Plus: School Board should continue to listen up; Anna Nicole being taken in death
Observations at the Grammy Awards: Unfortunately, I sat through the entire Grammy Awards telecast Sunday night. Most of the performances were underwhelming, even the big Police reunion and the otherwise-incredible Red Hot Chili Peppers. But I did learn a few things.
One – Mary J. Blige is apparently the new Jesus. She is a talented singer, if not a bit overrated. But she acts as if she is the only person to ever get over substance addiction and clean up her act. Blige got more stage time than almost anyone else, and it wasn’t just because she won three awards. She’s been advocating this “No More Drama” life-outlook for a few years now, and it’s annoying. Really, Mary, we get it.
At this point, she’s the perfect candidate to start her own religion.
Two - Speaking of annoying, I was really insulted by the Dixie Chicks and their “nanny nanny boo boo” acceptance speeches. It’s really too bad their five Grammys this year are based on politics and not musical merit, because they stole awards from artists who truly deserved it.
I think the Chicks are very talented, but their album, “Taking the Long Way,” is just mediocre folk rock. The Chicks themselves admitted they’re really not “country” artists anymore. When country radio banned them, they jumped ship accordingly.
While it’s true that most Grammy winners in country categories historically had very little radio airplay – Alison Krauss and Johnny Cash are two examples – I wonder why the Chicks even got categorized the way they did.
I know contemporary country music is very pop-oriented, but when does music cease to be “country?” Is it really all about being connected to the formal industry in Nashville?
Either way, it’s clear that the Chicks got the sympathy vote, fair and square.
Three – Christina Aguilera’s cover of James Brown’s “It’s a Man’s Man’s Man’s World” was stunning. And by “stunning,” I mean stunningly oversung.
The greatest thing about the performance was the look on Jamie Foxx’s face afterward. It totally said, “Yep, I could have done better.”
Four – Reba McEntire had the perfect opportunity to make a snarky comment about the Dixie Chicks, but she stuck to the script as she introduced Carrie Underwood and Rascal Flatts. Maybe she’ll say something on “The View” one day.
•••
Let the people speak: I hope I’m not in the minority in my complete opposition to the Tangipahoa Parish School Board’s proposal to further restrict public comments at board meetings.
I’m sure you’re wondering why the entertainment column writer even cares about this. My parents were pivotal in getting a Louisiana law passed in the 1990s that requires school boards to hear comments from the public before taking votes. Before then, in St. Charles Parish, the school board would simply hold its meeting in public and then hold a general public input segment after the meeting was over. The public comments were never shown on the public access cable channel.
I think the Tangipahoa School Board is afraid of just that – publicity. Sure, some people misuse their right to make comments by acting irrationally or making false claims. But that’s what the school board members signed up for when they took their oaths of office. The board should respond cordially to these claims instead of ignoring them.
It’s OK for people to disagree, and it’s OK for a comment from the public to make a board member rethink his or her position on an issue. Supposedly the proposed rules are to try to eliminate people even having to address the board in the first place by requiring them to sign up to speak and consulting the superintendent the day before the meeting is scheduled.
But many situations simply aren’t made to be taken care of by an administrator. The opposition to a school uniform policy is just one of those situations. In that case, a person’s opinion deserves to be heard in public.
The board should be encouraging more involvement by community members and parents, many of whom could offer precious insight into the educational process. Instead it is seeking to discourage that.
•••
Anna Nicole – The plot thickens: For some reason I can’t seem to get the theme song from “The Anna Nicole Show” out of my head. Oh that’s right, it’s because I can’t go 30 minutes without reading or watching something new about the dead Playboy Playmate.
This week “Entertainment Tonight” is rolling out its exclusive interviews with Anna Nicole Smith’s partner, Howard K. Stern. Just the fact that he’s willing to sell his grief is disgusting. And unfortunately, Smith’s baby daughter has to be taken along for the ride.
There are way too many facets to this story to make it leave the spotlight anytime soon – the paternity of Smith’s baby, the fate of her late husband’s fortune, the drug use, etc.
But look for the most shocking information to come from the goods that were stolen from the home Smith and Stern had been living in in the Bahamas. Apparently pictures, important documents and even Dannielynn’s birth certificate were taken. These will be sold to magazines and published.
Smith asked for all the publicity she received in life. But even she doesn’t deserve to have her personal effects pillaged and then sold for profit.
Hopefully everything will be settled sooner rather than later, for the sake of Dannielynn. But I’m guessing that won’t happen.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Blah, Blah, Blogging... about the SAINTS
The Saints being poised to make it into Superbowl XLI is surreal news for what’s now an equally surreal world.
This thing is starting to make me question reality. I’m sure part of The Matrix got miscoded a few months ago, and this is the result.
I’ll call Keanu Reeves and see what he can do about sending a heat wave over Chicago Sunday afternoon.
On to the hits and misses...
Please, leave the trash-talk on the Senate floor — Illinois Senator Barack Obama said Monday that the Saints should be prepared for their “fairytale ride” to come to an end Sunday. For someone who’s toying with running for the Democratic presidential nomination, he sure doesn’t know how to get or keep support in the Deep South.
Personally I think Obama should give his free playoff ticket to a New Orleans storm victim and pay for his or her travel expenses.
Where Y’at, FCC? — If you noticed the blond Saints fan with the offensive T-shirt broadcast during the game Saturday night, you’re not alone. Apparently her name is Heather, and she’s become a minor celebrity on YouTube.com.
Tuesday evening a local radio station was attempting to interview her, all because a FOX producer couldn’t see the F-word right in front of his face.
According to an e-mail from FOX spokesman Lou D’Ermilio, the scene was not live. It was recorded during a play and aired during a replay.
Nice going. But in a world where those words can fly fast and free after 11 p.m. on Comedy Central, is a second’s worth of profanity really that big of a deal? You tell me.
Angelina Jolie, Southern soccer mom — The biggest celebrity news coming out of New Orleans is that actress Angelina Jolie and her boyfriend/fiance/babydaddy Brad Pitt have bought a $3.5 million home in the French Quarter. Jolie says she wants to befriend “normal moms” and send her three children (two adopted, one not) to school in the city.
The other reason for the move — to escape the paparazzi — has pretty much been neutralized by the fact that everyone knows where she’s moving. The best way to avoid stalkers is, of course, to announce your move in US Weekly magazine.
Pitt has been doing some charity work in the city while filming another movie, so it’s probably convenient for them to be here right now. But I’m sure when the novelty wears off, they’ll go back to La La Land.
Then again, if there’s any celebrity who’s experienced the gamut of primitive, Third World conditions, it’s Jolie, who adopts children from impoverished countries and travels the world for the United Nations. And there’s that dark side of hers, the one prone to gothic dress and wearing vials of blood as jewelry.
At least the city will collect taxes on the property and rent some hotel rooms to paparazzi. And I’m sure they’ll grab a bite to eat while they’re in town. So thanks, Angelina and Brad, for improving New Orleans’ tourism outlook.
I’ll leave the Golden Globes up to you — Due to an interruption in my cable service Monday night, I missed the Golden Globe Awards. But I don’t feel like I missed out on much, not when I can tune into “The Insider” and get all the silly coverage I need.
“American Idol” alum Jennifer Hudson took home an award for “Dreamgirls” (never seen it), “Babel” won for best picture (never seen it) and America Ferrera won as TV’s “Ugly Betty” (never seen it).
Maybe Charter Communications did me a favor by forcing me to spend the night working on my computer.
The full list of winners can be found here. Is it just me, or is Hollywood once again proving that it’s out of touch with the likes and dislikes of the American public?
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Tangipahoa School Board colors outside the lines
The Tangipahoa School Board is beginning its search for a new superintendent, but it might not want an educator to fill the position.
It is asking the state BESE board to grant an exemption to its policy that public school superintendents be certified educators.
Would the school board be doing the right thing by hiring a non-educator, or should it follow the rules?
Read the full story here.
It is asking the state BESE board to grant an exemption to its policy that public school superintendents be certified educators.
Would the school board be doing the right thing by hiring a non-educator, or should it follow the rules?
Read the full story here.
"God Warrior" strikes again
Ponchatoula's Marguerite Perrin is set to appear on FOX reality show "Trading Spouses" once again next week. Daily Star staff writer Libby Haydel found out she was the only former guest to be asked to do another episode.
Her last appearance was marked by an angry rant against her Wiccan host family that has been parodied by many, including one drag queen. Perrin wants to show America she is not as closed-minded as she appeared the first time around.
Will Perrin improve her image by appearing on "Trading Spouses" again, or has the damage already been done?
Read the full story here.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Smoking a no-no on campus?
New smoking restrictions on the Southeastern Louisiana University campus are being implemented to “clear the air” near entrances to academic buildings.
The restrictions coincide with the Louisiana Smoke-Free Air Act that went into effect Jan. 1, Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs John Crain said.
The policy expands SLU’s efforts initiated in 2003 that allowed smoking only in designated areas around certain buildings, he said. Designated smoking areas have been created near D Vickers Hall, Garrett Hall, Fayard Hall and Sims Memorial Library.
Smoking will be banned at the entrances to Mims Hall, the Biology Building, certain areas on the north campus and in the mall of the War Memorial Student Union.
Should smoking be banned at other locations on campus? Or is SLU overdoing the new smoking ban by making even outside areas smoke-free?
The restrictions coincide with the Louisiana Smoke-Free Air Act that went into effect Jan. 1, Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs John Crain said.
The policy expands SLU’s efforts initiated in 2003 that allowed smoking only in designated areas around certain buildings, he said. Designated smoking areas have been created near D Vickers Hall, Garrett Hall, Fayard Hall and Sims Memorial Library.
Smoking will be banned at the entrances to Mims Hall, the Biology Building, certain areas on the north campus and in the mall of the War Memorial Student Union.
Should smoking be banned at other locations on campus? Or is SLU overdoing the new smoking ban by making even outside areas smoke-free?
Monday, January 08, 2007
Blog note
In 2007, the regular blog column will be published in monthly editions of Downtown. Look for the next blog right here on Thursday, Jan. 18.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Sugarbowl 2007
NEW ORLEANS—They say Notre Dame quarterback Brady Quinn is the best quarterback coming into the NFL Draft, a possible No. 1 overall pick even.
“They” almost certainly are re-evaluating that assessment today — especially if LSU quarterback JaMarcus Russell’s tour de force performance in the Sugar Bowl Wednesday night was indeed his collegiate swan song.
Russell’s MVP showing — 21-for-34 (62 percent) passing for 332 yards and two TDs and one interception — produced a double blowout in the Superdome. One was the final score, a 41-14 LSU victory that was just as one-sided as most observers who questioned Notre Dame’s BCS worthiness expected.
The other laugher was the highly touted matchup of quarterbacks, which most saw as perhaps the best quarterback duel on offer this bowl season. To be sure, it certainly helped that Russell didn’t have to play against an LSU defense which was ranked among the nation’s elite and played like it against the fighting Irish.
Still, those pro scouts who questioned Quinn’s accuracy saw plenty of ammunition to back up that claim. He finished just 15-for-35, hitting just 43 percent of his throws, and many of the ones he did hit were hardly the crisp, sure throws you look for from No. 1 pick-type quarterbacks.
Russell, on the other hand, played a game that might even have been good enough to quiet the LSU fans who still nitpick his every move. Ditto for Tigers coach Les Miles, whose coaching accumen has also been questioned by LSU’s semi-faithful.
But on this night Miles dominated his matchup as well with Notre Dame’s Super Bowl ring-laden Charlie Weis. It was expected that, given weeks to prepare and dissect LSU’s schemes, Weis’s Irish ingenuity would confuse the supposedly confusable Russell.
