiety don't mesh together properly. It starts out fine, but then Ryan pushes her too far. He wants her to do things she's uncomfortable with. It gets a little scary while still being PG, and she calls it off. Ryan gets sad. Then in a more subdued ending then we've had before, he asks for her back, and the story in the end is about needing to accept boundaries.
I'd watch those movies. But moving away from the idea of turning it into some artistic statement, the least they could do is follow a continuity.
Something that really pissed me off about the movie 3 was how it just kind of totally ignored the ending of movie 2. If you recall, I interpreted the ending of High School Musical 2 as Sharpay's fall from grace. In fact at the beginning of the movie when asked what the theme of the talent show should be, Sharpay replies "redemption." Everything falls apart around her. Her plan fails, her brother betrays her, she recognizes her own flaws and mortality, and in an attempt to redeem herself she gifts the man she's thrown under the bus since the beginning the reward he deserves.
This change of heart has no echo. There is no consequence for this action in movie 3. I think that sucks. I think the second film is the best one purely because the antagonist has an arc, and then it just gets swept under the rug. What?
Things like that would have helped the series. Little changes in characters, little moments where they get a chance to act, a little bit of humanity. This is what's truly missing from all 3 of these movies. I'm not saying this is terrible. The core engagement of these films is the music. They don't need to create a story full of meaning and relevance because, well, it's all about the songs.
There's nothing wrong with that, but we could have had both.