Author: firebreathinglizardraccoon

By Gigi L.

One of the music industry’s most cherished icons, Taylor Swift, has released a total of nine albums throughout her career, all of them being immensely successful. But have you ever heard the theory that there could be a 10th? Ever since the release of her most recent album, Midnights, fans have been suspecting that there is a secret, unreleased Taylor Swift album hiding away somewhere. You might think it’s far-fetched, but you’d be surprised at how much evidence actually supports this wild idea. Break out your shovels because we’re about to do some deep digging.

The theory about the lost album has been around for a while, but the release of Taylor’s new album has made fans start to connect the dots. The theory is as follows: there is a secret Taylor Swift album entitled Karma that was supposed to be released in 2016, but was scrapped because of the scandal with Kim Kardashian and Kanye West at the time. (Long story short, Kim released excerpts of tapes catching Taylor in a messy public lie, and fans turned on her. Don’t worry, the rest of the tape was released in 2020 and Taylor’s name was cleared). The song “Karma” on the Midnights album is theorized to be an unreleased track from the “lost” album. 

First, the evidence. For the first part of her career, Taylor released an album every two years: her debut album in 2006, followed by Fearless in 2008, Speak Now in 2010, Red in 2012, and 1989 in 2014. Following this pattern, her 6th album should have been released in 2016. However, it wasn’t. There was no album in 2016. Instead, Taylor took a one-year hiatus and released Reputation in 2017. Fans suspect that Taylor was supposed to release the lost album, Karma, in 2016, but it was thrown out after her feud with the Kardashians, which led her to skip her usual album release date.

I know you’re thinking, “That’s probably just a coincidence.” However, there are more pieces to the puzzle hidden in the first song of the album Reputation, “Look What You Made Me Do.” If you watch the music video, Taylor can be seen with a chainsaw, cutting the wings off of an airplane. Look a little closer and you’ll see that the plane is labeled TS6, possibly representing Taylor Swift’s sixth album. She then spray-paints the word “reputation” over it, suggesting that her sixth album, Karma, was scrapped and transformed into Reputation. But that’s not the only piece of evidence in the song. Taylor sings, “The world moves on, another day, another drama drama, but not for me, not for me, all I think about is karma.” Which karma are you referring to, Taylor?

But wait, there are more music video Easter eggs to look at. In her music video for “The Man” in 2019, a businessman can be seen standing in front of a wall with the names of all of Taylor Swift’s albums written on it. Guess what’s written in the middle of the wall? That’s right, “Karma.” In fact, next to the word “Karma” is a sign that says “MISSING, IF FOUND, RETURN TO TAYLOR SWIFT.” Is it still just a coincidence?

Now let’s look at some old interviews. In a 2016 interview with Vogue, Taylor was asked about her favorite life lesson. She responded, “Karma is real.” Fans thought this was an allusion to Taylor’s album Karma, as it is very common for her to plant Easter eggs like that. More recently, in 2021, Taylor told Jimmy Fallon about how she started planting Easter eggs for her fans in her very first album. She said, “All I started thinking of was, ‘How do I hint at things, like how far is too far in advance? Can I hint at something three years in advance? Can I even plan things out that far? I think I’m going to try to do it.’”

Still don’t believe it? Well, the theory was confirmed by Taylor herself… sort of. After she announced that the 11th track on her album would be “Karma,” Taylor’s marketing team tweeted a GIF from the “The Man” music video showing the gratified wall with “Karma” on it. While this doesn’t directly confirm anything, it does suggest that there is some sort of connection between the karma graffiti in “The Man” and the song “Karma.”

Overall, you can’t really deny that there is something fishy going on with “Karma.” Is it a secret album? Is it just publicity for the album? Or are we overthinking this too much? Some might say all of this evidence is a coincidence. But nothing’s ever really a coincidence with Taylor Swift, is it?

By Gigi L.

The Oscars took place on March 27, 2022 and were “a glittering Disney commercial, tarnished by one too-real moment,” according to The New York Times. Everyone is talking about Will Smith’s friendly little face high-five to Chris Rock. While that was a notable event, no one is talking about the outfits. So, because I want to be different, I’m going to do that. Please enjoy.

1. Jessica Chastain

I actually kind of like this dress. The ombre is beautiful, and the sequins are a nice touch. I would have loved it if it faded into gold, maybe a nice light rose color, but purple is fine. The only thing I’m not a fan of is the ruffles at the bottom. It reminds me of something the “Hunger Games” announcer would wear. Overall, Gigi approves. 7/10.