Didn’t happen — just like Weis’s call for a fake punt from his own 34 on the game’s first series against one of the nation’s top defenses wasn’t happening.
And then there was this Weis witticism after watching LSU jump his team for a 14-0 lead in the first eight minutes, and after Weis was duped by the Irish rally to tie it at 14-14:
“I saw no signs (at halftime) that we’d play a complimentary crummy second half,” said Weis, before conceding his error. “For the rest of the game they really laid the wood on us.”
Chalk that up to Weis whistling past the alleged ancient Indian burial ground beneath his feet in the Superdome, with Notre Dame safety Tom Zbikowski providing backup vocals.
“We didn’t make the plays, but I didn’t see any speed that we haven’t seen before,” Zbikowski sniffed.
Of course, Zbikowski — we were able to identify him on the postgame interview dais only via dental records — didn’t mention that the Irish DBs were burned beyond recognition all those other times they saw LSU’s brand of speed this season, too.
Those forced to watch the game bereft of Irish eyes saw the mismatch in the making.
“You saw big, strong men imposing their will on the defense,” said Miles, whose coaches made it easy for the Tigers. LSU must have been feeling a little deja vu when what they saw on the field looked eerily similar to what they had watched in the meeting room cinema.
“We have a month to prepare for something, you go zoom in and key on certain things,” Tigers receiver Chris Davis said. “Exactly what we saw on film was exactly what they played.”
“Give credit to our coaches for scouting so good and doing their job,” Russell said. “It made it easy for us.”
If anything, perhaps a little too easy, Russell said.
“It was too good, too fast,” he said of the Tigers’ jump to a quick 14-0 lead, then the inevitable lax before ripping off the last 27 points of the game.
And most of it was Russell taking advantage of the mismatches his receivers offered against the Notre Dame secondary. And for once, maybe it will be OK for LSU fans to give Russell his props. A guy who supposedly can’t read defenses very well did a pretty good job of dissecting the schemes the highly respected Weis came up with.
“What people don’t understand about JaMarcus is how smart he is,” Miles said. “He’s a very bright quarterback, understands what he’s looking at. If there’s a characteristic that a great quarterback has, I suspect JaMarcus has it.”
That’s something a lot of LSU fans and Heisman Trophy-voting media types haven’t always seen eye-to-eye with Miles on. But can there be any doubt left now as to who the No. 1 quarterback in the NFL Draft would be if Russell goes ahead and opts to come out after his junior year?
And why not, after Wednesday’s performance, one which left me feeling like Miles might secretly be hoping Russell does go ahead and pull that trigger. After all, it’s not like LSU’s QB cupboard is bare, and Russell’s departure would clear the decks for the Tigers to get highly touted freshman Ryan Perrilloux into the lineup and keep him from, say, jumping to some nearby, quarterback-needy I-AA team that could offer him a platform for his skills right away.
I mean, if there were such a team somewhere that fits that description.
Still, Miles can dream.
“I don’t know why he wasn’t mentioned for the Heisman,” Miles said. “I can tell you this, in short order he has to make a very difficult decision. Certainly he will be offered a pile of money. But if he returns, he’ll certainly be a Heisman Trophy candidate. And (LSU SID) Michael Bonnette, he’d better get the (Heisman campaign) mockups ready.”
– Commentary by John Lenz, Daily Star Sports Editor
“They” almost certainly are re-evaluating that assessment today — especially if LSU quarterback JaMarcus Russell’s tour de force performance in the Sugar Bowl Wednesday night was indeed his collegiate swan song.
Russell’s MVP showing — 21-for-34 (62 percent) passing for 332 yards and two TDs and one interception — produced a double blowout in the Superdome. One was the final score, a 41-14 LSU victory that was just as one-sided as most observers who questioned Notre Dame’s BCS worthiness expected.
The other laugher was the highly touted matchup of quarterbacks, which most saw as perhaps the best quarterback duel on offer this bowl season. To be sure, it certainly helped that Russell didn’t have to play against an LSU defense which was ranked among the nation’s elite and played like it against the fighting Irish.
Still, those pro scouts who questioned Quinn’s accuracy saw plenty of ammunition to back up that claim. He finished just 15-for-35, hitting just 43 percent of his throws, and many of the ones he did hit were hardly the crisp, sure throws you look for from No. 1 pick-type quarterbacks.
Russell, on the other hand, played a game that might even have been good enough to quiet the LSU fans who still nitpick his every move. Ditto for Tigers coach Les Miles, whose coaching accumen has also been questioned by LSU’s semi-faithful.
But on this night Miles dominated his matchup as well with Notre Dame’s Super Bowl ring-laden Charlie Weis. It was expected that, given weeks to prepare and dissect LSU’s schemes, Weis’s Irish ingenuity would confuse the supposedly confusable Russell.
Didn’t happen — just like Weis’s call for a fake punt from his own 34 on the game’s first series against one of the nation’s top defenses wasn’t happening.
And then there was this Weis witticism after watching LSU jump his team for a 14-0 lead in the first eight minutes, and after Weis was duped by the Irish rally to tie it at 14-14:
“I saw no signs (at halftime) that we’d play a complimentary crummy second half,” said Weis, before conceding his error. “For the rest of the game they really laid the wood on us.”
Chalk that up to Weis whistling past the alleged ancient Indian burial ground beneath his feet in the Superdome, with Notre Dame safety Tom Zbikowski providing backup vocals.
“We didn’t make the plays, but I didn’t see any speed that we haven’t seen before,” Zbikowski sniffed.
Of course, Zbikowski — we were able to identify him on the postgame interview dais only via dental records — didn’t mention that the Irish DBs were burned beyond recognition all those other times they saw LSU’s brand of speed this season, too.
Those forced to watch the game bereft of Irish eyes saw the mismatch in the making.
“You saw big, strong men imposing their will on the defense,” said Miles, whose coaches made it easy for the Tigers. LSU must have been feeling a little deja vu when what they saw on the field looked eerily similar to what they had watched in the meeting room cinema.
“We have a month to prepare for something, you go zoom in and key on certain things,” Tigers receiver Chris Davis said. “Exactly what we saw on film was exactly what they played.”
“Give credit to our coaches for scouting so good and doing their job,” Russell said. “It made it easy for us.”
If anything, perhaps a little too easy, Russell said.
“It was too good, too fast,” he said of the Tigers’ jump to a quick 14-0 lead, then the inevitable lax before ripping off the last 27 points of the game.
And most of it was Russell taking advantage of the mismatches his receivers offered against the Notre Dame secondary. And for once, maybe it will be OK for LSU fans to give Russell his props. A guy who supposedly can’t read defenses very well did a pretty good job of dissecting the schemes the highly respected Weis came up with.
“What people don’t understand about JaMarcus is how smart he is,” Miles said. “He’s a very bright quarterback, understands what he’s looking at. If there’s a characteristic that a great quarterback has, I suspect JaMarcus has it.”
That’s something a lot of LSU fans and Heisman Trophy-voting media types haven’t always seen eye-to-eye with Miles on. But can there be any doubt left now as to who the No. 1 quarterback in the NFL Draft would be if Russell goes ahead and opts to come out after his junior year?
And why not, after Wednesday’s performance, one which left me feeling like Miles might secretly be hoping Russell does go ahead and pull that trigger. After all, it’s not like LSU’s QB cupboard is bare, and Russell’s departure would clear the decks for the Tigers to get highly touted freshman Ryan Perrilloux into the lineup and keep him from, say, jumping to some nearby, quarterback-needy I-AA team that could offer him a platform for his skills right away.
I mean, if there were such a team somewhere that fits that description.
Still, Miles can dream.
“I don’t know why he wasn’t mentioned for the Heisman,” Miles said. “I can tell you this, in short order he has to make a very difficult decision. Certainly he will be offered a pile of money. But if he returns, he’ll certainly be a Heisman Trophy candidate. And (LSU SID) Michael Bonnette, he’d better get the (Heisman campaign) mockups ready.”
– Commentary by John Lenz, Daily Star Sports Editor
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Many Americans take shopping down to wire
That most-asked holiday question — “Have you finished your Christmas shopping?” — is starting to wear on my nerves.
And apparently I’m not alone in my unfinished business.
According to Consumer Reports magazine, 30 percent of Americans won’t finish their holiday shopping until the evening of Dec. 24. Better yet, one third of Americans hadn’t even begun their gift-buying until Dec. 10.
Regifting, the term Jerry Seinfeld coined for giving a previously-gotten gift to an unsuspecting friend or family member, is also an attractive option for late shoppers. According to the poll, 13 percent of consumers are planning to “regift” at least one item.
The biggest problem with regifting is the lack of originality. But if I’ve learned anything from HGTV’s “Cash in the Attic” and “Design Remix,” it’s that we have so much stuff nowadays, it’s entirely possible to “go shopping” in one’s own home.
I think what all this crucial data is saying is that we’re caring less and less for the commercial trappings of Christmas. Many people I’ve talked to have opted for simple get-togethers sans presents this year. Maybe advertising blitzes and long lines have killed the true meaning behind giving gifts. And fancy “things” can only make one happy for so long.
I, on the other hand, take gifts and cash in all forms, even credit cards. What some people might see as an irrelevant gift I see as a listing on Ebay.com.
Animals in the news:
What did your pet get for Christmas? (Don’t say it aloud. Fluffy might hear you.)
Fifty two percent of pet owners are buying toys, treats and clothing for their pets this year.
I’m crazy-as-charged, and I don’t even own a dog. I spent over $20 on a package of spa treatments for one of my friend’s dogs, which coincidentally has a larger wardrobe than I do.
I can’t help that it’s a lot easier to shop for a non-human. If you think an animal will like something, they probably will. They seem to genuinely appreciate it, unlike some people.
Maybe animals don’t know about the birth of Jesus, but all dogs go to heaven, right?
Speaking of Fido:
Britney Spears has been named World’s Worst Celebrity Dog Owner in an online poll of readers of Hollywood Dog and New York Dog magazines.
How did Spears win this coveted award? She got rid of her three Chihuahuas because of her two children, Sean Preston and Jayden James.
Spears’ soon-to-be ex-husband, Kevin Federline, said the house was too hectic, and the dogs were re-homed with friends of the couple.
Sympathetic to animal rescue, I always tend to get frustrated when people don’t want to at least try to work with their animals when a new baby comes into the picture.
I’m not sure why Spears couldn’t just hire a dog nanny or maybe give the pooches a wing in her mansion. Seems like a workable solution to me.
But Britney deserves a break on this one, especially when Paris Hilton’s running around buying illegal tropical rain forest inhabitants to keep in her menagerie, then getting bitten by them.
Onstage at the 2007 Grammy Awards:
You. Ever since Time Magazine named all of us their “person of the year,” “we” have ever-increasing chances to offer our personalized entertainment and news content to the world.
The latest chance comes from Spears’ ex-boyfriend, Justin Timberlake. He’s looking for someone to sing with him at the Grammy Awards to be held in Los Angeles on Feb. 11.
Instead of going to any number of his diva contemporaries, he wants YOU to upload a 60-second video clip of yourself singing one of nine selected Grammy-winning songs. Twelve contestants will be chosen from the audition videos, and an “American Idol”-like competition will ensue, with people voting on who they want to see on the Grammy stage. Three finalists will be flown to the Grammys, and the winner will be announced during the broadcast and hop onstage to sing.
Since when did award shows become reality TV?
To enter (or have fun watching people make fools of themselves), go to www.music.yahoo.com/mygrammymoment.
