Idealizing anything can cause unnecessary problems. And yet, I can't stop this compulsion, although I know all too well that nothing is totally perfect.
In the last few months, my love affair with telenovelas was wearing thin, mainly because the 'Gran Final' for some of my telenovelas have been hit and miss. For example, En Nombre Del Amor was a disappointment, despite enjoying the stories leading up to the conclusion. And with Mi Pecado, while I wasn't nearly as invested in this telenovela, the gran final was fantastic, especially seeing Carmelo disheveled and deranged in prison. So had some trepidation when it came to the Gran Final for Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe. After all, in the weeks leading up to the conclusion, the story seemed to drag a bit, and frankly, there were one too many Alejandra crying over Rafael scenes. Again, my criticisms of that may be unfounded, since I don't understand Spanish and may have missed a crucial plot point. At any rate, I marvel at how wrong I was about how Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe would conclude. In fact, I'd venture to say that it was the best finale of soap opera/telenovela that I have ever seen.
In previous posts, I've lamented (read: bitched!) about how American soaps end, or rather, the fact that they get canceled. And it's understandable that most of these soaps that have been on the air have a difficult time encapsulating their long histories in the remaining months, but the haste in winding down storylines that likely didn't work usually took a lot of time away from giving fans a satisfactory goodbye. For example, Santa Barbara's finale centered around Warren and B.J.'s wedding, which was a shame, since their history wasn't as entrenched as other characters. Or Guiding Light, which did resolve some long overdue relationships like Alexandra and Fletcher; however, a lot of time was spent on Josh and Reva, who in my mind, pissed away a lot of time and fans' patience during the last years. The same goes with As the World Turns. While it was nice to see the Hughes' presence in the last episode, they were glaringly absent in the shows leading up to the finale, since the writers decided to focus on Jack and Carly (yet again).
So yeah, I expected that Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe would center on Rafael and Alejandra, but imagine my surprise at how the gran final was a celebration of the whole collective. Yes, it was off-putting that several brides shared their wedding with Alejandra, but you know what - I kinda liked it. I liked that the reception was a vehicle for breaking the fourth wall, i.e. showing clips of significant and funny moments involving many of the personnel from the dealership on the large projection screen on the reception hall stage. And it was good to see the staff of the beauty shop, the two cops who had a knack at stopping the main characters for silly infractions, and Vicky's father at the reception as well. And Sadina. And the staff meeting at the old dealership with a staff that bear a strange resemblance to Marino, Ramirez, Claudia, Dandy, Rosella, Jimenez, etc. And the use of top notch actors familiar to regular telenovela viewers implied a reverence for this telenovela that exceeded mine.
Sure, it bothered me that Claudia didn't seem to pay for sleeping with Marco, but then again, there were times when I fell asleep before the end, so it's possible that Alejandra and Claudia had words. But I guess the word of the night was affection - affection for the show, the cast, and the audience. An affection that has been lacking in American soaps in favor of pacifying the soaps' sponsors who callously ordered the plug to be pulled. Finally, some respect was given to all of the people who invested their time in a genre that sometimes don't get their due.
It has been a long time that I said, out loud, how much I enjoyed a television show and how much I was going to miss it. And hopefully, I am not the only one who feels this way about Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe, because if enough people love it, maybe Univision will return it to its lineup like they did with La Fea mas Bella.
Here's a snippet of the premiere episode, which I stupidly missed.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Happy Birthdays, Dinah and Michael!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kinda crazy that this continues to happen. First, I find out that two of my favorite actresses, Rosalind Russell and Angelina Jolie, share the same birthday. Now, I find out that two of my favorite singers, Dinah Washington and Michael Jackson, also share the same b-day. Two very unique, beautiful voices who had lives with many highs and lows. Two unique souls who left too soon.
To be frank, I mainly heard Dinah during those K-Tel commercials during the 80s. And then there was that drag queen on Sally Jesse Raphael who sang To Sir With Love in the voices of a dozen of fantastic female singers like Doris Day, Eartha Kitt, and of course, Dinah. Finally, when I hit college, a Tower Records moved in a block away from campus and I finally bought one of her CDs - finally, I found my favorite female voice. Sure, Ella's voice had this elegance and grace about it, but there was something about Dinah. It could be sharp, tarty, soulful and kinda bell-like. Plus, I read up on her life in the liner notes - too much drama and upheaval, largely due to the desire to 'fit the part'. At any rate, I just loved her voice and the fact that she was so scrappy in life.
And as for Michael, some of his life shadows Dinah, although I never heard of him pulling a weapon out on anyone. He had similar hang ups about his looks, but had the financial means and the upgraded technologies to do something about it. Sadly, his improvements alienated some and was used against him at every turn. Nevertheless, I love him - the everchanging looks, the dancing, the smile, and of course, that voice. A beautiful, bell-like quality. Michael was just moving, whether he was on top of the world or in the midst of a crisis and he remains that way, even though he is gone.
To be frank, I mainly heard Dinah during those K-Tel commercials during the 80s. And then there was that drag queen on Sally Jesse Raphael who sang To Sir With Love in the voices of a dozen of fantastic female singers like Doris Day, Eartha Kitt, and of course, Dinah. Finally, when I hit college, a Tower Records moved in a block away from campus and I finally bought one of her CDs - finally, I found my favorite female voice. Sure, Ella's voice had this elegance and grace about it, but there was something about Dinah. It could be sharp, tarty, soulful and kinda bell-like. Plus, I read up on her life in the liner notes - too much drama and upheaval, largely due to the desire to 'fit the part'. At any rate, I just loved her voice and the fact that she was so scrappy in life.
And as for Michael, some of his life shadows Dinah, although I never heard of him pulling a weapon out on anyone. He had similar hang ups about his looks, but had the financial means and the upgraded technologies to do something about it. Sadly, his improvements alienated some and was used against him at every turn. Nevertheless, I love him - the everchanging looks, the dancing, the smile, and of course, that voice. A beautiful, bell-like quality. Michael was just moving, whether he was on top of the world or in the midst of a crisis and he remains that way, even though he is gone.
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Returning to Days of Our Lives... albeit temporarily
Likely, I will return to Young and the Restless, although I am deeply dissatisfied with the course it is taking, but for now, I am tuning into Days of Our Lives. Why? Because they are finally going to deal with Frances Reid's death via Alice Horton's slow and inevitable decline and death and so far, they're doing a pretty good job.
Pretty good... but not great.
The thing that I really like is how the Horton relatives are trickling into Salem to pay their final respects. Coupling that with old clips featuring Alice Horton, at various ages, offering her steadfast advice and support to her family and Salem's strays, TPTB are conducting a respectful tribute. And unlike with MacDonald Carey/Tom Horton, Alice's death will not come as quite a shock. And the added element of Alice's health declining after the death of her son, Mickey, makes sense.
However, I think that the Alice tribute is taking the backburner to stories that seem irrelevant, given the circumstances. I honestly don't care about Arianna (who's that?), Melanie (who's that?), Nicole, scheming for Brady's affections (yes, I know about that and that was the reason why I stopped watching Days), Carly interfering with Chloe (oh, Chloe) and Daniel (who's that?).
Chloe, Chloe, Chloe...
You know, it didn't help when the writers decided to scar Chloe via a car accident, fake her death, and eventually reunite and marry Brady in what had to be the most hastily put together supercouple wedding ever. That didn't bode well for Broe's future. When Nadia Bjorlin's foray into movies didn't work out, the @$$hat writers decided to salvage Phloe (Phillip and Chloe), which I was always thoroughly against, since Phillip was possessive and obsessive towards Chloe. But Chloe had to do something...
But Chloe still being tangled up with Phillip and cheating with Phillip? Come on!!!! Chloe has some pucker to her, which was the reason why I gravitated to her, but this storyline is just cheap. CHEAP!!!! When Alice finally goes, I'm outta there. It's demoralizing that Days took what, potentially, was an interesting character type and made her a insecure, bedhopping slut.
Channeling Broe... stat!!!!
Pretty good... but not great.
The thing that I really like is how the Horton relatives are trickling into Salem to pay their final respects. Coupling that with old clips featuring Alice Horton, at various ages, offering her steadfast advice and support to her family and Salem's strays, TPTB are conducting a respectful tribute. And unlike with MacDonald Carey/Tom Horton, Alice's death will not come as quite a shock. And the added element of Alice's health declining after the death of her son, Mickey, makes sense.
However, I think that the Alice tribute is taking the backburner to stories that seem irrelevant, given the circumstances. I honestly don't care about Arianna (who's that?), Melanie (who's that?), Nicole, scheming for Brady's affections (yes, I know about that and that was the reason why I stopped watching Days), Carly interfering with Chloe (oh, Chloe) and Daniel (who's that?).
Chloe, Chloe, Chloe...
You know, it didn't help when the writers decided to scar Chloe via a car accident, fake her death, and eventually reunite and marry Brady in what had to be the most hastily put together supercouple wedding ever. That didn't bode well for Broe's future. When Nadia Bjorlin's foray into movies didn't work out, the @$$hat writers decided to salvage Phloe (Phillip and Chloe), which I was always thoroughly against, since Phillip was possessive and obsessive towards Chloe. But Chloe had to do something...
But Chloe still being tangled up with Phillip and cheating with Phillip? Come on!!!! Chloe has some pucker to her, which was the reason why I gravitated to her, but this storyline is just cheap. CHEAP!!!! When Alice finally goes, I'm outta there. It's demoralizing that Days took what, potentially, was an interesting character type and made her a insecure, bedhopping slut.
Channeling Broe... stat!!!!
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Rue McClanahan... gone
I realize that Rue passed away weeks ago, but I needed to mark her passing, regardless of how much time has passed.
For me, The Golden Girls' Blanche was an acquired taste. I understood Rose's innocence, Dorothy's doubts, and Sophia's scrappiness, but Blanche was one of the elements that I had to grow on; fortunately, once I hit my 20s, I finally 'got' Blanche. And in subsequent years, I realized that of all of the characters, Blanche came 'of age' during the run of the show. Yes, Blanche was known to be the sexy, promiscuous one of the bunch, but you also saw how she repaired her damaged relationships with her children, grapple with her own aging (getting a pacemaker comes to mind, along with doubting her allure, albeit temporarily), deal with the residual pain of being widowed and adapting to life choices of family members (brother Clayton's homosexuality and Big Daddy's marriage to a younger woman and his long ago affair with her nanny).
But enough with the internal reconciliations - some of Blanche's best moments involved the rest of her roommates. Unfortunately, I couldn't find my favorite Blanche clips on Utube, like when Blanche was trying to comfort Rose and Dorothy after they had a falling out due to their children sexing each other. Or the clip when Blanche taunted Sophia while she was on a date with Fidel Santiago, resulting in one of Sophia's best burns. But the clips I did find illustrate the awesomeness of Blanche, which Rue McClanahan portrayed with effortless panache.
For me, The Golden Girls' Blanche was an acquired taste. I understood Rose's innocence, Dorothy's doubts, and Sophia's scrappiness, but Blanche was one of the elements that I had to grow on; fortunately, once I hit my 20s, I finally 'got' Blanche. And in subsequent years, I realized that of all of the characters, Blanche came 'of age' during the run of the show. Yes, Blanche was known to be the sexy, promiscuous one of the bunch, but you also saw how she repaired her damaged relationships with her children, grapple with her own aging (getting a pacemaker comes to mind, along with doubting her allure, albeit temporarily), deal with the residual pain of being widowed and adapting to life choices of family members (brother Clayton's homosexuality and Big Daddy's marriage to a younger woman and his long ago affair with her nanny).
But enough with the internal reconciliations - some of Blanche's best moments involved the rest of her roommates. Unfortunately, I couldn't find my favorite Blanche clips on Utube, like when Blanche was trying to comfort Rose and Dorothy after they had a falling out due to their children sexing each other. Or the clip when Blanche taunted Sophia while she was on a date with Fidel Santiago, resulting in one of Sophia's best burns. But the clips I did find illustrate the awesomeness of Blanche, which Rue McClanahan portrayed with effortless panache.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Happy Birthday, Marilyn Monroe!!!
She was an unexpected surprise to me, a fact that may be lost on some. Like many so-called icons, she was talked up so much, that I didn't want to look into why so many loved her. But thanks to ole skool, commercial-free, actually showing classic movies American Movie Classic, I got a sample of why so many found Marilyn special.
She really was special - vulnerable and absolutely adorable. Sexy, of course, but that's only incidental, IMO. She was soft, both in manner and in appearance, something that women should aspire to more often.
Loved Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, especially because of the friendship between Dorothy and Lorelei. Marilyn was rarely paired with other women, in terms of friendships, and no, I can't count How to Marry a Millionaire because that was more about strategy. I wished that Marilyn was paired with more women, in terms of onscreen relationships - maybe it would've made her seem less threatening, although I still have a problem with women being threatened by another woman's sexuality, especially when the sexuality is far from pornographic or superficial. After all, Jean Harlow was often pair with Una Merkal and that onscreen pairing did wonders to add dimension to Harlow's persona (and it was fun and funny).
At any rate, this clip is the reason why Marilyn was added to my list of actresses/stars whose tears at the hands of another warrants butchy, ass-kicking wrath, because some hearts should not be hurt, whether accidentally or intentionally.
She really was special - vulnerable and absolutely adorable. Sexy, of course, but that's only incidental, IMO. She was soft, both in manner and in appearance, something that women should aspire to more often.
Loved Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, especially because of the friendship between Dorothy and Lorelei. Marilyn was rarely paired with other women, in terms of friendships, and no, I can't count How to Marry a Millionaire because that was more about strategy. I wished that Marilyn was paired with more women, in terms of onscreen relationships - maybe it would've made her seem less threatening, although I still have a problem with women being threatened by another woman's sexuality, especially when the sexuality is far from pornographic or superficial. After all, Jean Harlow was often pair with Una Merkal and that onscreen pairing did wonders to add dimension to Harlow's persona (and it was fun and funny).
