Archive for the ‘Media’ Category
Someone on a message board of which I’m a subscriber mentioned Jack Nicholson’s 1989 “Batman” performance and weighed against the late Heath Ledger’s 2008 ”The Dark Knight” performance. It’s strange how, even generationally separated, that comparisons are made pitting one against another. So, let’s run with that thought a second.
First, one just shouldn’t measure one against the other. Jack is Jack. And he carries a lot of volume and weight into any role (save ‘Bucket List’ or films of that ilk). There are simply arias that require his presence (’The Departed,’ ‘A Few Good Men’,'The Dark Knight’). In 1989, the Tim Burton version required his weight. It was taking Tim Burton and mashing it with elements of what Frank Miller had already put into print (more on the Miller effect in a moment). Also, Jack was a hip choice then and now. It was win-win for everybody. Besides, Jack was asked to play the role that way. The performance was carrying elements from the old (the Cesar Romero Joker), Tim Burton Elements and Frank Miller elements (and in fact, Jack’s Joker felt much more toward Miller’s creation, although Miller’s creation also had elements of homoerotica. I’m babbling …) So, for 20 years ago, this was a seminal performance.
No Comments »
One of the most influential comedians and an influential person in my life.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/06/23/carlin.obit/index.html
No Comments »
April 16, 2008 | Media
Eddie Izzard = Star Wars fan. One fo the better moments from his "Circle" show.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv5iEK-IEzw]
2 Comments »
When I returned home from Chilé, I discovered that Deedee had bumped into an old friend named Christian Waggoner while she was in Atlanta.
Mr Waggoner was kind enough to provide my daughter Annabelle a signed litho of some work he'd been commissioned by Lucasfilm to do. The print is a close-up of Darth Vader with Obi-Wan Kenobi reflected in his eyes, a seminal scene from "Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope." I'm so excited to get this picture framed, matted and up on the wall. A sample of his work is on the right here.
If you have the opportunity, his work is fantastic. Visit his gallery online at http://www.juliettegallery.com.
Thanks so much, Christian!
No Comments »
The case of OJ Simpson now spans two decades and two millenia. It includes fresh material (road rage and, as of today, seven felony counts). Something that was better left as parody for a VH1 "Remember When" special keeps infecting our lives like a deadbeat dad who visits whenever it's convenient for him.
It is not enough that Mr. Simpson is haunted by the legacy of his acquittal. Haunted because there are few who truly believe him innocent, despite that fact that almost everyone got their facts from the media tales. Haunted because of the $34 million civil finding in favor of the Goldman family. Haunted because a former college football star, a former NFL star and a former movie star is now breaking into hotel rooms to claim bits of his past to sell them for income -- alledgedly.
You're probably thinking this is easy pickings for bloggers, columnists and the media -- and you'd be right. It is because he pops up like the gopher in the yard that won't go away, chewing out the foundation of your home. It is that memory of a courtroom full of people under closer scrutiny than oil fields in Iraq. And soon after, almost everyone in that courtroom became famous, in one way or another. So, the easy pickings come because when Mr. Simpson pops up in the news, someone is looking to ride his coattails to an hour-long gig on Court TV.
As I sat and thought of tonight's blog topic, I couldn't get past the one mind-boggling fact: Mr. Simpson is 60. Sixty! He's already an AARP member. He collects a pension from the NFL and two others from other sources (which cannot be taken by the Goldmans; it's income already earned). If his arthritis bothered him during the trial, it must have been awful while he chased killers on golf courses from Boca Raton to Pebble Beach. It must be agonizing now secretly stealing away time to sign USC jerseys and footballs in events set-up in more clandestine fashion that an Air Force U-2 flight over Iran. In any case, my grandparents at 60 had little to do with sports memorabilia and friends with guns and more to do figuring out Medicare.
The funny thing is this: he must covertly make this time. If the Goldmans discover that he's doing these signings, all the income goes to them. Mr. Simpson gets none. At this moment, the Goldmans are seeking a ruling to get the merchandise Mr. Simpson alledgedly went after in that hotel room, which includes a pair of Joe Montana-signed cleets.