And apparently I’m not alone in my unfinished business.
According to Consumer Reports magazine, 30 percent of Americans won’t finish their holiday shopping until the evening of Dec. 24. Better yet, one third of Americans hadn’t even begun their gift-buying until Dec. 10.
Regifting, the term Jerry Seinfeld coined for giving a previously-gotten gift to an unsuspecting friend or family member, is also an attractive option for late shoppers. According to the poll, 13 percent of consumers are planning to “regift” at least one item.
The biggest problem with regifting is the lack of originality. But if I’ve learned anything from HGTV’s “Cash in the Attic” and “Design Remix,” it’s that we have so much stuff nowadays, it’s entirely possible to “go shopping” in one’s own home.
I think what all this crucial data is saying is that we’re caring less and less for the commercial trappings of Christmas. Many people I’ve talked to have opted for simple get-togethers sans presents this year. Maybe advertising blitzes and long lines have killed the true meaning behind giving gifts. And fancy “things” can only make one happy for so long.
I, on the other hand, take gifts and cash in all forms, even credit cards. What some people might see as an irrelevant gift I see as a listing on Ebay.com.
Animals in the news:
What did your pet get for Christmas? (Don’t say it aloud. Fluffy might hear you.)
Fifty two percent of pet owners are buying toys, treats and clothing for their pets this year.
I’m crazy-as-charged, and I don’t even own a dog. I spent over $20 on a package of spa treatments for one of my friend’s dogs, which coincidentally has a larger wardrobe than I do.
I can’t help that it’s a lot easier to shop for a non-human. If you think an animal will like something, they probably will. They seem to genuinely appreciate it, unlike some people.
Maybe animals don’t know about the birth of Jesus, but all dogs go to heaven, right?
Speaking of Fido:
Britney Spears has been named World’s Worst Celebrity Dog Owner in an online poll of readers of Hollywood Dog and New York Dog magazines.
How did Spears win this coveted award? She got rid of her three Chihuahuas because of her two children, Sean Preston and Jayden James.
Spears’ soon-to-be ex-husband, Kevin Federline, said the house was too hectic, and the dogs were re-homed with friends of the couple.
Sympathetic to animal rescue, I always tend to get frustrated when people don’t want to at least try to work with their animals when a new baby comes into the picture.
I’m not sure why Spears couldn’t just hire a dog nanny or maybe give the pooches a wing in her mansion. Seems like a workable solution to me.
But Britney deserves a break on this one, especially when Paris Hilton’s running around buying illegal tropical rain forest inhabitants to keep in her menagerie, then getting bitten by them.
Onstage at the 2007 Grammy Awards:
You. Ever since Time Magazine named all of us their “person of the year,” “we” have ever-increasing chances to offer our personalized entertainment and news content to the world.
The latest chance comes from Spears’ ex-boyfriend, Justin Timberlake. He’s looking for someone to sing with him at the Grammy Awards to be held in Los Angeles on Feb. 11.
Instead of going to any number of his diva contemporaries, he wants YOU to upload a 60-second video clip of yourself singing one of nine selected Grammy-winning songs. Twelve contestants will be chosen from the audition videos, and an “American Idol”-like competition will ensue, with people voting on who they want to see on the Grammy stage. Three finalists will be flown to the Grammys, and the winner will be announced during the broadcast and hop onstage to sing.
Since when did award shows become reality TV?
To enter (or have fun watching people make fools of themselves), go to www.music.yahoo.com/mygrammymoment.
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Another roundup – Brad Pitt; Mute Math; Is it really 'Idol' time again?
Money ‘Pitt’ — Brad Pitt showed up in New Orleans last week. Usually this means he’s pushing some pie-in-the-sky do-gooder scheme, like “green building.” (I’m still not sure what that was all about.)
But this time Pitt was actually doing good — he was filming a movie called “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” which is coincidentally the biggest-budget film ever to be shot in the Crescent City.
I agree with my readers about celebrities like Pitt and Sean Penn “acting” like they’re humanitarians when they’re really out to get publicity. But I’ll give him more credit for his chosen career. I hope he makes tons of movies in Louisiana. The more movie industry business New Orleans gets, the better. That boost to the economy will help local people more than any eco-friendly house ever could.
And Brad, I hope you didn’t forget to tip well at those nightspots you were spotted at. Oh, and throw in some of Angie’s money, too.
Look for “Benjamin Button” in 2008.
‘Muted’ mayhem – Now that I’ve gotten some great suggestions on local country artists, I’d like to throw a musical suggestion back at you: Mute Math.
The name actually has a deep, spiritual meaning that I won’t get into, but these guys are one of the best bands coming out of southern Louisiana right now. I wasn’t surprised when they popped up on ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live” as the musical guest Friday night. After playing at New Orleans’ Voodoo Music Festival and Tennessee’s Bonaroo Festival earlier this year, they’re on the cusp of mainstream popularity.
Here’s how I describe their sound: Reggae-ish Sting meets electronica meets experimental rock. And they’re one progressive act you don’t have to worry about your kids getting into. They’re actually veterans of the Christian music industry looking to deliver a positive message without sacrificing audience numbers.
Plus, they’re the only band I can think of that can make smashing fluorescent lights in a fit of rock star rage with the neck of a keytar seem hardcore. In fact, they’re the only band I can think of that still uses a keytar.
Check them out: www. myspace.com/mutemath.
Time’s flying by – I’m not a huge movie-watcher, but over the weekend I rented “American Dreamz,” starring Hugh Grant and Mandy Moore. It’s actually a quite disturbing film. It makes spoofing “American Idol” a satirical high art.
But what’s even more disturbing is the image of Simon Cowell on my television telling me that another season of “American Idol” is coming soon.
Is it really that time again?
But who am I kidding? “American Idol” has become like a season in my family. It’s the one just after Christmas and right before Carnival.
And for you Soul Patrollers: Taylor Hicks’ full-length album comes out on Dec. 12.
The Great Smokeout – Also coming soon: Enforcement of the Louisiana Smoke-Free Air Act. Don’t expect to smoke a cigarette in a restaurant anytime soon, in Louisiana at least.
Southeastern Louisiana University is looking to reinforce its “No Smoking” areas, which were set up in 2003 and largely ignored by a student body that smokes like a bunch of mostly-20-something chimneys.
The courtyard in front of D Vickers is one of the worst offenders as far as second-hand smoke. I’m not too sure how SLU hopes to enforce the areas, especially when second-hand smoke is a moving hazard in most cases (students have mastered walking and smoking at the same time).
The best I can say is good luck to law enforcement in these trying times for tobacco users in this state of excess.
But this time Pitt was actually doing good — he was filming a movie called “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” which is coincidentally the biggest-budget film ever to be shot in the Crescent City.
I agree with my readers about celebrities like Pitt and Sean Penn “acting” like they’re humanitarians when they’re really out to get publicity. But I’ll give him more credit for his chosen career. I hope he makes tons of movies in Louisiana. The more movie industry business New Orleans gets, the better. That boost to the economy will help local people more than any eco-friendly house ever could.
And Brad, I hope you didn’t forget to tip well at those nightspots you were spotted at. Oh, and throw in some of Angie’s money, too.
Look for “Benjamin Button” in 2008.
‘Muted’ mayhem – Now that I’ve gotten some great suggestions on local country artists, I’d like to throw a musical suggestion back at you: Mute Math.
The name actually has a deep, spiritual meaning that I won’t get into, but these guys are one of the best bands coming out of southern Louisiana right now. I wasn’t surprised when they popped up on ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live” as the musical guest Friday night. After playing at New Orleans’ Voodoo Music Festival and Tennessee’s Bonaroo Festival earlier this year, they’re on the cusp of mainstream popularity.
Here’s how I describe their sound: Reggae-ish Sting meets electronica meets experimental rock. And they’re one progressive act you don’t have to worry about your kids getting into. They’re actually veterans of the Christian music industry looking to deliver a positive message without sacrificing audience numbers.
Plus, they’re the only band I can think of that can make smashing fluorescent lights in a fit of rock star rage with the neck of a keytar seem hardcore. In fact, they’re the only band I can think of that still uses a keytar.
Check them out: www. myspace.com/mutemath.
Time’s flying by – I’m not a huge movie-watcher, but over the weekend I rented “American Dreamz,” starring Hugh Grant and Mandy Moore. It’s actually a quite disturbing film. It makes spoofing “American Idol” a satirical high art.
But what’s even more disturbing is the image of Simon Cowell on my television telling me that another season of “American Idol” is coming soon.
Is it really that time again?
But who am I kidding? “American Idol” has become like a season in my family. It’s the one just after Christmas and right before Carnival.
And for you Soul Patrollers: Taylor Hicks’ full-length album comes out on Dec. 12.
The Great Smokeout – Also coming soon: Enforcement of the Louisiana Smoke-Free Air Act. Don’t expect to smoke a cigarette in a restaurant anytime soon, in Louisiana at least.
Southeastern Louisiana University is looking to reinforce its “No Smoking” areas, which were set up in 2003 and largely ignored by a student body that smokes like a bunch of mostly-20-something chimneys.
The courtyard in front of D Vickers is one of the worst offenders as far as second-hand smoke. I’m not too sure how SLU hopes to enforce the areas, especially when second-hand smoke is a moving hazard in most cases (students have mastered walking and smoking at the same time).
The best I can say is good luck to law enforcement in these trying times for tobacco users in this state of excess.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Roundup of local, national pop culture hits and misses
LSU’s No. 21 — Even though Louisiana State University didn’t even crack U.S. News and World Report’s 2007 best colleges list, the school is still pretty “high” up on a list that really counts: CollegeHumor.com’s 2006-2007 Power Rankings.
The male chauvinists over at College Humor, with the help of similar-minded students that make up the site’s user base, set out to “scientifically” find the best schools where you can “have the maximum amount of fun while putting forth the least amount of effort.”
They asked all the tough questions: Are free condoms available on campus? (yes) What time do the bars close? (2 a.m.) How many students are interested in drugs? (To get this score, they used information provided by students on their own personal Facebook profiles.)
I admit, I’m a Southeastern girl through and through. And I know LSU has a reputation as a “party school.” Anyone who doubts that should find the Advocate article in which students feebly defended their alma mater in the face of the U.S. News and World Report omission. The best many could come up with was, “But we have a good football team!”
Maybe it’s me, but if I went to LSU I’d be more than a little disturbed about the disparity between these two lists. Then again, SLU made neither.
Just chalk it up to another case of Louisiana being first (or close to it) in everything bad. But wait, since when is a school having an all-male vocal group a bad thing?
•••
Nashville South — I’m becoming thoroughly convinced that Tangipahoa Parish is Nashville South. In my time at The Daily Star, I’ve interviewed and written about four country musicians or bands directing their own careers out of this parish. And I’ve only had this job since late June.
All of them have CDs, mostly on independent labels. They travel back and forth to Nashville all the time, i.e., Kayla LoCicero, and Chris Gray, who is in the middle of work on his third album there now. They work with award-winning songwriters. They travel all over the Southeast and even the world (The Honky Tonk Disciples are actually going on tour in Belgium soon).
And let’s not forget about Lindsey Cardinale, Ponchatoula’s other claim to fame. The “American Idol” finalist is apparently working on more songs in Nashville. Sure, she’s name-dropping Country Music Association vocalist of the year Ms. Carrie Underwood on her MySpace blog (they were roommates and kindred spirits during their “Idol” season), but she’s a star.
I’m interested to find out about any other country music talent in Hammond and the surrounding areas (and Todd O’Neil is on my list). Any suggestions?