At any rate, this clip is the reason why Marilyn was added to my list of actresses/stars whose tears at the hands of another warrants butchy, ass-kicking wrath, because some hearts should not be hurt, whether accidentally or intentionally.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Gary Coleman... gone
I like how fans are giving celebs their flowers while they are still hear. I really love how Betty White is getting hers; kinda dubious about Brett Michaels is getting his, especially if the flowers seem to be ill-gotten (The Apprentice). Nevertheless, people should let others know that their efforts are appreciated while they are coherent and healthy enough to appreciate it. Sadly, Gary Coleman didn't get his until he was in a coma, so who knows if he ever heard or knew about them.
Didn't much care for the press' treatment of his death on Friday, especially the way The Insider handled it. Yes, they were respectful, but they were also deceitful and hypocritical. They should've acknowledged that their stage was the scene of one of Gary's last public humiliations and that it was at the hands of legal expert Lisa Bloom, who preceded to do a victory lap on various 24/7 news outlets like CNN and HLN. I hope our peroxided Ursula relished the amulet containing Coleman's outburst because hopefully, her conduct after the unwarranted confrontation will be remembered, just as Nancy Grace's grilling of Melinda Duckett continues to be a black mark.
At any rate, I hope that at some point, Gary was proud of his work on television. As I said in a previous post, I will never understand this conspiracy of making people/audiences forget. Gary Coleman was more than 'What'cha talkin' 'bout, Willis?' Hell, the first season of Diff'rent Strokes wasn't made by that line. It was the sincerity of the performances. It was the writing. It was the chemistry among the actors. It was the way that the child actors melded with their adult counterparts. It was too bad that Diff'rent Strokes drifted away from those elements and at points, became too preachy and heavy. But then again, the audience was partly to blame, since they had certain expectations on how things should've played out onscreen and off, resulting in limited opportunities for the younger actors.
Nevertheless, Gary Coleman possessed a spark. And while he carried it onto Diff'rent Strokes, he had it long before, as demonstrated on previous guest starring appearances like on Good Times and The Jeffersons. His appearance on The Jeffersons was one of my favorite performances - loud/smart-mouthed Raymond, George's nephew from Chicago. Little Raymond gave Uncle George the blues BIG TIME!
Doing good work, at some point, is better than never doing it at all. And the fact that Gary did it while battling serious health problems deserves additional consideration. Hopefully, NOW, Gary will find some peace and maybe, a resurgent (albeit procrastinated) amount of respect.
Didn't much care for the press' treatment of his death on Friday, especially the way The Insider handled it. Yes, they were respectful, but they were also deceitful and hypocritical. They should've acknowledged that their stage was the scene of one of Gary's last public humiliations and that it was at the hands of legal expert Lisa Bloom, who preceded to do a victory lap on various 24/7 news outlets like CNN and HLN. I hope our peroxided Ursula relished the amulet containing Coleman's outburst because hopefully, her conduct after the unwarranted confrontation will be remembered, just as Nancy Grace's grilling of Melinda Duckett continues to be a black mark.
At any rate, I hope that at some point, Gary was proud of his work on television. As I said in a previous post, I will never understand this conspiracy of making people/audiences forget. Gary Coleman was more than 'What'cha talkin' 'bout, Willis?' Hell, the first season of Diff'rent Strokes wasn't made by that line. It was the sincerity of the performances. It was the writing. It was the chemistry among the actors. It was the way that the child actors melded with their adult counterparts. It was too bad that Diff'rent Strokes drifted away from those elements and at points, became too preachy and heavy. But then again, the audience was partly to blame, since they had certain expectations on how things should've played out onscreen and off, resulting in limited opportunities for the younger actors.
Nevertheless, Gary Coleman possessed a spark. And while he carried it onto Diff'rent Strokes, he had it long before, as demonstrated on previous guest starring appearances like on Good Times and The Jeffersons. His appearance on The Jeffersons was one of my favorite performances - loud/smart-mouthed Raymond, George's nephew from Chicago. Little Raymond gave Uncle George the blues BIG TIME!
Doing good work, at some point, is better than never doing it at all. And the fact that Gary did it while battling serious health problems deserves additional consideration. Hopefully, NOW, Gary will find some peace and maybe, a resurgent (albeit procrastinated) amount of respect.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Now... can you see how it could happen?
Many MJ haters have declared that his settlement was his admission. They always lament that no innocent man would give up and settle. And while many MJ supporters are quick to bring up J.C. Penney, the previous entity the Arvisos attempted to milk, there are many other non-MJ related cases when an innocent does the unthinkable and give up.
Kevin Fox was one such innocent.
First of all, I have to thank what(who)ever for waking me up at 3am to see this story. Sure, it was on ABC World News Now, a program that I loathe; however, the anchors, Vinita Nair and Jeremy Hubbard, didn't do the legwork, therefore the segment about Riley Fox was compelling and, dare I say, accurate. The segment, taken from Nightline, detailed the case of Riley Fox, a missing 3 year old, who was later found raped, bound, and drowned in a local creek.
The story detailed how the local police zeroed in on Riley's father, Kevin Fox, since there was no evidence of forced entry and the delay in contacting 911 about the little girl's disappearance. On that basis, the cops proceeded to interrogate Kevin, without legal counsel present, for 14 hours, showing him graphic pictures of his murdered child. After the relentless pressure, Kevin confessed; the local authorities told the FBI to not conduct DNA tests using Kevin's samples. So, the cops had their man and to them, their case was closed; however, Kevin's attorney, Kathleen Zellner took the initiative and had Kevin's samples tested independent of the authorities, an action that resulted in Kevin being excluded as a suspect in Riley's death. This happened in 2005.
Fast forward to 2010 - the local authorities received a tip regarding an incarcerated sex offender, Scott Eby. The local authorities paid Eby a prison visit, took a sample - 24 hours later, his DNA was determined to be a match to the DNA found on Riley, resulting in an immediate confession.
Noticably, many bloggers and TV anchors are asking how could an innocent person confess to a crime? And apparently, the local authorities now want to talk to Kevin Fox and ask him how that could happen, an action that should've happened as soon as he was released from jail. An action that could've begun the process of examining their local law enforcement interrogation techniques. But personally, I think that this pompous, grandiose attempt to 'get answers' is wholly unnecessary. I feel that this goes along with the concept that the greedy can't accurately gauge generosity. The cynical or pessimists of the world can't gauge innocence either. Especially if the innocent is perceived as being 'too' innocent. And sadly, the innocent can be naive enough to think that the helpers of the world can see them clearly. They really can't - their lens is cloudy.
Now, if a father can admit to raping, bounding, and drowning his little daughter just based on 14 hours of interrogation and implications that he would be repeatedly raped in prison if he didn't take the authorities' deal, shouldn't considerations be taken in MJ's 1993 case? After all, MJ was strip searched and photographed, interrogated by authorities who weren't above taking their case to the press via 'leaks' over a longer period of time. And while the settlement was designed to prevent the family from continuing to 'leak' things to the press, it didn't prevent them from participating in the investigations and litigation of the case; however, the evidence didn't yield anything that could result in a successful prosecution. Michael Jackson's financial status was pretty stable before the allegations when Evan Chandler tried to get money for his (cow)pie in the sky screenplays; Michael's financial status was as strong after the accusation, but he allowed his insurance company to cut the check. What was the difference between the initial inquiry and the payment from the insurance company?
PRESSURE!!!!!!!!!!!
And given that he wasn't just getting it from law enforcement, but from many different directions in the press, can anyone blame him for making the pressure stop?
And BTW... the FBI. Apparently, the FBI allowed the local authorities to dictate their level of involvement in the investigation in the Illinois case. Apparently, this was the case with the Santa Barbara investigation. Whereas the Illinois wanted the minimum amount of participation in the Fox investigation, a decision that was detrimental to the Fox family and the greater community, Santa Barbara wanted the FBI to hit MJ with all that they got. The result? No evidence of kiddie porn on MJ's numerous computers and the ruling out of numerous dubious witnesses who courted the press in the past with contradictory pantload stories.
So how can anyone congratulate the FBI on great detective work on the Fox case and yet, unilaterally dismiss their decidedly more thorough work in the MJ molestation case? Actually, this is directed specifically at Diane Dimond, the b*tch who accused the FBI of whitewashing the MJ investigations just because their findings didn't support the pantload she and her ilk spewed for nearly 20 years?
Needless to say, I hope that the Kevin Fox debacle is an isolated incident, but I truly doubt that it is. Hell, Hollywood is fond of purchasing film rights to stories like this, and yet, they sat on their hands as this particular drama befell Michael in 1993 and 2005. And they still remain pretty tight-lipped about this. Mind you, Kevin Fox didn't carry the baggage of being a Black, effeminate, enigmatic superstar who continually put fellow performers to shame, whether it was onstage, in development/brainstorming meeting, or giving away millions upon millions of dollars without blinking an eye.
Kevin Fox was just a young White father watching his kids while his wife was away. Just a citizen of a small town that easily believed the local law enforcement instead of looking at Kevin and his circumstances. It's easy to play armchair quarterback regarding how one would react to being falsely accused of a crime, especially when one thinks that they are living a life in which such questions or allegations would never be lodged.
I'm willing to bet that Kevin and his family thought the same thing - once upon a time.
Kevin Fox was one such innocent.
First of all, I have to thank what(who)ever for waking me up at 3am to see this story. Sure, it was on ABC World News Now, a program that I loathe; however, the anchors, Vinita Nair and Jeremy Hubbard, didn't do the legwork, therefore the segment about Riley Fox was compelling and, dare I say, accurate. The segment, taken from Nightline, detailed the case of Riley Fox, a missing 3 year old, who was later found raped, bound, and drowned in a local creek.
The story detailed how the local police zeroed in on Riley's father, Kevin Fox, since there was no evidence of forced entry and the delay in contacting 911 about the little girl's disappearance. On that basis, the cops proceeded to interrogate Kevin, without legal counsel present, for 14 hours, showing him graphic pictures of his murdered child. After the relentless pressure, Kevin confessed; the local authorities told the FBI to not conduct DNA tests using Kevin's samples. So, the cops had their man and to them, their case was closed; however, Kevin's attorney, Kathleen Zellner took the initiative and had Kevin's samples tested independent of the authorities, an action that resulted in Kevin being excluded as a suspect in Riley's death. This happened in 2005.
Fast forward to 2010 - the local authorities received a tip regarding an incarcerated sex offender, Scott Eby. The local authorities paid Eby a prison visit, took a sample - 24 hours later, his DNA was determined to be a match to the DNA found on Riley, resulting in an immediate confession.
Noticably, many bloggers and TV anchors are asking how could an innocent person confess to a crime? And apparently, the local authorities now want to talk to Kevin Fox and ask him how that could happen, an action that should've happened as soon as he was released from jail. An action that could've begun the process of examining their local law enforcement interrogation techniques. But personally, I think that this pompous, grandiose attempt to 'get answers' is wholly unnecessary. I feel that this goes along with the concept that the greedy can't accurately gauge generosity. The cynical or pessimists of the world can't gauge innocence either. Especially if the innocent is perceived as being 'too' innocent. And sadly, the innocent can be naive enough to think that the helpers of the world can see them clearly. They really can't - their lens is cloudy.
Now, if a father can admit to raping, bounding, and drowning his little daughter just based on 14 hours of interrogation and implications that he would be repeatedly raped in prison if he didn't take the authorities' deal, shouldn't considerations be taken in MJ's 1993 case? After all, MJ was strip searched and photographed, interrogated by authorities who weren't above taking their case to the press via 'leaks' over a longer period of time. And while the settlement was designed to prevent the family from continuing to 'leak' things to the press, it didn't prevent them from participating in the investigations and litigation of the case; however, the evidence didn't yield anything that could result in a successful prosecution. Michael Jackson's financial status was pretty stable before the allegations when Evan Chandler tried to get money for his (cow)pie in the sky screenplays; Michael's financial status was as strong after the accusation, but he allowed his insurance company to cut the check. What was the difference between the initial inquiry and the payment from the insurance company?
PRESSURE!!!!!!!!!!!
And given that he wasn't just getting it from law enforcement, but from many different directions in the press, can anyone blame him for making the pressure stop?
And BTW... the FBI. Apparently, the FBI allowed the local authorities to dictate their level of involvement in the investigation in the Illinois case. Apparently, this was the case with the Santa Barbara investigation. Whereas the Illinois wanted the minimum amount of participation in the Fox investigation, a decision that was detrimental to the Fox family and the greater community, Santa Barbara wanted the FBI to hit MJ with all that they got. The result? No evidence of kiddie porn on MJ's numerous computers and the ruling out of numerous dubious witnesses who courted the press in the past with contradictory pantload stories.
So how can anyone congratulate the FBI on great detective work on the Fox case and yet, unilaterally dismiss their decidedly more thorough work in the MJ molestation case? Actually, this is directed specifically at Diane Dimond, the b*tch who accused the FBI of whitewashing the MJ investigations just because their findings didn't support the pantload she and her ilk spewed for nearly 20 years?
Needless to say, I hope that the Kevin Fox debacle is an isolated incident, but I truly doubt that it is. Hell, Hollywood is fond of purchasing film rights to stories like this, and yet, they sat on their hands as this particular drama befell Michael in 1993 and 2005. And they still remain pretty tight-lipped about this. Mind you, Kevin Fox didn't carry the baggage of being a Black, effeminate, enigmatic superstar who continually put fellow performers to shame, whether it was onstage, in development/brainstorming meeting, or giving away millions upon millions of dollars without blinking an eye.
Kevin Fox was just a young White father watching his kids while his wife was away. Just a citizen of a small town that easily believed the local law enforcement instead of looking at Kevin and his circumstances. It's easy to play armchair quarterback regarding how one would react to being falsely accused of a crime, especially when one thinks that they are living a life in which such questions or allegations would never be lodged.