1. Timothée Chalamet

I see my boy Timmy is sporting the “vampire grunge band” aesthetic. In all honesty, I have no problem with his outfit. He usually goes for pretty simple, elegant looks. The lace bracelet-things are a little unnecessary, but it’s a free country. Gigi approves. 8.5/10.

3. Lupita Nyong’o

Look, I really hate to do this but…honey. Sweet pea. Really? Sis looks like a roll of tinsel. Christmas was four months ago. The diamonds, too. This looks like something 6-year old me would have made for one of my Barbies. Who picked this? Fire them, please. -3/10.

4. Megan Thee Stallion

Words cannot describe how much I love this dress. Probably my favorite outfit of the night. Meg PULLED THROUGH. The shape, the cut, the texture, just wow. Gigi approves and Gigi wants. 1000000000000/10.

5. Vanessa Hudgens

Okay Nessi, I see you. Sleek, simple, timeless, pretty good. I do feel like the necklace is a little much and the straps could be thicker, but I won’t be too nitpicky. Gigi approves. 8/10.

6. Ricky Thompson

No. Just no. I can’t do this anymore. I’m sorry. Where do I even start? The cutout, the cape, the dangly whatcha-ma-doodles…bestie. He looks like a randomized Sims character. Burn this along with your stylist. -6000/10.

7. Saniyya Sidney

I don’t know how I feel about this one. It’s not completely atrocious, but my girl also looks like she’s going to Easter church service. Cut it shorter and it’s the dress my cousin wore to homecoming in 2013. It’s just not very appropriate for the Oscars, you know? 4/10.

8. Renate Reinsve

This one will be in my nightmares. Maybe it’s a statement, but I don’t like it. She looks like a pirate who fell into a paper shredder. This is what they made with all of the fabric scraps from the other dresses. Not a great Oscars outfit, but she has her Halloween costume down for this year. 0/10.

9. Jane Campion

Babe, this is a nightgown. You could have worn literally anything and you chose this. You look like Voldemort. These celebrity stylists need to be exiled. This is Dior, too. I could cut armholes into a bed sheet and get the exact same result. 2/10.

10. Rosie Perez

To end on a high note, I really like this dress. It’s not too flashy or complicated, however it’s still very pretty. Argue with me if you want, but red makes even the ugliest outfits gorgeous. Chef’s kisses. Gigi approves. 10/10.

In conclusion, the Oscars were filled with beautiful outfits, hideous outfits, and pretty average ones. I hope you enjoyed my review, and remember kids, violence is never the answer to your problems, unless you want to get banned from the Oscars.

By Gigi L.

Ladies and gentlemen, they did it again. After the catastrophe that was “Tall Girl” came out in 2019, Netflix thought it would be a brilliant idea to make a sequel. Did anyone ask for this? No. Did anyone want this? Also no. In fact, the audience was not too happy about this continuation considering it received 2 stars and a 63% on Rotten Tomatoes. But, they did it anyway because Netflix is on a roll with these trashy rom-coms. So, without further ado, let’s unpack this mess. (Spoilers are to come.)

For those of you who do not know, the first “Tall Girl” movie is basically about an outcast girl named Jodi who has had to deal with the struggles and oppression of being a tall, pretty, blonde girl all throughout her life. She has two friends, Fareeda and Jack (Jack is madly in love with her because why not?) One day, a Swedish exchange student named Stig shows up and Jodi falls head over heels for him for the sole reason that he is taller than her. I find it impossible to believe that Jodi has never met a guy who is taller than her because she is only 6’1”, but that is beside the point. Jack obviously hates Stig because he stole the heart of his woman, but to add fuel to the fire, Stig is going to be living with Jack’s family for the duration of his time in good ol’ ‘Merica. After 1 hour and 42 minutes of classic high-school-rom-com nonsense, Jodi ends up with Jack. Cute.

The second movie is even worse. This is mainly because of the fact that there is no storyline whatsoever. The whole plot is that Jodi and Jack break up because Jodi is busy with the school play. There is so much random information that is just thrown in that does not tie into the basic plot. For example, Stig’s sister comes to stay with them, Fareeda designs these ugly zipper-hoodie things, Stig and Fareeda fall in love; I could go on. None of this information adds anything to the plot, mind you, because the plot is so stupid. The writers could have woven these plot points into a much better sequence to make them all work together and relate to one message, but why would they ever do that?