Bill Maher noted aptly on CNN tonight that someone who "killed his wife and has the reputation he has should stay away from guns. Maybe it was because he couldn't find his knife. I don't know." There is something to the phrase "Don't eat where you've shit." Perhaps in contrast, the phrase is flipped for Mr. Simpson: "Don't shit where you've eaten."
However, the reason why Mr. Simpson's legacy spans these two millenia is this: it has to, for his sake. If he fades away; goes and lives the quiet life, his memorabilia loses value. It's another sort of oddity; a throwaway; the OJ Simpson jersey signed that the guy at the table at the convention will let go for twenty bucks. But if Mr. Simpson is out there still poking a stick in the eye of society; still flipping the Goldmans a bloody-glove covered bird; and still keeping himself in the public eye -- but not too much -- then Mr. Simpson is like an occasional rate cut by the fed (with apologies for using the word 'cut'). And he knows it.
Has Mr. Simpson has gone too far this time? Alledgedly raiding a room with four friends? Guns? There's a kidnapping charge as part of the indictment, too. Perhaps the years are catching up to Mr. Simpson's judgment. Perhaps at 60, the times are becoming more desperate. Perhaps his weakness is one that, stolen away in a cheap hotel in Las Vegas, manifests itself into something a generation of viewers knew was true long before even the first verdict was read aloud.
Finally, I doubt this will be his demise. So many people's heart leapt. With today's seven felony charges on thr table, there is a grand swath of people who saw the white Bronco and thought, "Here is the redemption I seek." But it won't happen. This whole business is shady. Why would someone record that? Why was it on TMZ within hours? This whole business is shady.
What it means, however, is Mr. Simpson will be with us for a long time to come. He's back in clear focus. I would have just prefer he been part of a VH1 special with some Nirvana music playing over his grainy image.
1 Comment »
Two items of note from the Emmys, both of which are no surprise.
In the first, Kathy Griffin's acceptance speech cut whacked from the broadcast because she said some things that Christians would find offensive. The CNN story is here. In the same show, Sally Field started to say something about the war, then supposedly got cut off for saying something about the war.
There's no real discord about Ms. Griffin's comments. When you have the potential to offend 180 million consumers in the US, you censor the speech. Besides, she got more publicity from the censorship anyway. She's right where she wants to be as far as controversey goes. She wins. The network wins.
There's nothing concrete on Ms. Field's speech (i.e., no good news report to send you to on this one), but, you can catch the Digg story here. However, apparently, she was talking about mothers (the maternal kind; not the 12-letter word kind). Her sentence started with, "If mothers ruled the world, there would be no --" and Fox, apparently, cut the speech off from there. The Digg report says the sentence ended like this: "... goddamned wars in the first place." I have no issue with Fox using the 7-second delay. If she said "goddamned," it's an FCC no-no and that's that. You make whatever you want of the politics.
The problem, as my friend Ray Wong raised earlier today, is that these awards shows stink. As Ray points out, there's nothing to these shows. Just a lot of pablum. My take is this: there are a lot of pretty people who mind there P's and Q's more than ever. They do this because networks buy SO MUCH advertising that erratic behavior would upset the advertisers. So, the hook comes faster people like Ms. Griffin and Ms. Field. Gone are the days of George C. Scott refusing his Oscar. Gone are the days of t-shirts with slogans at the Grammys (because you can get zoomed in upon). Unless it's a real surprise, it gets quashed well before it could get aired.
Someone might argue that the ratings are what matter here. They do, always. However, companies buy spots based on the show's producers being able to suppress the loose cannons. They buy ads so that those ads can be sandwiched between segments of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie handing out awards, smiling and doing, well, nothing at all save radiating beauty. I mean, did you really care that Sopranos won best drama? Like that wasn't going to happen?
And there's always the issue of Ryan Seacrest belonging in a wood chipper. But that's another post for another time.
No Comments »
With just a four-hour ride to make, I'll be in Gainesville, Fla., for the game between the Florida Gators and the Troy University ... whatever Troy University's mascot is called is called. To be fair to myself, I haven't Wikipedia'd the university yet, but i do remember a lot of officers in the Air Force having earned their degrees and commissions as part of the ROTC program from that school.
In any case, I'll be playing media person, shooting bunches of new sports and people photography. Most of this will be used in a newspaper in Hawaii, with some going elsewhere. I'm not sure where you'll be able to see the pix yet (I've stripped my gallery bare). However, I'll figure that out before I go.