I'm willing to bet that Kevin and his family thought the same thing - once upon a time.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Small potatas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Again... I know that it is wrong for me to still be enjoying this, but the Klein/Pfeiffer c*ck-up is still amusing to me. Apparently, the threats continue, which isn't altogether funny. Personally, I hoped that it would've ended by now. But then again, Klein continue to fan the flames by engaging in an online sparring match with elderly Liz Taylor, so you have to wonder whether, deep down, he's getting off on the negative attention.
He probably was, but sadly, I think the charge he initially got is waning and fortunately, the FBI is helping to throw cold water on Klein. Apparently, they declined to get involved in the death threats being directed at Klein and his 'pal' Pfeiffer and referred them to the local authorities. That must've stung Klein - yet another federal agency telling him thanks, but no thanks. First, it was the FDA ever so subtly telling Klein to move along, since his input about prescription drugs and facial injectibles were not needed at all, and now, the FBI saying that his death threats case isn't all that serious.
Hee... hee...
Because dude thinks that he is an elite. That being a dermatologist to the stars should count for something, because, after all, Michael Jackson was the subject of a death threat and the FBI went to work. Of course, some haters would cite that the loon included President Bush Sr. in the threats, but the fact remains that some serious surveillance were conducted at Havenhurst. And frankly, it looks like Klein couldn't even get an escort to his car. And, then there was that terrorist threat at the 2005 trial. But maybe Klein can keep his fingers crossed that at his trial, the feds will have to intervene for the sake of public safety. Oh, wait... the possibility that the heavy tongued douchebag being locked up and all of his medical licenses pulled permanently could and should protect public safety.
Paraphrasing a line from Frasier, the FBI pricked the balloon of Klein's pomposity. I hope the trend continues.
But not the threats. There should be better ways to apply pressure on Klein and Pfeiffer for their flagrant attempt at disparaging the dead for a fee. Having them hire bodyguards could drain them financially, but stopping entertainment outlets from funding pantloads and various forms of lying should be the priority.
But for now, Klein and Pfeiffer being declared 'small potatas' by a federal agency on an international stage, will do.
He probably was, but sadly, I think the charge he initially got is waning and fortunately, the FBI is helping to throw cold water on Klein. Apparently, they declined to get involved in the death threats being directed at Klein and his 'pal' Pfeiffer and referred them to the local authorities. That must've stung Klein - yet another federal agency telling him thanks, but no thanks. First, it was the FDA ever so subtly telling Klein to move along, since his input about prescription drugs and facial injectibles were not needed at all, and now, the FBI saying that his death threats case isn't all that serious.
Hee... hee...
Because dude thinks that he is an elite. That being a dermatologist to the stars should count for something, because, after all, Michael Jackson was the subject of a death threat and the FBI went to work. Of course, some haters would cite that the loon included President Bush Sr. in the threats, but the fact remains that some serious surveillance were conducted at Havenhurst. And frankly, it looks like Klein couldn't even get an escort to his car. And, then there was that terrorist threat at the 2005 trial. But maybe Klein can keep his fingers crossed that at his trial, the feds will have to intervene for the sake of public safety. Oh, wait... the possibility that the heavy tongued douchebag being locked up and all of his medical licenses pulled permanently could and should protect public safety.
Paraphrasing a line from Frasier, the FBI pricked the balloon of Klein's pomposity. I hope the trend continues.
But not the threats. There should be better ways to apply pressure on Klein and Pfeiffer for their flagrant attempt at disparaging the dead for a fee. Having them hire bodyguards could drain them financially, but stopping entertainment outlets from funding pantloads and various forms of lying should be the priority.
But for now, Klein and Pfeiffer being declared 'small potatas' by a federal agency on an international stage, will do.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Do we REALLY need doormen for bandwagons?
Thank you, NPR.
For some reason, doormen have been on my mind. Then I thought back on an NPR program that discussed the impending New York City doormen strike. An 'expert' was explaining why the residents of some of NYC's most elite hotels and apartments are shaking in their boots, stating that these men provide information, a sense of familiarity, and community to those who depend on them.
Which brings me to Betty White's recent triumph on Saturday Night Live. Naturally, there are those who need to be contrary about her appearance. (Un)fortunately, I came in contact with two morons who had to play devil's advocate. One was a local morning DJ on a country music station; the other was Access Hollywood's Billy Bush. Their consensus - the SNL writers used Betty White's age to counterpoint their risque dialogue.
A giant Marty Feldman eye roll on that one.
Obviously, these two got on the bandwagon a bit too prematurely. Because if they were paying attention pre-Screen Actors Guild speech, they would've known about the following Betty had due to her using her age, her candy-faced appearance, and gentle voice when tackling risque and touchy material. Clearly, none of these dudes knew about her recurrent appearances on Craig Ferguson, where she wasn't above pretending to be a drug mule. Or the Funny or Die video where she used very salty language when interacting with Ryan Reynolds on The Proposal set. Or when she was a murderess on Boston Legal. Or her recurrent role on Bold and the Beautiful as Stephanie Forrester's glacial, battleax mother.
And let's go back to The Golden Girls, shall we? Instead of watching the edited syndication versions of the show, why not rent the unedited original episodes on DVD. Golden Girls was my Saturday night viewing as a kid and I marvel at how many jokes and sexual references went over my head. And yes, some of the juicy stuff was uttered by Betty White.
And in case these douchebags missed The Golden Girls, they could go back to The Mary Tyler Moore Show. Yes, there were a variety of women on the show - prim working woman Mary; wisecracking working woman Rhoda; insecure homemaker Phyllis; innocent chronic girlfriend Georgette. But then came Sue Ann Nivens - steely, hotsy totsy working woman. With the other women, there was some rivalry (Phyllis and Rhoda), but there was a feeling of comradeship. Sue Ann, on the other hand, was disinterested in being 'one of the girls'. She was satisfied with being the alpha female and unapologetic when she was on the prowl. Maybe Sue Ann was jealous of Mary Richards, but she never languished in that feeling. If anything, Sue Ann played harder and more ruthlessly to compensate for Mary's sweetness. And she got as much as she gave, as proven by Murray picking Sue Ann up and sitting her in a multilayer cake.
So for people to accuse SNL of taking advantage of Betty White for cheap jokes... these losers need to get a life and preferably, some context. One of the reasons why people are rooting for Betty White is because she doesn't take herself too seriously. She takes the work seriously, but never herself. People are tired of being told that people like Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon, Cameron Diaz, etc. are funny. People saw funny on Saturday. Betty's enthusiasm, professionalism, and dare I say, chemistry with her fellow cast members were some of the reasons why people loved her on SNL. And personally, my favorite skit was the Scared Straight skit, teaming her with Keenan Thompson. There was an undeniable chemistry between these two which almost overshadowed the WIZARD OF ASS bit.
I said ALMOST.
So in closing, people shouldn't jump on bandwagons just because it's the thing to do. Know what you're in for - Betty obviously did, hence her continuing to get gigs at 88. And please... stop making this woman into America's Grandma. I don't think she's a grandma in real life, so why should she shoulder the burden of other people's perceptions and expectations, especially the lazy-brained?
For some reason, doormen have been on my mind. Then I thought back on an NPR program that discussed the impending New York City doormen strike. An 'expert' was explaining why the residents of some of NYC's most elite hotels and apartments are shaking in their boots, stating that these men provide information, a sense of familiarity, and community to those who depend on them.
Which brings me to Betty White's recent triumph on Saturday Night Live. Naturally, there are those who need to be contrary about her appearance. (Un)fortunately, I came in contact with two morons who had to play devil's advocate. One was a local morning DJ on a country music station; the other was Access Hollywood's Billy Bush. Their consensus - the SNL writers used Betty White's age to counterpoint their risque dialogue.
A giant Marty Feldman eye roll on that one.
Obviously, these two got on the bandwagon a bit too prematurely. Because if they were paying attention pre-Screen Actors Guild speech, they would've known about the following Betty had due to her using her age, her candy-faced appearance, and gentle voice when tackling risque and touchy material. Clearly, none of these dudes knew about her recurrent appearances on Craig Ferguson, where she wasn't above pretending to be a drug mule. Or the Funny or Die video where she used very salty language when interacting with Ryan Reynolds on The Proposal set. Or when she was a murderess on Boston Legal. Or her recurrent role on Bold and the Beautiful as Stephanie Forrester's glacial, battleax mother.
And let's go back to The Golden Girls, shall we? Instead of watching the edited syndication versions of the show, why not rent the unedited original episodes on DVD. Golden Girls was my Saturday night viewing as a kid and I marvel at how many jokes and sexual references went over my head. And yes, some of the juicy stuff was uttered by Betty White.
And in case these douchebags missed The Golden Girls, they could go back to The Mary Tyler Moore Show. Yes, there were a variety of women on the show - prim working woman Mary; wisecracking working woman Rhoda; insecure homemaker Phyllis; innocent chronic girlfriend Georgette. But then came Sue Ann Nivens - steely, hotsy totsy working woman. With the other women, there was some rivalry (Phyllis and Rhoda), but there was a feeling of comradeship. Sue Ann, on the other hand, was disinterested in being 'one of the girls'. She was satisfied with being the alpha female and unapologetic when she was on the prowl. Maybe Sue Ann was jealous of Mary Richards, but she never languished in that feeling. If anything, Sue Ann played harder and more ruthlessly to compensate for Mary's sweetness. And she got as much as she gave, as proven by Murray picking Sue Ann up and sitting her in a multilayer cake.
So for people to accuse SNL of taking advantage of Betty White for cheap jokes... these losers need to get a life and preferably, some context. One of the reasons why people are rooting for Betty White is because she doesn't take herself too seriously. She takes the work seriously, but never herself. People are tired of being told that people like Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon, Cameron Diaz, etc. are funny. People saw funny on Saturday. Betty's enthusiasm, professionalism, and dare I say, chemistry with her fellow cast members were some of the reasons why people loved her on SNL. And personally, my favorite skit was the Scared Straight skit, teaming her with Keenan Thompson. There was an undeniable chemistry between these two which almost overshadowed the WIZARD OF ASS bit.
I said ALMOST.
So in closing, people shouldn't jump on bandwagons just because it's the thing to do. Know what you're in for - Betty obviously did, hence her continuing to get gigs at 88. And please... stop making this woman into America's Grandma. I don't think she's a grandma in real life, so why should she shoulder the burden of other people's perceptions and expectations, especially the lazy-brained?
Monday, May 10, 2010
Lena Horne... gone
Saying that the world has gotten a little less pretty would be a tool bag thing to say. Something that a pedestrian observer would say who knew little about Lena Horne. Mind you, I am not an expert on all things Lena Horne - not by any stretch. However, I was fortunate enough to pay attention when programs like PBS's American Masters decided to delve beneath the glossy, arrestingly beautiful veneer, revealing a rather complex woman who, despite her beauty, which opened some doors, was wounded by the times she lived in and through. Unfortunately, these difficulties get a passing acknowledgment, but hopefully, if her life story makes it to the screen, she will get more of a due than she's getting now.
Of course, I will always remember her for Cabin In the Sky, Stormy Weather, and her appearance on Sanford and Son. And The Wiz too. But this commercial was probably Lena's last public appearance.
Of course, I will always remember her for Cabin In the Sky, Stormy Weather, and her appearance on Sanford and Son. And The Wiz too. But this commercial was probably Lena's last public appearance.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Hasselbeck versus Andrews: Smugness run amok
So Elisabeth popped off at the mouth about the skimpiness of Erin Andrews' costumes on Dancing with the Stars... as if skimpiness is a new thing for the show. And per usual, the fellow women on the panel just sat there and snickered, egging her on.
Really, Elisabeth? You really think that watching Erin in skimpy costumes would've been enough for dude? Really? Because the way I remember it, dude found out which hotel she was staying at, tampered with her hotel room peepholes, taped her, in the privacy of her hotel room, and put the images online.
No, Elisabeth... skimpy costumes were not going to get it for this dude. And for that matter, why does Elisabeth continue to take on the shallower aspect of a subject instead of getting to the marrow of things? Remember... Elisabeth was the victim of threats against herself, her husband and newborn child. Maybe Elisabeth should've tried to draw a correlation between that personal event and Erin's situation, especially since Erin is still going through a separate situation along the same lines. And remember when Elisabeth was mortified that Law & Order SVU had a storyline where a character with a name similar to Elisabeth, was brutally raped and murdered? She got coddled and stroked by her fellow co-hosts, and yet, she couldn't do the same for another woman?
Therein lies the problem with the majority of the panelists on The View. They think that they reached a certain level, therefore they can't be mindful of others' situations. They think that everything is a Hot Topic subject, instead of something that's tangible and pressing to real life women. Mind you, I haven't watched The View in years - probably since Star Jones got married - but that mindset was setting in even then.
I do wonder what the ladies' take was when Sandra Bullock adopted little Louis? Was that an act of love to them or was it 'buying a child', an accusation that they readily lodge against Angelina Jolie? And for that matter, why is adoption the only process tainted with the accusation that it's a purchase versus an act of love? Isn't spending large amounts of money to create a biological child buying a child? If anything, one could argue that not only one is purchasing a child, it is also an exercise in egotism, since one is saying that they can't love a child that they can't see themselves in. And yes... this is directed to Sherri Shepherd.
For me, Elisabeth and Sherri are the biggest culprits when it comes to devaluing other women's choices. And if Elisabeth gets a chunk chomped out of her @$$ for this Erin Andrews thing, so be it. And please, public, do not fall for the tears. Some women can cry themselves out of tight spots; Elisabeth Hasselbeck shouldn't be one of them. Hell... no woman should be able to do this. It's supposed to be a new day - women should act like it.
Really, Elisabeth? You really think that watching Erin in skimpy costumes would've been enough for dude? Really? Because the way I remember it, dude found out which hotel she was staying at, tampered with her hotel room peepholes, taped her, in the privacy of her hotel room, and put the images online.