•••
“The Sweet Escape” ... to Pop Music Hell — In national music news, Gwen Stefani is set to release her second solo album, “The Sweet Escape” on Dec. 5.
I’m only mentioning this because I am such a huge fan of Stefani, yet I am so disturbed about her artistic direction. If you (or your kids) are considering buying into Stefani’s brand, please do yourself a favor and go here.
Here’s the unfortunate gist. Current single “Wind it Up,” a strange conglomeration of hip-hop beats and yodeling from “The Sound of Music,” is actually one of the best songs on the CD.
Stefani’s first CD, “Love, Angel, Music, Baby” was groundbreaking. Just listening to current hits by Nelly Furtado and Fergie attests to the massive copycatting going on. But I think the experiment has run its course.
•••
Look at me! — OK, I couldn’t resist. Apparently Britney Spears and Paris Hilton are fast becoming BFFs. And when you run with Hilton, underwear is optional.
I suppose I don’t have to actually write what the paparazzi have pictures of this time. Let’s put it this way — one far-from-ladylike party momma plus one low-to-the-ground vehicle plus one bad camera angle equals... yep, you thought right.
So much for my prediction of a slightly more modest comeback.
If you’re interested: www.perezhilton.com.
The male chauvinists over at College Humor, with the help of similar-minded students that make up the site’s user base, set out to “scientifically” find the best schools where you can “have the maximum amount of fun while putting forth the least amount of effort.”
They asked all the tough questions: Are free condoms available on campus? (yes) What time do the bars close? (2 a.m.) How many students are interested in drugs? (To get this score, they used information provided by students on their own personal Facebook profiles.)
I admit, I’m a Southeastern girl through and through. And I know LSU has a reputation as a “party school.” Anyone who doubts that should find the Advocate article in which students feebly defended their alma mater in the face of the U.S. News and World Report omission. The best many could come up with was, “But we have a good football team!”
Maybe it’s me, but if I went to LSU I’d be more than a little disturbed about the disparity between these two lists. Then again, SLU made neither.
Just chalk it up to another case of Louisiana being first (or close to it) in everything bad. But wait, since when is a school having an all-male vocal group a bad thing?
•••
Nashville South — I’m becoming thoroughly convinced that Tangipahoa Parish is Nashville South. In my time at The Daily Star, I’ve interviewed and written about four country musicians or bands directing their own careers out of this parish. And I’ve only had this job since late June.
All of them have CDs, mostly on independent labels. They travel back and forth to Nashville all the time, i.e., Kayla LoCicero, and Chris Gray, who is in the middle of work on his third album there now. They work with award-winning songwriters. They travel all over the Southeast and even the world (The Honky Tonk Disciples are actually going on tour in Belgium soon).
And let’s not forget about Lindsey Cardinale, Ponchatoula’s other claim to fame. The “American Idol” finalist is apparently working on more songs in Nashville. Sure, she’s name-dropping Country Music Association vocalist of the year Ms. Carrie Underwood on her MySpace blog (they were roommates and kindred spirits during their “Idol” season), but she’s a star.
I’m interested to find out about any other country music talent in Hammond and the surrounding areas (and Todd O’Neil is on my list). Any suggestions?
•••
“The Sweet Escape” ... to Pop Music Hell — In national music news, Gwen Stefani is set to release her second solo album, “The Sweet Escape” on Dec. 5.
I’m only mentioning this because I am such a huge fan of Stefani, yet I am so disturbed about her artistic direction. If you (or your kids) are considering buying into Stefani’s brand, please do yourself a favor and go here.
Here’s the unfortunate gist. Current single “Wind it Up,” a strange conglomeration of hip-hop beats and yodeling from “The Sound of Music,” is actually one of the best songs on the CD.
Stefani’s first CD, “Love, Angel, Music, Baby” was groundbreaking. Just listening to current hits by Nelly Furtado and Fergie attests to the massive copycatting going on. But I think the experiment has run its course.
•••
Look at me! — OK, I couldn’t resist. Apparently Britney Spears and Paris Hilton are fast becoming BFFs. And when you run with Hilton, underwear is optional.
I suppose I don’t have to actually write what the paparazzi have pictures of this time. Let’s put it this way — one far-from-ladylike party momma plus one low-to-the-ground vehicle plus one bad camera angle equals... yep, you thought right.
So much for my prediction of a slightly more modest comeback.
If you’re interested: www.perezhilton.com.
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
In Britney's world, divorce signals maturity
Nov. 7 was a glorious day.
Not only was it a perfect day to go out and exercise our right to vote in the mid-term elections, it was also my birthday.
But it wasn’t my own personal “Best Day Ever” until election-day coverage broke into entertainment news.
Britney Spears had finally come to her senses. She was shipping Fed-Ex out.
I can’t say it was surprising that Spears decided to divorce her wannabe rapper husband of two years, Kevin Federline. There were just too many situations working against these two – the huge gap between Spears’ and Federline’s bank accounts; his two out-of-wedlock children with a previous girlfriend; his whiny and cocky ‘respect-me-because-I’m-a-serious-rapper’ attitude.
The entire world could see exactly what K-Fed really was, including Spears’ mother, according to some reports. As they say, love is blind.
Alissa, a local commenter on The Daily Star’s blog, pointed out that she’s known a few ‘Fed-Exes’ in her time. Even if they weren’t former backup dancers, they still fit the bill.
“I knew a few fellas back in my day who were the epitome of FedEx,” she said. “And then I grew up.”
After more than two years of being in the spotlight for events unrelated to her musical career – the 55-hour annulled Vegas wedding, the baby-riding-on-the-lap-while-driving incident and the doomed “Dateline” interview, just to name a few – Spears is finally realizing that she must make a career comeback to regain her credibility. The K-Fed disaster was just a final learning experience.
Spears, at 24, is finally all grown up.
It sounds strange for me to say that about a woman with two sons. But Spears’ situation is a little different – she’s been famous worldwide since she was 16 years old.
She, just like many child stars, simply hasn’t had the time to grow up.
I actually find Spears’ situation a lot like pop star Madonna’s, who, of course, shared that infamous kiss with Spears on the 2003 MTV Video Music Awards. That act was a lot more symbolic than either Spears or Madonna realized.
In 1995 Madonna announced to the world in an interview that she wanted to be a mother. Quickly after that, she gave birth to a daughter, Lourdes. The girl’s father is Carlos Leon, a personal trainer. Madonna and Leon were never rumored to be much more than a dating couple, and they would never be more than that.
Madonna simply wanted a child, and paternity never seemed to be a big concern. The world wasn’t shocked – consider the source. This was Madonna’s attempt at finding normality within a very public and nontraditional lifestyle.
Likewise, Spears, from the time she announced her engagement to Federline, proclaimed that she always wanted to be “a young mother.” And nothing was going to stop her from having what she thought was going to grant her a normal, adult life – a baby.
I guess I have to give props to Spears for marrying Federline beforehand, but she must not have thought about the ramifications of making Federline a dad for the third, then fourth, time.
I’m not sure if Spears could differentiate between wanting a new car and wanting a baby. In her world, if she wanted it, she got it. Only after putting up with a few harsh realities after the birth of Sean Preston was she finally able to snap out of dreamland. And the same happened with Federline – who was said to be growing increasingly violent during their fights about his flirting, among other things.
It is a shame that the children have to be involved in Spears’ highly public divorce. One positive thing is that they are too young to truly know what is happening.
But if not for the kids, I’m not sure we’d have the Spears we have today – confident, attractive and ready to reinvent herself. I have no reason to believe, even with the baby blunders, that Spears doesn’t love her sons with all her heart.
I’m not a huge fan of Spears’ music, but I know legions of her fans are rooting for a comeback. Unlike a few of this column’s commenters, I think her new image will err on the modest side. With acts like Fergie, I’m not sure even Spears – formerly the top saleswoman of sex – can outdo what’s on the popular music landscape right now.
She’ll just need to do some serious reinventing – something her pal Madonna knows a lot about.
Spears’ new CD is due in early 2007.
Not only was it a perfect day to go out and exercise our right to vote in the mid-term elections, it was also my birthday.
But it wasn’t my own personal “Best Day Ever” until election-day coverage broke into entertainment news.
Britney Spears had finally come to her senses. She was shipping Fed-Ex out.
I can’t say it was surprising that Spears decided to divorce her wannabe rapper husband of two years, Kevin Federline. There were just too many situations working against these two – the huge gap between Spears’ and Federline’s bank accounts; his two out-of-wedlock children with a previous girlfriend; his whiny and cocky ‘respect-me-because-I’m-a-serious-rapper’ attitude.
The entire world could see exactly what K-Fed really was, including Spears’ mother, according to some reports. As they say, love is blind.
Alissa, a local commenter on The Daily Star’s blog, pointed out that she’s known a few ‘Fed-Exes’ in her time. Even if they weren’t former backup dancers, they still fit the bill.
“I knew a few fellas back in my day who were the epitome of FedEx,” she said. “And then I grew up.”
After more than two years of being in the spotlight for events unrelated to her musical career – the 55-hour annulled Vegas wedding, the baby-riding-on-the-lap-while-driving incident and the doomed “Dateline” interview, just to name a few – Spears is finally realizing that she must make a career comeback to regain her credibility. The K-Fed disaster was just a final learning experience.
Spears, at 24, is finally all grown up.
It sounds strange for me to say that about a woman with two sons. But Spears’ situation is a little different – she’s been famous worldwide since she was 16 years old.
She, just like many child stars, simply hasn’t had the time to grow up.
I actually find Spears’ situation a lot like pop star Madonna’s, who, of course, shared that infamous kiss with Spears on the 2003 MTV Video Music Awards. That act was a lot more symbolic than either Spears or Madonna realized.
In 1995 Madonna announced to the world in an interview that she wanted to be a mother. Quickly after that, she gave birth to a daughter, Lourdes. The girl’s father is Carlos Leon, a personal trainer. Madonna and Leon were never rumored to be much more than a dating couple, and they would never be more than that.
Madonna simply wanted a child, and paternity never seemed to be a big concern. The world wasn’t shocked – consider the source. This was Madonna’s attempt at finding normality within a very public and nontraditional lifestyle.
Likewise, Spears, from the time she announced her engagement to Federline, proclaimed that she always wanted to be “a young mother.” And nothing was going to stop her from having what she thought was going to grant her a normal, adult life – a baby.
I guess I have to give props to Spears for marrying Federline beforehand, but she must not have thought about the ramifications of making Federline a dad for the third, then fourth, time.
I’m not sure if Spears could differentiate between wanting a new car and wanting a baby. In her world, if she wanted it, she got it. Only after putting up with a few harsh realities after the birth of Sean Preston was she finally able to snap out of dreamland. And the same happened with Federline – who was said to be growing increasingly violent during their fights about his flirting, among other things.
It is a shame that the children have to be involved in Spears’ highly public divorce. One positive thing is that they are too young to truly know what is happening.
But if not for the kids, I’m not sure we’d have the Spears we have today – confident, attractive and ready to reinvent herself. I have no reason to believe, even with the baby blunders, that Spears doesn’t love her sons with all her heart.
I’m not a huge fan of Spears’ music, but I know legions of her fans are rooting for a comeback. Unlike a few of this column’s commenters, I think her new image will err on the modest side. With acts like Fergie, I’m not sure even Spears – formerly the top saleswoman of sex – can outdo what’s on the popular music landscape right now.
She’ll just need to do some serious reinventing – something her pal Madonna knows a lot about.
Spears’ new CD is due in early 2007.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Blogging Britney
As you all know by now, our hometown girl extraordinaire, Britney Spears, has filed for divorce from her husband of just over two years, Kevin Federline.
