Michael Rubin

Best Pictures Nominees Need Best Director Nominations

2012-01-25T21:37:00.000-08:00

For the 2008 year of films, there were five films nominated for Best Picture. They were Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk, and The Reader.

What was missing from that group was a big budget audience pleaser. That same year, critically acclaimed and commercially successful The Dark Knight was not nominated. In years past, films like Forrest Gump and Titanic would make the most money in a year and win the top award. People liked the thought of watching the Oscars and seeing the films they enjoyed competing for the top awards. While I saw all five of those films before the Oscars took place, I would say that The Reader should have been off of that list and The Dark Knight should have been on it. With five smaller films that many people did not see competing for Best Picture, audiences had little interest in seeing the Oscars.

Realizing that having only five Best Picture nominees may not allow a crowd pleaser to be nominated, the list was increased from five to ten nominees the next year. To correct the problem of too few nominees, they allowed too many nominees. Which ten films up for Best Picture in a single year, audiences knew that some of those films would have no real shot at winning the top prize.

But there was a bigger problem. While they doubled the number of Best Picture nominees, they continued to only have five nominees for Best Director.

Christopher Nolan, having been snubbed before for The Dark Knight, made another box office and critically successful film called Inception. Many people thought that Inception would be one of the top films competing for Best Picture. With ten films nominated for Best Picture, it appeared that the Oscars corrected an error before and allowed enough films to be nominated so people like Mr. Nolan wouldn’t be snubbed again.

Inception was nominated for Best Picture. However, it was not nominated for Best Director. This made Inception’s Best Picture nominee appear to be half-hearted and not serious.

Typically, when there were five films up for Best Picture, at least four of those films had a director who was also nominated. The fifth film may be a fun film that no one assumes would really win the top prize. Increasing the Best Picture nominees to ten and keeping the Best Director nominees at five allows five films to be almost written off they day that the nominations are announced.

There is one exception in recent years… Driving Miss Daisy, which was the Best Picture winner for the 1989 year of film. The director, Bruce Beresford, was not nominated for Best Director.

This year, there are nine films up for Best Picture, and four of them are not up for Best Director. One of the directors who was snubbed is two-time Best Director winner Steven Spielberg. When a director finds out that his or her film is not nominated for Best Director, he or she may just hope to win the top award and think, “It happened for Driving Miss Daisy. It could happen again.” Or the person may feel that they were taken out of the Best Picture race without the Best Director nomination.

If I could give two recommendations to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, I would first recommend that they have the same films nominated for Best Picture automatically be nominated for Best Director. This way, audiences (and Oscar voters) won’t automatically dismiss the chances of a Best Picture nominee because the director did not get a nomination as well. Sure we may not think that films like Toy Story 3 will actually have a shot at the top prize, but we won’t dismiss films like Inception or War Horse due to a snub of the films’ directors. I also feel that while five films may be too few, nine or ten films are too many to have nominations for Best Picture. My second recommendation would be to reduce the number of films nominated for Best Picture (and Best Director)to seven.

My recommendations would give the audience pleasers a better shot at a Best Picture nomination, keep films from being dismissed from the Oscar race due not having a Best Director nomination, and keep a few films out of the Best Picture race that are unlikely to win.

Loutallica: Worthy Experiment, Bad Result

2011-10-02T09:58:00.000-07:00

I dedicate this article to my cousin, Evan Appleton.

I want to begin by giving credit to Metallica and Lou Reed for experimenting on an album together instead of playing it safe. I would rather see musicians take risks than to put out albums that sound too much like their previous work. But when an experiment turns out to be bad, in this case really bad, it should have been placed on the shelf.

For some reason, people like to see different musical artists perform together. Recently I downloaded from the Sopranos soundtrack a track that mixes Every Breath You Take with the theme from Peter Gunn. I can easily hear both tracks separately, but hearing them together gives me a new experience. This is referred to as a mashup. I view mashups as the “Reese’ Peanut Butter Cups” of music. Sure people love peanut butter and they love chocolate, but together they taste great. Sometimes two songs mashed up together can be better than the previous songs were separately. This is all a matter of opinion. Sometimes mashups are great and sometimes they are bad.

A few years ago, Linkin Park made an album with Jay-Z and the result was excellent. I am more of a fan of rock music than I am a fan of rap, but I understand how rappers can use rock music in the background successfully. When Aerosmith worked with Run DMC for the song “Walk This Way”, the music and singing of Aerosmith fit with the rapping of Run DMC. When Linkin Park worked with Jay-Z, they made sure that the tempo of the music fit the lyrics correctly. Great lyrics will not make a song successful if the lyrics do not fit well with the original song that was chosen to be in the background. MC Hammer could have used the same rap lyrics from “U Can’t Touch This” and added them to the music of a different song instead of “Super Freak” by Rick James, but the result may have not been as successful.

Jay-Z has a lot of experience taking the music of other artists and makes sure that it fits well in the background. As a rapper, he can tell if the music fits with his lyrics.

Metallica and Lou Reed have decided to make an album together called Lulu. They released a song called “The View.” To compare this to Jay-Z and Linkin Park, the talking is done by Lou Reed and the music and is performed by Metallica.

Here is the link to hear it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LWtb621DRg

The result is absolutely horrible…..

But the reason why this song is bad is very simple. Lou Reed is talking with very little emotion with a very fast musical background. James Hetfield has some lines in the song and he is singing (not talking) with the same aggressive style that fits most Metallica songs. Hearing Lou Reed use such a lack of emotion is like hearing an old man talking on stage while a heavy metal band is playing fast and aggressive music. The singing, talking, or rapping has to fit the music that is being played. Jay-Z understands this. Lou Reed does not.

In my opinion, “The View” is the worst song that Metallica has ever released. When the full album is released on November 1st, I may possibly have a lower opinion of the other songs on the album, but I will not even consider purchasing the album at this time.

I really do love the music of Metallica. I am a big fan of them. I respect their decision work with Lou Reed on an album. But at some point, I really do wish they said to themselves, “This album is bad. We’re going to have to tell Lou that we can’t release it.” How do you tell someone who is considered a legendary artist that you can’t release the work that you have done with him because it’s not good? Would it be like insulting yourself, insulting the other artist, or both?

I expect Lulu to be considered the worst album that Metallica has ever released and ranked below St. Anger. Artists decide not to release songs all of the time. I’m sure that Metallica has written many songs that they did not put on their albums and would only choose the songs that they felt were the best. When a group writes many songs and can only put a few on an album, they have to be their own worst critic and decide which songs are unworthy of the album. But it’s harder to decide that a body of work overall needs to be shelved. It is hard to be that hard on yourself to shelf an entire project. In this case, they would not have had to just be their own worst critic, but a critic of Lou Reed.

By deciding to release the worst song of their career (The View), and possibly their worst album (which I cannot judge it until I hear it), Metallica may have opened up Lou Reed and themselves to their true worst critics… the audience.

Amy Winehouse: The Celebration of Self-Destruction

2011-07-25T09:35:00.000-07:00

Earlier this year, a man named Blair River died at the young age of 29. He was the 575-pound spokesman for Heart Attack Grill in Arizona, a restaurant that celebrates obesity. If you go to Heart Attack Grill and you weigh more than 350 pounds, you get to eat for free. They name the burgers the bypass, double-bypass, triple-bypass, and quadruple-bypass based on the number of patties in your burger. Blair River celebrated his obesity by becoming a spokesman for Heart Attack Grill, which celebrates unhealthy eating. This is different than someone being a spokesman for a typical fast-food restaurant. Heart Attack Grill is a celebration of what unhealthy food will do to you. Should anyone have been shocked that Blair River died at such a young age? No. Those around him must have realized that his weight and unhealthy eating habits would take a toll on his health. While I feel sad at the passing of someone at a young age, I feel angry when people celebrate their addictions and then die at an early age.

The death of Amy Winehouse was not a surprise to many people. She did not only struggle through drug addiction, but she celebrated her addiction with the hit single, “Rehab” which won Grammys for Song of the Year and Record of the Year. Now that she has died at the age of 27, I feel that for the first time in my life, I have witnessed a celebrity practically committing public suicide. She let the world know that she was going through substance-abuse and that she did not want to receive treatment.

The two celebrities who I thought for a while would die at a young age have been Amy Winehouse and Lindsay Lohan. I do not think that Lindsay Lohan celebrates her substance-abuse, but I also don’t think that she has been serious about trying to rehabilitate herself. If Lindsay Lohan wants to be serious about getting over her substance-abuse, she needs to place herself in an environment in which she can avoid temptation. An alcoholic and drug-user should not go to clubs where substances can be easily purchased. If Lindsay Lohan continues to go to clubs in L.A. then she’s not serious about getting treatment. A very fat person would struggle to have just one plate of food if he or she goes to a buffet.

While I am sad for the family of Amy Winehouse, I am angry at Amy and those who celebrated her self-destruction. By celebrating her issues with drugs, Amy Winehouse showed an acceptance of her lifestyle and possibly an acceptance of what the final outcome would be. By celebrating Amy’s “I use drugs and I’m not going to change” attitude, her fans should accept that they knew that she was going to die, that they celebrated her self-destruction, and that they patted her on the back instead of offering real help. Amy filled her body with expensive drugs over the years which were paid for by album sales and concert tickets which were purchased by her fans.

I would rather someone live a long life than for me to be correct. I think that Lindsay Lohan is going to die at a young age. I really hope that I am wrong and that she turns her life around.

Adele: The Best Singer Today

2011-05-30T17:50:00.000-07:00

This article is dedicated to Jennifer Waller, a fellow fan of Adele.

For weeks, I saw on Amazon.com’s list of the top selling albums the album 21 by Adele. Week after week this album was at the top of the chart. I was not familiar with Adele. I found out that she won the Grammy for Best New Artist a few years ago and had a song called Chasing Pavements that I remembered hearing. But I was not a fan of that song and I did not remember her name. I decided to preview a few of her songs on her 21 album. Once I heard the preview, I knew that I had to order this album. After hearing it, I will not be surprised if it wins the Grammy for Album of the Year.

I read an article in Rolling Stone magazine about her. I learned about how heartbreak inspired both of her albums. I think that her album 19 is good, but her album 21 is a masterpiece.

In my opinion, Adele is the best music artist working today.

The album has four songs that I just love. The first song, Rolling In The Deep, is a powerful ballad about wishing that she did not meet a man who used to be in her life. This is the song that is currently on the radio. One thing I like about this song is that it’s not anti-male, but anti-ex. I am reminded in contrast of the singer Kelis who sang I Hate You So Much Right Now. The problem with that song was it was dedicated to the women who were hurt by men. What about the men who were hurt by women? Adele does not make that mistake. Her songs are not about bad men, but about bad previous relationships. Men and women can identify with her.

The third song on the album, Turning Tables, is not an angry song, but more about feeling hurt. If Rolling In The Deep is like clenching a fist, then Turning Tables is like letting a tear fall down a cheek. It’s about the wounded feeling after the loss of love.

The tenth song is Love Song, which is a remake of the hit by The Cure. Yes, a remake, but this one is good. Unlike the version by 311, the version by Adele is really good. She expresses the sadness that was heard in the original version, while the 311 version feels less emotional.

The final song, Someone Like You, is a farewell to a man she loved who has now married someone else. The album begins with a song full of anger, then is filled with songs of sadness. Now with the final song, Adele deals with the final stage of heartbreak… acceptance of love that will never return.

It is nice to know that an album of true substance has sold so many copies. I predict that this album will win the Grammy for Album of the Year, even if it does not, Adele has touched so many people with her music. In the music industry, occasionally we find a truly great artist. In this case, that artist is being given the attention that she deserves.

Judas Priest, Ray Belknap, and James Vance: 25 Years Later

2010-12-23T12:10:00.000-08:00

This is the most powerful story in the history of Heavy Metal.

Either before or after reading this article, you may want to see the documentary about the Judas Priest trial. The documentary is called Dream Deceivers: The Story Behind James Vance vs. Judas Priest.

To view this powerful documentary on YouTube, click on the link below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfJkeGpiD9M

Today is the 25th anniversary of the day that Ray Belknap and James Vance shot themselves after listening to the Judas Priest album, Stained Class. On December 23, 1985, Ray Belknap gave James Vance a copy of Stained Class, which they listened to in Ray’s room while drinking beer and smoking pot. Afterwards, they trashed Ray’s room. After trashing the room, they took Ray’s shotgun to the playground by a church. Ray put the shotgun under his chin and fired. He died immediately. James picked up the shotgun which was covered in blood. He put it under his own chin and fired.

He lived…

When James fired, the shot missed his brain and eyes, but blew off his mouth and nose. He lived for three more years disfigured. While he was alive and disfigured, he sent a letter to Ray Belknap’s mother in which he blamed the music of Judas Priest for him and Ray deciding to commit suicide.