No, Elisabeth... skimpy costumes were not going to get it for this dude. And for that matter, why does Elisabeth continue to take on the shallower aspect of a subject instead of getting to the marrow of things? Remember... Elisabeth was the victim of threats against herself, her husband and newborn child. Maybe Elisabeth should've tried to draw a correlation between that personal event and Erin's situation, especially since Erin is still going through a separate situation along the same lines. And remember when Elisabeth was mortified that Law & Order SVU had a storyline where a character with a name similar to Elisabeth, was brutally raped and murdered? She got coddled and stroked by her fellow co-hosts, and yet, she couldn't do the same for another woman?
Therein lies the problem with the majority of the panelists on The View. They think that they reached a certain level, therefore they can't be mindful of others' situations. They think that everything is a Hot Topic subject, instead of something that's tangible and pressing to real life women. Mind you, I haven't watched The View in years - probably since Star Jones got married - but that mindset was setting in even then.
I do wonder what the ladies' take was when Sandra Bullock adopted little Louis? Was that an act of love to them or was it 'buying a child', an accusation that they readily lodge against Angelina Jolie? And for that matter, why is adoption the only process tainted with the accusation that it's a purchase versus an act of love? Isn't spending large amounts of money to create a biological child buying a child? If anything, one could argue that not only one is purchasing a child, it is also an exercise in egotism, since one is saying that they can't love a child that they can't see themselves in. And yes... this is directed to Sherri Shepherd.
For me, Elisabeth and Sherri are the biggest culprits when it comes to devaluing other women's choices. And if Elisabeth gets a chunk chomped out of her @$$ for this Erin Andrews thing, so be it. And please, public, do not fall for the tears. Some women can cry themselves out of tight spots; Elisabeth Hasselbeck shouldn't be one of them. Hell... no woman should be able to do this. It's supposed to be a new day - women should act like it.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Arnie Klein getting death threats? Ahhh... the poor boo-boo
As a 90s young adult, the Ricki Lake Show was my lunch. Very fun show, although Ricki seemed uncomfortable and wooden at times. But sometimes when things got a bit too heated, she would say, rather unconvincingly, 'Violence is not the answer.'
Violence is not the answer... usually in the tone of a thoroughly unprepared preschool teacher.
But for some reason, Ricki's refrain is echoing in my head because apparently, Dr. Arnie Klein, the self-proclaimed 'best friend' of Michael Jackson, is getting death threats after 'outing' Michael Jackson.
'Outing' Michael Jackson? Errrr... no, since people have been trying to say that Michael Jackson was gay since his teens. So, no... that's not the reason why he's getting threats.
Klein is getting threats because he continues to lie about Michael Jackson, using the guise that he's trying to clear the air about the molestation allegations. That was the reason for the pee story. That is the reason for this story. But Fcuktard, merely going to Reflections of the Dance and various other MJ vindication sites would've been a better idea. But no... saying Michael Jackson was gay was just easier? Profitable, more like.
So I am not entirely mad at MJ fans who are threatening Klein and Fat Boy Pfeiffer, because I totally understand it. For many years, disparaging the dead has been a taboo. But, of course, with anything associated with Michael, exceptions are made. Journalists taking root on their cronies' shows, spending hours rehashing the lies that made them money years ago; journalists throwing out every single rumor out there, muddying the waters in the weeks following his death; and the worst - journalists encouraging (read: begging) every possible egg or sperm donor and surrogate to come out and stake a claim on his children when actions like this are violations of the whole reproduction/surrogacy process? And Klein, MJ's dermatologist, continually violating not only HIPAA but MJ's privacy for little more than money and screen time, because, let's face it, Klein is not an oil painting and the snap! crackle! pop! that is audible whenever he speaks is disgusting to hear. SWALLOW ALREADY, DUDE!!!! So, no, Dr. Klein's dream of being another Dr. Oz or Sanjay Gupta, or Art Ulein , or to a lesser extent, Travis Stork, will be a dream unfulfilled. A good consolation prize - being the sultan of skeeve. And Chunky is along for the ride.
So will the death threats continue? Probably, but I hope they won't since it could lead to Klein winding up on Larry King or something. Mind you, since Larry King sort of banned him from the show, hence Klein taking his message to TMZ and to any other outlet willing to shell out some cash, maybe his next recourse is to take it to HLN. But then again, maybe they have more standards than previously thought.
Anyway, I hope that MJ fans chill on the threats, but not on the pressure. Extra, Pfeiffer, Alicia Jacobs and Klein need to know that this flagrant attempt at lying about a deceased person will not stand, especially when it doesn't add to anything of importance. And their pocket books, egos and careers qualify as same.
But here's a throwback to Klein's earlier days... you know, when he was successfully passing himself off as Michael Jackson's friend. Those days are long gone.
Violence is not the answer... usually in the tone of a thoroughly unprepared preschool teacher.
But for some reason, Ricki's refrain is echoing in my head because apparently, Dr. Arnie Klein, the self-proclaimed 'best friend' of Michael Jackson, is getting death threats after 'outing' Michael Jackson.
'Outing' Michael Jackson? Errrr... no, since people have been trying to say that Michael Jackson was gay since his teens. So, no... that's not the reason why he's getting threats.
Klein is getting threats because he continues to lie about Michael Jackson, using the guise that he's trying to clear the air about the molestation allegations. That was the reason for the pee story. That is the reason for this story. But Fcuktard, merely going to Reflections of the Dance and various other MJ vindication sites would've been a better idea. But no... saying Michael Jackson was gay was just easier? Profitable, more like.
So I am not entirely mad at MJ fans who are threatening Klein and Fat Boy Pfeiffer, because I totally understand it. For many years, disparaging the dead has been a taboo. But, of course, with anything associated with Michael, exceptions are made. Journalists taking root on their cronies' shows, spending hours rehashing the lies that made them money years ago; journalists throwing out every single rumor out there, muddying the waters in the weeks following his death; and the worst - journalists encouraging (read: begging) every possible egg or sperm donor and surrogate to come out and stake a claim on his children when actions like this are violations of the whole reproduction/surrogacy process? And Klein, MJ's dermatologist, continually violating not only HIPAA but MJ's privacy for little more than money and screen time, because, let's face it, Klein is not an oil painting and the snap! crackle! pop! that is audible whenever he speaks is disgusting to hear. SWALLOW ALREADY, DUDE!!!! So, no, Dr. Klein's dream of being another Dr. Oz or Sanjay Gupta, or Art Ulein , or to a lesser extent, Travis Stork, will be a dream unfulfilled. A good consolation prize - being the sultan of skeeve. And Chunky is along for the ride.
So will the death threats continue? Probably, but I hope they won't since it could lead to Klein winding up on Larry King or something. Mind you, since Larry King sort of banned him from the show, hence Klein taking his message to TMZ and to any other outlet willing to shell out some cash, maybe his next recourse is to take it to HLN. But then again, maybe they have more standards than previously thought.
Anyway, I hope that MJ fans chill on the threats, but not on the pressure. Extra, Pfeiffer, Alicia Jacobs and Klein need to know that this flagrant attempt at lying about a deceased person will not stand, especially when it doesn't add to anything of importance. And their pocket books, egos and careers qualify as same.
But here's a throwback to Klein's earlier days... you know, when he was successfully passing himself off as Michael Jackson's friend. Those days are long gone.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
April is over... thank goodness!!!!!!!!!!!
So far, April has been the most exhausting, emotionally draining month of 2010. Of course, the year's still young, so who knows what pantload awaits.
In real life, something very sad and tragic hit a bit too close to home. One of my neighbors was murdered by her boyfriend. Fortunately, the cops apprehended him immediately, but unfortunately, this 42 year old 'man' murdered his 22 year old girlfriend because she had the audacity to dump his @$$ after he abused her one time too many. She did the right things and yet... she's gone. Completely not fair.
But before this bad thing happened, I was blissfully happy because I ordered It's All About L.O.V.E., a self-published book about fans' Michael Jackson encounters. I ordered it on Easter Sunday, and yet... I haven't finished reading it yet. Yes, it's nearly 400 pages long, but for some reason, I feel that I need to take my time reading this. So far, some of my favorite stories involved MJ's birthdays and his late night 'shows' and talks with fans outside of his hotel windows/balconies. These stories made me smile because I had similar, late night talks with people I vague knew in college and I still prize those unexpected intimate moments, especially with people with whom I seemingly had little in common with. I smile, thinking that Michael had those moments too.
Sandra Bullock scammed the whole Hollywood community by getting on with her life instead of milking her misfortune? Now, that was an April high point. And her little Louis is absolutely adorable!
Rieille Hunter on Oprah... didn't watch.
But I did watch Todd Bridges on Oprah and I have to say, Oprah should be ashamed of herself. Demanding that he read page 68? The page in which he described his molestation? Really, Oprah? Honestly, Oprah's insistence that any molestation talk has to be graphic makes me wonder about her.
Naomi Campbell was a victim of dubious gotcha journalism... and no one blinked an eye? Hate her all you want, but if someone refuses to answer a question that wasn't germane to the reason for the interview, then you stop the particular line of questioning.
Chelsea Handler had to defend her 'audition tape' which looked remarkably like the most depressing, demoralizing sex tape since Gene Simmons. No audition is worth positioning oneself in a way that makes your breasts look like really old cow udders.
Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe has been pretty good. Last week, Univision showed back to back episodes of HQEDNS featuring the aftermath of Marco finding out that Alejandra and (Rafael) Medina shared a hotel room. Thanks to Claudia, who I used to like but now thinks she a mega b*tch, Alejandra's professional reputation is taking a beating and she may distance herself from Medina because of her mistaken belief that he was the one who dished the works. I fell asleep towards the end of Friday's episode, but the last part I saw was when Medina witnessed Marco, with a Mariachi band in tow, serenading Alejandra and threw down the dozen of roses ,intended for Alejandra, down in disgust. Maybe Alejandra found them?
As for Arnie Klein's current media grab... I will wait to talk on this, since I get really emotional when @$$holes harm people who can't defend themselves.
In real life, something very sad and tragic hit a bit too close to home. One of my neighbors was murdered by her boyfriend. Fortunately, the cops apprehended him immediately, but unfortunately, this 42 year old 'man' murdered his 22 year old girlfriend because she had the audacity to dump his @$$ after he abused her one time too many. She did the right things and yet... she's gone. Completely not fair.
But before this bad thing happened, I was blissfully happy because I ordered It's All About L.O.V.E., a self-published book about fans' Michael Jackson encounters. I ordered it on Easter Sunday, and yet... I haven't finished reading it yet. Yes, it's nearly 400 pages long, but for some reason, I feel that I need to take my time reading this. So far, some of my favorite stories involved MJ's birthdays and his late night 'shows' and talks with fans outside of his hotel windows/balconies. These stories made me smile because I had similar, late night talks with people I vague knew in college and I still prize those unexpected intimate moments, especially with people with whom I seemingly had little in common with. I smile, thinking that Michael had those moments too.
Sandra Bullock scammed the whole Hollywood community by getting on with her life instead of milking her misfortune? Now, that was an April high point. And her little Louis is absolutely adorable!
Rieille Hunter on Oprah... didn't watch.
But I did watch Todd Bridges on Oprah and I have to say, Oprah should be ashamed of herself. Demanding that he read page 68? The page in which he described his molestation? Really, Oprah? Honestly, Oprah's insistence that any molestation talk has to be graphic makes me wonder about her.
Naomi Campbell was a victim of dubious gotcha journalism... and no one blinked an eye? Hate her all you want, but if someone refuses to answer a question that wasn't germane to the reason for the interview, then you stop the particular line of questioning.
Chelsea Handler had to defend her 'audition tape' which looked remarkably like the most depressing, demoralizing sex tape since Gene Simmons. No audition is worth positioning oneself in a way that makes your breasts look like really old cow udders.
Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe has been pretty good. Last week, Univision showed back to back episodes of HQEDNS featuring the aftermath of Marco finding out that Alejandra and (Rafael) Medina shared a hotel room. Thanks to Claudia, who I used to like but now thinks she a mega b*tch, Alejandra's professional reputation is taking a beating and she may distance herself from Medina because of her mistaken belief that he was the one who dished the works. I fell asleep towards the end of Friday's episode, but the last part I saw was when Medina witnessed Marco, with a Mariachi band in tow, serenading Alejandra and threw down the dozen of roses ,intended for Alejandra, down in disgust. Maybe Alejandra found them?
As for Arnie Klein's current media grab... I will wait to talk on this, since I get really emotional when @$$holes harm people who can't defend themselves.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Maybe it's just me, but I think I witnessed a hat trick
HLN is slowly but surely becoming a network that I try to avoid. Last year (pre-MJ's death), I watched their primetime programs fairly regularly, although I barely remember what shows I watched back then. But then, primetime became an estrogen block: Jane Velez-Mitchell, Nancy Grace, and Joy Behar. Actually, it's more like PMS lane, but who am I to quibble.
But late last night, I was up and I caught a bit of Nancy Grace and Behar's show and marveled at how, despite their best efforts to control and manipulate their particular messages, that the home truths tumbled out. I smiled at Nancy Grace, something I haven't done in like... ever, when she was talking about the runaway mom case. She had the woman's father, a pastor, on the show, and she was so emphatic that she was sure that the woman may have ran afoul with some miscreant, since she couldn't imagine the woman abandoning her one year old daughter. Obviously, the episode was one filmed earlier last week, since we did find out that, indeed, the woman DID abandon the one year old daughter, staged a crime scene and ran off with some loser dude to Florida. So much for Nancy Grace's 'instincts'. But then again, Grace's 'instincts' are usually colored by her particular political leanings, not on sheer gut feeling. I'm armchair quarterbacking it, but even I knew that the chick was okay, and I was hardly paying attention to the story. Score one, for following one's own instinct versus some shrieking shrew's.