And sources as credible as People magazine say Spears visited in Kentwood earlier this week.
This plot has more twists and turns than a game of Chutes and Ladders, with Federline apparently plotting to sell a sex tape of he and Spears in an attempt to weasel out of the pair's supposed iron-clad prenuptial agreement. (Boy must he feel dumb for agreeing to sign that.)
And to top it all off, Spears seems to be staging a comeback.
Will this somewhat-postive (in my opinion) Britney news turn out to be too good to be true? What do you think of her comeback? Can she regain her superstar status? Does Britney, like Times Picayune columnist Chris Rose said in his column last week, put the "ho" back in Tangipahoa?
Tak, discuss, mingle.
And sources as credible as People magazine say Spears visited in Kentwood earlier this week.
This plot has more twists and turns than a game of Chutes and Ladders, with Federline apparently plotting to sell a sex tape of he and Spears in an attempt to weasel out of the pair's supposed iron-clad prenuptial agreement. (Boy must he feel dumb for agreeing to sign that.)
And to top it all off, Spears seems to be staging a comeback.
Will this somewhat-postive (in my opinion) Britney news turn out to be too good to be true? What do you think of her comeback? Can she regain her superstar status? Does Britney, like Times Picayune columnist Chris Rose said in his column last week, put the "ho" back in Tangipahoa?
Tak, discuss, mingle.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Media's messages on body image not hard to decipher
Monday night found me watching the impossibly toned Jennifer Nettles hop around the stage on the Country Music Association Awards feeling just a little inadequate. Nettles is the lead singer of country pop duo Sugarland. If I remember correctly, Sugarland used to be a trio. Suddenly I started to wonder what happened to the group’s plain-looking, not-so-toned, short-haired female guitarist.
Maybe she faded into obscurity in light of the fact that Nettles was not only the group’s lead singer, but for all intents and purposes, the entire band. If you watch the band’s video for “Just Might (Make Me Believe)” it’s tough to tell if there are any members other than Nettles. What can I say? The girl can sing… and her face can sell records.
It’s true that plain-looking people tend to fade into the background. And lately television hasn’t been shy in pointing out that sad fact of biology.
On Friday, “20/20’s” John Stossel set out to uncover what we all already knew about “Privilege in America.” He discussed nepotism and unfair treatment of poor vs. wealthy citizens. He even did some great hidden-camera “investigations” in which a celebrity look-alike sailed to the front of the line in a busy coffee shop just to gauge the reactions. (What were people going to say — oh, yes, we love being cut in front of by Paris Hilton?)
The most harsh experiment came when he took two young women — one considered attractive and one considered plain — and put them head-to-head in a competition for tips at a sports bar and grill. The attractive waitress came back with about $50 more in tips than the other. Another experiment used the same premise and showed that people are more willing to help beautiful people if they drop a pile of books in the street.
Stossel really got me thinking about the predicament we find ourselves in with regard to body image. It doesn’t take Tyra Banks or Vanessa Manillo dressing up as overweight “Ugly Betties” to tell me that this discrimination really does occur (both of which actually happened, by the way).
Academics and psychiatrists are railing against the “rail” thin models filling fashion magazines. French officials recently outlawed anorexic models walking the catwalk in fashion shows. But none of that changes the fact that we are biologically wired to show favor toward beauty. That’s the case according to anthropologist Helen Fisher, who said that beauty appeals to a primal mechanism. Beauty simply equals good genes in our brains. We’re attracted to beauty, and we just can’t help it. We also think beautiful people are smart, hard working and interesting. Anyone who has seen the “Anna Nicole” show knows, mentally, that’s not true.
But the good thing, Stossel said, is that we are now able to help ourselves in the race to be beautiful. “Extreme Makeover” started the whole plastic surgery craze, but it was canceled last week. Luckily you’re never far from a doctor willing to fix your imperfections for the right price.
And it seems like we never make much progress on our want to accept all body types. A typical teen magazine might feature one or two models who happen to be a size 10 instead of a size eight, and that is supposed to suffice for progress. We watch “Celebrity Fit Club” and try to be happy because a has-been celebrity has dropped two pounds. We make front-page news out of an overweight lingerie model strutting down the runway but continue to care about the exploits of such pillars of the community as Kate Moss and Naomi Campbell.
I really don’t see this pattern changing, at least not until America Ferrera of ABC’s “Ugly Betty” can carry a blockbuster film and make millions. That would mean that Angelina Jolie, Reese Witherspoon, Salma Hayek and Pamela Anderson would have to die in a horrific accident.
And everyone knows beautiful people wear their seat belts, right?
Maybe she faded into obscurity in light of the fact that Nettles was not only the group’s lead singer, but for all intents and purposes, the entire band. If you watch the band’s video for “Just Might (Make Me Believe)” it’s tough to tell if there are any members other than Nettles. What can I say? The girl can sing… and her face can sell records.
It’s true that plain-looking people tend to fade into the background. And lately television hasn’t been shy in pointing out that sad fact of biology.
On Friday, “20/20’s” John Stossel set out to uncover what we all already knew about “Privilege in America.” He discussed nepotism and unfair treatment of poor vs. wealthy citizens. He even did some great hidden-camera “investigations” in which a celebrity look-alike sailed to the front of the line in a busy coffee shop just to gauge the reactions. (What were people going to say — oh, yes, we love being cut in front of by Paris Hilton?)
The most harsh experiment came when he took two young women — one considered attractive and one considered plain — and put them head-to-head in a competition for tips at a sports bar and grill. The attractive waitress came back with about $50 more in tips than the other. Another experiment used the same premise and showed that people are more willing to help beautiful people if they drop a pile of books in the street.
Stossel really got me thinking about the predicament we find ourselves in with regard to body image. It doesn’t take Tyra Banks or Vanessa Manillo dressing up as overweight “Ugly Betties” to tell me that this discrimination really does occur (both of which actually happened, by the way).
Academics and psychiatrists are railing against the “rail” thin models filling fashion magazines. French officials recently outlawed anorexic models walking the catwalk in fashion shows. But none of that changes the fact that we are biologically wired to show favor toward beauty. That’s the case according to anthropologist Helen Fisher, who said that beauty appeals to a primal mechanism. Beauty simply equals good genes in our brains. We’re attracted to beauty, and we just can’t help it. We also think beautiful people are smart, hard working and interesting. Anyone who has seen the “Anna Nicole” show knows, mentally, that’s not true.
But the good thing, Stossel said, is that we are now able to help ourselves in the race to be beautiful. “Extreme Makeover” started the whole plastic surgery craze, but it was canceled last week. Luckily you’re never far from a doctor willing to fix your imperfections for the right price.
And it seems like we never make much progress on our want to accept all body types. A typical teen magazine might feature one or two models who happen to be a size 10 instead of a size eight, and that is supposed to suffice for progress. We watch “Celebrity Fit Club” and try to be happy because a has-been celebrity has dropped two pounds. We make front-page news out of an overweight lingerie model strutting down the runway but continue to care about the exploits of such pillars of the community as Kate Moss and Naomi Campbell.
I really don’t see this pattern changing, at least not until America Ferrera of ABC’s “Ugly Betty” can carry a blockbuster film and make millions. That would mean that Angelina Jolie, Reese Witherspoon, Salma Hayek and Pamela Anderson would have to die in a horrific accident.
And everyone knows beautiful people wear their seat belts, right?
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
The magic of negative publicity
Have you ever been to a movie or listened to a song just because you wanted to find out for yourself what made it so “controversial?”
I’m sorry to admit that that’s pretty much the reason I recognize a few of rapper Eminem’s songs.
New York Times writer David M. Halbfinger recently pointed out a trend in Hollywood: the more negative publicity something gets, the more popular it’s going to be.
Case in point: Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ.” If you’re like me and watch way too much cable news, you noticed that every program discussed this movie for what seemed like the entirety of 2004. Never mind that the film was released near Good Friday or that this nation’s majority Christian movie-going public was going to turn out for the film anyway.
“The Passion” was a whirlwind, dominating force in popular culture because someone decided it was anti-Semitic. That touched off a firestorm of controversy that brought out the non-Christian crowd to a foreign language film about a man they might not even believe in.
In that case, curiosity got the dollar.
Today we’re dealing with the ever-popular country group The Dixie Chicks, who are starring in an upcoming documentary called “Shut Up and Sing.” Major TV networks NBC and the CW have refused to air commercials for the film, citing the fact that it attacks President Bush at a time when Bush couldn’t be expected to buy response ads. For them it is an issue of fairness. (As you may recall, Dixie Chicks lead singer Natalie Maines said she was ashamed the president was from her home state of Texas at one of their concerts a few years ago in Britain, triggering quite a few American country radio stations to yank the Chicks’ music off their playlists.)
For the cable news networks, the Dixie Chicks debacle has become an issue of free speech. Free speech is always a timely topic. Only, what the news networks fail to understand is that the regulated airwaves are not exactly public streets. They have the right to refuse advertisements, just like you or I have the right to boycott The Dixie Chicks. It pretty much works both ways.
The Chicks have been featured nightly on TV to discuss their supposed “blacklisting.”
I think the Chicks have the mentality of a contestant who has just opened the $1 million case on “Deal or No Deal.” They know they’ll never get their old audience (and popularity) back, so they’re taking stupid chances and hoping against hope that somehow their anti-Bush stance will win them something greater. Personally, I think they’ve got a small amount in their case. All they seem to have now are fans who like them because of their political stance, not their music. It’s tough to disconnect their political leanings from their music these days because they’re just so vocal about it.
Maybe they should take their own advice. It’s in the title of the documentary, after all.
Yet if they did that, would anyone actually go and see their film? I don’t think so.
This tactic, mostly created by public relations machines, get “controversial” pieces free publicity. That can almost never be a bad thing. You know how the old saying goes.
But Habfinger says the trend is actually slowing down.
Take the documentary “Jesus Camp,” which comes out this summer. It purports to be a shocking look into the world of evangelical Christianity. In particular, it follows a group of church leaders who claim they are training soldiers in “God’s Army.”
Magnolia Pictures President Eamonn Bowles actually said the religious backlash against the film was not as strong as he would have liked it to be. That’s right, a movie maker is upset because one of his films just wasn’t disliked enough.
And because of that, the movie is not a household name. There’s no buzz surrounding it. There’s no compelling news story associated with it. There’s no sense of conflict. There are no picketers or protests. Nobody cares.
And so another documentary — most likely a biased mockery of real filmmaking a la “Fahrenheit 9/11” — gets passed over in the publicity game. It’s not that religious groups don’t disagree with the message, it’s that they now know that ignoring it is a better way to make it go away than meeting it head-on.
It’s a nightmare scenario for film promoters hoping to manipulate the public and make a quick buck off a genre that traditionally generates very little revenue.
Besides, if this marketing scheme is losing favor with films, it’s only gaining favor with celebrities. Just look at Anna Nicole Smith and Britney Spears. I’ll be first in line at the “Bring the pre-K-Fed Britney Back” rally.
I’m sorry to admit that that’s pretty much the reason I recognize a few of rapper Eminem’s songs.
New York Times writer David M. Halbfinger recently pointed out a trend in Hollywood: the more negative publicity something gets, the more popular it’s going to be.
Case in point: Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ.” If you’re like me and watch way too much cable news, you noticed that every program discussed this movie for what seemed like the entirety of 2004. Never mind that the film was released near Good Friday or that this nation’s majority Christian movie-going public was going to turn out for the film anyway.