Another thing I want to focus on is the love-triangle potential this movie had. At the beginning of “Tall Girl 2,” Jodi meets a guy named Tommy. Tommy and Jodi kind of flirt, there’s a little chemistry, you know? Then, after Jack and Jodi break up, Jodi and Tommy have a moment and they KISS. Now, this would have been the perfect opportunity for some “Kissing Booth 2”-esque action. They could have had a love triangle between Jodi, Tommy, and Jack. They could have had tension between Jack and Tommy. They could have had suspense with Jodi deciding who to give the final rose to. But no, of course not, why would Netflix ever make a conscious decision? Instead, Jodi and Tommy kiss, Jodi tells Jack, Jack pouts for a bit, Jodi and Tommy decide to forget it ever happened, and that useless plot point is done. A missed opportunity, I believe.

One more thing to complain about is the theme of the movie, a problem that was also seen in the first film. The message is not very relatable. The whole premise of the movie is Jodi breaking down barriers and proving to the world that she is more than just a tall girl. However, it is hard for people to resonate with this message because, in real life, Jodi would not even be considered that tall. It is not as pressing of an issue in the real world as the movie makes it seem. Plus, being tall is basically this girl’s whole personality. Rolling with the tall thing is fine, I guess, but it is way too exaggerated for viewers to identify with it.

All in all, I think this movie could have been fine. If the writers just constructed the story more articulately and somehow made all the random plot points contribute to one message, it would have been a much better movie. I am not saying that it is terrible, especially considering that it is supposed to be a little dumb and air-headed, but from a creative standpoint, this one goes in the trash. Although, it might not fit…

By Gigi L.

It has been over two years since the horrific monstrosity known as “Cats” first invaded theaters. It received a not-so-surprising 19% on Rotten Tomatoes, and the New York Times said it “wasn’t even an epic hairball.” So, in honor of the anniversary, it would be most fitting to discuss what an appalling mess this film is, don’t you think? (As always, spoilers ahead.)

The “Cats” movie is an adaptation of the famous Broadway musical. “Cats” is kind of notorious for being very confusing, so let’s break it down. The musical follows a group of cats called the Jellicle Cats who just hang out in sewers or whatever. Every year, the Jellicle Cats come together to decide who gets to go to the “heaviside layer,” or who gets to be reborn into a new life. The whole musical is just a bunch of songs about the cats leading up to who gets to be chosen. 

Now, “Cats” is a very unique show. This is mainly because, unlike many other classic theater plays, “Cats” does not have a protagonist. Therefore, the traditional musical construct is warped. Allow me to explain. The average musical begins with an establishing song, a song about the setting and sometimes the conflict(s). “Cats” has this. The next song is usually a song that the main character sings. “Cats” does not have this. In theater and musical film, this song that the main character sings is most commonly called the “I Want” song because it is about what the protagonist wants. For example, “How Far I’ll Go” from “Moana” or “Part of Your World” from “The Little Mermaid.” Villains, on the other hand, have their own special songs. The antagonist typically gets an “I Am” song. This song is not about what they want, just what they are, like “Mean Green Mother from Outer Space” from “Little Shop of Horrors” or “Shiny” from “Moana.” It was mentioned twice, so let’s use “Moana” as our example. “How Far I’ll Go” is about how much Moana wants to leave the island and explore the ocean, making it her “I Want” song. This sets up the main conflict of the movie and introduces Moana as the protagonist. “Shiny,” on the other hand, is not about what Tamatoa WANTS, it is only about what he IS. And that is very, very shiny. This is why “Cats” is so different. Since Cats does not have a protagonist, there is no “I Want” song. Instead, the whole musical is basically just two hours of “I Am” songs. Cats singing about other cats…until the end. 

Towards the end of the musical, one of the characters, Grizabella, sings a little tune called “Memory.” For context, Grizabella was once a Jellicle Cat but got the boot for some reason. “Memory” is about how much Grizabella misses the Jellicle Cats and wants to rejoin the club. So, after hours of “I Am” songs, we finally get an “I Want” song. Is Grizabella the hidden protagonist? Not really. This is what makes “Cats” so special, though. It goes against the traditional format of a musical and creates something completely new.

Why do you need to know all of this? It is so you can understand the main problem with the “Cats” movie. They took the musical that is literally famous for not having a protagonist, and guess what they did? They added a protagonist. Not only that, but she is probably the most useless character in the entire movie. 