James Vance died in 1988. The lawsuit against Judas Priest went to trial in 1990.

As Ken McKenna, the lawyer for the families, planned the lawsuit against Judas Priest, his team of experts listened to the Stained Class album and examined it closely. They could not blame the lyrics for the suicide, because the courts have already ruled that musicians cannot be sued for lyrics because song lyrics are covered by the First Amendment. This was tested and when Ozzy Osbourne was sued over the song “Suicide Solution” that a boy listened to as he committed suicide.

There was a loophole….. subliminal messages. In the song “Better By You, Better Than Me,” there was a sound several times that could be heard throughout the song that sounded like someone saying “Do it!” The judge ruled that the case can move forward because he viewed subliminal messages were not covered by the First Amendment

Throughout the case, it was shown that Ray Belknap and James Vance had horrible upbringings. They were from broken families. Both of them had violence families. They used drugs, had police records, and both of them were high school drop-outs. They did not have promising futures. Feeling that life was not going in a positive direction, they were depressed.

Can anyone really blame the music for this? Should the parents have sued themselves? Or at least maybe they should they have taken some of the blame for the raising of their children?

The case was dismissed when it was proven that the sounds that caused the “Do it” sound came from two different recording tracks. The “Do it” was considered an accidental sound.

Now here’s my take. I do not believe that hearing “Do it” in the middle of “Better By You, Better Than Me” would drive anyone to commit suicide. Let’s say the sound was actually intentional. Let’s say instead of a soft sound, Rob Halford sang “Do it” out loud. The message of the song is about a man asking a friend (gender not identified) to express the feelings of the man to the man’s girlfriend. Kind of like a boy in class asking his best friend to express his love for a girl. If you have seen Steve Martin in the movie Roxanne, Steve Martin’s character was used to express the feelings of another man to Roxanne because Steve Martin’s character was better at finding the right words. Saying “Do it”…. Do what? The singer of the song wants his friend to go express his feelings to a girl. He wants the friend to do that. The song is not about suicide.

When you listen to sad songs, you may think about sad feelings. I do think that listening to the album may have made them think about their own mortality, but not in a way that can be blamed on Judas Priest. One of the songs, “Beyond The Realms Of Death” is a haunting song about life not being worth living. The song after that “Heroes End” has the line “Why do you have to die to be a hero?” They were also the last two songs on the album. Maybe hearing two songs about death (especially at the end of the album) made Ray and James think about not wanting to live.

On this day in 1985, two friends were in a room using substances and talking about their depressing lives. They hear two songs about death at the end of the album. They decide together to commit suicide. What breaks my heart about this story is that in a suicide pack, two people encourage each other to end their lives together, convincing each other that this is the decision to make. Suicide is a serious issue. It should be discouraged. I wonder if one of them convinced the other one to commit suicide. It is possible that the discussion treaded lightly on the topic of suicide and then they may have convinced each other that this was the right decision to make. Maybe both of them were willing to pull the trigger because each one felt that he would not be making this choice alone. Maybe had they listened to a different album that night, they may be alive today.

Let’s say I am right. I don’t know if I am, but for the sake of discussion, let’s say that my theory is correct that listening to “Beyond The Realms Of Death” and “Heroes End” made them think about suicide instead of “Better By You, Better Than Me.” Can we truly blame Judas Priest? As a society, should we ban every song, every film, every play, every book that discusses death? Will lives be perfect, or better, if we ban art discussing death? Will our society be happy and will our problems be solved by censorship?

If James and Ray did not have access to songs that discussed death, would their parents and stepfathers not beat them? The two of them listened to Judas Priest because they could identify with Heavy Metal and loved the music. If they identified with the theme from “Beyond The Realms Of Death” then maybe their mothers should have tried harder to give them happy upbringings without violence.

This is protective speech. I think that hearing these songs when someone is depressed can make them think about death, just like seeing Top Gun in the theaters led to many young men deciding to sign up for the Air Force. Judas Priest did nothing wrong by recording the songs on the album. If we change the Constitution to allow any artist to be sued for someone listening to depressing songs before committing suicide, then we might as well ban any songs about love and loss. If those men listened to “Only The Lonely” and committed suicide, would it have been right for their parents to sue Roy Orbison?

This is the greatest story of Heavy Metal because it has all of the elements. Depressed youth, drugs, suicide, families blaming the music for the problems of the young men. What is most fascinating is how one of the victims lived to blame the music personally. Had both men died that night, this would be another story of youth and suicide. Hearing one of them talk about the events and living to tell about it is a rare look into the sadness and desperation of those without hope. I don’t fault James Vance for blaming the music, but I think he took issue with the wrong song. They would have no case against the song “Beyond The Realms Of Death” so they blamed the only song that they could (Better By You, Better Than Me).

It is ironic that the song they blamed was “Better By You, Better Than Me” because the song is about placing actions in the hands of another. Multiple stepfathers, violence, drug usage, arrest records, and discontinued education led to two young men seeing no future. Better blame the music. Better than the families blaming themselves.

Lost on Netflix (No Spoilers)

2010-11-07T09:20:00.000-08:00

I dedicate this article to Shannon Brown, Kelly Flynn, Rich Gillum, Sarah McMahon, John Prado, and Kelley Prado, my co-workers who also watched Lost but did not spoil the ending. Thanks everyone.

I have “No Spoilers” in the title because I want those who have not seen Lost to be able to read this without having plot twists ruined for them. This article is about 1) the show Lost and 2) how using Netflix can be a better way to watch television shows.

Back in 2004 I remember people talking about the show Lost like it was the greatest show ever made. A few years ago I decided to wait for the show to completely end and then I would watch the entire show by renting the DVDs on Netflix. At work several months ago, I asked fellow employees not to discuss the show in front of me because I did not want the ending ruined. I wanted to see why people were so crazy about this show. After the final episode of Lost aired, I started watching the show from the beginning.

For those who have not seen the show, it is mainly about a group of passengers who have survived a plane crash and are stuck on an island. Each episode has a focus on the life of one of the characters before he or she was on the plane in addition to showing the group on the island. This is key because it allows us to learn about what made some characters the way that they are and keeps the story interesting.

When students go to college after high school, they get to start over in a way. When you are in your first year of college, other students will not know that your past (positive or negative) and you have the opportunity to start over. For those on the island, they can tell as much or as little about themselves as they choose. Some of them have very painful pasts.

What makes this show so fascinating is the character development and the plot twists in the show, both from their lives before being on the island and their lives on the island. The plot twists hit the audience like the Twilight Zone. This is not the drama version of Gilligan’s Island. This is an interweaving story of shocking revelations that I won’t reveal in this article. We learn how characters developed into the people they are on the island and why they may be more likeable than they initially appear.

In my opinion, Lost is the greatest drama that I have ever seen on TV. My focus on watching six seasons of Lost prevented me from spending time watching many movies, but I do not regret this. I give Lost four stars and watching the show is the equivalent of watching a long four-star film. It is a masterpiece.

Now about using Netflix to watch television shows. Obviously I have paid money to watch a show that others have seen for free over the last six years. This is something that I not only don’t regret, but will use to watch other television shows in the future. Lost was a fascinating show, but those who viewed it had to wait week by week to watch the show. They also had to go months at a time between seasons. In my situation, I was able to watch the show as slowly or as quickly as I chose to. By waiting until Lost ended, I got to watch the show:

1. Without having to wait during commercials.
2. Without having to wait for the next episode.
3. Without having to wait for the next season.

I literally could watch the show without ever having to wait. Instant gratification. I also was able to enjoy the show over a few months instead of over six years. I know I could have gone through the show more quickly, but I was not in a rush to get through it. I got to enjoy it at my own rate.

There are many shows that I have yet to see. I have decided to wait for some shows to end and then I will use this method to watch them. Having the ability to watch a show straight through without waiting is (ironically) well worth the wait.

Dr. Laura: Read the Constitution

2010-08-29T08:46:00.000-07:00

This article is dedicated to Bobby Duke, who truly understands the Constitution.
Dr. Laura Schlessinger is either a racist or the least intelligent person in the United States who has obtained a Ph.D. I will refer to her as “Dr. Laura” for the rest of the article because that is what she goes by (like Dr. Phil). I try to make this blog to be about the entertainment business, not about politics. I am discussing Dr. Laura because she had a radio show with millions of listeners. I will avoid having this article be about her political views because it is more important to talk about what she did than where she is on the political spectrum.

Recently, Dr. Laura said the n-word 11 times when talking to a black woman on the radio. Dr. Laura was trying to make a point that she believes that if blacks can use the n-word on HBO, then whites should be able to use it as well. After this became a national story, Dr. Laura “quit” her radio show. I use the word “quit” in quotes because she is acting like she left the show on her own will. Chances are, had she not “quit”, she would have been fired because the advertisers would have stopped advertising on the show. She may have been fired before quitting, or asked if she would resign. I do not know how her departure from radio occurred, but it is unlikely that she would have been able to continue her show.

If Dr. Laura is not a racist, then she is just a very unintelligent person. White people have learned in the last 15 years that a white person should never use the n-word in any situation, even in context. Even if the white person is discussing the word, he or she does not have to actually say it. Instead, the person can just do what I am doing, and describe it as “n-word” so everyone will know what the person is talking about.

During the O.J. Simpson trial, Mark Fuhrman was shown to be a racist for using the n-word. A few years ago, comedian Michael Richards got in trouble for using it on stage while trying to make people laugh. Obviously the joke did not work. Recently, Mel Gibson was caught on an audio recording using the word as well. All three of these men are viewed as racists. Did Dr. Laura not hear about the reaction of society to the actions of each of these men?

If this was 1993, Dr. Laura may have tried to make a point that backfired. But with society knowing how people react to white people using the n-word, she should have known better. It is one thing to be the first person to get into trouble for actions, but to do the same thing after so many careers have been ruined by people using the n-word, means that she’s either a racist, a moron, or both.

Dr. Laura may be a racist and/or a moron, but she definitely has no understanding of the Constitution. She claimed that she left radio to “regain my First Amendment rights.” What she doesn’t understand is that her First Amendment rights were never violated. The First Amendment means that the government will not prohibit your right to speak. The government had nothing to do with this. As an employee of company that employs her to speak on the radio, they can fire her if they do not like what she says at work. A business has the right to not employ someone based on what that person says at work. If advertisers boycott a radio station over comments by a talk show host, those advertisers have the legal right to do so. If the radio station disagrees with her controversial comments, they can fire her. The government has nothing to do with this. People can lose their jobs at work based on their behavior.

Dr. Laura is not a victim. She may have a Ph.D, but she does not understand the Constitution. Hopefully someone will explain to her what the First Amendment truly means.

Food Wars: Pizza Mart Is Better Than Jumbo Slice

2010-07-07T22:36:00.002-07:00

Most of the time, I write about the Entertainment Industry from far away. This time, I had the pleasure of experiencing a side of it right in Washington D.C.

There is a show on The Travel Channel called Food Wars. The show is about how there are many cities in the United States with two competing restaurants which make the same item. The purpose of the show is to have a blind taste test to determine which restaurant makes the item better. The results of the show are still only the opinions of a few selected food testers, so the losing restaurant will not be viewed by all customers as inferior to the winning restaurant.

After an episode ends is actually when the fun actually begins. If audience members are near the city of the competition, they can play Food Wars themselves. That is what I decided to do in the case of Pizza Mart vs. Jumbo Slice.

In Washington D.C., two brothers own competing restaurants known for their large slices of pizza. The first brother owned Pizza Mart and began making large slices of pizza. He decided to open a second location called Jumbo Slice and have his brother take over Pizza Mart. The second brother, now in charge of Pizza Mart, decided to change the recipe to make the slices of pizza taste different. So the competition on Food Wars was between the original flavor pizza at Jumbo Slice and the new flavor pizza at Pizza Mart. On the show, Pizza Mart won the competition.

As I have been dieting since April, I decided that I must lose 50 pounds before I get to reward myself by going to both restaurants. On Saturday, July 3rd, I had lost 50 pounds and was ready to try both slices of pizza. I thought that I would prefer the pizza at Jumbo Slice because I tend to prefer more simple recipes over complex ones. I first went to Jumbo Slice so I can see what the original pizza tastes like. I enjoyed it very much. I had no negative comments about the pizza as I ate it. It was a very good slice of pizza.

I walked down the block to Pizza Mart, which is only a few minutes away. I ordered a large slice of pepperoni pizza (the same topping I had on the Jumbo Slice pizza). Within a few bites I realized that Pizza Mart had a better slice of pizza. What stood out to me was the sauce, which tasted like it had a higher quality flavor than the sauce in the pizza at Jumbo Slice. This was not a close competition. Comparing the sauce would be like comparing a steak at a typical bar to what you would find at Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse or Morton’s. I could tell that the sauce at Pizza Mart was a true improvement on the sauce used at Jumbo Slice.