Next... Behar. Her Friday edition was reran last night, which happened to be a rehash of her week's highlights. She had a panel discussing various subjects like Sandra Bullock, Scott Baio and other stuff; a panel consisting of Nancy Giles, that dude who used to host TV Guide Network's TV Watercooler, and a playwright I have never heard of, but one I now want to know about. The subject was Roman Polanski and his sending a letter to France's president to give to President Obama about his long delayed (and denied) trial regarding the rape of a 13 year old girl. Naturally, Joy wanted the discussion to remain on her level - righteous indignation and general resignation - but the playwright said something that I would never forget. He essentially said that talk about the Polanski case by the media (read: yes, you, Joy Behar) is useless, because this is supposed to be between Polanski and the court of law. And my next question is 'Where were you during the Michael Jackson trial, dude?' Because that should've been said back then when it was absolutely clear that the press was trying to impede the investigation and influence the verdict.
And finally... this one didn't involve HLN or any of their anchors/rags, but it involved an everpresent guest on the show. On this morning's Today Show, Robi Ludwig was on, discussing how the whole community has to support 'mothers by choice', which made me wonder if that is the consensus of opinion within the psychiatric community. Or maybe, the psychiatric community had a 'coming to Jesus' moment after Michael Jackson's death, because as many remembered, he didn't get support from the community when he became a 'father by choice'. If anything, psychiatric buttinskys like Carole Liebermann made his attempts at parenting a talking point for her insatiable need to park her botoxed butt in front of a camera.
So the point of this post? Well, I hope that many who have been on the fence about things dictated to us by the persistent and often over presently, learned a lesson. Agendas and not necessarily bipartisan-dictated agendas, are what drives these people who are placed in a position of authority and respectability. But every once in a while, the truth escapes from the vice grip that these wenches have on it. Or in other words, trust your instincts, distrust anyone working overly hard to persuade you otherwise, and keep an eye out for anyone who play both ends against the middle.
But late last night, I was up and I caught a bit of Nancy Grace and Behar's show and marveled at how, despite their best efforts to control and manipulate their particular messages, that the home truths tumbled out. I smiled at Nancy Grace, something I haven't done in like... ever, when she was talking about the runaway mom case. She had the woman's father, a pastor, on the show, and she was so emphatic that she was sure that the woman may have ran afoul with some miscreant, since she couldn't imagine the woman abandoning her one year old daughter. Obviously, the episode was one filmed earlier last week, since we did find out that, indeed, the woman DID abandon the one year old daughter, staged a crime scene and ran off with some loser dude to Florida. So much for Nancy Grace's 'instincts'. But then again, Grace's 'instincts' are usually colored by her particular political leanings, not on sheer gut feeling. I'm armchair quarterbacking it, but even I knew that the chick was okay, and I was hardly paying attention to the story. Score one, for following one's own instinct versus some shrieking shrew's.
Next... Behar. Her Friday edition was reran last night, which happened to be a rehash of her week's highlights. She had a panel discussing various subjects like Sandra Bullock, Scott Baio and other stuff; a panel consisting of Nancy Giles, that dude who used to host TV Guide Network's TV Watercooler, and a playwright I have never heard of, but one I now want to know about. The subject was Roman Polanski and his sending a letter to France's president to give to President Obama about his long delayed (and denied) trial regarding the rape of a 13 year old girl. Naturally, Joy wanted the discussion to remain on her level - righteous indignation and general resignation - but the playwright said something that I would never forget. He essentially said that talk about the Polanski case by the media (read: yes, you, Joy Behar) is useless, because this is supposed to be between Polanski and the court of law. And my next question is 'Where were you during the Michael Jackson trial, dude?' Because that should've been said back then when it was absolutely clear that the press was trying to impede the investigation and influence the verdict.
And finally... this one didn't involve HLN or any of their anchors/rags, but it involved an everpresent guest on the show. On this morning's Today Show, Robi Ludwig was on, discussing how the whole community has to support 'mothers by choice', which made me wonder if that is the consensus of opinion within the psychiatric community. Or maybe, the psychiatric community had a 'coming to Jesus' moment after Michael Jackson's death, because as many remembered, he didn't get support from the community when he became a 'father by choice'. If anything, psychiatric buttinskys like Carole Liebermann made his attempts at parenting a talking point for her insatiable need to park her botoxed butt in front of a camera.
So the point of this post? Well, I hope that many who have been on the fence about things dictated to us by the persistent and often over presently, learned a lesson. Agendas and not necessarily bipartisan-dictated agendas, are what drives these people who are placed in a position of authority and respectability. But every once in a while, the truth escapes from the vice grip that these wenches have on it. Or in other words, trust your instincts, distrust anyone working overly hard to persuade you otherwise, and keep an eye out for anyone who play both ends against the middle.
Mexican telenovelas are bringin' it, by GOD!!!!!
For months, I've been debating whether to remove The Young and the Restless from my recording program. The writers' lackluster approach to storytelling, their rush to hook up some characters (Jack and Emily; Ashley and Neil), while dragging their feet towards others (Hot Chance and Chloe), and currently, having two doubles stepping into the lives of the originals (I mean... come on!!!) - Y & R is just not what it used to be. There's a complete lack of the Bell magic. The only true bright spot of the show is the potential of a Billy and Victoria pairing, two characters I couldn't stand due to their individual selfishness, and yet, I eat them up whenever they are together. They 'get' each other, but the possibility of dirty, loathsome hate sex is always there and actually welcomed. Of course, a J.T/Mac pairing is looming and the writers may, foolishly, use this as a distraction for Billy and Victoria, but they would be stupid, since Mac is probably the most boring Y & R character, which is something since Ashley is always stiff competition. And unfortunately, J.T.'s continual sanctimony regarding Victoria, nevermind that his past wasn't that pristine, makes him the third dog in the race. In short, I am fed up with the never-ending Adam storyline (although I doubt that he's really dead), tired of the missing Janna and Lauren storyline starring the Wonder Twins, the Lily and Cane storyline since nothing is really happening, and I'm tired of Neil being set up as the Bellamy, since it is clear that the writers are trying to pair Ashley with Tucker McCall. And BTW, while I love Stephen Nichols, I prefer the original actor more.
Now to the good... the Mexican telenovelas, specifically Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe. While I do watch Mi Pecado as well, HQEDNS is my favorite. Yes, it absolutely has campy aspects to it - I mean, there was a Michael Jackson impersonator on it, for reasons I haven't quite figured out yet, but despite the language barrier, I am genuinely enjoying the show. Mind you, I was extremely pissed that Claudia (the sexy blonde) slept with Alejandra's fiance, Marco, the most weaselly pig I've seen recently, and I hope that ole girl has a damn good explanation for doing it. But the money is Rafael aka Medina and Alejandra. They are very funny to watch, given Itati's pint-sized kewpie doll looks contrasting Pedro's dark good looks, but it's Alejandra and Medina's personalities that are the clincher. Alejandra is kinda bossy and impatient while Medina is childlike and enthusiastic. Clearly, the bossiness and impatience is a facade on Alejandra's part, since whenever Medina is in a precarious place, she defrosts and reveals her true feelings. So when Medina and Alejandra had to pretend to be a couple, it was inevitable that this was going to happen. Thank you, jealousy and oneupsmanship:
The kiss continued and it was delicious and sensual. Very Thomas Crown Affair, Notorious, and Vertigo romantic rapture. For me, it was among one of the best kisses I've seen on both American soaps and telenovelas. Oh so nice, I have to post it twice:
I wish, wish, WISH that American soaps would take a peek at Mexican telenovelas. Telenovelas are what American soap operas used to be: romantic, funny, dramatic, pot boilers. Sure, telenovelas have an advantage, given that they have a finite amount of time on-air, therefore, there is a lack of tendency and need to drag $h*t out. If Wiki can be believed, I know that HQEDNS will end in November, so waiting for Medina and Alejandra to get together will not be as torturous. Some may think that would ruin the fun - uh, I've been watching soaps for nearly 33 years; it's time to explore a different form of fun, like unpredictable storylines, and depicting couples who don't take love or their partners for granted. Yes, Alejandra is engaged to douchebag Marco and Medina is saddled with shrieky Vicky, but when Alejandra and Medina are alone and being open and honest with each other, it is must see TV.
Fingers crossed that HQEDNS keeps up the good work.
Now to the good... the Mexican telenovelas, specifically Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe. While I do watch Mi Pecado as well, HQEDNS is my favorite. Yes, it absolutely has campy aspects to it - I mean, there was a Michael Jackson impersonator on it, for reasons I haven't quite figured out yet, but despite the language barrier, I am genuinely enjoying the show. Mind you, I was extremely pissed that Claudia (the sexy blonde) slept with Alejandra's fiance, Marco, the most weaselly pig I've seen recently, and I hope that ole girl has a damn good explanation for doing it. But the money is Rafael aka Medina and Alejandra. They are very funny to watch, given Itati's pint-sized kewpie doll looks contrasting Pedro's dark good looks, but it's Alejandra and Medina's personalities that are the clincher. Alejandra is kinda bossy and impatient while Medina is childlike and enthusiastic. Clearly, the bossiness and impatience is a facade on Alejandra's part, since whenever Medina is in a precarious place, she defrosts and reveals her true feelings. So when Medina and Alejandra had to pretend to be a couple, it was inevitable that this was going to happen. Thank you, jealousy and oneupsmanship:
The kiss continued and it was delicious and sensual. Very Thomas Crown Affair, Notorious, and Vertigo romantic rapture. For me, it was among one of the best kisses I've seen on both American soaps and telenovelas. Oh so nice, I have to post it twice:
I wish, wish, WISH that American soaps would take a peek at Mexican telenovelas. Telenovelas are what American soap operas used to be: romantic, funny, dramatic, pot boilers. Sure, telenovelas have an advantage, given that they have a finite amount of time on-air, therefore, there is a lack of tendency and need to drag $h*t out. If Wiki can be believed, I know that HQEDNS will end in November, so waiting for Medina and Alejandra to get together will not be as torturous. Some may think that would ruin the fun - uh, I've been watching soaps for nearly 33 years; it's time to explore a different form of fun, like unpredictable storylines, and depicting couples who don't take love or their partners for granted. Yes, Alejandra is engaged to douchebag Marco and Medina is saddled with shrieky Vicky, but when Alejandra and Medina are alone and being open and honest with each other, it is must see TV.
Fingers crossed that HQEDNS keeps up the good work.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Dixie Carter... gone
It is unfortunate that my first entry for April is about this. Mind you, Suzanne and Charlene were my favorites, which is not to say that Mary Jo and Julia were slouches, because they were not. Especially, Julia.
Julia Sugarbaker.
It's strange, but lately, I've been thinking about sitcom rants - Steve's bathroom and naked bottoms rants on Coupling; Edina's rants about the laws and the sucking away of fun in favor of political correctness on Absolutely Fabulous. Yeah - the Brits know how to write fantastic rants. But the Bloodworth-Thomasons of the late 80s and early 90s were no joke and thankfully, they cast Dixie Carter as Julia Sugarbaker and she delivered the goods every single time.
Carter, a conservative, remarked that everytime she had to give a Julia tear, which was usually in a liberal vein, the Bloodworth-Thomasons had to give her an opportunity to sing on the show. I assume that this clip was a result of the under the table bargain. And it's just funny as hell!
And rarely did Julia make a misstep, but when she did, it was fantastic:
But Carter's signature, beyond the much lamented cocky walk and great legs, was her rants. One of my favorites didn't require her to yell or anything, but I think of it whenever I go into Barnes & Noble or any bookstore. It involved Julia attempting to buy Tess of the d'Urbervilles and a kid was minding the register - a kid who obviously wasn't that into books. He didn't know where Julia could find Tess because he never heard of it, but he knew where she could find 'the hind end of a cartoon cat' that you could attach to your car window with suction cups. Just the way Julia pronounced 'literature' - classic. I hope to find that clip, but there are others that are classic Julia 'The Terminator' Sugarbaker moments. Like this:
So... a hat tip to one of the last great big shouldered, big-mouthed dames to ever grace night-time television.
Julia Sugarbaker.
It's strange, but lately, I've been thinking about sitcom rants - Steve's bathroom and naked bottoms rants on Coupling; Edina's rants about the laws and the sucking away of fun in favor of political correctness on Absolutely Fabulous. Yeah - the Brits know how to write fantastic rants. But the Bloodworth-Thomasons of the late 80s and early 90s were no joke and thankfully, they cast Dixie Carter as Julia Sugarbaker and she delivered the goods every single time.
Carter, a conservative, remarked that everytime she had to give a Julia tear, which was usually in a liberal vein, the Bloodworth-Thomasons had to give her an opportunity to sing on the show. I assume that this clip was a result of the under the table bargain. And it's just funny as hell!
And rarely did Julia make a misstep, but when she did, it was fantastic:
But Carter's signature, beyond the much lamented cocky walk and great legs, was her rants. One of my favorites didn't require her to yell or anything, but I think of it whenever I go into Barnes & Noble or any bookstore. It involved Julia attempting to buy Tess of the d'Urbervilles and a kid was minding the register - a kid who obviously wasn't that into books. He didn't know where Julia could find Tess because he never heard of it, but he knew where she could find 'the hind end of a cartoon cat' that you could attach to your car window with suction cups. Just the way Julia pronounced 'literature' - classic. I hope to find that clip, but there are others that are classic Julia 'The Terminator' Sugarbaker moments. Like this:
So... a hat tip to one of the last great big shouldered, big-mouthed dames to ever grace night-time television.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
A final (and woefully long overdue) farewell to En Nombre Del Amor
I hestitated commenting on the grand finale of En Nombre because I ended up being kinda disappointed by the ending. For me, the pacing and the overuse of slow motion throughout the finale grated on my nerves. However, I slowly began to appreciate En Nombre Del Amor because, at least, during the weeks leading up to the finale, there were a bunch of surprises. For example, Carlota taking a header off of her staircase. Another was Romina doing a 180 about her life and her child after she was nearly killed in a car accident. But the real clincher was watching The Young and the Restless 'resolution' to the baby Faith story - it landed with a great, big plop! It didn't have a tenth of the tension and emotionality of the Colleen death story, and Faith was a baby.