Say hello to Victoria. Victoria is a cat who just kind of showed up one day and now wants to be a part of the Jellicle Cats. Victoria’s whole spiel is basically: “Oh, you think your life is hard, Grizabella? Well at least you got to be part of the Jellicle Cats for a little while.” This truth is particularly evident in the song “Beautiful Ghosts,” which Victoria sings to Grizabella as she is pouting. The chorus of the song is literally “but at least you have beautiful ghosts,” which says Victoria is more deserving of being a part of the Jellicle Cats because Grizabella already had a chance. Because both of them want to be a part of the Jellicle Cats, you would think this would cause some tension between the two, right? Wrong. At the end of the movie, Victoria literally HELPS Grizabella become a part of the Jellicle Cats again AND go to the heaviside layer. Does this make sense? Absolutely not. Why did they decide to do it? Beats me, bro.

Another thing wrong with creating a protagonist is that Victoria literally does not do anything. At the end of a movie or play, something is supposed to happen to the main character; they are supposed to get something or change in some way, but nothing happens to Victoria. She does not become a Jellicle Cat, and she does not get to go to the heaviside layer. If they wanted a protagonist so badly, why not make it Grizabella? After all, she is the one who gets all the action. SHE gets to be a Jellicle Cat, and SHE gets to go to the heaviside layer.

One more thing. I know this is a bit off-topic, but it just has to be said. The animation in this movie is absolutely terrifying. I woke up in the middle of the night screaming several times because I had a nightmare that one of these digital rats was going to rip my limbs off.

All in all, “Cats” is just awful. If they had just stuck with the original plot, maybe I wouldn’t be here. Maybe I could spend my Saturday doing something fun instead of writing about dancing furballs. Sorry, but this one’s got to go in the litterbox.

By Gigi L.

I’m really sorry. I’m probably risking my life writing this article because “Encanto” got such rave reviews, but I feel like I need to explain why this movie was just not that good. Please don’t kill me.

In case you have been living under a rock, “Encanto” is Disney’s latest film project and everyone is talking about it. It got a 93% on Rotten Tomatoes for audience review, and the New York Times described it as having “stunning animation, a beautifully composed story and spellbinding songs…” This is where my opinion clashes with millions of fans and reviewers. The idea behind “Encanto” was golden, but the execution was the issue. (Before we start, there will be spoilers in this article, so do not read any further if you do not want to read about the plot.)

“Encanto” is about a magical family called the Madrigals living in a magical house in Colombia. Each member of the family receives a “gift,” or magical power, when they are a young child, like super strength or shape-shifting. However, one of the Madrigal children never got a gift. Meet our protagonist, Mirabel. Mirabel always felt degraded and unloved by her abuela, aka the head of the house and a horrible grandmother, because she is not magical like her siblings or cousins. 

Mirabel then finds out that their house, their Casita, is losing its magic. She seeks out her uncle, Bruno, who was exiled from the family or something. Bruno’s gift is telling the future, so when he predicted something the family didn’t like, I guess they just kind of threw him out. Anyway, Bruno predicts the future and tells Mirabel that the only way to save the family’s magic is to… hug her sister. Wow. 

Mirabel’s sister, Isabela, has the gift to grow plants and flowers. She was always the golden child of the family and Abuela’s favorite because she is so perfect. Naturally, Mirabel absolutely hates her. So, she goes to Isabela’s room and they sing a song about how Isabela does not have to be perfect, and she could do so much more if she was not controlled by Abuela. Then, at the end of the song, they hug. Yay, the magic is saved. But wait, you’ll never guess, the house falls apart anyway. Why? I have no earthly idea. 

In the ruins, Mirabel tells Abuela that she’s always wanted her approval and she feels like she was never loved by Abuela. They hug and make up and all that dumb family stuff. Whoo hoo. Then, they rebuild their house. That is pretty much the end of the movie, at least all the important parts.

Now for my one issue… the plot. The whole movie felt like the beginning of the movie. There was no journey or climax; it just fell flat. The movie would have been much stronger if there was more build-up to the main point. In most successful films, the protagonist has to go through trials, or it takes them a little longer to find out what they have to do to save whatever. Mirabel knew from the start. She saw she had to hug her sister, so she hugged her sister. Done and done. 

Also, the whole point of a movie like this is to show that Mirabel is just as good as the rest of her family because she saved the house. But the thing is, she didn’t. Even after Mirabel and Isabela made up, the house still fell apart. Even after Mirabel and Abuela made up, the house didn’t come back together. Do you see where I’m coming from? There was no real conclusion or overall message.

“Encanto” had the potential to be a fantastic movie, but the plot was just not put together well. It would have been so much better if there was some sort of actual journey or growth, but I guess the writers were just lazy and wanted to get this thing done with. You know, I’m starting to think the movie was written by Bruno’s rats, but maybe that’s just me…