I decided to tell the people working at Pizza Mart that I have just had the pizza at both locations and that I prefer the pizza at Pizza Mart. I spoke with the owner, Mike Chisti, and explained that I am writing an article about both locations and that I have chosen Pizza Mart as the winner.

Here is the best part. Mike Chisti gave me an explanation as to what he does to make the pizza at Pizza Mart better than his brother’s restaurant. He said that he uses a blend of three kinds of cheese, which are cheddar, mozzarella, and provolone. He also adds a secret blend of spices which makes the pizza a little spicier than the pizza at Jumbo Slice. The pizza at Pizza Mart is not spicy, but the additional spice adds richness to the flavor of the pizza at Pizza Mart. The final reason why the pizza is better at Pizza Mart is because instead of the New Jersey Tomatoes which are used at Jumbo Slice, they use California tomatoes at Pizza Mart, which Mike Chisti said are more flavorful.

So why am I writing about food when this is an Entertainment Industry blog? The reason is because the show Food Wars is part of the Entertainment Industry and has provided an outlet for viewers to learn about different restaurants and judge the food independently. To me, it did not matter that the show determined Pizza Mart to be the winner. I wanted to judge both places for myself. My conclusion was that Pizza Mart does indeed make a better slice of pizza, but it was fun to have the opportunity to compare the restaurants. The true winner when it comes to Food Wars is both locations in any episode because the show will actually drive customers to try each competing restaurant. New customers will seek both restaurants out, regardless of which one was declared to be the winner. While I was in Pizza Mart, I heard another customer say that he is there because he heard about Pizza Mart from watching Food Wars. Had I never seen the show, I would not have known that there are places in Washington D.C. where I can get a huge slice of pizza. I am glad that I learned about these restaurants and I had fun evaluating the pizza at each of them.

I am not a food critic. My preference for the pizza at Pizza Mart is just my opinion, and there will be people who will disagree with my choice. If you want to play Food Wars and try both restaurants, then I think that you will enjoy two great slices of pizza. If you do not feel that you can eat more than one slice, then I highly recommend Pizza Mart. Mike Chisti took the pizza from Jumbo Slice and improved it at Pizza Mart with great cheese, excellent spices, and California tomatoes. In the business world, if you want to compete with an excellent product, it is important to make your product better than the original one. Mike Chisti knows this concept, and the pizza at Pizza Mart is excellent.

Here are the addresses of the restaurants:

Pizza Mart
2445 18th St NW
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 234-9700

Jumbo Slice
2341 18th Street NW
Washington, DC 20009

JaMarcus Russell: Purple Drank Connoisseur

2010-07-05T20:18:00.001-07:00

In 2007, JaMarcus Russell was the first player selected in the NFL Draft, having been selected by the Oakland Raiders. After three seasons, the Raiders cut him from the team. With his high salary and poor statistics, no team in the NFL would have traded for him and be willing to pay him the amount that he was scheduled to earn. As a free agent, he was being considered by the New York Jets. That consideration has ended now that he has been arrested for being caught with Purple Drank.

What is Purple Drank? For those who are not familiar with it, Purple Drank is a beverage made from Codeine syrup, which can be found in cough syrup. It has been made famous by the rapper Lil Wayne.

JaMarcus Russell had been highly compensated during his first three seasons as an NFL quarterback. The guy can afford any alcoholic beverage that he desired. Instead, he chose Purple Drank, and now he has been arrested. Many people have died using Purple Drank. If JaMarcus Russell wanted to return to the NFL, he truly hurt his chances of making a comeback with his actions.

Ryan Leaf, the second pick in the 1998 NFL Draft behind Peyton Manning, has been considered the biggest draft bust of all time. I think that JaMarcus Russell is possibly going to replace him at the top of the list. It is not just the fact that JaMarcus Russell did a horrible job playing for the Oakland Raiders, but as a free agent, his actions show a lack of dedication to resurrecting his horrible career.

On the bright side, his actions appear to only cause potential harm to himself. He is a free agent, so no NFL team has been hurt by having him on their team at the time of his arrest. If he wasn’t driving while enjoying his Purple Drank, then no one else was at risk of being harmed.

Just like Vince Neil, I hope that he can turn his life around, whether he plays in the NFL again or not. He was a waste of an NFL draft pick, but maybe he can do something meaningful in his life. Heath Shuler was the third pick in the 1994 NFL Draft and never lived up to his potential in the NFL, but he is now in Congress. I wouldn’t expect JaMarcus Russell to aim that high, but maybe he can make a difference with his life in other ways. During Hurricane Katrina, he housed people who needed a play to stay, including musician Fats Domino. There is goodness in JaMarcus Russell and hopefully he can use his good heart again in a positive way.

Vince Neil: Please Don’t Drive!

2010-07-03T23:02:00.000-07:00

I feel very bad for musicians who struggle with alcohol addiction. We live in a culture in which alcohol is legal, accepted, and promoted… but many people are addicted to it. I don’t drink alcohol, but I do not support banning it. Unlike the use of drugs, alcohol is legal. Alcohol is also accepted in social events. The use of alcohol among those over 21 years-old is not frowned upon like smoking is. The problem is that while alcohol is legal, some people who consume too much of it can develop major substance abuse issues.

On the other hand, I cannot feel bad for those who drink and drive. I have a higher level of anger at those who are rich and famous who drink and drive, because they can afford to have designated drivers (and in many cases, fans who would drive them around for free). I believe that with financial resources and fan support, celebrities have a stronger ability to avoid getting a DUI. I would completely support tougher fines/jail sentences for celebrities who get charged with a DUI because they have the best resources to avoid driving while drunk.

Vince Neil was recently arrested for driving while he was drunk. He is one of the worst offenders that I can imagine writing about. On December 8, 1984, Vince was driving drunk while the drummer, Razzle of Hanoi Rocks, was in his car. Vince crashed into another car. Razzle died at the age of 24 and Hanoi Rocks later disbanded.

So Vince Neil’s choice to drink and drive led to the death of a beloved drummer. I will admit that Razzle is not 100% innocent like the passengers in the other car, because Razzle chose to ride in the car with Vince Neil knowing that Vince was drinking. Regardless of the fact that Razzle chose to ride in the car, he still paid the ultimate price for his decision. Vince should have learned from this situation because he caused the death of a friend. I believe that the jail time that he served for his actions was not long enough. Had he killed one of the passengers of the other vehicle, he probably would have gone to jail for years.

Vince Neil is not immune to tragedy himself. In 1995, his daughter, Skylar, passed away. He knows what it is liked to lose a loved one. He also knows what it is like to be responsible for the death of another person due to driving while drunk. One of the members of his own band, bassist Nikki Sixx, actually died of an overdose for two minutes and was brought back to life by the paramedics. Vince Neil is wealthy enough to pay for a taxi to pick him up if he is too drunk to drive. He has plenty of fans who would be honored to give him a ride home just to be able to say that they helped him out. There is no excuse for his reckless behavior.

I have pure sympathy for anyone who cannot control their addiction to alcohol. If Vince Neil is having difficulty trying to stay sober, I can understand that. I do not frown on those who suffer from an addiction to alcohol. But his decision to drive after drinking is horrible and knowing that he already killed one person by driving while being drunk, he deserves a long jail sentence. I want him to get better. I really do. But his actions are not just risking his own life. He is risking the lives of others… again.

For those who have not heard the music of Razzle’s former band, Hanoi Rocks, I strongly recommend that you watch the video of their song “Don’t You Ever Leave Me” on YouTube. Here is the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipcZr4ky8jo

Tiger Woods: -$750 Million For Cheating

2010-07-01T23:12:00.000-07:00

I have always thought that the term “sex addict” is ridiculous, but now I wonder if sexual addition can actually be real. Recently, it has been reported that Tiger Woods will be giving his now ex-wife $750 Million in a divorce settlement in exchange for her silence. If Tiger Woods is willing to risk $750 Million to cheat on one of the most beautiful women in the world, then maybe he actually does suffer from sex addiction.

I think it is hush money and that Tiger Woods actually has other dirt that we do not know about. It’s one thing if the divorce settlement came last year, before we knew that he was cheating with many women. In that situation, an expensive divorce could have prevented the world from finding out that the guy was a serial cheater. But we already know that he is a cheater. So how much is Elin’s silence really worth right now? If we already know that he cheated, then isn’t the secret already out?

I think that there are deeper secrets that Elin knows and Tiger Woods would never want the world to find out. Maybe Tiger Woods has done some things in his personal life that would cause the rest of his sponsors (including Nike) to drop him. Maybe he made offensive comments in his personal life that would be more controversial than any of his activities. Maybe he did nothing else besides cheat on his wife and he’s just paying her the money so she doesn’t write a book about him.

We’ll never know, because $750 Million buys silence. If Tiger Woods has secrets that can further hurt him if they are revealed, he has paid enough money to protect himself from those secrets coming out. I cannot assume what those secrets are because my guess would be as good as anyone else’s. Hopefully for Tiger Woods, he can move on with his life and rebuild his career. One thing is clear, he paid the price for his actions.

Should I Side With Mel Gibson?

2010-06-28T17:52:00.000-07:00

If you cannot tell by my last name, I am Jewish. So it would be safe to say that I was not happy that Mel Gibson went on an Anti-Semitic tirade several years ago when he was arrested for driving while drunk. The guy has hatred in his heart for Jews and I no longer have a desire to go to the theater to watch his movies.

As a Jew, I try to be extremely careful before I label anyone an Anti-Semite, which means that the person is a Jew-hater. When I saw “The Passion of the Christ” in the theater with the Catholic Student Association, I told them that I noticed that all of the Jews in the film had hook noses. I also said that the film perpetuated the view that the Jews did this to their savior, while those who understand Christianity know that society killed Jesus and according to Christianity, Jesus was to die for their sins. I felt that the film pushed a view hostile to Jews instead of explaining that he was killed by and for society. I was not ready to accuse Mel Gibson of being an Anti-Semite because it was not clear that he had any hatred of Jews.

When he was arrested for driving while drunk, Mel Gibson shouted hateful comments about Jews. After that point, I can clearly call him an Anti-Semite with an understanding that I am judging him for what he truly is, not what I think he could be. Mel Gibson is an Anti-Semite.

That being said, Mel Gibson and his wife broke up and he started dating Oksana Grigorieva. Unmarried, they are now the parents of a child. Now both Mel Gibson and Oksana Grigorieva have filed restraining orders against each other. I do not know who is at fault for the breakup of their relationship. Both people blame each other. Without knowing who is at fault, I pose this question... Should I side with Mel Gibson or Oksana Grigorieva?

On one hand, Mel Gibson is an alcoholic and an Anti-Semite. I do not think that he’s a bad person for being an alcoholic and I do not know if he is currently sober or not. I do think that he is a bad person for being an Anti-Semite.

On the other hand, Oksana decided to date him after the entire world found out that he was an alcoholic and an Anti-Semite. What is her problem? How can she accept an Anti-Semite into her life, her heart, and her bed? Was David Duke taken? Does she hate Jews herself? Did she look at the size of Mel Gibson’s bank account and say, “He’s rich and handsome. I don’t care that he hates Jews.”

So who should I side with, Mel Gibson who is a Jew-hating alcoholic or Oksana Grigorieva, who is okay with dating a Jew-hating alcoholic? I have to side with Mel Gibson. I think that Mel is a horrible person, but I think that Oksana has to be the dumber than a bag of bricks. We all knew that Mel Gibson was a piece of crap, but she accepted that piece of crap into her life, so she played with fired and probably got burned.

I feel bad when people date or marry a horrible person without having a clue what that person is really capable of doing. I feel bad for Nicole Brown Simpson. When she married O.J. Simpson, she didn’t know that he could potentially kill her. Sure he has not been found guilty. Let’s say for a second that he didn’t kill her. We at least have proof that he was an abusive husband. She didn’t know that he would beat her. I am still shocked that he has had a girlfriend after the murder trial. If a guy is accused of murder, can’t the girl look for other fish in the sea? How wealthy does a guy have to be for a girl to risk her life to date him? Would it really matter how wealthy a guy is to a girl if he kills her?

I cannot feel sorry for people who date those who have already been in trouble. I cannot feel bad for a girl who would date O.J. Simpson. I also cannot feel bad for a guy who would date Lorena Bobbitt. If he loses a part of his body, at least he knew her history and had knowledge that she could do something like that to a guy.