So I reexamined my initial thoughts about En Nombre Del Amor and felt a bit more satisfied, especially when I thought about the emotional highpoint of the finale: Gabriel's death.
I knew that Paloma and Emiliano would wind up together, but I certainly didn't expect Gabriel to do what Paloma should've done: look out for Paloma's happiness. Again, I don't speak Spanish, but it seemed that Gabriel truly loved Paloma, but he was hiding his health condition from her. Still, he trucked on, planning his wedding. But after Paloma and Cristobal's walk down the aisle, out steps Emiliano, via Gabriel's invitation, and Gabriel put it out there - if you're going to marry, Paloma, marry for true love. And he made her decide - and she picked Emiliano. Heartbreaking, right? Except that Gabriel had a look of peace and contentment as Paloma and Emiliano exchanged vows. GABRIEL WAS THA MAN!!!! Too bad Carlota had to c*ck up the day by trying to kill Paloma, yet again. And once again, telenovelas demonstrated their recognition and appreciation of men with pure hearts by having them die tragically. Too bad, because after what Gabriel did for Paloma, I wanted to climb all over him - it would've been a beautiful vacation for me, since the actor who portrayed Gabriel was all kinds of yummy!!
But back to Carlota. Carlota... Carlota... Carlota... certainly had a hand at killing a good time. Speaking of killing, here's a montage of Carlota's best kills. She was a very busy girl and yet, her hair was rarely out of place and her makeup was impeccable.
And finally, the very thing that attracted me to En Nombre Del Amor - the theme song. En Cambio No, as performed by Laura Pausini, is one of the best television theme songs I've heard in a long time. Mind you, I sing Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe at the top of my lungs. But En Cambio No is a pretty fantastic song. It reminded me of Lost in Your Eyes by Debbie Gibson... only totally awesome!!!! I am so close to buying Laura Pausini's album for this song, although I suspect that there may be some other gems on it - Pausini has some serious singing chops.
So thanks, to whomever or whatever it was that compelled me to watch En Nombre Del Amor. I regret not watching it sooner, but grateful for what I eventually ended up seeing.
So I reexamined my initial thoughts about En Nombre Del Amor and felt a bit more satisfied, especially when I thought about the emotional highpoint of the finale: Gabriel's death.
I knew that Paloma and Emiliano would wind up together, but I certainly didn't expect Gabriel to do what Paloma should've done: look out for Paloma's happiness. Again, I don't speak Spanish, but it seemed that Gabriel truly loved Paloma, but he was hiding his health condition from her. Still, he trucked on, planning his wedding. But after Paloma and Cristobal's walk down the aisle, out steps Emiliano, via Gabriel's invitation, and Gabriel put it out there - if you're going to marry, Paloma, marry for true love. And he made her decide - and she picked Emiliano. Heartbreaking, right? Except that Gabriel had a look of peace and contentment as Paloma and Emiliano exchanged vows. GABRIEL WAS THA MAN!!!! Too bad Carlota had to c*ck up the day by trying to kill Paloma, yet again. And once again, telenovelas demonstrated their recognition and appreciation of men with pure hearts by having them die tragically. Too bad, because after what Gabriel did for Paloma, I wanted to climb all over him - it would've been a beautiful vacation for me, since the actor who portrayed Gabriel was all kinds of yummy!!
But back to Carlota. Carlota... Carlota... Carlota... certainly had a hand at killing a good time. Speaking of killing, here's a montage of Carlota's best kills. She was a very busy girl and yet, her hair was rarely out of place and her makeup was impeccable.
And finally, the very thing that attracted me to En Nombre Del Amor - the theme song. En Cambio No, as performed by Laura Pausini, is one of the best television theme songs I've heard in a long time. Mind you, I sing Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe at the top of my lungs. But En Cambio No is a pretty fantastic song. It reminded me of Lost in Your Eyes by Debbie Gibson... only totally awesome!!!! I am so close to buying Laura Pausini's album for this song, although I suspect that there may be some other gems on it - Pausini has some serious singing chops.
So thanks, to whomever or whatever it was that compelled me to watch En Nombre Del Amor. I regret not watching it sooner, but grateful for what I eventually ended up seeing.
One of my Sunday morning rituals... to be gone
For the last 10-15 years, I usually do two things, without fail: watch CBS Sunday Morning; and watch At the Movies. Last week, an announcement came - At the Movies is being canceled.
A colossal disappointment to me and I've been very vocal about not allowing critics to dictate people's movie choices, namely mine. I came to this conclusion last year because the two Bens were at the helm, plus I exposed myself to Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB way too much. But I fixed part of the issue by not camping out at RT and IMDB and the powers that be at Disney took care of the other problems. And now, it looks like Disney think that they are fixing things by canceling At the Movies altogether, but per usual, Disney went a bit too far.
Disney were idiots to not negotiate with Roger Ebert to keep the thumps up/down rating system and they were definitely idiots for hiring the smarmy, much too green Bens, and having a panel of critics discussing films like it was a lightning round on a game show. Yes, Disney was very stupid. But the one thing they got right was hiring A.O. Scott and Michael Phillips, who did manage to recapture some of Siskel and Ebert's chemistry. Sure, they were within the league of Ebert and Roeper, but it was good enough and certainly, compelling enough to watch.
The time to cancel the show was when Ebert finally had to bow out. Not to take anything away from Richard Roeper, since he didn't do anything wrong, but Ebert was the last vestige of the Siskel and Ebert brand. His presence was reassuring to people. But with him gone and Disney's stubbornness about trying to keep some trace of the Siskel and Ebert legacy (read: the thumbs up/down), At the Movies became just another movie review show... for a time. I truly believe that Scott and Phillip could've made a successful go of it, if given a legitimate chance.
Disney, of all companies, should've understood how certain components can solidify a brand. How many years have 'When You Wish Upon a Star' been their signature song? And if that wasn't enough of an example (although it should've been), they could look at my other favorite, CBS Sunday Morning. That show suffered a huge blow when Charles Kuralt died, but they took their time and found a suitable replacement in Charles Osgood. And most importantly, they retained the show's identity by not changing the opening credits too much and keeping the trumpet fanfare. That trumpet fanfare is part of CBS Sunday Morning's identity, and although they rerecord the fanfare every few years, it retains its integrity.
Subtle things like this is important to people. I only wished that, along the way, Disney would've recognized this and treated At the Movies with the respect that it deserved.
Well, at least I have it until August.
A colossal disappointment to me and I've been very vocal about not allowing critics to dictate people's movie choices, namely mine. I came to this conclusion last year because the two Bens were at the helm, plus I exposed myself to Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB way too much. But I fixed part of the issue by not camping out at RT and IMDB and the powers that be at Disney took care of the other problems. And now, it looks like Disney think that they are fixing things by canceling At the Movies altogether, but per usual, Disney went a bit too far.
Disney were idiots to not negotiate with Roger Ebert to keep the thumps up/down rating system and they were definitely idiots for hiring the smarmy, much too green Bens, and having a panel of critics discussing films like it was a lightning round on a game show. Yes, Disney was very stupid. But the one thing they got right was hiring A.O. Scott and Michael Phillips, who did manage to recapture some of Siskel and Ebert's chemistry. Sure, they were within the league of Ebert and Roeper, but it was good enough and certainly, compelling enough to watch.
The time to cancel the show was when Ebert finally had to bow out. Not to take anything away from Richard Roeper, since he didn't do anything wrong, but Ebert was the last vestige of the Siskel and Ebert brand. His presence was reassuring to people. But with him gone and Disney's stubbornness about trying to keep some trace of the Siskel and Ebert legacy (read: the thumbs up/down), At the Movies became just another movie review show... for a time. I truly believe that Scott and Phillip could've made a successful go of it, if given a legitimate chance.
Disney, of all companies, should've understood how certain components can solidify a brand. How many years have 'When You Wish Upon a Star' been their signature song? And if that wasn't enough of an example (although it should've been), they could look at my other favorite, CBS Sunday Morning. That show suffered a huge blow when Charles Kuralt died, but they took their time and found a suitable replacement in Charles Osgood. And most importantly, they retained the show's identity by not changing the opening credits too much and keeping the trumpet fanfare. That trumpet fanfare is part of CBS Sunday Morning's identity, and although they rerecord the fanfare every few years, it retains its integrity.
Subtle things like this is important to people. I only wished that, along the way, Disney would've recognized this and treated At the Movies with the respect that it deserved.
Well, at least I have it until August.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
The conspiracy to make people forget
No... this won't be about Michael Jackson, although it is obvious that MJ is the perpetual victim of this phenomenon.
This time, I'm talking about Diff'rent Strokes, or specifically, the show's true legacy and that of the young co-stars. I have Todd Bridges to thank for this current train of thought.
Bridges' recent appearances on HLN shows illustrated how articulate and charismatic he is. Unfortunately, the media continues to fixate on his tulmultous 20s, a period that most adults don't look back on too fondly, including me. Because of Bridges, I decided to revisit Diff'rent Strokes, specifically, the first season (on DVD). And I have to say... I loved strolling down memory lane, feeling completely impressed by Bridges, Gary Coleman and Dana Plato's energy, charisma, and consistent good work. Yes, eventually, life caught up with all of these young performers, but that shouldn't be the beginning, middle, or end of any of these performers.
And that's my question... why is the media do hell-bent on making people forget, especially the good? These kids were good, despite having it bad behind the scenes. It's like the media blame them for the bad, when in fact, the adults in their lives were the primary purveyors of the bad that eventually befell them. The exception, of course, is Conrad Bain, who consistently remained a dignified presence when it came to the legacy of Diff'rent Strokes and to some of the child actors who retained contact with him long after the show's end.
I am grateful to Todd Bridges for making me remember the good. And on that note, here's a clip from Diff'rent Strokes, featuring a young Janet Jackson as Charlene, Willis' first girlfriend. And needless to say, some good work from Coleman, Plato and Bain as well.
This time, I'm talking about Diff'rent Strokes, or specifically, the show's true legacy and that of the young co-stars. I have Todd Bridges to thank for this current train of thought.
Bridges' recent appearances on HLN shows illustrated how articulate and charismatic he is. Unfortunately, the media continues to fixate on his tulmultous 20s, a period that most adults don't look back on too fondly, including me. Because of Bridges, I decided to revisit Diff'rent Strokes, specifically, the first season (on DVD). And I have to say... I loved strolling down memory lane, feeling completely impressed by Bridges, Gary Coleman and Dana Plato's energy, charisma, and consistent good work. Yes, eventually, life caught up with all of these young performers, but that shouldn't be the beginning, middle, or end of any of these performers.
And that's my question... why is the media do hell-bent on making people forget, especially the good? These kids were good, despite having it bad behind the scenes. It's like the media blame them for the bad, when in fact, the adults in their lives were the primary purveyors of the bad that eventually befell them. The exception, of course, is Conrad Bain, who consistently remained a dignified presence when it came to the legacy of Diff'rent Strokes and to some of the child actors who retained contact with him long after the show's end.
I am grateful to Todd Bridges for making me remember the good. And on that note, here's a clip from Diff'rent Strokes, featuring a young Janet Jackson as Charlene, Willis' first girlfriend. And needless to say, some good work from Coleman, Plato and Bain as well.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
To counterbalance the funk I'm in
Apparently, MJ, despite being gone, has inked an unprecedented recording deal with Sony, which promises at least $250M to his estate. Good news, right? Except, I had to hear this from the anchors of World News Now. They showed a segment about other late recording stars and how many records they sold after they died. Freddie Mercury and Queen made around $30M in record sales since Mercury's passing in '91; Kurt Cobain and Nirvana made around $27M in record sales since Kobain's suicide in '94; and Elvis made around $31M in record sales since his death in '77.
And yet, when they talked about Michael, they poor talked it, saying that his record sales have falling off sharply?
Errr... Jeremy and Vinita... Michael Jackson died less than 9 months ago and he made $31M in record sales since then. $31M for pre-existing material that people have likely bought two or three times prior to his death, due to changes in recording mediums. We are talking about new material that fans are obviously hungry for. And sorry, douches, but the reason why the single This is It didn't do better was because of Paul Anka's ridiculous hissy fit. If he would've shut up and talked to the executors instead of taking it to the Inside Editions and Extras, he would've gotten some major bank. But, as Kelly Bundy would say... Case of rum, case of rum.
That annoyed me, but again, a divine spark has directed me to this little gem. MJ was so adorable in this, which makes me even happier that more money is coming in for his children.
And yet, when they talked about Michael, they poor talked it, saying that his record sales have falling off sharply?
Errr... Jeremy and Vinita... Michael Jackson died less than 9 months ago and he made $31M in record sales since then. $31M for pre-existing material that people have likely bought two or three times prior to his death, due to changes in recording mediums. We are talking about new material that fans are obviously hungry for. And sorry, douches, but the reason why the single This is It didn't do better was because of Paul Anka's ridiculous hissy fit. If he would've shut up and talked to the executors instead of taking it to the Inside Editions and Extras, he would've gotten some major bank. But, as Kelly Bundy would say... Case of rum, case of rum.
That annoyed me, but again, a divine spark has directed me to this little gem. MJ was so adorable in this, which makes me even happier that more money is coming in for his children.
An abysmal week - human nature gone horribly wrong!!