Meanwhile, I owe you a Raiders season preview. I also know Mr. Cowherd is doing the Penn State game Friday, but I'll probably miss a full critique due night-before socializing and reuniting with my buddy, Mark Munsey, after a five-year drought. Speaking of Mark ...
I've been trying to coax him into blogging for several years. This may be the jumping off point. I'll be blogging my adventures via my Blackberry and you'll be able to catch those here. I may also give Mark here. We'll see if he uses it. He drinks a lot. Just sayin'. :-)
No Comments »
I took the weekend off to help do housework and clean my garage. So, let's lead off the week with this ...It's time to talk about Colin Cowherd's commentary during the college football game Friday night. I made a point to listen to most of the first half. House work had me too busy for the other. However, I'd say Mr. Cowherd did fine. Not great. Not awful. He did fine. And he probably commented on all of this working Memorial Day. I did not listen Memorial Day, thinking he was off.
Some background first. If you listen at all to Mr. Cowherd, you'll know his opinions are polarizing; caustic, even, to some. He generally has the ability to cut through plenty of PR fluff. He doesn’t seem to take many sides on issues. In short, he's worth listening to each day. However, he does think he's funny. He's also fidgety. If you've ever watched him on his Webcam during the show, he chews his nails plenty, his eyes tend to dart around. Admittedly, there's a lot going on, but he looks like he's got a touch of ADHD or something. He's admitted to sleeping about 4 hours a night with one leg up in the air. He often references himself as "we," meaning the collective "Thundering Herd" I suppose. In any case, his radio show gets an 'A' from me, as does his insight, which in part, is why I devote some time on my blog.
So, that's sets the table for Mr. Cowherd, who was the third analyst for the event Friday night, which pitted Washington at Syracuse. Mr. Cowherd is from Washington by way of Las Vegas and San Diego (in jobs). So, he makes no bones about his love for PAC-10 teams. He did say this morning that he doesn't believe the "PAC-10 isn't the best" conference. However, that comment felt shaded. So, in any case, he probably held some bias for Washington that night. So, that's my part in doing a full disclosure (although, to be more fair, Mr. Cowherd has said he did not attend Washington, and for the life of me, I cannot remember which uni he did attend in the rain state.)
Regardless, the Mr. Cowherd played the third analyst. Let me riff on this phenomenon a bit. I've watched sports for a long time. It's evolved from one, to two and now three announcers in the booth. I've never liked it. When Monday Night Football did it, Howard Cossell had a lot of New York Juice. So, he pulled that number. Beyond that, it never worked. However, networks have continually added more people from front to back, from the "studio show" to the play-by-play booth. Fox has four guys in its NFl studio show. NBC's football night in America will have five (Keith Olbermann, Jerome Bettis, Tiki Barber, Bob Costas and Cris Collinsworth). Then it will have three in the booth. The phenomenon isn't strictly a football deal, either.
Even NASCAR coverage has gone to the army of studio hosts. On ESPN's coverage, there's a studio crew (with Brent Musburger), then a trackside crew (with three people). In short, too much. There's also too much feature reporting ("Hey, it just so happens the cats of the new sitcom 'Cavemen' is in the crowd tonight ... hey guys!"). But let's get back to giving Mr. Cowherd a grade.Mr. McDonough's introduction of Mr. Cowherd was dubious, at best. So, that didn't bode well for their night. It felt like Mr. McDonough was treating Mr. Cowherd very much like an outsider. More on this later.
First, it sounded, initially, like they were piping him in from Bristol. His mic sounded tinny and isolated. Sean McDonough's mic boomed as did Chris Spielman's, with whom Mr. Cowherd worked alongside that night. Next, I liked that Mr. Cowherd didn't force himself into spots, but then again, he wasn't commenting enough. I wanted to hear what Cowherd had to say after Spielman made some analysis of an event on the field. Cowherd paced himself, however, and that was fine, too.