I cannot feel sorry for Oksana Grigorieva even if she was the perfect girlfriend and Mel Gibson was a nightmare to live with. Mel Gibson was an open book and she decided to turn the page. The book is called “Jew-hating alcoholic.” She knew that she would be taking a risk by dating a guy with such problems and she accepted him for who he was already known to be.

People usually cannot side with those who have no disregard for their own safety or well-being. The reason why the majority of people hate the Octomom is because she had zygotes implanted in her to have more children when she could not take care of the ones that she already had. How can someone make more children when that person cannot take care of the current ones? Her actions outraged the majority of Americans because her actions went against survival instincts and common sense.

Oksana Grigorieva also went against common sense when she decided to date a Jew-hating alcoholic who may or may not be currently sober. Maybe she should have waited a little longer before making a daughter with him. I have to side with Mel Gibson because he came to the table with all of his dirty laundry and she decided to accept the Jew-hating alcoholic for who he is. She knew exactly what she was getting with Mel Gibson so she has no right to complain. Oksana is one or more of these things: stupid, ignorant, an Anti-Semite, or an extremely greedy gold-digger. I do not feel sorry for her and no one else should either.

Amanda Bynes Retired, Betty White Did Not

2010-06-23T17:02:00.000-07:00

This article is dedicated to Kate Arney-Cimino, who is a beautiful and talented actress. To learn more about her, check out her website:

http://www.katearneycimino.com

I have only seen one movie with Amanda Bynes. That movie was the remake of Hairspray (2007). I saw it because I enjoyed the original one. I felt that the new version was also well made. I liked both versions. Don't expect to see her in a sequel because she recently announced that she has retired at age 24.

At age 88, Betty White is still acting and now has a new television show called Hot In Cleveland. It is clear that Betty White has been very popular in the last year. Maybe she is still acting because of all the positive attention that she receives... or maybe she just loves to act.

While I was joking by making the picture of Amanda wanting to play Bingo and Betty having a new acting role, I really cannot fault either person. Betty White probably had enough money to retire before I was born. I think she continues to act because she loves to do so.

When it comes to Amanda Bynes, I cannot actually criticize her for retiring because if she does not want to act, there are many other actresses who would gladly love to take the roles that she will not. Amanda developed a career in acting at a young age and she is lucky to being able to make a living as an actress. In Los Angeles, there are many aspiring actors and actresses who would love to act, but there are not enough roles for them to take.

This is the ultimate win-win situation for the Entertainment Industry. On one side, Amanda gets to retire and sleep in on Monday. On the other side, Hollywood gets the opportunity to fill movie roles with actresses who really have a passion to act.

To the credit of Amanda Bynes, it may be better that she has the ability to quit acting while she is still employable than to be a has-been actress who can no longer win roles. Think of actors or actresses who were big years ago and now have difficulty getting roles. Whether Amanda would have had a great career or one that fizzled, at least she was able to leave the Entertainment Industry on her own terms.

Perez Hilton vs. Miley Cyrus: Going Too Far

2010-06-20T20:20:00.000-07:00

This article is dedicated to Jenny Haddow Doman, a responsible and loving mother to her three children.

Yes this is the second article in a row about the raising of a child, but sometimes the topic is important enough to be discussed at the time. On one hand, I can criticize Miley Cyrus for dressing and acting slutty. On the other hand, when a child is the victim, the child is still a child (regardless of how she dresses or acts).

Miley Cyrus has followed in the footsteps of Britney Spears by being another wholesome singer who starts to engage in slutty behavior and wear skimpy clothing. She is only 17 years-old, and anyone who saw Britney Spears self-destruct in the middle of the 2000s knows when we are seeing a copycat. First, Miley takes slutty photos, then she performs a song while using a stripper pole, next we think she will probably break her “until marriage” vow, marry a relative of Kevin Federline, and hit rehab.

Am I being mean? Yes, because when I see slutty behavior, I call it how I see it. She deserves to be criticized for dressing and acting like a slut.

But… Perez Hilton crossed the line.

Perez Hilton is a blogger who is so successful that his website is his job. I write these articles for fun and have not received any compensation for my articles.

Recently, Perez Hilton posted a link to a fake photo of Miley Cirus with some nudity in the photo. I have not seen the photo and do not wish to look at it for the sake of going into detail. The reason why this is so controversial is because Miley Cyrus is 17 years-old, which means that the doctored photo of her could be considered child pornography.

Luckily for Perez Hilton, Miley Cyrus has decided not to press charges against him. I am not a fan of Perez Hilton or Miley Cyrus, but I am fascinated by this story for two reasons:

1. It is unclear if Perez Hilton actually broke any laws or if the law would have to be clarified. Had Miley Cyrus pressed charges, Perez’s lawyers would probably argue that the doctored photo is not actual child porn because it wouldn’t be Miley’s nudity. Instead, her head on a body with nudity. A case like this could actually go all the way to the Supreme Court due to the fact that it is not clear if his actions are a crime or not.

2. This is a reminder that there is a huge difference between picking on children and picking on an adult.
In the first example, I do not know if what Perez Hilton did was a crime or not, but I think it is inappropriate to doctor a photo of an underage person to include nudity. Just based on my own morals, legal or not, I believe that we draw a line in the sand at age 18 so we can have a clear point as to when to treat someone as an adult or a child. If Perez posting a doctored photo of a 17 year-old is allowed, then how young can a person be before actions against that person be considered off-limits? We draw the line at age 18 so we can clearly say who is a child and who is an adult. Legally, Miley Cyrus is a child, so putting her head on a photo with nudity is wrong and possibly illegal.

In the second example, the media and bloggers do criticize celebrities. As a blogger, I criticize celebrities. I like to think that when I criticize them, I don’t just call them names, but go into detail as to why they are doing something wrong. But we all have to remember that just because Miley Cyrus is famous does not mean that we should treat her like adult celebrities. I was a child in the mid-1990s. I turned 18 in 1996. I’m trying to imagine how well I would take the media picking on me if I was underage. I would probably feel very hurt hearing adults making fun of me. She probably feels that way too.

But just like with the age of 18, there are lines that people should not cross. As you may have noticed, I began this article really criticizing Miley Cyrus. I criticized her for dressing like a slut, acting like a slut, and following in the footsteps of Britney Spears (which is probably the harshest way to criticize her). At the same time, I’m criticizing her for something that she should know better than to do. Any teenage girl in the United States knows that girls who dress and act slutty get criticized. I call her out on her actions because she knows those actions will bring her criticism. While I may have been harsh with my criticism, I think I am being fair and did not cross the line. If she read my article, I would hope that she would see that I think she should tone down her actions a bit.

At the same time, there is a line that should not be crossed. Perez Hilton crossed that line. He should have stuck with the things that I have said to criticize her. Instead, he took it a step too far and is lucky that he wasn’t arrested. Perez Hilton should call out celebrities when they act like morons or like sluts, but remember to be careful when talking about the actions of a child.

Should I Still Defend Diddy?

2010-06-16T18:27:00.000-07:00

This article is dedicated to Brent Bowie, who is a wonderful father to his son.

Happy early Father’s Day everyone!

Five years ago, I defended Diddy in my article “P. Diddy’s Case” on May 24, 2005. I felt that the mother of one of his children was asking for too much money to raise their child. She wanted $21,782 per month to support one child. Doing the math, that comes out to $261,384 per year. I stated in my article that, “Even if I was a millionaire, I would not want over $200,000 spent every year on my children because it could make them spoiled.” Here is the link to the article:

http://moviemike.blogspot.com/2005/05/p-diddys-case.html

Now it’s five years later and Diddy (formally known as P. Diddy and other names) has decided to purchase a $360,000 Maybach for his son’s 16th birthday. Can I defend this? No. I believe in my opinion that spending $360,000 for a Maybach is very similar to an ex-girlfriend wanting over $200,000 to spend on the child for a year of care. Both are excessive. Let’s face it, I don’t think that anyone would believe Diddy’s ex-girlfriend would spend the entire $261,384 per year on the child. Most likely that money would be taking care of the ex-girlfriend as well. After a few years, she would probably have enough money left over to retire. In this situation, the entire $360,000 Maybach would go to one child. Diddy’s justification could be that he’s giving directly to a child and not to support an ex-girlfriend. At the same time, I believe that both the child support and the Maybach are far too excessive.

Diddy not only has a lot of money, but obviously loves all of his children and wants to spend money on them to make them happy. Unlike Diddy, there are extremely wealthy people who are not generous with their money. I think that Diddy’s generosity could potentially have negative consequences. In my life, I have had a few minor accidents with my car. None of these accidents came from reckless actions. At the same time, I have known people who have totaled their vehicles. I have known young people who have caused so much damage to their cars that the cars could not be fixed. Imagine being 16 years-old and your first car is a $360,000 Maybach. What if you crashed your car? What if Diddy's son completely totals this car? Will he get a new Maybach, or many a more modest car under $100,000?

I’m not worried as much about the price of the car as I am about how the son will turn out if he is spoiled. Some children of rich parents turn out well and some don’t. One of the best examples is Ivanka Trump. However you feel about Donald Trump, he did an excellent job raising his daughter. She has a college degree from the Wharton School of Business, works for her father, and has not done anything controversial that would make her family look bad. On the other hand is Paris Hilton. From her sex tape to her time in jail, Paris Hilton has done more damage to the Hilton name than a typical rock star does to a Hilton hotel room. Maybe Paris felt that she could do anything she wants in life without having to try to set an example or maybe she would be the exact same way had she been raised without wealth. Her parents are probably very embarrassed by her actions over the last several years.

Diddy’s children can turn out like Ivanka Trump (great example), Paris Hilton (bad example), or somewhere in the middle. But in this situation, if Diddy's son gets into a lot of trouble later in life, Diddy’s generosity will be blamed for the child’s behavior.

While I strongly disagree with Diddy’s choice to give his son a $360,000 Maybach, he is a better person than the parents of Abby Sunderland, who let their 16-year-old daughter attempt to sail alone across the world. Her family provided permission and financial support for their daughter to risk her life. The family tried to exploit her daughter’s work to get fame and fortune. They tried to get a reality show and they even sold products on Abby’s website. I saw shoes that had the name “Abby” on the side. Luckily their daughter is alive and all they have to fear is media criticism, the exact same thing that Diddy is getting for giving his son an expensive car.

Diddy may spoil his children, but he doesn’t risk their lives. His decision to give his son one of the most expensive cars in the world is excessive and outrageous, but he is a better father than the parents of Abby Sutherland. The safety and love of a child are more important than any material item. I think that Diddy would agree.

Fire Bud Selig

2010-06-03T20:15:00.000-07:00

Baseball has two big problems right now. First, it is now considered to be the third most popular sport in the nation behind football and basketball. Second, there are many villains in baseball and not enough heroes. Maybe more kids in the last 25 years decided that they wanted to be Like Mike (Michael Jordan) and not enough wanted to be like Barry Bonds. I think that baseball does not have enough players like Cal Ripken, Jr. and too many players like Barry Bonds. It’s easy to cheer for players who are outstanding role models. It is hard to cheer for cheaters.

Recently, pitcher Armando Galarraga threw what should be considered to be a perfect game. For what would be the final pitch in the ninth inning, the ball was hit and the batter started to run to first base. The ball was thrown to the first baseman who caught the ball before the batter crossed the first base bag. The umpire, Jim Joyce, called the batter safe. The umpire messed up and when seeing this on instant replay, knew that he had messed up. This incorrect call would mean that officially Armando Galarraga had not thrown a perfect game.

Jim Joyce is not the villain in this situation. Unlike many people, he was willing to publicly admit that he messed up. He feels sorry for his incorrect call. There are people in this world who pretend that the mistakes they have made are meaningless and there are people who have the compassion to publicly admit their mistakes. Jim Joyce is a man of true character.

There is a villain in this case, though. Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig has the power to overturn the call and allow Armando Galarraga to be the 21st official pitcher of a perfect game, but he decided that he will not overturn the call. Selig is letting history stand uncorrected and justice not served.

Bud Selig is exactly what Major League Baseball does not need. He is someone who will stomp on the good will of fans who just want to see an honest pitcher receive credit for an achievement that he earned. Since baseball has been tarnished by home run records by players who have cheated through steroid use, the sport of baseball needs people like Armando Galarraga who can achieve greatness without sticking a needle in his rear end. Baseball needs people like Jim Joyce who have the integrity to admit their mistakes.

Baseball does not need Bud Selig.

I am going to take a stand. The National Baseball Hall of Fame would be more honored with the induction of Pete Rose while he’s filling out his NCAA tournament brackets and Barry Bonds while he has a needle sticking out of his butt than someone like Bud Selig.