Personally and professionally, my week was pretty good. No upsets at work or home. Was a little too broke before payday, but I managed. In general, everything was pretty good. My only real regret was channel-surfing while watching my telenovelas. I'm officially addicted to them, specifically, the telenovelas that air between the 7 to 10 pm block. While I was sad to see En Nombre Del Amor end, Mi Pecado is a pretty d@mn good replacement so far. And Hasta Que El Dinero Nos Separe is probably my favorite, mainly because of Pedro Fernandez's fantastic charisma and great comic timing - I assume. Again, I don't know Spanish, but I honestly enjoy his performance, along with Itati Cantoral. Crazy chemistry between the two of them... chemistry I haven't seen lately on American soaps. The third telenovela... unfortunately, I don't know the exact name, but it's a period piece and has some promise. I caught a bit of it during its second week and... some chick stole another chick's baby and left it in the elements to die and she eventually walled up said chick in the cellar. The walled up chick escaped... I think... but I don't know how long her escape lasted. Anyway, the historical telenovela looks promising, although I tend to fall asleep before it comes on at 9.
Anyway, it would serve me to not channel surf during commercials because usually the things that fill in the commercial time are absolutely demoralizing. During the 7 to 8 pm block, there's the entertainment shows and Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell. Naturally, because of Sandra Bullock's domestic troubles, watching entertainment shows are out of the question, especially since they were thoroughly kissing her butt not even a week ago about her happy home life. And Jane Velez-Mitchell's show focused on the possibility that George Anthony may have had an affair - as if that fact will hasten Casey Anthony going to trial. The 8 pm hour is no problem, given that Nancy Grace is on and more and more, she's showing her true colors. Really, Nancy... the National Enquirer's take on George Anthony's alleged affair should be the lead-in story 2 or 3 days in a row? Really? But the worse had to be the 9 pm hour - Joy Behar. Luckily, Larry King had Todd Bridges and Betty White on consecutive nights, but I channel surfed anyone and saw that Andrew Young douche talking about Rielle Hunter's GQ spread. And who was his co-panelist/partner in crime? Diane fcuking Dimond!!! I guess lurking on courthouse easements have finally paid off for her. Got a segment on CBS Early Morning, which isn't too surprising since they depend on Maggie Rodriguez sooooooo much. But per usual, whenever Diane gets access, she becomes the biggest toadie/buttkiss/hype man in mass media. Really, Diane, did Elizabeth Edwards deserved to be cheated on while campaigning for Hair Boy and battling cancer because some random people told you that she wasn't a very nice person? My hope is that those who consider some sort of champion for mainstream, whitebread morality, take careful notice of what she really is.
Then the assault of the skanks, specifically that Joslyn James trick and the tatted up b*tch. Yes, famous married men made the mistake of fcuking them, but why is the media making these broads stars? I knew that Joslyn trick would pull something like this when I saw her at an Oscar party. First of all, why was that trick allowed on the premises? And no, I don't think that Tiger apologizing would've prevented the text messages leak. IMO, that b*tch only wanted verbal contact in order to re-established the 'relationship'. And yeah, I heard the texts were very explicit, but $h*t, if Tiger was fcuking a porn star, he wasn't expecting gingersnaps and Country Time lemonade on the sparking couch. And the fact that she had so many profoundly filthy texts from him says more about her. Women have limits, and the women I know would stop contact if a dude's dirty talk got violent and way too out of hand. She just confirmed that she was completely down with what he was dishing and that she was an even bigger chump for doing some, if not all, of his 'special requests'. And BTW... where is Gloria Allred? Her 'victim' is out there, all by her lonesome. That sterling example of flowering womanhood, befouled by Tiger, rigged up her website to recount how she consented to being befouled. Kinda funny, actually. And the tatted trick... 30 grand for your story? Really? Very cheap... but given how you look, it was much too much. Too late for girl power, sweetie. Girl power should've kept you off your knees and Jesse James' balls out of your mouth. Next time, know that!
So many sucky people that don't impact whether I have a roof over my head, and yet, they really got to me this week. Visiting You Tube helped - and I truly thank the divine spark that told me to seek out ole skool Tex Avery cartoons. Some of them have racist elements in them, but they still are funny as fcuk! Here's an example... and may everything that happens to that dog with the creepy-@$$ed laugh, happen to all of the fcuks who brought a downer on my week.
Anyway, it would serve me to not channel surf during commercials because usually the things that fill in the commercial time are absolutely demoralizing. During the 7 to 8 pm block, there's the entertainment shows and Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell. Naturally, because of Sandra Bullock's domestic troubles, watching entertainment shows are out of the question, especially since they were thoroughly kissing her butt not even a week ago about her happy home life. And Jane Velez-Mitchell's show focused on the possibility that George Anthony may have had an affair - as if that fact will hasten Casey Anthony going to trial. The 8 pm hour is no problem, given that Nancy Grace is on and more and more, she's showing her true colors. Really, Nancy... the National Enquirer's take on George Anthony's alleged affair should be the lead-in story 2 or 3 days in a row? Really? But the worse had to be the 9 pm hour - Joy Behar. Luckily, Larry King had Todd Bridges and Betty White on consecutive nights, but I channel surfed anyone and saw that Andrew Young douche talking about Rielle Hunter's GQ spread. And who was his co-panelist/partner in crime? Diane fcuking Dimond!!! I guess lurking on courthouse easements have finally paid off for her. Got a segment on CBS Early Morning, which isn't too surprising since they depend on Maggie Rodriguez sooooooo much. But per usual, whenever Diane gets access, she becomes the biggest toadie/buttkiss/hype man in mass media. Really, Diane, did Elizabeth Edwards deserved to be cheated on while campaigning for Hair Boy and battling cancer because some random people told you that she wasn't a very nice person? My hope is that those who consider some sort of champion for mainstream, whitebread morality, take careful notice of what she really is.
Then the assault of the skanks, specifically that Joslyn James trick and the tatted up b*tch. Yes, famous married men made the mistake of fcuking them, but why is the media making these broads stars? I knew that Joslyn trick would pull something like this when I saw her at an Oscar party. First of all, why was that trick allowed on the premises? And no, I don't think that Tiger apologizing would've prevented the text messages leak. IMO, that b*tch only wanted verbal contact in order to re-established the 'relationship'. And yeah, I heard the texts were very explicit, but $h*t, if Tiger was fcuking a porn star, he wasn't expecting gingersnaps and Country Time lemonade on the sparking couch. And the fact that she had so many profoundly filthy texts from him says more about her. Women have limits, and the women I know would stop contact if a dude's dirty talk got violent and way too out of hand. She just confirmed that she was completely down with what he was dishing and that she was an even bigger chump for doing some, if not all, of his 'special requests'. And BTW... where is Gloria Allred? Her 'victim' is out there, all by her lonesome. That sterling example of flowering womanhood, befouled by Tiger, rigged up her website to recount how she consented to being befouled. Kinda funny, actually. And the tatted trick... 30 grand for your story? Really? Very cheap... but given how you look, it was much too much. Too late for girl power, sweetie. Girl power should've kept you off your knees and Jesse James' balls out of your mouth. Next time, know that!
So many sucky people that don't impact whether I have a roof over my head, and yet, they really got to me this week. Visiting You Tube helped - and I truly thank the divine spark that told me to seek out ole skool Tex Avery cartoons. Some of them have racist elements in them, but they still are funny as fcuk! Here's an example... and may everything that happens to that dog with the creepy-@$$ed laugh, happen to all of the fcuks who brought a downer on my week.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Todd Bridges: A High Five for a former child star
While channel-surfing, I noticed that Todd Bridges was the headliner for Larry King Live. Given the recent death of Corey Haim, I figured that, maybe, he was positioning himself for some spotlight. Mind you, Todd Bridges has been one of the rare former child stars who don't grasp desperately for an additional 15 minutes. And remarkably, he lived up to that reputation last night.
Sure, I had to wade through the Rielle Hunter crap, Jesse Ventura, Sean Astin, and that Republican lady discussing the health care legislation, but eventually, I was treated to a composed, contrite and very mature Todd Bridges, who was there to promote his book Killing Willis.
Was so thoroughly impressed by Todd. He talked about Diff'rent Strokes, his tumultuous home life, the sexual abuse at the hands of his publicist and his slide during the 90s. For once, you saw a child star who took full responsibility for his mistakes and never made any excuses for them. He didn't name-drop - technically, he really didn't have to, since Larry King kept interjecting names like Gary Coleman, Janet Jackson, and Corey Haim. And yet, Todd didn't fall for it. His comments about his former costars and friends remained short and pretty discreet. I liked him for that.
I am really curious about his Killing Willis book, especially the part about the sexual abuse. Sexual abuse has been on my mind because of my own and the possible abuse that Corey Haim had suffered. Because I am a female, I feel I have more resources at my disposal to remedy some of my residual issues, but I continue to contend that boys/young men don't have the same luxury. I know that Todd is a really religious guy, but I wonder whether he took other steps to achieve the peace he obviously have.
Anyway, I wish him so much luck and congratulate him on 17+ years of sobriety.
Sure, I had to wade through the Rielle Hunter crap, Jesse Ventura, Sean Astin, and that Republican lady discussing the health care legislation, but eventually, I was treated to a composed, contrite and very mature Todd Bridges, who was there to promote his book Killing Willis.
Was so thoroughly impressed by Todd. He talked about Diff'rent Strokes, his tumultuous home life, the sexual abuse at the hands of his publicist and his slide during the 90s. For once, you saw a child star who took full responsibility for his mistakes and never made any excuses for them. He didn't name-drop - technically, he really didn't have to, since Larry King kept interjecting names like Gary Coleman, Janet Jackson, and Corey Haim. And yet, Todd didn't fall for it. His comments about his former costars and friends remained short and pretty discreet. I liked him for that.
I am really curious about his Killing Willis book, especially the part about the sexual abuse. Sexual abuse has been on my mind because of my own and the possible abuse that Corey Haim had suffered. Because I am a female, I feel I have more resources at my disposal to remedy some of my residual issues, but I continue to contend that boys/young men don't have the same luxury. I know that Todd is a really religious guy, but I wonder whether he took other steps to achieve the peace he obviously have.
Anyway, I wish him so much luck and congratulate him on 17+ years of sobriety.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Peter Graves... gone
I realize that many will remember him and Mission Impossible, or as that creepy-@$$ed pilot from Airplane!, but I prefer to remember him as one of the hosts of A & E's Biography, my prime time staple during the 90s. And for this:
I spell classy 'R-I-E-L-L-E'
This b*tch must be from another planet.
Rielle Hunter.
In GQ.
In a man's white shirt.
Waxing poetic about her 'romance' with John Edwards. And trashing Edwards' cancer stricken wife.
Classy, huh?
Then, she goes on to say that she and John will be together... 'til death parts them.
Alright.
Then, the waterworks. Apparently, she didn't like the resulting layout and cried in Barbara Walters' ear... according to Barbara Walters.
Now, my question is... how did that b*tch get that old crone's phone number? Maybe jump offs have each others numbers.
And my final question... why the white shirt? Didn't she know that she assumed the costume of Jilted Wife Extraordinaire, Jennifer Aniston? Of course, Aniston rocked the look on Vanity Fair's cover, but just the audacity to do that... scandalous!
Rielle Hunter.
In GQ.
In a man's white shirt.
Waxing poetic about her 'romance' with John Edwards. And trashing Edwards' cancer stricken wife.
Classy, huh?
Then, she goes on to say that she and John will be together... 'til death parts them.
Alright.
Then, the waterworks. Apparently, she didn't like the resulting layout and cried in Barbara Walters' ear... according to Barbara Walters.
Now, my question is... how did that b*tch get that old crone's phone number? Maybe jump offs have each others numbers.
And my final question... why the white shirt? Didn't she know that she assumed the costume of Jilted Wife Extraordinaire, Jennifer Aniston? Of course, Aniston rocked the look on Vanity Fair's cover, but just the audacity to do that... scandalous!
Time just got away from me
A lot happened last week which deserved commentary: the Farrah snub and the attempted MJ backlash; the conclusion of En Nombre Del Amor and the commencement of Mi Pecado; the death of Corey Haim and the subsequent D-list posturing; and today, the return of my hatred of the Rickey Smiley Morning show.
My hope is to discuss all of these topics, but again, time just keep getting away from me (read: I get distracted).
My hope is to discuss all of these topics, but again, time just keep getting away from me (read: I get distracted).
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Saturday, February 20, 2010
So the b*tch is still demanding an apology?
Tiger Woods had his press conference... didn't watch it, though.
The media pundits watched and analyzed his performance... didn't bother to watch that, either, although, yet again, Gloria Allred had her @$$ parked on Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell, fuming that Tiger didn't offer her pornstar (oops... former pornstar) client a public apology. Because, as Allred added, Tiger made promises to her and exposed her to diseases, given that he was banging other women at the same time.
Ha!
And she said that Tiger implored her to get out of the porn business.
The b@$terd!! Because he wanted to be the only one in the arrangement teeming with VD from questionable, shady sex partners.
Seriously, Allred needs to give it up because this woman, nor any other of the jump ups deserve an apology. All of them could've refused his advances; all of them could've refused to have unprotected sex with him; and all of them could have camel it instead of allowing him to take refuge between their thighs.
Personally, I think that this demand for an apology smacks of racism. From the beginning of time, those with the gold made the rules. And conveniently, when people of color started making comparable coin, they were subject to stricter expectations simply because the source of wealth came from the majority population. But when members of the majority population make mistakes or flat disrespect both fellow members of their race and members of racial minorities, they are not called upon to apologize. But when a wealthy man of color humiliates a bunch of willing, desperate White women, or rather, scoop up what many other broke, yet observant men would scoop up with little monetary investment, the world has to stop because, now, the flowery integrity of womanhood has been insulted.
Please.
People teach others how to treat them... a lesson that every woman has to learn. And just because some of these broads were pushing 30 or were mothers don't preclude them from being morons.
Personally, I hope Tiger continues to not apologize to these women because they do have a lion's share of responsibility for being humiliated. Just say no, b*tches.
And on that note, I hope Allred's attempts at justifying how Tiger ruined her client's chances of getting 'facials' on camera from random porn dudes, continues. Because I suspect that if it does, her rationalizations will become as convoluted as this woman's:
Edina Monsoon... another unexpected sage.