“The Passion” was a whirlwind, dominating force in popular culture because someone decided it was anti-Semitic. That touched off a firestorm of controversy that brought out the non-Christian crowd to a foreign language film about a man they might not even believe in.
In that case, curiosity got the dollar.
Today we’re dealing with the ever-popular country group The Dixie Chicks, who are starring in an upcoming documentary called “Shut Up and Sing.” Major TV networks NBC and the CW have refused to air commercials for the film, citing the fact that it attacks President Bush at a time when Bush couldn’t be expected to buy response ads. For them it is an issue of fairness. (As you may recall, Dixie Chicks lead singer Natalie Maines said she was ashamed the president was from her home state of Texas at one of their concerts a few years ago in Britain, triggering quite a few American country radio stations to yank the Chicks’ music off their playlists.)
For the cable news networks, the Dixie Chicks debacle has become an issue of free speech. Free speech is always a timely topic. Only, what the news networks fail to understand is that the regulated airwaves are not exactly public streets. They have the right to refuse advertisements, just like you or I have the right to boycott The Dixie Chicks. It pretty much works both ways.
The Chicks have been featured nightly on TV to discuss their supposed “blacklisting.”
I think the Chicks have the mentality of a contestant who has just opened the $1 million case on “Deal or No Deal.” They know they’ll never get their old audience (and popularity) back, so they’re taking stupid chances and hoping against hope that somehow their anti-Bush stance will win them something greater. Personally, I think they’ve got a small amount in their case. All they seem to have now are fans who like them because of their political stance, not their music. It’s tough to disconnect their political leanings from their music these days because they’re just so vocal about it.
Maybe they should take their own advice. It’s in the title of the documentary, after all.
Yet if they did that, would anyone actually go and see their film? I don’t think so.
This tactic, mostly created by public relations machines, get “controversial” pieces free publicity. That can almost never be a bad thing. You know how the old saying goes.
But Habfinger says the trend is actually slowing down.
Take the documentary “Jesus Camp,” which comes out this summer. It purports to be a shocking look into the world of evangelical Christianity. In particular, it follows a group of church leaders who claim they are training soldiers in “God’s Army.”
Magnolia Pictures President Eamonn Bowles actually said the religious backlash against the film was not as strong as he would have liked it to be. That’s right, a movie maker is upset because one of his films just wasn’t disliked enough.
And because of that, the movie is not a household name. There’s no buzz surrounding it. There’s no compelling news story associated with it. There’s no sense of conflict. There are no picketers or protests. Nobody cares.
And so another documentary — most likely a biased mockery of real filmmaking a la “Fahrenheit 9/11” — gets passed over in the publicity game. It’s not that religious groups don’t disagree with the message, it’s that they now know that ignoring it is a better way to make it go away than meeting it head-on.
It’s a nightmare scenario for film promoters hoping to manipulate the public and make a quick buck off a genre that traditionally generates very little revenue.
Besides, if this marketing scheme is losing favor with films, it’s only gaining favor with celebrities. Just look at Anna Nicole Smith and Britney Spears. I’ll be first in line at the “Bring the pre-K-Fed Britney Back” rally.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Reality TV equals motivation in 'cardio theater'
There’s definitely something about watching a plastic surgeon do his or her work that makes you want to keep going on the treadmill.
Lately I’ve been hitting the gym pretty hard, and wherever there’s stationary bikes and elliptical machines there’s bound to be televisions these days. It’s called the “cardio theater.”
The gym at Southeastern, the Pennington Student Activity Center, has a cardio theater of about 12 television sets tuned to the old standbys — CBS, NBC, ABC, etc.
Gymgoers bring in their headphones and plug into a tuner that allows them to switch between audio feeds from the TVs, though the equipment at this particular gym is in need of repair.
One’s enjoyment of television, I’ve found, is directly proportional to the size and comfort of the couch one is lounging on to view it, most of the time. The tastiness of the accompanying snack or beverage seems to help, too.
It becomes a bit harder to enjoy, or even pay attention, to television when your heart rate is 170 and you’re dripping in sweat.
Luckily, someone at the gym had the foresight to park one of the TVs on E! Entertainment television. Because as much perkiness as Katie Couric brings to the “CBS Evening News,” hearing about suicide bombs and earthquakes doesn’t help a person’s drive to exercise.
On E!’s “Dr. 90210,” Dr. Robert Rey and his band of surgeons slice and dice lots of young women from Beverly Hills, Calif.
It’s a straight-forward reality show, minus the graphic plastic surgery footage. Viewers even follow Rey into his private life (on one recent episode Rey’s wife laments that their new house is — get this — too big). On another, Rey goes to Venezuela to try to figure out why the women there are so beautiful. Rey puts up with perfectly beautiful exotic dancers who apparently need bodily improvements in order to work. I pity them and turn up the resistance on my machine.
I’m more of a believable candidate for plastic surgery than 75 percent of Rey’s patients, but I like to change my body the old-fashioned way. It’s cheaper and a whole lot less painful.
It’s interesting to marvel at the shallow thought processes at work on the show, though. And watching someone get lipo-suctioned is a great motivator, for me at least.
But E!’s depictions of geniuses at work don’t stop there. “The Girls Next Door” centers on the charmed lives of “Playboy” founder Hugh Hefner’s three girlfriends.
They basically play with their dogs, lounge by the pool and go on trips to Las Vegas every now and then.
One of Hefner’s girlfriends, Holly Madison, seems to have a bit of a business venture going on designing Playboy logo jewelry and clothing.
Bridget Marquardt, another girlfriend, actually has a bachelor of arts in public relations, a master’s in communication and is working on another master’s in broadcast journalism. But when she opens her mouth, she sounds like she’s in the eighth grade.
I guess I’m fascinated with the fact that power and money can make a normal-looking 80-year-old man attractive to 25-year-old women.
Or maybe it’s the fact that Hefner’s harem treats the “girlfriend” title more as a job, with other girlfriends leaving to pursue acting or modeling careers and asking another to be “main” girlfriend (that title belongs to Madison presently).
Either way, the combination of plastic surgery, fitness-crazed playmates and less-than-stellar IQs makes me feel really good about myself.
I’m not famous, skinny or rich, but I don’t need to be to be happy. E!’s mindless shows have shown me that, in a sick and twisted kind of way.
And if television can’t do that, what can it do?
Lately I’ve been hitting the gym pretty hard, and wherever there’s stationary bikes and elliptical machines there’s bound to be televisions these days. It’s called the “cardio theater.”
The gym at Southeastern, the Pennington Student Activity Center, has a cardio theater of about 12 television sets tuned to the old standbys — CBS, NBC, ABC, etc.
Gymgoers bring in their headphones and plug into a tuner that allows them to switch between audio feeds from the TVs, though the equipment at this particular gym is in need of repair.
One’s enjoyment of television, I’ve found, is directly proportional to the size and comfort of the couch one is lounging on to view it, most of the time. The tastiness of the accompanying snack or beverage seems to help, too.
It becomes a bit harder to enjoy, or even pay attention, to television when your heart rate is 170 and you’re dripping in sweat.
Luckily, someone at the gym had the foresight to park one of the TVs on E! Entertainment television. Because as much perkiness as Katie Couric brings to the “CBS Evening News,” hearing about suicide bombs and earthquakes doesn’t help a person’s drive to exercise.
On E!’s “Dr. 90210,” Dr. Robert Rey and his band of surgeons slice and dice lots of young women from Beverly Hills, Calif.
It’s a straight-forward reality show, minus the graphic plastic surgery footage. Viewers even follow Rey into his private life (on one recent episode Rey’s wife laments that their new house is — get this — too big). On another, Rey goes to Venezuela to try to figure out why the women there are so beautiful. Rey puts up with perfectly beautiful exotic dancers who apparently need bodily improvements in order to work. I pity them and turn up the resistance on my machine.
I’m more of a believable candidate for plastic surgery than 75 percent of Rey’s patients, but I like to change my body the old-fashioned way. It’s cheaper and a whole lot less painful.
It’s interesting to marvel at the shallow thought processes at work on the show, though. And watching someone get lipo-suctioned is a great motivator, for me at least.
But E!’s depictions of geniuses at work don’t stop there. “The Girls Next Door” centers on the charmed lives of “Playboy” founder Hugh Hefner’s three girlfriends.
They basically play with their dogs, lounge by the pool and go on trips to Las Vegas every now and then.
One of Hefner’s girlfriends, Holly Madison, seems to have a bit of a business venture going on designing Playboy logo jewelry and clothing.
Bridget Marquardt, another girlfriend, actually has a bachelor of arts in public relations, a master’s in communication and is working on another master’s in broadcast journalism. But when she opens her mouth, she sounds like she’s in the eighth grade.
I guess I’m fascinated with the fact that power and money can make a normal-looking 80-year-old man attractive to 25-year-old women.
Or maybe it’s the fact that Hefner’s harem treats the “girlfriend” title more as a job, with other girlfriends leaving to pursue acting or modeling careers and asking another to be “main” girlfriend (that title belongs to Madison presently).
Either way, the combination of plastic surgery, fitness-crazed playmates and less-than-stellar IQs makes me feel really good about myself.
I’m not famous, skinny or rich, but I don’t need to be to be happy. E!’s mindless shows have shown me that, in a sick and twisted kind of way.
And if television can’t do that, what can it do?
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Online gamblers wagering on the stars
For the last couple days I’ve been receiving promotional e-mails from online betting Web sites.
No, I don’t know the odds that the Saints will beat the Eagles this weekend. Nor did they offer tips to improve my poker game (not that I had one to begin with).
Instead, I learned that most BetUS.com users think Shanna Moakler would win in a cat fight with Paris Hilton. Moakler, a former contestant on “Dancing With the Stars,” is favored by 67 percent of voters over hotel heiress Hilton’s 33 percent.
The question arose after Moakler and Hilton both filed police reports claiming the other had physically assaulted them during a recent jaunt at Los Angeles nightclub Hyde Lounge.
According to the Associated Press, Moakler’s publicist said she was attacked by Hilton’s ex-boyfriend Stavros Niarchos, who bent her wrists, poured a drink on her and shoved her down some stairs.
Sounds like a fun time.
Hilton had been romantically linked to Moakler’s ex-husband, Blink 182 drummer Travis Barker.
“Celebrity feuds are always interesting to poll, especially when they are involving two models/actresses,” stated BetUS.com spokesman Christopher Bennett. “I’m surprised that Paris had so many votes. Shanna is a mother of three; obviously she knows how to dish out punishment.”
Obviously, a bet placed on either flaky publicity junkie would never pay off. I’m pretty sure there won’t be a real-life Celebrity Death Match between these two anytime soon.
But people are betting on other entertainment-related news matters, such as who will win this season of “Dancing With the Stars” (Mario Lopez’s odds are currently 1 to 9) and which case will win the “Lucky Case Game” on Thursday’s “Deal or No Deal” (statistically those odds are the same for each of the six cases).
Intertops.com is even featuring betting on whether “American Idol” number six will be male or female. The show doesn’t even begin airing until January 2007.
My father’s big hobby is horse racing, so I know a little bit about betting myself. But you don’t have to know much to figure out that betting on the result of a show that hasn’t even started yet is pretty dumb.
Of course, you can always bet on sports. There’s everything from hockey to cricket, in fact. But you can also bet on the careers of sports stars themselves.
The hot topic back in April was the future of NFL football star and admitted marijuana user Ricky Williams’ career. Some options offered by BetUS.com were: Enters a Rehabilitation Center: 2 to 1; Joins World Football League playing for Amsterdam: 3 to 1; He and T.O. start an independent Pro Football League: 20 to 1; Becomes an odds consultant for BetUS.com: 4 to 1; Becomes the abbot of a monastery: 100 to 1.