When I think of what Bud Selig is doing, I imagine being given a parking ticket for an incorrect violation and having the police officer say, “Well I’m still going to give you the ticket because I’ve already filled it out.” When people watch sports, they have a common desire for justice in its purest form. When people look at politics or a Supreme Court decision, they tend to have different opinions on issues. Ironically, when it comes to sports, people who are fans of opposing teams would rather see an honest decision made about a play than see it even benefit their own team. As a Redskins fan, I wouldn’t want the Redskins to win a game by a completely incorrect call. When they win, I want to feel that they truly won the game. When they lose, I want to feel that nothing unfair caused them to lose.

The desire for justice has led to people being outraged by Bud Selig’s unwillingness to allow Armando Galarraga the credit for something that would negatively impact no one. It would not change which team won the game. All it would do is give people something to feel good about without causing anyone pain.

If Bud Selig wants to be a stickler to the rules, then maybe he should spend some time in the empty stands at one of the teams that cannot sell many tickets. He should sit in a seat with no one around him and ask himself why so many people decided to stay home instead of buy a ticket to the baseball game. Maybe, just maybe, he will realize that he is throwing away the greatness of a sport that used to be America’s Pastime.

Recently, Ken Griffey, Jr. announced his retirement from baseball. He was the first pick in the 1987 MLB Draft. Yes I said 1987! That is the year that I had finished second grade and I’m 32 years-old. The first pick of the 2009 MLB Draft, Stephen Strasburg, wasn’t even born yet. For someone to play professional baseball for 23 years, that person has to truly love the game. Let me be the first person to say that the sport of baseball would be better served with Ken Griffey, Jr. as the new commissioner. He could bring leadership back to the sport and repair the image of baseball.

Gary Coleman: Victim of Parental Greed

2010-05-29T10:13:00.000-07:00

There have been many child stars whose lives have been ruined after they are no longer desired by Hollywood. Some of them are known for turning to drugs or getting arrested. Some have committed suicide due to their being unable to cope with their inability to get roles in films or on television. Some have been unable to quietly retire because they have spent all of the money they earned when they were popular.

One of the most famous situations involving a child star was when Gary Coleman’s fortune was spent by his parents. He successfully sued them and his business advisor, but could not get back the majority of the money that was lost. Years later he was working as a mall cop.

The parents of Gary Coleman are usually discussed as how parents can make bad decisions (purposely or an accident) when dealing with the finances of child actors.

Unlike many other child actors, Gary Coleman’s small size has made him remain very recognizable years after Diff’rent Strokes was off the air. Standing only four feet and eight inches tall, his height also helps people recognize him as little Arnold from the show. While his short stature make have helped him get the role of Arnold, it may have hurt his ability to gain future roles after Diff’rent Strokes ended.

There are not many actors who are very short who have had long careers in Hollywood. I’m not talking about Sylvester Stallone or Tom Cruise, who are not tall. I’m talking about guys who are under five feet and five inches. The only actor who comes to my mind as having a long and very successful career in Hollywood is Danny DeVito. Many times, Danny DeVito took roles in which height was not an issue. In many films, he was a supporting character. Why did Danny DeVito have a long, successful career but Gary Coleman did not? I’m not sure, but I think that Gary Coleman was viewed as a child star while Danny DeVito’s entire career occurred during adulthood.

I want to close with this thought. Gary Coleman still seemed like someone who could have been used by Hollywood more frequently over the last 24 years. He still look like Arnold from Diff’rent Strokes and still has that personality. He was also willing to make fun of himself. Look at the photo that I have included (but added the Halo and caption at the bottom). He’s standing on a box to compete in height. Instead of hating the way he was, he was willing to use his short stature to get a laugh. Unlike the article about Dio, the sadness of this article is due to the fact that Gary Coleman never had the career that he wanted. Dio had a long career and was celebrated until the end. Gary Coleman had a short career and 24 years of difficulty finding work. His career was an uphill battle from 1986 until his death. Instead of celebrating his career, I feel bad due to the difficulty that he faced for the majority of his life. When a celebrity dies, I ask myself, “Would I have wanted the life that person had.” Sure we don’t want to give up the life that we live, but if you were not you, would you be willing to live the life of certain people? Just like in the case of Michael Jackson, I would have no desire to live the life that Gary Coleman had. Unlike many former child stars, Gary Coleman was extremely funny. I think ideally he would have been excellent in a role similar to those played by Sherman Hemsley in The Jeffersons or Amen. Had someone wanted to remake The Jeffersons, I don’t think that a single actor in Hollywood would have been better for the George Jefferson role than Gary Coleman.

Not only did the Entertainment Industry lose someone who was a hilarious as a child actor, they lost someone who could have been used in film and television so much more over the years. He was not misused by Hollywood. He was underused.

Christina Aguilera: Has-Been In A Bottle

2010-05-25T23:27:00.001-07:00

Eleven years ago, four female solo artists emerged in music. They were Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Jessica Simpson, and Mandy Moore. Over a decade later, it is easy to see where their careers have gone. Britney Spears became the most successful of the four of them in music. Christina Aguilera was known for being the most talented singer who was in second place when it came to selling records. Jessica Simpson became more known as a media figure with her image used to sell products and the tabloids continuing to detail her unsuccessful search for love. Mandy Moore, who did not make much of an impact in the music business, had a very successful career in film.

Technically, none of them has turned into a has-been, but Christina Aguilera appears to be headed in that direction. Recently, Christina had to cancel her concert tour, citing “prior commitments.”

Say what? Music artists make money two ways. 1) Selling albums 2) Selling concert tickets. The argument that she had prior commitments is just ridiculous. If her concerts sold out like the concerts of Britney Spears, then she would not cancel them.

I really cannot think of a “prior commitment” that cause an artist to cancel an entire concert tour. This is how artists make money. They don’t cancel sold-out concerts for prior commitments. They cancel prior commitments for sold-out concerts.

But then again, maybe tickets to her concerts were not selling. Who wants to perform concerts with extremely low attendance?

I think that the appeal of Christina Aguilera is wearing off. The main reason for this is the fact that her career has been so inconsistent. When looking at other artists, we can usually describe their image and how they focus their work. Britney Spears used sexuality to sell albums. She was never celebrated for having talent, a good voice, real morals, etc. Instead, Britney Spears was practically a stripper with a record deal, with the focus of her music and concerts being centered around her looks. That may sound like I’m criticizing her, but I’m actually saying that she has been consistent. The Britney Spears of 2004 is the same as Britney Spears of 2010.

Meanwhile, the focus of Christina Aguilera has gone in so many directions that it is harder for her to build on an image that will sell. First, she was the alternate to Britney Spears. Then, she was known for having amazing vocals. Then, she had a song called “Dirrty” in which she went after the Britney Spears slutty image. Then after that backlash, she moved back to a cleaner image. Then she had a husband and a baby.

Are we supposed to view her as a mature wife and mother who turns 30 years-old later this year, or is she the hot young sexy singer, or is she the amazing vocalist? Having an inconsistent image does not help her build a fan base, and it appears that base has been shrinking. Had she chose to focus on being known for her vocals over looks, she could have gone the Celine Dion route, in which no one would care that she got married and had a kid. If the focus is on her looks, well the female artists with a focus on looks sell fewer albums when they settle down. Are guys going to be obsessed with a woman who appears to be happily married with a child? No. I’m not arguing against her seeking love and building a family, but naturally it is harder to sell an image based on sex appeal for a singer who is off of the market when it comes to relationships.

Sometimes changing an image can work for an artist. Madonna has been known to change her image over the years, but the reason why Madonna has been able to stay successful is because the act of changing her image is actually her image. That is why changing an image has worked for Madonna so well and has failed for Christina Aguilera.

As Christina Aguilera approaches 30 years-old, she has to come to terms with the fact that she’s no longer the young, hot thing. The year 1999 may have given the Entertainment Industry four young singers who are still working today, but there are new faces ready to replace them. Taylor Swift, Lady GaGa, Ke$ha, and Miley Cirus have all developed a following.

If Christina Aguilera wants to avoid being a permanent has-been, she needs to choose where she wants her image to go or her career won’t have a future.

Ronnie James Dio: Saint In The Dark

2010-05-16T21:01:00.001-07:00

This article is dedicated to Kartik Chandrasekhar, who is passionate about Heavy Metal.

“RIP Ronnie James Dio! I cannot believe it! You left behind great work and you fought valiantly! Some day, we will slay Cancer ONCE AND FOR ALL!” –Kartik Chandrasekhar

In 1985, many musicians came together to raise money to fight famine in Africa. They sang a song called, “We Are The World.” Not many Heavy Metal musicians were involved. Ronnie James Dio led a group of 40 Heavy Metal artists to make their own song to raise money to fight famine in Africa. They were known as Hear ‘N Aid and their song was, “We’re Stars!” Some may view this as Heavy Metal trying to stick it to the mainstream artists. I view it as Heavy Metal saying, “You’re not going to prevent us from helping the people of Africa too!” They raised $1 Million for Africa.

The song began with Ronnie James Dio singing, “Who cries for the children? I do.”

Ronnie James Dio will be remembered for many things. He will be remembered for replacing Ozzy Osbourne in the group Black Sabbath. He will be remembered for the songs “Holy Diver” and “Rainbow In The Dark” which he released with his own band, Dio. He will be remembered for making the Devil Horns hand gesture. But the man was a saint. The money he raised saved many lives.

I want him to be remembered for the good he did in 1985. The Heavy Metal musicians could have accepted not being a part of the “We Are The World” song, but they proved that they have the heart to do good things for others as well. Heavy Metal may play off the image of evil, but the genre of music is filled with people as caring as any other genre of music.

Heavy Metal as a genre has singers with excellent vocal skills and guitarists who write solos worthy of their predecessors in Rock and Jazz. Ronnie James Dio actually turned down a scholarship to Julliard because he wanted to focus on his style of music.

Heavy Metal reached its peak of popularity in the 1980s, but many of its fans want to see it continue for decades to come with new musicians who are inspired by people like Ronnie James Dio. Now that it is 2010, we have entered the third decade since the 1980s. It is expected that some of the legends of Heavy Metal will pass away. I hope that the genre can live on without its founders. I don’t want to think of Ronnie James Dio as irreplaceable. I don’t want to think that we’ll never have another Ozzy Osbourne, Judas Priest, Metallica, or Megadeth.

Normally when people write about musicians who have passed away, they say that the person is irreplaceable. I don’t think that Ronnie James Dio would want that. I think that he would want Heavy Metal to live on and grow with new musicians who are inspired by him. To have Heavy Metal fade with the passing of him would be tragic. I hope to hear another singer who I can compare him to. I hope that his amazing vocal abilities inspire another singer to make Heavy Metal music.

Right now, I am thinking about those in Africa who were saved by Ronnie James Dio. In Africa, there are probably people who have never heard of Ronnie James Dio, and never heard Heavy Metal, but they were saved by him in 1985 because he helped to raise money to feed them. Does it matter to me that people living today were saved by him and they probably don’t know his name? No. I am satisfied with the fact that he is up there in Heaven and he finally gets to look down on Africa and see the people who he saved. For those people who were saved by him, he has been their rainbow in the dark.

Ronnie James Dio (1942 – 2010)

Dez Bryant vs. Jeff Ireland: No Mama Drama

2010-04-28T18:45:00.000-07:00

This article is dedicated to Bobby Shoemaker, a true NFL expert.

Players in the NFL are not just judged by their talent, but by their emotional maturity. Many talented athletes have entered the NFL and had their careers ended by stupid decisions. Todd Marinovich’s NFL career was ended by drug usage within two seasons (and he was drafted before Brett Favre). Plaxico Burress is currently in prison for unlawfully carrying a handgun with which he accidentally shot himself in the leg. Darrell Russell had a successful NFL career before drug use led to him being suspended for 1.5 years, which led to a decline in his performance and early end to his NFL career. He died in a car crash in 2005. All three of these men were first-round picks, but their actions led to short NFL careers. That is why teams want to make sure that the players they select will be responsible and mature.

Last year, the San Francisco 49ers wanted to have a psychiatrist evaluate quarterback Matt Stafford because his parents were divorced. He refused and they made it clear that they would not draft him. It did not matter because they had the tenth pick and he was the first pick of the draft. Was the request of a psychiatrist to evaluate him unreasonable? Yes. But was it beyond insulting? No. He was able to politely decline their request and was picked up way before they had a chance to draft him.

There is a difference between actions being reasonable, unreasonable, and beyond insulting. For a player to turn down a reasonable request can make the player look bad to the public. If a potential NFL player refused to run the 40-yard dash or prove how much weight he can bench press, the refusal of a reasonable request could make teams look at the player in a negative light. If teams ask an unreasonable request of a player, the refusal can be done in a way that will not make teams look down on the player. Maybe the 49ers didn’t like Matt Stafford’s answer, but it made no impact on the team with the first draft pick. Since the question was unreasonable, Stafford’s answer was very reasonable.