The media pundits watched and analyzed his performance... didn't bother to watch that, either, although, yet again, Gloria Allred had her @$$ parked on Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell, fuming that Tiger didn't offer her pornstar (oops... former pornstar) client a public apology. Because, as Allred added, Tiger made promises to her and exposed her to diseases, given that he was banging other women at the same time.
Ha!
And she said that Tiger implored her to get out of the porn business.
The b@$terd!! Because he wanted to be the only one in the arrangement teeming with VD from questionable, shady sex partners.
Seriously, Allred needs to give it up because this woman, nor any other of the jump ups deserve an apology. All of them could've refused his advances; all of them could've refused to have unprotected sex with him; and all of them could have camel it instead of allowing him to take refuge between their thighs.
Personally, I think that this demand for an apology smacks of racism. From the beginning of time, those with the gold made the rules. And conveniently, when people of color started making comparable coin, they were subject to stricter expectations simply because the source of wealth came from the majority population. But when members of the majority population make mistakes or flat disrespect both fellow members of their race and members of racial minorities, they are not called upon to apologize. But when a wealthy man of color humiliates a bunch of willing, desperate White women, or rather, scoop up what many other broke, yet observant men would scoop up with little monetary investment, the world has to stop because, now, the flowery integrity of womanhood has been insulted.
Please.
People teach others how to treat them... a lesson that every woman has to learn. And just because some of these broads were pushing 30 or were mothers don't preclude them from being morons.
Personally, I hope Tiger continues to not apologize to these women because they do have a lion's share of responsibility for being humiliated. Just say no, b*tches.
And on that note, I hope Allred's attempts at justifying how Tiger ruined her client's chances of getting 'facials' on camera from random porn dudes, continues. Because I suspect that if it does, her rationalizations will become as convoluted as this woman's:
Edina Monsoon... another unexpected sage.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Apologizing to the jump offs? FCUK THAT
While channel-surfing during a commercial break for En Nombre Del Amor, I switched over to HLN's Issues With Jane Velez-Mitchell.
Apparently, Tiger will be issuing a public apology. Apparently, it will take place on Friday. And apparently, the press will not get a chance to put their oar in, meaning no Q & As. And apparently, Gloria Allred, the loudmouth attorney for several of the loudmouthed whores, expect Tiger to give a public apology to them.
Are you fcuking kidding me?
Grown @$$ women who knew that Tiger was married and proceeded to text him, sext him and fcuk him and they think they deserve an apology because he made the usual promises that cheaters make to their jump offs? Or maybe they want an apology because he obliged a large number of like-minded spotlight seeking, yet limited talented skanks who thought the closest they could get to greatness was by getting on their knees? Getting getting on your knees is much easier than cultivating one's own talent, working and sweating for it, and dealing with the disappointments along the way.
Oh, no... it's just easier getting on your knees. And thanks to Gloria Allred, she makes getting down on all fours all the more easy.
They don't deserve an apology, Allred. If anything, those whores need to give some apologies. To Elin. To Tiger's daughter, Sam. To Tiger's son, Charlie. To Elin's sister and mother. To whomever they were sleeping with while they were letting Tiger ride them bareback. To their children because some of them were mothers. To their employers because their private behavior, which they enthusiastically made public, cast a shadow on their reputations. And mostly, they need to apologize to Tiger because if they exercised any self-control on their part, neither he or they would be in the jam that they are in now.
Seriously... is this the kind of feminism Allred is pushing now - a woman fcuks up and makes the wrong decision and the dude is solely responsible for it? Come on... these b*tches knew what they were doing; they need to take responsibility for themselves, period. And sadly, responsibility doesn't come in the form of payouts, hence Allred working so hard to convince the American public that these women are victims.
Fcuk that!
Apparently, Tiger will be issuing a public apology. Apparently, it will take place on Friday. And apparently, the press will not get a chance to put their oar in, meaning no Q & As. And apparently, Gloria Allred, the loudmouth attorney for several of the loudmouthed whores, expect Tiger to give a public apology to them.
Are you fcuking kidding me?
Grown @$$ women who knew that Tiger was married and proceeded to text him, sext him and fcuk him and they think they deserve an apology because he made the usual promises that cheaters make to their jump offs? Or maybe they want an apology because he obliged a large number of like-minded spotlight seeking, yet limited talented skanks who thought the closest they could get to greatness was by getting on their knees? Getting getting on your knees is much easier than cultivating one's own talent, working and sweating for it, and dealing with the disappointments along the way.
Oh, no... it's just easier getting on your knees. And thanks to Gloria Allred, she makes getting down on all fours all the more easy.
They don't deserve an apology, Allred. If anything, those whores need to give some apologies. To Elin. To Tiger's daughter, Sam. To Tiger's son, Charlie. To Elin's sister and mother. To whomever they were sleeping with while they were letting Tiger ride them bareback. To their children because some of them were mothers. To their employers because their private behavior, which they enthusiastically made public, cast a shadow on their reputations. And mostly, they need to apologize to Tiger because if they exercised any self-control on their part, neither he or they would be in the jam that they are in now.
Seriously... is this the kind of feminism Allred is pushing now - a woman fcuks up and makes the wrong decision and the dude is solely responsible for it? Come on... these b*tches knew what they were doing; they need to take responsibility for themselves, period. And sadly, responsibility doesn't come in the form of payouts, hence Allred working so hard to convince the American public that these women are victims.
Fcuk that!
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Plagiarism doesn't get you fired... it can get you to quit, though
I can't believe that I missed out on this story. Maybe I should blame my current telenovela binging. But then again, I watch the usual infotainment shows like Inside Edition, Entertainment Tonight, Insider and numerous HLN programs, and yet, I have to depend on CNN's Reliable Sources to report on Gerald Posner's recent resignation from The Daily Beast.
Mind you, I am not a regular follower of The Daily Beast. And I didn't necessarily have an opinion on Gerald Posner, although I did notice that he was seemingly all over HLN, MSNBC, Hollywood 411, and other infotainment shows adding to the already muddied waters associated with Michael Jackson's death. I will say that I was getting pretty annoyed with seeing his face damn near every single day since June 25th. And the introductions the show hosts would give him... hyperbolic, much? Especially given that some of the information he gave was eventually discounted.
At any rate, he's getting his @$$ chewed out, right now, but you know it won't last. Over the last few years, journalists who committed huge boners continue to get TV gigs with very little mention of their tendency to get their facts wrong. Sure, people can make mistakes (that's why pencils have erasers... blah, blah, blah) but the infinite number of chances doesn't make sense, especially when news agencies refuse to dig deeper before hiring and rehiring these people. Honestly, is it really fair to give Posner a hard time for lifting copy from the Miami Herald when the majority of Diane Dimond's investigative repertoire for Entertainment Tonight consists of standing on easements outside of court houses and private residents and repeating headlines featured on the cover of the National Enquirer?
Plagiarism should be taken seriously, but so should flagrant lying and showboating. Because like Posner, many like Nancy Grace, Jane Velez-Mitchell Lisa Bloom, Chris Jacobs, Robin Sax, etc. have legal backgrounds, not necessarily journalistic backgrounds and yet, there are placed in a position of 'reporting' when they are used to giving analysis. Analysis and interpretation have their place, but if you are placed in a position that implies that you are responsible for delivering facts, the line continues to get muddied. Add to it the tendency to be pro-prosecution and the concept of balanced reporting flies out of the window.
Unfortunately, the large media outlets will continue to hire these questionable people with plump resumes for the sake of expediency. Look for Posner to take root in a high profile 24/7 news outlet very soon.
Mind you, I am not a regular follower of The Daily Beast. And I didn't necessarily have an opinion on Gerald Posner, although I did notice that he was seemingly all over HLN, MSNBC, Hollywood 411, and other infotainment shows adding to the already muddied waters associated with Michael Jackson's death. I will say that I was getting pretty annoyed with seeing his face damn near every single day since June 25th. And the introductions the show hosts would give him... hyperbolic, much? Especially given that some of the information he gave was eventually discounted.
At any rate, he's getting his @$$ chewed out, right now, but you know it won't last. Over the last few years, journalists who committed huge boners continue to get TV gigs with very little mention of their tendency to get their facts wrong. Sure, people can make mistakes (that's why pencils have erasers... blah, blah, blah) but the infinite number of chances doesn't make sense, especially when news agencies refuse to dig deeper before hiring and rehiring these people. Honestly, is it really fair to give Posner a hard time for lifting copy from the Miami Herald when the majority of Diane Dimond's investigative repertoire for Entertainment Tonight consists of standing on easements outside of court houses and private residents and repeating headlines featured on the cover of the National Enquirer?
Plagiarism should be taken seriously, but so should flagrant lying and showboating. Because like Posner, many like Nancy Grace, Jane Velez-Mitchell Lisa Bloom, Chris Jacobs, Robin Sax, etc. have legal backgrounds, not necessarily journalistic backgrounds and yet, there are placed in a position of 'reporting' when they are used to giving analysis. Analysis and interpretation have their place, but if you are placed in a position that implies that you are responsible for delivering facts, the line continues to get muddied. Add to it the tendency to be pro-prosecution and the concept of balanced reporting flies out of the window.
Unfortunately, the large media outlets will continue to hire these questionable people with plump resumes for the sake of expediency. Look for Posner to take root in a high profile 24/7 news outlet very soon.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
To fellow MJ fans... a word
For months, I've lurked on various MJ fan sites/discussion boards in the hope of hastening the mourning process and for the most part, doing this was helpful. However, I have come across pockets of fans who are overzealous in their appreciation of MJ's contributions to their lives. They come off as overly sensitive and possessive and worse, they think that their 'taking up for Michael' is some sort of divine mission - not an exaggeration, given that some have made him into some sort of deity.
Michael Jackson wasn't a deity. He was a man. A very special man, but a man. And yes, I have on, more than a few occasions, engaged in overindulgent behavior when it comes to this man; however, I haven't forgotten about the gift that this man bestowed on me and numerous others: the ability to be receptive to new experiences.
It is very hard to remain receptive in the current world, because you are constantly assailed with vindictiveness, mediocrity, and outright pantload, but it is a battle worth waging. Mercifully, a little part of me held on to receptiveness, despite Mary Hart and Entertainment Tonight's infiltration of the We Are the World 25 Haiti recording. Thanks to the bad editing and Mary Hart's posturing, I was fully prepared to hate the update. How thoroughly wrong I would've been.
First of all, for me, nothing will ever overshadow the original version of We Are the World. I loved that song so much, I even bought the full length LP, which feature other artists like Steve Perry, Prince, Tina Turner and Bruce Springsteen. I remember singing it, along with my classmates, in music class. That original version is entrenched inside of me; however, I would be lying if I didn't say that I am feeling the updated version, especially the new material featuring rappers/hip hop artists. Initially, I thought, along with many, that Lionel Richie and Quincy Jones were posturing when they implied that MJ would be on board with this version, but I honestly think that they were right. MJ was many things, but mostly, he was a collaborator. He fed on the creative energies of others, especially the 'others' who were, seemingly, outside of his comfort zone.
Did the new version have big-marquee names like the original version? No. Has something like this been done before? No. But thinking back on the other charity singles like Do They Know It's Christmas? or Hands Across America, or Voices that Care or even the hip hop charity/public awareness projects like Self Destruction or We're All In the Same Gang, We Are the World seems to be the only single that withstood the test of time and can be improved upon without the threat of destroying it's original integrity.
No, it's not mandatory for fans to embrace the updated version, but for pete's sake, don't use your reticence to manipulate MJ's actual legacy. MJ was not Norma Desmond, folks - so desperate to cling onto past glories that they became distorted to grotesque proportions.
He was a man who wrote a pretty good song, which clearly, still has a life of its own. Wouldn't that make MJ happy?
Michael Jackson wasn't a deity. He was a man. A very special man, but a man. And yes, I have on, more than a few occasions, engaged in overindulgent behavior when it comes to this man; however, I haven't forgotten about the gift that this man bestowed on me and numerous others: the ability to be receptive to new experiences.
It is very hard to remain receptive in the current world, because you are constantly assailed with vindictiveness, mediocrity, and outright pantload, but it is a battle worth waging. Mercifully, a little part of me held on to receptiveness, despite Mary Hart and Entertainment Tonight's infiltration of the We Are the World 25 Haiti recording. Thanks to the bad editing and Mary Hart's posturing, I was fully prepared to hate the update. How thoroughly wrong I would've been.
First of all, for me, nothing will ever overshadow the original version of We Are the World. I loved that song so much, I even bought the full length LP, which feature other artists like Steve Perry, Prince, Tina Turner and Bruce Springsteen. I remember singing it, along with my classmates, in music class. That original version is entrenched inside of me; however, I would be lying if I didn't say that I am feeling the updated version, especially the new material featuring rappers/hip hop artists. Initially, I thought, along with many, that Lionel Richie and Quincy Jones were posturing when they implied that MJ would be on board with this version, but I honestly think that they were right. MJ was many things, but mostly, he was a collaborator. He fed on the creative energies of others, especially the 'others' who were, seemingly, outside of his comfort zone.
Did the new version have big-marquee names like the original version? No. Has something like this been done before? No. But thinking back on the other charity singles like Do They Know It's Christmas? or Hands Across America, or Voices that Care or even the hip hop charity/public awareness projects like Self Destruction or We're All In the Same Gang, We Are the World seems to be the only single that withstood the test of time and can be improved upon without the threat of destroying it's original integrity.
No, it's not mandatory for fans to embrace the updated version, but for pete's sake, don't use your reticence to manipulate MJ's actual legacy. MJ was not Norma Desmond, folks - so desperate to cling onto past glories that they became distorted to grotesque proportions.
He was a man who wrote a pretty good song, which clearly, still has a life of its own. Wouldn't that make MJ happy?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)