Two of BetUS.com’s open wagers focus on Angelina and Brad: Will they get married by the end of the year? And, which country will they adopt from next?
Of course, all bets placed after the answer is public knowledge are null and void, but there’s apparently no tabloid rumor disclaimer.
Is “public knowledge” when it comes from the mouth of a star’s publicist, the author of magazine article or from the star himself?
Online gambling has erupted into a large but controversial industry during the past few years, with many of the Web sites operating out of foreign countries to try to avoid the differing gambling laws in each of the 50 states. But their publicity machines never stop turning.
The recent addition of video bingo in Tangipahoa Parish seems tame compared to this form of gambling, where life decisions are wagered on.
Maybe I should start an online gambling Web site, too. You, the readers, will be able to bet on how many times a year I’ll mention Britney Spears in my columns, or maybe what color shirt I decide to wear on Wednesdays.
Excuse me while I open a Swiss bank account...
No, I don’t know the odds that the Saints will beat the Eagles this weekend. Nor did they offer tips to improve my poker game (not that I had one to begin with).
Instead, I learned that most BetUS.com users think Shanna Moakler would win in a cat fight with Paris Hilton. Moakler, a former contestant on “Dancing With the Stars,” is favored by 67 percent of voters over hotel heiress Hilton’s 33 percent.
The question arose after Moakler and Hilton both filed police reports claiming the other had physically assaulted them during a recent jaunt at Los Angeles nightclub Hyde Lounge.
According to the Associated Press, Moakler’s publicist said she was attacked by Hilton’s ex-boyfriend Stavros Niarchos, who bent her wrists, poured a drink on her and shoved her down some stairs.
Sounds like a fun time.
Hilton had been romantically linked to Moakler’s ex-husband, Blink 182 drummer Travis Barker.
“Celebrity feuds are always interesting to poll, especially when they are involving two models/actresses,” stated BetUS.com spokesman Christopher Bennett. “I’m surprised that Paris had so many votes. Shanna is a mother of three; obviously she knows how to dish out punishment.”
Obviously, a bet placed on either flaky publicity junkie would never pay off. I’m pretty sure there won’t be a real-life Celebrity Death Match between these two anytime soon.
But people are betting on other entertainment-related news matters, such as who will win this season of “Dancing With the Stars” (Mario Lopez’s odds are currently 1 to 9) and which case will win the “Lucky Case Game” on Thursday’s “Deal or No Deal” (statistically those odds are the same for each of the six cases).
Intertops.com is even featuring betting on whether “American Idol” number six will be male or female. The show doesn’t even begin airing until January 2007.
My father’s big hobby is horse racing, so I know a little bit about betting myself. But you don’t have to know much to figure out that betting on the result of a show that hasn’t even started yet is pretty dumb.
Of course, you can always bet on sports. There’s everything from hockey to cricket, in fact. But you can also bet on the careers of sports stars themselves.
The hot topic back in April was the future of NFL football star and admitted marijuana user Ricky Williams’ career. Some options offered by BetUS.com were: Enters a Rehabilitation Center: 2 to 1; Joins World Football League playing for Amsterdam: 3 to 1; He and T.O. start an independent Pro Football League: 20 to 1; Becomes an odds consultant for BetUS.com: 4 to 1; Becomes the abbot of a monastery: 100 to 1.
Two of BetUS.com’s open wagers focus on Angelina and Brad: Will they get married by the end of the year? And, which country will they adopt from next?
Of course, all bets placed after the answer is public knowledge are null and void, but there’s apparently no tabloid rumor disclaimer.
Is “public knowledge” when it comes from the mouth of a star’s publicist, the author of magazine article or from the star himself?
Online gambling has erupted into a large but controversial industry during the past few years, with many of the Web sites operating out of foreign countries to try to avoid the differing gambling laws in each of the 50 states. But their publicity machines never stop turning.
The recent addition of video bingo in Tangipahoa Parish seems tame compared to this form of gambling, where life decisions are wagered on.
Maybe I should start an online gambling Web site, too. You, the readers, will be able to bet on how many times a year I’ll mention Britney Spears in my columns, or maybe what color shirt I decide to wear on Wednesdays.
Excuse me while I open a Swiss bank account...
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
'Must-see TV' back on NBC this fall
NBC is bringing back its Thursday night “Must-See TV Lineup,” but the shows are a far cry from the traditional late ‘90s fare.
Back then there was “Friends,” “Will and Grace,” and “Frasier.” All were smart, sassy Emmy-winning sitcoms that stuck to the traditional formula but improved upon it exponentially. With the help of syndication, I have probably seen each and every episode of those three shows. They broke new ground, and in some ways even changed society, especially “Will and Grace,” the story of a straight-girl-gay-guy friendship.
The NBC Thursday night prime time block stopped being so “must-see” right around the time someone thought “Friends” spin-off “Joey” would be a good idea. “Friends’” last episode ran on May 6, 2004. “Joey,” starring Matt LeBlanc, began its run soon after, but it was nothing more than a shadow of “Friends.” Ratings for the night plummeted.
But NBC is changing that with its current lineup, which includes comedies “My Name is Earl” and “The Office,” game show “Deal or No Deal” and the been-on-air-forever drama “ER.”
The two comedies, “Earl” and “The Office,” are special because they push the boundaries of the sitcom. Where the previous line-up improved upon the established formula, these shows turn the formula itself on its head. I would think they aren’t even classified as sitcoms as there is no studio audience and different production values. And instead of the relatively normal surroundings of New York City or Seattle, both shows are based in fictional locations. With all the crazy stuff that happens, suspension of disbelief is a necessity.
“Earl” is the twisted story of a mustached lowlife named Earl Hickey, played by Jason Lee. Earl develops a belief in karma after surviving being hit by a car and rediscovering a lottery ticket worth $100,000 soon after. The show is all about Earl and his “list” of wrongdoings he intends to repay. Since Earl is a former petty criminal, the payback situations are endless.
Earl’s world is a weird landscape of shady, unique characters — one doofus brother, a classless ex-wife, a one-eyed mailman and a hooker who works only in the daytime. And there’s a killer soundtrack.
“Earl” is part situation comedy and part goofy Ben Stiller movie, which makes it one of the greatest things on network TV.
Meanwhile, “The Office” uses the techniques of reality television to a hilarious result. Based on a British show of the same name, it is filmed as a mockumentary with no background music or laugh track. There’s an improvisational feel to the show, which is helmed by “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart” alum Steve Carrel. Carrel’s character, Michael, is an awkward, unsocialized supervisor who always seems to mess up sensitive situations. Dwight is his nerdy-but-thinks-he’s-cool suck up assistant manager. The rest of the cast watches their antics in embarrassed horror and offer commentary via one-on-one interviews that remind me of “Big Brother.”
But there’s also a serious side to “The Office” with the romance between Jim and Pam. Thankfully, though, the series doesn’t delve into drama very often.
And then there’s “Deal” with host Howie Mandel. I wrote a column completely dedicated to the show a few months ago. I hate that I love this show. There’s no other word to describe it other than “addictive.” If you haven’t seen it, tune in to NBC at 8 p.m. Monday, Thursday or Friday. Even if you’re not a gambler, the adrenaline rush is hard to turn away from.
Finally, “ER” has been on the air since 1994. I used to be a religious viewer of the medical drama (to me it will always be better than “Grey’s Anatomy”), and thanks to the lead-ins, I’m becoming interested in it again.
All of these shows, too, besides the recently started “Deal,” have won Emmys. “Earl” and “The Office” have been on less than four years. That’s got to mean something.
Back then there was “Friends,” “Will and Grace,” and “Frasier.” All were smart, sassy Emmy-winning sitcoms that stuck to the traditional formula but improved upon it exponentially. With the help of syndication, I have probably seen each and every episode of those three shows. They broke new ground, and in some ways even changed society, especially “Will and Grace,” the story of a straight-girl-gay-guy friendship.
The NBC Thursday night prime time block stopped being so “must-see” right around the time someone thought “Friends” spin-off “Joey” would be a good idea. “Friends’” last episode ran on May 6, 2004. “Joey,” starring Matt LeBlanc, began its run soon after, but it was nothing more than a shadow of “Friends.” Ratings for the night plummeted.
But NBC is changing that with its current lineup, which includes comedies “My Name is Earl” and “The Office,” game show “Deal or No Deal” and the been-on-air-forever drama “ER.”
The two comedies, “Earl” and “The Office,” are special because they push the boundaries of the sitcom. Where the previous line-up improved upon the established formula, these shows turn the formula itself on its head. I would think they aren’t even classified as sitcoms as there is no studio audience and different production values. And instead of the relatively normal surroundings of New York City or Seattle, both shows are based in fictional locations. With all the crazy stuff that happens, suspension of disbelief is a necessity.
“Earl” is the twisted story of a mustached lowlife named Earl Hickey, played by Jason Lee. Earl develops a belief in karma after surviving being hit by a car and rediscovering a lottery ticket worth $100,000 soon after. The show is all about Earl and his “list” of wrongdoings he intends to repay. Since Earl is a former petty criminal, the payback situations are endless.
Earl’s world is a weird landscape of shady, unique characters — one doofus brother, a classless ex-wife, a one-eyed mailman and a hooker who works only in the daytime. And there’s a killer soundtrack.
“Earl” is part situation comedy and part goofy Ben Stiller movie, which makes it one of the greatest things on network TV.
Meanwhile, “The Office” uses the techniques of reality television to a hilarious result. Based on a British show of the same name, it is filmed as a mockumentary with no background music or laugh track. There’s an improvisational feel to the show, which is helmed by “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart” alum Steve Carrel. Carrel’s character, Michael, is an awkward, unsocialized supervisor who always seems to mess up sensitive situations. Dwight is his nerdy-but-thinks-he’s-cool suck up assistant manager. The rest of the cast watches their antics in embarrassed horror and offer commentary via one-on-one interviews that remind me of “Big Brother.”
But there’s also a serious side to “The Office” with the romance between Jim and Pam. Thankfully, though, the series doesn’t delve into drama very often.
And then there’s “Deal” with host Howie Mandel. I wrote a column completely dedicated to the show a few months ago. I hate that I love this show. There’s no other word to describe it other than “addictive.” If you haven’t seen it, tune in to NBC at 8 p.m. Monday, Thursday or Friday. Even if you’re not a gambler, the adrenaline rush is hard to turn away from.
Finally, “ER” has been on the air since 1994. I used to be a religious viewer of the medical drama (to me it will always be better than “Grey’s Anatomy”), and thanks to the lead-ins, I’m becoming interested in it again.
All of these shows, too, besides the recently started “Deal,” have won Emmys. “Earl” and “The Office” have been on less than four years. That’s got to mean something.
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Bloggers react to pope's 'insults'
There’s a reason I never think too hard about current events in politics and religion.
It makes my head hurt.
I still think it’s important to keep up with world news, because it’s always good to stay current on which psycho militant Islamic Middle Eastern ruler is planning to blow up the United States during any given week. You know, for personal safety and all.
So when Pope Benedict XVI made what some are calling “negative” remarks about Islam on Sept. 12, I glossed over the media coverage. At least the Vatican wasn’t going to acquire nuclear weapons or send suicide bombers into other countries. But what some offended Muslims have threatened in response to the pope’s words might just constitute a security issue.
I returned to the topic this week to find bloggers had very strong opinions about the incident, which happened something like this:
Benedict was giving a lecture titled, “Faith, Reason and the University” at the University of Regensburg in Germany, where he had formerly been a professor. Just like the title says, he was offering an argument that faith must always be rationalized through basic human reason. According to what I’ve read about the pope, he’s big into the assertion that faith in God, whatever your religious belief, should be reasonable, and he backs it up with scholarship.