Then there are actions that are beyond insulting. The General Manager of the Miami Dolphins, Jeff Ireland, decided to ask wide receiver Dez Bryant if his mother was ever a prostitute. He wanted to see how Dez would react. Dez was angry, but he did not show his feelings. Jeff Ireland is lucky that Dez Bryant did not attack him.

Dez Bryant’s mother was involved in drugs, but there were no allegations of prostitution. Had there been actual rumors, it may seem fair for Jeff Ireland to address the rumors. Had Jeff Ireland asked him about his mother’s involvement with drugs, it would have been reasonable. But Jeff Ireland was only looking to provoke a fight for the sake of testing the tempter of Dez Bryant.

In my personal opinion, this was an abuse of Jeff Ireland’s power and verbally abusive to Dez Bryant. Let’s look at the situation this way. Dez Bryant is a potential employee interviewing for a job with multiple companies. He will go to the team that drafts him with the highest draft pick. If one team is not interested in him and he is not selected before they have a draft pick, then he will be drafted lower. His goal is to impress every team that he can so he can be drafted as high as possible. Jeff Ireland, as a boss, was asking a question that was more than unreasonable. It was beyond offensive.

Talking about a player’s mother in such a disrespectful manner is abusive. To question her sexual morality is almost as bad as to accuse her of sexual immorality, because it is an accusation without any proof of her sexual history. Jeff Ireland’s choice to question if Dez Bryant’s mother was a prostitute is worse than asking if she was a slut. He is implying the possibility that she had sex with men for financial gain.

I hope that the NFL puts a fine on Jeff Ireland or the Miami Dolphins fire him. What he did was not a mistake. It was a horrific question into the morality of Dez Bryant’s mother for the sake of provocation, not knowledge. I am a fan of the Washington Redskins and Dez Bryant has been drafted by the Dallas Cowboys (the rival team of the Redskins). While he plays for the rival team, I hope that he has a great career in the NFL…

…with the exception of games in which he plays against the Redskins!

Popcorn Directors vs. Great Directors

2010-04-23T02:47:00.000-07:00

This article is dedicated to Jarrett Lee Conaway, a graduate of the University of Virginia and the graduate film school program at the University of Southern California (yes the program that’s really hard to get into). May you become a director who makes GREAT popcorn movies.

There is a debate among those who consider themselves to be students of cinema. The debate is whether it is more important to have directors who make big-budget entertaining films (aka popcorn movies) or directors who make great dramatic films on a small budget (the “great” directors). Recently, there was a film made that is called “Great Directors” which is about directors who have made critically acclaimed films that are powerful, but not aimed at reaching a large audience. Usually the directors who make low-budget dramatic films believe that the makers are big-budget popcorn movies are not talented. In the film community, it is not a secret that big budget directors like Michael Bay and Brett Ratner are not respected. I have decided that it is time for me to play referee between the two sides and state where I believe that the film industry should go.

In 1997, the American Film Institute created a list of the 100 Best Films. At the top of that list was Citizen Kane. At the time, there were many of the films on the list that I had never heard of. What is Citizen Kane? Is it really that great? I had to find out. I started renting film after film from the list. I still have not seen everything on the list, but I have seen a majority of the films (79 out of 100). Seeing these films gave me the opportunity to see films that were excellent in many ways. Some of them were excellent big budget films. Others were very emotionally powerful. What many of these films had in common was that they were big budget films that were both crowd and critic favorites. Films like Forrest Gump earned the most money in their years of release and won Best Picture.

If I had to put myself in one camp, I would align myself with the films by the great directors over the popcorn directors for one reason, I’m looking for films that really grab my emotions and make me think. My favorite films of the 2000-2009 decade were No Country For Old Men, Red (2008), and Precious. To me, those films were powerful. Not only were they entertaining, but showed the good and bad of society and allowed the audience to see characters that were well developed. I love when a film makes me think about the human experiences in which the conflicts are more detailed than who plays the good and bad guys. The film The Godfather is a great example. The characters in the film are in the mafia. They are criminals. But the film is not about how evil they are. It is really about a family and how one son who was not in the family business had to join for the protection of his father. The character of Michael Corleone is not an evil person, but circumstances lead him into a life of crime and murder. The film is also about his father, who is not an evil man, but must live with the choices that he has made by entering the mafia and allowing his sons to be a part of his business.

The Godfather is one of those films that is respected by mainstream audiences and by critics. Films like The Godfather, Ordinary People, Lawrence of Arabia, and One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest are the reason why I love films with a passion. Those films were not complicated, were accepted by mainstream audiences, by critics, and each of them won Best Picture.

But in the category of great films by great directors, there are a lot of great films that the majority of audiences will have never heard of, but would love if they had seen them. As someone who has turned to different films, I can recommend Aguirre- The Wrath of God, Fitzcarraldo, Withnail & I, and many others. When I was in college, I recommended that two students rent Withnail & I. One of them after seeing it said to me “I am Withnail” because he noticed how much he was like the Withnail character. They would have never seen the film without my recommendation. There are powerful films that most audiences have never heard of, but would enjoy had the audiences seen the films. Here’s one recommendation. See the film All That Heaven Allows which is about a younger man dating a woman who is between ten and twenty years older than he is. It is a great movie. But then I want you to rent Ali: Fear Eats The Soul, which is a remake of the film. Instead of being simply a film about the woman being older than the man, she is white (assumed Christian) and he has dark skin and is Muslim. This film is way more powerful to see the differences taken to a higher level than simply age.

While I love films that have extremely compelling stories and are critically acclaimed, I’m also human and love a film that is pure, dumb entertainment. Movies like Superbad, Borat, and Bruno do not touch my heart. I don’t feel that I’ve examined society by seeing them. I don’t take them serious and I’m not looking for artistic achievement from them. What I qA looking for are movies that would make me laugh, and those three films did a great job making me do so. When I see the fourth Shrek movie, I don’t need a touching story about how an ugly ogre will be accepted by society. I need the film to make me laugh. When I see Russell Crowe in the new version of Robin Hood, I want to see some great action.

Sometimes the audience wants a film to simply satisfy their hearts, not their heads. To watch a movie for laughs, action, or romance, the audience is looking to fulfill their emotions. The desire for humor can be satisfied with a great comedy. The desire for adventure can be satisfied with a great action movie. The desire for romance can be satisfied with a movie about two people falling in love. These are emotions that people feel and they know exactly what they want to get from their movies. The stories do not have to be complicated. The characters do not have to be well developed. The movies can be completely predictable as long as they give the audience what the audience actually wants.

I do not believe that the film industry can survive with only low budget powerful films. Even if the screenplays are better and the films have high critical ratings, not everyone wants to see powerful films all of the time. Sometimes people come home after a long day at work and they watch television for entertainment. If the only television options were shows on the History Channel, Discovery, and low-budget productions of famous plays from Broadway, then the audiences would not be satisfied. Sometimes people just want to be entertained and not have to think about issues. Society needs big budget films as much as it needs low budget dramas. In both cases, audiences need to have their desires satisfied.

I think the logical conclusion is that the film industry should make more films that have a big budget but the films should be both successful at the box office and with film critics. We don’t need every big budget film to be as bad as Transformers 2. If an Oscar-winning screenwriter worked with Michael Bay, then Bay’s next movie could be another big budget action movie, but have better developed characters and a decent plot. We as audience members have the right to ask for Michael Bay to improve the dialogue and character development in his movies. The low budget dramas will continue to be made, but hopefully some of those directors will get the attention that can help them get the financing to make great films with a bigger budget and more famous actors and actresses.

Even George Washington Had Overdue Books

2010-04-19T07:09:00.000-07:00

There have only been two areas in which having media materials overdue causes people to be fined. The first is Blockbuster, which removed then may have reinstated late fees on the video rentals. The other would be libraries. Recently, it was discovered that George Washington had two library books checked out that were never returned. I don’t think that the library will be able to collect any late fees.

Is it time for the practice of late fees at libraries to be altered, or eliminated? I think so.

The practice of charging late fees for items that were not properly returned is simple, makes sense, and can be enforced even 200 years ago. The most effective part of having fees for overdue books is the fact that people can be compelled to pay attention to due dates without the need of technology. Once someone is informed of a due date when checking out a book, that person is responsible for returning the book on time, or else he or she will owe money. The late fees would motivate people to return books on time. In the possibility that a person cannot return a book on time, the person would still be motivated to return the book as soon as possible in order to minimize the amount of money owed to the library.

The reason why this practice should be altered is because with technology, more can be done to ensure that people return books to the library on time. Maybe libraries should have a person’s e-mail address on file so they can e-mail someone who checked out the book that it will be due the next day. An e-mail reminder can even be set into the library system with the use of software to send e-mails on certain days.

Also, I must say this. When someone checks out a old book that has not been checked out for a while, and no one has the book on the waiting list, holding that book late should not require a penalty because the person has not denied another user the ability to check out the book. There is a difference between new releases that are popular and items that are randomly checked out. For libraries to charge late fees for a book that no one else has requested just seems trivial because there is no reason for a book to be checked back in earlier if no one is currently requesting it.

While I believe that the library system should use technology to remind people of overdue books, I don’t believe that fines for books being late should completely be removed. Instead, books should have a due date and a fine date. By the due date, the person should either have the book checked out for a longer period of time. When Blockbuster removed late fees, they noticed that people were holding onto their videos for a long time after the due date. Some people will just continue to hold onto late items unless there is a financial penalty. Blockbuster had to bring back late fees because people were holding onto movies way too long. Basically, without some form of enforcement, the consumer is likely to hold items way past the due dates.

I must confess that just like George Washington, I had an overdue book that was way overdue. In 1997, I checked out a biography of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Last year (2009) I returned it to the library of my old high school. I realized as I walked through the high school to get to the library that the seniors were in kindergarten when I had checked out the book. These kids were only 6 years-old and now they are 18 years-old and about to go off to college. When I returned the book, I reminded the librarians that I had raised a lot of money for the library when I was a student. They did not charge me a late fee for the book.

Sigourney Weaver Throws Katherine Bigelow Into The Kitchen

2010-04-14T19:39:00.000-07:00

This really upsets me. It is sad to see that the accomplishments of a woman are questions for her being a woman. It is sad that the horrible comments come from another woman. Worst of all, these comments come from an actress who I have admired for years… Sigourney Weaver.

Last year, Sigourney Weaver was one of the stars of Avatar, which is now the highest grossing film in history. She is also the most famous star in the film (second place is Giovanni Ribisi). It must be an honor to be the most famous star of the highest grossing film of all time, but it appears that Weaver is bitter that Avatar lost the Oscars for Best Director and Best Picture.

Sigourney Weaver has been quoted recently for saying, “Jim didn’t have breasts, and I think that was the reason.” She was referring to the director of Avatar, three-time Oscar winner James Cameron.

Katherine Bigelow became the first woman to win the Oscar for Best Director. She is the fourth nominee. For the first time in 82 years, the female gender receives a Best Director Oscar. That’s one woman winning an award after the first 81 awards went to men. Not only that, but with only four nominations, a woman gets a Best Director nomination on an average of less than once every twenty years (although three of those nominations came during the last two decades).

It has been so rare for women to be recognized for their ability to direct and their talent as filmmakers. How could Sigourney Weaver think that Katherine Bigelow won for having breasts or being a female, when so many female directors have been passed over for years?

I did not judge the films nominated for Best Picture and Best Director based at all on what the directors look like. Had I been a voting member of the Academy, I wouldn’t have voted for either Katherine Bigelow or James Cameron. I would have voted for Lee Daniels, the director of Precious. I am straight and I find Katherine Bigelow to be very attractive, but I felt that the film Precious was the best film of the year and Lee Daniels did a better job making a touching masterpiece.

History was made with Katherine Bigelow’s Oscar win. I am very happy for her. While I preferred Precious, I do not think that she won because she is a woman and very attractive. I think that she won because most of the voting members of the Academy felt that she did a better job directing and that The Hurt Locker was a better picture than the other nominated films. Katherine Bigelow did a great job making the film. She captured the stress and intensity of the soldiers who have to disarm bombs. No one should deny that Katherine Bigelow did an excellent job as a director.

Sigourney Weaver herself has been nominated for the Oscar without winning one. For the year 1988, she was nominated for both Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress (two separate films). Why did she not win? Was it because all of her fellow nominees were also women? Or… could it be… that the voters just liked the other performances more than the ones by Sigourney Weaver?