Meanwhile, it probably didn't help that Mr. Cowherd labeled the Syracuse football program "awful" before coming to town to do the game. The score did bear out Mr. Cowherd's estimation, however. Washington smashed Syracuse 42-12.During the cutaways, as noted, Mr. Cowherd's fidgety behavior came in full swing . He rocked back and forth played with his hands and couldn’t keep his eyes on his fellow crew mates. Obviously, the guy's got an agile mind and he wanted to pounce on about 79 things Mr. Spielman was saying, but couldn't. Plus, he looked like the guy who was going to sell me a washer at Sears -- khaki slacks, blue shirt and striped tie. Shouldn't a radio icon have his own look? Isn't the "third guy" the personality? Tony Kornheiser, Cossell and Dennis Miller?
There were a couple of moments when Mr. Cowherd could have inserted one of his theories famously expounded on radio, but did not. I remember cruising into the living room, and thinking, "Oh, he's going to mention his 'blah' theory." But he didn't and that was when I shut the game off.
Overall, I think Mr. Cowherd did fine. While zero chemistry existed between the three men, and the game became an abomination, when Mr. Cowherd provided some insight, it worked. Not as exacting as his radio bite, which has time to be thought through, certainly. However, he could work in the right booth with the right people. However, Mr. Cowherd could also become that third smartass in the booth as Mr. Miller did -- and people eventually turned philistine and stoned the comedian for that,ESPN is obviously trying to find out where Mr. Cowherd makes a bigger splash and this experiment is one of the easy avenues to work him in. He's show little on TV. However, according to him, his radio show is growing and with the loss of Dan Patrick, it's apparent that Mr. Cowherd is looking to step through ...
1 Comment »
Idaho Senator Larry Craig's statement Tuesday made me laugh. He was trying so hard to keep claiming over and over again that he wasn't gay. Excerpt No. 1 of his statement:
First, please let me apologize to my family, friends, staff, and fellow Idahoans for the cloud placed over Idaho. I did nothing wrong at the Minneapolis airport. I regret my decision to plead guilty and the sadness that decision has brought to my wife, family, friends, staff, and fellow Idahoans. For that I apologize.
What's fantastic about that first part is the statement "I did nothing wrong in the Minneapolis airport. He pleaded guilty to a crime, so, he did something wrong somewhere. Sounds like a little voodoo with the worlds on the Senator's part. Another part of the statement also makes me giggle:
In June, I overreacted and made a poor decision. While I was not involved in any inappropriate conduct at the Minneapolis airport or anywhere else, I chose to plead guilty to a lesser charge in the hope of making it go away. I did not seek any counsel, either from an attorney, staff, friends, or family. That was a mistake, and I deeply regret it.
Larry can vote to send your children to war. He can up or down vote judicial nominees. He can help wage wars. He's probably got a mental Rolodex of every lobbyist who glad handed him and passed him a free vacation or two. But he overreacted when faced with the charge of lewd conduct? Please. Panicked, maybe. Crapped his pants, certainly. But overreacted? It's still a guilty plea on the books. This senator, from Idaho, a state slightly less starched than a military uniform, blamed the Idaho Statesman newspaper. But Larry is the one who pleaded guilty to the disorderly conduct charge in a police sting, according to associated press:
The arresting airport office has a different story. Working undercover, Sgt. Dave Karsnia said Craig entered a stall next to him, then tapped his foot and rubbed it against the officer's, a signal, police say, to engage in "lewd conduct."
Already, the pillars of support are breaking. I could care less about his politics. Rather, the sham of wanting so badly to suck from the Beltway teet, then, suddenly, blowing it (excuse the pun). He stands on the podium next to his wife, saying, "I am not gay." Well, then, what are you? In trouble, mostly. It is fascinating television, for sure, and certainly, the media are eating it up.
Just a reminder, too, that the guilty plea is historical. Gone. Done. Some more notes from AP:
Craig now says the guilty plea was a mistake, painting quite a different portrait than he did just three weeks ago in court documents in which he stated "I'm pleading guilty" to "physical" conduct that tended "to arouse alarm." He entered that plea "freely and voluntarily."
Freely and voluntarily. I understand before you can do that, you have to be asked that particular question several times in several forms.
And once again, Larry is one of the many making big people decisions about the United States, its economy, our military at war and, well, the state of Idaho.
Good luck with all that, Lar. Here's his Web site if you'd like to catch the spin up close.
No Comments »