For Benedict, that argument doesn’t carry over to the Islamic concept of Jihad, or Holy War. But boy did he pick the wrong “scholarship” to back up his comments — a quote by Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus in 1391:
“Show me just what Muhammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached,” was the offending passage.
Benedict framed those “anti-Islamic” comments with something I think most people can agree on — that religion and violence are unreasonable and incompatible.
If only he had omitted the previous comment and gone with just this:
“The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable.
Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. ‘God,’ he says, ‘is not pleased by blood — and not acting reasonably is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats.’”
He was clearly speaking of Jihad, not the whole of the Islamic faith.
Blogcritics.org reprinted a column by blogger Greg Strange, who calls Islam the “Religion of Perpetual Outrage.”
Strange roll calls comments from Muslim leaders and finds this one from Pakistan Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam the most ironic:
“Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.”
I’m guessing Islamic militants have a thorough understanding of the concept of the self-fulfilling prophecy.
Blogger Douglas Farah opines about the many demonstrations that took place in majority-Islamic countries in which effigies of the pope were burned. He says that sort of readiness to fight is what is taught to so many young people in the Middle East:
“When crowds can form in seemingly spontaneous reaction to an obscure and lightly-reported papal speech, it is evidence of an organization that has pre-positioned its people to strike when the opportunity arises. It was the same in the Danish cartoon riots.”
With the Western idea of freedom of speech, non-Muslims rarely have the same reaction when the tables are turned, according to Farah:
“Should the non-Islamic world riot at each anti-Semetic remark from the president of Iran, the Saudi royalty and imams?
“We would have time for nothing else.”
And though his intent was clouded by his quotation, I think that’s what the pope meant. A college professor of mine once said that nothing will change on the terror front until ideas change; until words cease to inspire violence.
I’m not someone who thinks democracy is a one-size-fits-all proposition, but dialogue is at the heart of diplomacy. But why talk if anything you say can be taken out of context to make the situation worse?
The pope, like most of the world, just wants an end to senseless terrorism. Tragically, his words backfired.
It makes my head hurt.
I still think it’s important to keep up with world news, because it’s always good to stay current on which psycho militant Islamic Middle Eastern ruler is planning to blow up the United States during any given week. You know, for personal safety and all.
So when Pope Benedict XVI made what some are calling “negative” remarks about Islam on Sept. 12, I glossed over the media coverage. At least the Vatican wasn’t going to acquire nuclear weapons or send suicide bombers into other countries. But what some offended Muslims have threatened in response to the pope’s words might just constitute a security issue.
I returned to the topic this week to find bloggers had very strong opinions about the incident, which happened something like this:
Benedict was giving a lecture titled, “Faith, Reason and the University” at the University of Regensburg in Germany, where he had formerly been a professor. Just like the title says, he was offering an argument that faith must always be rationalized through basic human reason. According to what I’ve read about the pope, he’s big into the assertion that faith in God, whatever your religious belief, should be reasonable, and he backs it up with scholarship.
For Benedict, that argument doesn’t carry over to the Islamic concept of Jihad, or Holy War. But boy did he pick the wrong “scholarship” to back up his comments — a quote by Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus in 1391:
“Show me just what Muhammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached,” was the offending passage.
Benedict framed those “anti-Islamic” comments with something I think most people can agree on — that religion and violence are unreasonable and incompatible.
If only he had omitted the previous comment and gone with just this:
“The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable.
Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. ‘God,’ he says, ‘is not pleased by blood — and not acting reasonably is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats.’”
He was clearly speaking of Jihad, not the whole of the Islamic faith.
Blogcritics.org reprinted a column by blogger Greg Strange, who calls Islam the “Religion of Perpetual Outrage.”
Strange roll calls comments from Muslim leaders and finds this one from Pakistan Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam the most ironic:
“Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence.”
I’m guessing Islamic militants have a thorough understanding of the concept of the self-fulfilling prophecy.
Blogger Douglas Farah opines about the many demonstrations that took place in majority-Islamic countries in which effigies of the pope were burned. He says that sort of readiness to fight is what is taught to so many young people in the Middle East:
“When crowds can form in seemingly spontaneous reaction to an obscure and lightly-reported papal speech, it is evidence of an organization that has pre-positioned its people to strike when the opportunity arises. It was the same in the Danish cartoon riots.”
With the Western idea of freedom of speech, non-Muslims rarely have the same reaction when the tables are turned, according to Farah:
“Should the non-Islamic world riot at each anti-Semetic remark from the president of Iran, the Saudi royalty and imams?
“We would have time for nothing else.”
And though his intent was clouded by his quotation, I think that’s what the pope meant. A college professor of mine once said that nothing will change on the terror front until ideas change; until words cease to inspire violence.
I’m not someone who thinks democracy is a one-size-fits-all proposition, but dialogue is at the heart of diplomacy. But why talk if anything you say can be taken out of context to make the situation worse?
The pope, like most of the world, just wants an end to senseless terrorism. Tragically, his words backfired.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Name suggestions for the Hammond Square Mall
The Hammond Square Mall will be going through a major redevelopment beginning in April, and shoppers will be able to go to a completed "open air lifestyle center" beginning in 2008. New stores inclue Target, Outback Steakhouse, The Home Depot and the return of J.C. Penney.
Developers are looking for a new name for the area. Here's where you can post your suggestions.
Developers are looking for a new name for the area. Here's where you can post your suggestions.
CNN relieves 9/11 appropriately through news coverage
Country singer Alan Jackson asks this question in his 9/11 tribute song: “Where were you when the world stopped turning?”
I was in my webmastering class as a senior at Hahnville High School in St. Charles Parish.
When jetliners crashed into the Twin Towers that morning, I didn’t know it happened.
When I went to lunch around 10:30 a.m., a friend passed me in the hall and said, “Did you hear about the plane crashing into the World Trade Center?”
I immediately thought of the World Trade Center at the foot of Canal Street in New Orleans. I pictured a small single-engine plane dangling off of one or two floors of that massive white structure. I had been to the top of that building not too long before then to see the rotating restaurant on the top floor, which is now defunct.
Then he corrected me.
I didn’t know exactly what happened until I got off the school bus around 3 p.m.
While my future college classmates were sitting transfixed in front of television sets all day, experiencing the worst attack on American soil as a community, my principal decided to shelter us from the valid opportunity to learn and discuss current events.
When she got on the public address system at the end of the school day and announced a moment of silence for the many who had died in the event, I was dumbfounded. What in the world had happened?
I remember, too, that I wrote an essay that day on the WWI novel “All Quiet on the Western Front,” by Erich Maria Remarque, in English class. I later found out just how fitting that was.
For the five-year anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, CNN.com replayed their coverage from that day in real time, from 8:30 a.m. until 11 p.m.
I took the opportunity to see what I had missed that day. It was amazing to feel the emotions those reporters felt as our nation changed forever. I missed the actual moment the buildings collapsed, but I watched as CNN correspondents grabbed interviews with whomever they could, from congressmen to civilians on the Manhattan streets.
A lot has changed in five years. Pope John Paul II, who called the attacks “inhuman,” is no longer with us. Neither is Yassar Arafat, former Palestinian prime minister, who was seen issuing a statement that day denouncing the terrorists’ actions.
Most of us in southeast Louisiana didn’t truly know the pain of loss and disaster. Hurricane Katrina was another four years away.
Everything I felt that day came rushing back like never before. I watched in anger as CNN showed footage of Palestinians dancing in the street celebrating America’s pain. Senators cried “act of war” and got away with using expletives on air to describe the revenge we would exact on our enemies.
One senator lamented how distracted we had been. Education, health care and the economy, he said, were all minor concerns compared to national security and the safety of the American public.
I marveled at how five years — approximately 1,825 days — could unravel the good things that came out of 9/11 — the unity, pride, patriotism and solidarity we all felt.
Now 9/11 is inevitably tied to the Iraq War and then to oil prices. Discussion of the pros-and-cons of our polarizing President George W. Bush, as was illustrated so clearly in a Monday rant by Chris Matthews on MSNBC.
When I started to mentally rebut Matthews, I had to remind myself that the year was 2006. What seemed so cut-and-dry then isn’t so simple now.
But hopefully, in the years to come, we will continue to remember the victims and what we felt that day apart from current political spin and repercussions. It’s important for us to be reminded just what’s at stake.
I agree with the bumper sticker. We should not forget.
CNN helped me remember and did a service to all Americans by replaying its 9/11 coverage. I only hope they will continue that tradition every year.
I was in my webmastering class as a senior at Hahnville High School in St. Charles Parish.
When jetliners crashed into the Twin Towers that morning, I didn’t know it happened.
When I went to lunch around 10:30 a.m., a friend passed me in the hall and said, “Did you hear about the plane crashing into the World Trade Center?”
I immediately thought of the World Trade Center at the foot of Canal Street in New Orleans. I pictured a small single-engine plane dangling off of one or two floors of that massive white structure. I had been to the top of that building not too long before then to see the rotating restaurant on the top floor, which is now defunct.
Then he corrected me.
I didn’t know exactly what happened until I got off the school bus around 3 p.m.
While my future college classmates were sitting transfixed in front of television sets all day, experiencing the worst attack on American soil as a community, my principal decided to shelter us from the valid opportunity to learn and discuss current events.
When she got on the public address system at the end of the school day and announced a moment of silence for the many who had died in the event, I was dumbfounded. What in the world had happened?
I remember, too, that I wrote an essay that day on the WWI novel “All Quiet on the Western Front,” by Erich Maria Remarque, in English class. I later found out just how fitting that was.
For the five-year anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, CNN.com replayed their coverage from that day in real time, from 8:30 a.m. until 11 p.m.
I took the opportunity to see what I had missed that day. It was amazing to feel the emotions those reporters felt as our nation changed forever. I missed the actual moment the buildings collapsed, but I watched as CNN correspondents grabbed interviews with whomever they could, from congressmen to civilians on the Manhattan streets.
A lot has changed in five years. Pope John Paul II, who called the attacks “inhuman,” is no longer with us. Neither is Yassar Arafat, former Palestinian prime minister, who was seen issuing a statement that day denouncing the terrorists’ actions.
Most of us in southeast Louisiana didn’t truly know the pain of loss and disaster. Hurricane Katrina was another four years away.
Everything I felt that day came rushing back like never before. I watched in anger as CNN showed footage of Palestinians dancing in the street celebrating America’s pain. Senators cried “act of war” and got away with using expletives on air to describe the revenge we would exact on our enemies.
One senator lamented how distracted we had been. Education, health care and the economy, he said, were all minor concerns compared to national security and the safety of the American public.
I marveled at how five years — approximately 1,825 days — could unravel the good things that came out of 9/11 — the unity, pride, patriotism and solidarity we all felt.
Now 9/11 is inevitably tied to the Iraq War and then to oil prices. Discussion of the pros-and-cons of our polarizing President George W. Bush, as was illustrated so clearly in a Monday rant by Chris Matthews on MSNBC.
When I started to mentally rebut Matthews, I had to remind myself that the year was 2006. What seemed so cut-and-dry then isn’t so simple now.
But hopefully, in the years to come, we will continue to remember the victims and what we felt that day apart from current political spin and repercussions. It’s important for us to be reminded just what’s at stake.
I agree with the bumper sticker. We should not forget.
CNN helped me remember and did a service to all Americans by replaying its 9/11 coverage. I only hope they will continue that tradition every year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)