Sigourney Weaver is an extremely talented actress. I think that her acting ability is worth her receiving an honorary Oscar. But I am found of her as an actress based on her ability to act. I have never viewed her as a sex-object. She is great in dramatic roles and she was excellent in the four films of the Alien series. I have been very impressed with her work, but very saddened by her comments directed towards Katherine Bigelow.

Wouldn’t it be nice if Sigourney Weaver could judge the talent of Katherine Bigelow the way I judge them both?

Kal Penn: Leaving Obama For Harold & Kumar 3

2010-04-04T08:29:00.000-07:00

Kal Penn is not just another Democratic actor in Hollywood who supported Barack Obama in the 2008 election. After Obama won the Presidency, Kal Penn was appointed to the position of Associate Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement. To take this job, Kal Penn had to leave the show House.

Kal Penn is probably the most famous actor in the United States of Indian origin. I do not mean Native American. I mean origin of the country India. He is famous for playing the pothead Kumar in the Harold & Kumar movies. Now he has decided to leave the Obama Administration to make Harold & Kumar 3.

While I am a supporter of President Obama, I have to admit that giving a political job to an actor was probably not the best decision to make. Obama has been in office for less than two years and Kal Penn is already leaving political life to return to his acting career. I think that it does not help the Obama Administration to have placed an actor into a political position that the actor would only fill for a small period of time before the desire to return to Hollywood became too strong to resist.

In my opinion, President Obama should not place any other celebrities in political positions. While celebrities love to get involved in politics, I don’t think that many of them are willing to give up four to eight years of their lives for political positions. I think that before being offered the job, Kal Penn should have been asked to stay in the position for a certain number of years. Leaving after only two years sends the message that Kal Penn either 1) did not like the job or 2) felt that returning to Hollywood would be more rewarding.

There have been Hollywood actors who have given up years of their acting careers for politics. The two most famous cases are Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both men became the Governor of California. Ronald Reagan later became the President of the United States, something that Arnold is not eligible to do, since he was not born as a citizen of the United States. But I think that while both of these men spent years in politics, they did so in leadership roles. Being in a leadership role as governor, a person is less likely to step away from that role than someone in a lower position. Kal Penn was not in a position of authority. I feel that he took his position out of the excitement to serve President Obama, but not with a commitment to serve for many years.

While I think that the Obama Administration should not have chosen an actor for a position within the administration that he would only serve for a short period of time, I think that Kal Penn has made the right choice to return to Hollywood and his most recognizable role. Sometimes actors spend years avoiding the film roles that made them famous in the first place, only to return to the film years, or decades later. In the early 1990s, Paul Hogan turned down millions to make Crocodile Dundee 3. His other films did not do very well at the box office. Years later, he finally made Crocodile Dundee in Los Angeles. The movie probably would have done a lot better had it been released in 1991 instead of 2001.

For years, Sylvester Stallone avoided making another Rocky or Rambo movie. After making his third Rambo movie in 1988 and his fifth Rocky movie in 1990, it is fair to say that both series had enough films made to end where they did. Then Stallone had a horrible acting career in the 1990s. None of his characters were that memorable. After waiting way longer than he should have, he made the sixth and final Rocky film in 2006 (16 years after part 5). He then made a forth Rambo movie a whole 20 years after part 3. Surprisingly, both films were great. The Rocky film gave the series a respectable ending. What really surprised me was how much I loved the fourth Rambo movie. In my opinion, the fourth Rambo movie was the best action film since Gladiator.

Kal Penn must know that shunning the character which made him famous would be a bad idea. Maybe in the future, he will have some truly great film roles, but to many people, he will always be Kumar. I loved the first Harold & Kumar movie, but wasn’t very pleased with the second one. I hope that the third Harold & Kumar movie will be great. Someone else can fill Kal Penn’s role in the Obama Administration. No one else can replace Kumar.

Ricky Martin Is Gay: Obvious Since 2000

2010-03-30T17:51:00.001-07:00

Ricky Martin in 2010 has decided to finally come out of the closet and admit to the world that he is gay. The problem is that the only person more obviously gay in the last decade has been Clay Aiken.

It is not often that I am grateful that an artist disappeared from the spotlight, but in the case of Ricky Martin I was glad that he went away. For those who remember 1999, one of the biggest songs of the year was “Livin’ La Vida Loca.” Ricky Martin had been very popular for years in Latin America and this was the song that made him famous in the United States. Then the song was overplayed on the radio. Then it was overplayed again. Then it became so annoying that people would turn the channel once they heard the horns from the beginning of the song.

I thought that Ricky Martin’s entry into the Entertainment Industry of the United States was so big that we would have him around for many sad years like we experienced with Britney Spears, singing bad pop songs that get way too much radio play. But Ricky Martin’s follow-up songs were not as popular. By the time that you heard the phrase “9/11”, Ricky Martin had become a has-been.

There were rumors that Ricky Martin was gay. I remember a scene from a concert when he had his back to the audience and started shaking his butt-cheeks very fast. I thought that is not something that you would see straight men do. Then there was the Barbara Walters interview.

During the Barbara Walters interview with Ricky Martin in 2000, she asked him about the rumors that he is gay. He said that he did not mind the rumors if they helped him sell more albums. She then said (I am paraphrasing based on my memory of the interview) that he could end the rumors now if he just said if he was gay or straight. I remember he said that he was not ready to answer that question.

WHAT????? How could he not answer a simple question like that? At that point, it was clear to me that Ricky Martin was gay. Whether he was gay or straight did not matter to me, because I hated his music either way. But it appears that this interview may have been part of what caused his career to fade away.

It is possible that the rumors of him being gay, plus his unwillingness to answer a simple question about his sexuality, may have led to the end of his career. I tend to believe that his career ended because after having hits like “Livin’ La Vida Loca” and “She Bangs,” he did not have hits catchy enough for the radio. While I don’t like those two songs, I have to admit critically that they were upbeat and catchy.

In a way, it is sad that Ricky Martin waited an entire decade to admit that he was gay when most of society already knew it. Maybe for the last few years, he thought that he could make a comeback and being known as gay would hurt his appeal with female audiences. After a forgettable decade for him, he probably realized that he has nothing to lose now.

There are musicians who are admired mainly for their music and there are others who are admired for both their talent and attractiveness. One of the most talented musicians who I am a fan of is George Michael. He did not just have a great voice, but he actually wrote and produced hit songs. He is a talented musician who happened to be considered a sex object in the 1980s. When George Michael was arrested for something of a sexual nature in a bathroom involving a male undercover police officer, it became public news that George Michael is gay. Unlike many other artists, he did not have the opportunity to “out” himself. He was “outed” by the activity that he was arrested for. While George Michael did not have any hits for the previous few years, being proven to be gay did not help him when he came out with future albums. For female fans, the fantasy was gone. They knew that he was not interested in their gender. When they would hear his song, “I want your sex,” they knew he wasn’t talking about any of them.

Ricky Martin probably realized that being known as gay would hurt his ability to sell albums to female fans. That is why he was not ready to answer any questions about his sexuality.

The sad thing is, if his career was hurt by the Barbara Walters interview (and I believe that it was), it is because Ricky Martin decided to be honest. He could have easily just lied and said, “I’m straight.” Then he could have spent the next few years being a bit more successful than he had been. Then a few years later, he could admit that he had lied and no one would have blamed him. Instead, his decision to tell Barbara Walters that he was not ready to answer if he was gay or not made the audience conclude that he was gay. It was clear to me that he was gay when I saw the interview.

I think that Barbara Walters probably thought that he was straight and that he was being coy about it to avoid disappointing his gay fans. By him potentially saying that he was straight, he would step away from the ambiguity and give a clear answer. I don’t think that Barbara Walters realized that if he was gay, how much that could hurt him more than losing his gay audience. In the year 2000, society was not as open to accepting gay people as it is today. In 2004, many states voted against allowing gay marriage. I had not even thought about the issue until that year. I decided to support gay marriage. Over the next six years, support for gay marriage and gay people in general has increased dramatically. Maybe Ricky Martin is coming out of the closet now because he feels that society will accept him as a human being.

I am not a fan of Ricky Martin. I will never accept his music. While I do not want to see a Ricky Martin comeback on the music charts, I can say that I respect him as a human being.

Win An Oscar, Lose A Spouse

2010-03-24T13:40:00.000-07:00

A year ago, Kate Winslet won the Oscar for Best Actress and Sean Penn won for Best Actor. Now both of them are getting a divorce. In the case of Kate Winslet divorcing director Sam Mendes, I have no idea what has happened. In the case of Sean Penn and Robin Wright Penn, they have broken up and reconciled before. To read my article about Sean Penn and Robin Wright Penn from last year, click here:

Sean Penn: Robin Wrong Or Robin Wright?

Recently, within a few weeks of Sandra Bullock winning Best Actress, it is discovered that her husband, biker Jesse James, has cheated on her. Imagine right now the life of Sandra Bullock. A few weeks ago, she was a highly paid actress who finally received recognition for her acting talent by winning an Oscar. She had success, recognition, and what appeared to be a loving spouse. In just a short time after reaching the pinnacle of her career, her personal life is in the spotlight and she must have to deal with the pain of adultery in public.

I am not going to view this as "The Oscar Curse" because many of the Oscar winning actors and actresses of the past decade have remained with their spouses or partners. I also do not expect Jeff Bridges, who has been married to his wife for 33 years, to have his marriage impacted in any way based on his Oscar win. I also think that recent Oscar winner Mo’Nique has a strong enough marriage to survive the increase in fame that she received in the last year.

When it comes to Sandra Bullock, I just have to say that this is another situation of a girl marrying the “bad boy” type and hoping that he will change. Women need to learn that you cannot change men, just as men cannot change you. Jesse James was previously married to a porn star, he is a biker, and he is covered in tattoos. The woman who he cheated on Sandra Bullock with is also covered with tattoos. She is more of Jesse James’ type than clean-cut Sandra Bullock.

Normally I get into a long detailed look into a situation. This case needs none. Jesse James is the bad boy type that girls go after and then are shocked, I say shocked, when they find out that he cheated on them. Everyone knows a girl who dated a guy like this. All of her friends are telling her to stay away. She ignores them. Then when the guy cheats on her, she runs to all of her friends for comfort and support. They are nice to her, but they all knew that this was going to happen.

If you date a bad boy, don’t be shocked when he cheats on you.

Chris Brown: The Beginning Of The End

2010-03-20T04:28:00.000-07:00

After Chris Brown beat up his now ex-girlfriend, Rihanna, I did not believe that he could revive his career. A lot of people disagreed with me. It turns out I was right. The sales for his latest album have been low and he is trying to get radio stations to consider playing his music again.

What Chris Brown doesn’t understand is that his actions are considered so low by society that he has blacklisted himself from the Entertainment Industry. There are a few people In the Entertainment Industry who are so vilified that they can hardly find work. Michael Vick is one of them. He lost all of his sponsorships and is now an NFL back-up quarterback. After running dog fights and executing some of the dogs, he is viewed as a villain for harming defenseless animals.

O.J. Simpson is one of the most famous vilified celebrities. While he was found “Not Guilty” in criminial court for the murder of his ex-wife and her lover, most people do believe that O.J. Simpson was in fact guilty of the two murders. Prior to the murders, he was a retired football player who was making money by doing commercials and staring in movies. Since the murders, I have yet to see him star in a movie television.

Mel Gibson’s career has not fully recovered since his Anti-Semitic comments were made while he was being arrested for DUI. Mel Gibson’s return to acting in Edge of Darkness came and went. He is still tainted by his Anti-Semitic comments during his arrest. He tried to do things to make up for his previous actions, but many Jews (myself included) felt that he had finally been proven to be the Anti-Semite that we thought he was for years.

Was there anything that Chris Brown could have done to truly repair his damaged image? I think so. If I had been an adviser to him, I would have told him that he’s going to have to hold off from making an album for at least two to three years and spend the time working to help battered women at shelters. Take a long period off volunteering at shelters, listen to the pain that they have gone through, and avoid any public activities like celebrity events. He could have shown the public that not only is he extremely sorry, but dedicate extra time to truly learn what it is like for women who have been abused by their boyfriends or husbands.

Instead, within a short period after the attack on Rihanna, photos came out of Chris Brown on a jetski having fun. He seemed to be extremely focused on his next album and released it the same year that he assaulted Rihanna, 2009. He probably thought that if he moved on and made another album, the public would quickly move on and forget what he did. Not only was he wrong, but I think his focus on making a new album so soon after the assault made him look insincere. In my opinion, it made him look selfish because he was more focused on saving his career than showing the public that he has spent the time to learn his lesson.

I’m not going to lie. I think that Chris Brown truly regrets harming Rihanna. I think he knows that assaulting her was the biggest mistake of his life. But he should have spent more time between the assault and releasing a new album. While he probably deeply regrets what he did, he should have done more to show his regret to try to get the public to forgive him. The public has not forgiven him and I don’t think that they will. His unwillingness to spend enough time between the assault and releasing a new album was the final straw.

The one other problem that I have with Chris Brown is that he went on Larry King to talk about the assault and then pretended that he did not remember it at all. If Chris Brown really didn’t remember it, then his defense would be that he truly has no idea of why people are saying that he hurt Rihanna, that he is shocked, offended, and would never do such a thing. The truth is that Chris Brown did not want to go through the details of what lead to him assaulting Rihanna. The problem is that people should only go on Larry King if they truly want to come clean. Chris Brown did not appear willing to come clean. Talking about the assault was not enough. He was unwilling to talk about what led to him becoming so angry that he would start beating the woman he was dating.

It looks like this is the beginning of the end for Chris Brown’s career. His actions are considered to be one of the worst of anyone in the Entertainment Industry and he did a bad job trying to save his career. He had a small chance to redeem himself by putting his image over his career, and he failed. I don’t think that he realized that his career could be killed over this. Now that he has had a failed album, his career is likely to only go further downhill unless if he can do something, anything, to repair his image.

I think that it’s too late for him to save his career. I view him as a horrible woman abuser. To me, it’s not a question of how sorry he was for doing what he did. I am sick of Chris Brown because he was willing to beat a woman in the first place. He didn’t just punch or slap her… he bit her! He beat so badly that her face was covered with bruises. I do view Chris Brown as a monster not only for what he did, but for his selfish desire to focus more on fixing his career over his image. Chris Brown’s career looks like it will probably be over soon. His actions prove that he deserves to have his career end.

Howard Stern vs. Gabourey Sidibe: Too Fat For Hollywood?

2010-03-14T19:26:00.000-07:00

I dedicate this article Gabriella Ilisco for one reason. She is a “Gabby” who is hot enough for Hollywood!

In my opinion, the film “Precious” was the best film of 2009 and one of the best films of the decade. I believe that the performances of Gabourey “Gabby” Sidibe, Mo’Nique, and Paula Patton were outstanding. When it comes to the performance of Gabourey Sidibe, it is clear that she was a new actress. At certain points, I felt that I was either watching someone who was hired for being a non-professional, or someone who was channeling Marlon Brando as a method actor.

Recently, Howard Stern made the argument that Gabourey is too fat to have a career in Hollywood. He said, “There’s the most enormous, fat black chick I’ve ever seen. She is enormous. Everyone’s pretending she’s a part of show business and she’s never going to be in another movie. She should have gotten the Best Actress award because she’s never going to have another shot. What movie is she gonna be in?”

Basically, what he is saying is that Gabourey is too fat to get movie roles in Hollywood.

As someone who has decided to write about this issue, I have to give Howard Stern some credit, but point out where he may be incorrect. Gabourey has already received another role in the film industry, called “Yelling to the Sky.” Then again, I don’t know how big this film will be. Will it be in theaters or go straight to DVD? I don’t know. So just because Gabourey received another film role does not mean that she will have a career in Hollywood.

Before people wonder ask if I’m being mean to Gabourey Sidibe (which I’m not), let me explain my reasoning. First, there have been other performers in Hollywood who had something so unique about their physical appearance that they could not have a long career after giving a great performance. In 1946, Harold Russell played the role of a WWII veteran who lost both of his arms in the war. The truth is that he really did lose both of his arms in WWII. Not only did he win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, but received a special Oscar for how his performance honored the WWII soldiers. This made him the only actor to receive two Oscars for one performance (one competitive and one honorary). Harold Russell proved that he could act and that he was a very talented actor, but without arms, there were no more roles for him. He did not act again until 1980, which was 34 years after his Oscar winning performance.

Second, Gabourey Sidibe is does not have an irreversible condition like Harold Russell had, but her unique shape may limit the roles that she can enter. Looking at the last 20 years of film, I’m trying to think of how many film roles went to overweight women. Kathy Bates has had a few roles that were not based on her looks, but she also played characters that were usually in their 40s or above in age and white. Her role in Misery won her an Oscar. She starred as the unsinkable Molly Brown in James Cameron’s Titanic. She also was up for an Oscar for playing the mother of the groom in About Schmidt. But her film roles were different than those that could be filled by Gabourey Sidibe. The character Annie Wilkes in Misery was too old of a character for Gabourey to play. Molly Brown in Titanic was white, which Gabourey is not. The mother of the groom in About Schmidt was also too old for Gabourey to play. The top performances of Kathy Bates’ career could not have been filled by Gabourey.

So let’s look at roles in film that were played by women who are younger, over-weight, and African-American. The two actresses that come to mind who have filled these roles in recent years have been Queen Latifa and Mo’Nique. Queen Latifa was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for Chicago, only to lose to her co-star, Catherine Zeta-Jones. Mo’Nique, who was Gabourey’s co-star in Precious, actually won Best Supporting Actress for the film. But unlike Gabourey Sidibe, her competition have shown talent in other fields. Queen Latifa is a famous rapper with years of acting experience. Mo’Nique is a famous comedian who has been in many films, television shows, and currently hosts her own show. The fact that both Queen Latifa and Mo’Nique are multi-talented actresses will give them advantages when going after different film roles.

Is Gabourey Sidibe too fat to work as an actress? No, but she cannot go after many of the typical roles available in Hollywood. Being unique, as a very overweight young woman, I believe that her best bet is to be on a television show. Gabourey reminds me of Parminder Nagra, the star of 2002’s Bend It Like Beckham. Her co-star, Keira Knightley, was a thin blond, Natalie Portman look-a-like. Keira was exactly what Hollywood typically looks for in an actress, which is she has had a very successful acting career. Parminder Nagra, a British actress of Indian heritage, was not the typical Hollywood actress. So what did she do? She got a job on the television show ER. On television shows, it is easier to add new characters of any different group than in a film, where the characters are already written into the story. When it comes to television, it would be a lot easier to fit someone like Gabourey Sidibe into a show.

Was Howard Stern wrong for pointing out that Gabourey Sidibe’s weight would hurt her ability to make a career as an actress? No, but he did not realize that there are other areas where she could act. Let’s face it… there is nothing wrong with being on television. Oscar Winner Whoopie Goldberg is on The View. I hope that Gabourey Sidibe can continue to act, because I’d rather see her in movies than people like Lindsay Lohan.

If Lindsay Lohan is reading this, I just said that I’d rather see Gabourey in films than see you, and I did not say why. I haven’t actually insulted you, so you won’t find grounds to sue me for $100 Million.

The Hurt Locker: The First Iraq War Film That Worked

2010-03-06T08:42:00.000-08:00

This article is dedicated to Conor Donahue, an Iraq War veteran.

Since 1997, I have seen all of the Best Picture nominees before the Oscars and guessed the Best Picture winner correctly in all but two years (Shakespeare In Love and Crash). This year there were 10 Best Picture nominees and the only one I still have yet to see is District 9 (which I have rented on DVD and will try to see today or tomorrow before the Oscars. But I feel that this year I am ready to guess that the Best Picture Oscar will go to The Hurt Locker instead of Avatar. Unlike last year’s Slumdog Millionaire, The Hurt Locker does not appear to have the Oscar in the bag yet, but I must still make my guess. If I am wrong, I will not edit this to say that I guess for Avatar. While neither The Hurt Locker, nor Avatar has a lock on Best Picture, this is the first year in which it appears that all four acting categories have a lock on who will win their awards (Jeff Bridges, Sandra Bullock, Mo’nique, and Christoph Waltz).

The Hurt Locker is about a soldier who disarms bombs in Iraq during the current Iraq War. There have been other films about the Iraq War, but this is the first one that is getting a lot of positive attention. I think one of the film’s strengths is that it focuses on what it is like to be a soldier in the Iraq War instead of in other wars. The majority of the deaths of soldiers in Iraq have been caused by bombs called IEDs (improvised explosion devices). The film tries to show what it is like to be in Iraq, where soldiers are more likely to be killed by a bomb than by a bullet.

The Hurt Locker is not about why we are in Iraq. The words “Bush”, “Cheney”, “WMDs”, and “9/11” are never used in the film. The film is neither pro nor anti-Iraq War. There are no anti-Iraq War comments and no comments about patriotism. The filmmaker, Kathryn Bigelow, focuses on the experience of the new style of war that we are in, and leaves the reasons why we are there to be the focus of other films.

I think that it was time for a successful Iraq War film to be made, and avoiding the reasons for the war was probably a good thing in 2009. While I was against the Iraq War from the beginning, I will admit that our nation is still divided on whether the Iraq War was necessary or not. When we eventually leave, history will render a verdict, as it has on every previous war that we have fought in.

The Vietnam War gave us many powerful films after the war had ended. I really love the films The Deer Hunter and Apocalypse Now, but both films came out after the war had ended. I believe that when the Iraq War is over, then we may see quality films about the politics of the war. Since we are still in the war, any films that are either support or oppose the Iraq War will be viewed more as partisan instead of historical.

The Hurt Locker gives the audience the experience of the Iraq War without the politics. That does not mean that the film is without emotion. Without going into detail, sometimes innocent people are dragged into the war.

While I predict that The Hurt Locker will win Best Picture, it would not be my personal pick. I thought that Precious was the best film of the year. I did not think that any film was as powerful and emotionally touching as Precious. While Precious is my favorite film of the year, I recommend that people see both Precious and The Hurt Locker.

Orianthi: Please Avoid Bubble-Gum Pop

2010-02-28T10:30:00.000-08:00

When Michael Jackson was preparing for his final tour that would never take place, he had hired a young female guitarist named Orianthi. She has blonde hair, looks like a pop star, but plays the guitar like she’s Eddie Van Halen. Recently, she has released her own album with a song called “According To You”, which is more pop than rock. While I doubt that many bubble-gum pop tarts like Britney Spears can play any musical instrument with an ounce of talent, I wonder if Orianthi is choosing the wrong style of music because she would rather be the next Britney Spears than the next Eddie Van Halen.

If you watch the video for “According To You”, you will see Orianthi play the guitar at different points in the song, then pull off a very impressive solo. To me, the song says, “I can sing the same music, and play amazing guitar solos.” The problem is… I don’t want to hear her singing bubble-gum pop music.

I want to clarify that I don’t put Michael Jackson in that category. While he was the king of pop, he wrote mainstream songs that were appreciated by the majority of people. Even Ronald Reagan was a fan of Michael Jackson. But Michael also used a variety of styles in his music. His song, “Beat It” was actually a hard rock song. The solo was played by Eddie Van Halen. To become Michael Jackson’s current guitarist, Orianthi proved that she could play the solo in “Beat It” and she received the job. Orianthi’s guitar style is Hard Rock/Heavy Metal with an 1980’s feeling.

Trying to mix Hard Rock with Bubble-Gum Pop (like Britney Spears) is not a good combination. Fans of Hard Rock/Heavy Metal cannot accept a guitar virtuoso singing pop songs and, let’s face it, fans of singers like Britney Spears hardly care if the “artist” is even singing the songs on stage. If you are a fan of Bubble-Gum Pop, and you accept Britney Spears lip-syncing, then do you really care if another singer is up there, singing, and playing the guitar? Probably not.

Orianthi has another difficult thing to deal with. After putting out a Bubble-Gum Pop album, can she actually change to Hard Rock and be accepted? I’m not sure about this one. I will admit that there have been very few successful female artists in Hard Rock/Heavy Metal, but having already made a Bubble-Gum Pop album, I think it would be harder for her to be accepted in Hard Rock or Heavy Metal. Basically, she has the talent for Rock and wants to sing Pop. She needs to choose which side of the music world to build her career and then stay on that side.

I think what she should do is try to reinvent herself before she is well-known. Maybe she should be the guitarist in a band with another singer or be the lead in a Hard Rock girl band. Girl band? Am I being condescending? No. I think she needs to find an area that she can fit in because she’s too unique for the music industry of today.

I want to be clear that I think that Orianthi is extremely talented. I respect her for not being another pop tart on stage singing without musical talent. She can play the guitar better than the majority male guitarists and has proven that she is talented enough to be a successful musician. The only thing that she needs to do is find the right kind of music and decide what kind of band that she will be in. Right now, she’s too Pop for Metal fans and she’s too Metal for Pop fans. With new direction, she can find the right path.

Betty White: The New George Burns

2010-02-25T00:08:00.000-08:00

This article is dedicated to my sister. Happy Birthday Emily!

In early 1976, George Burns became the oldest person to win a competitive Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. He was 80 years-old. That would have been predicted to be the sunset of his career. Having already lived past the average age of people in the United States, people would have probably predicted that he could live another few years and make another film or two. When you win an Oscar, opportunities open to you. What surprised everyone is that he lived another 20 years.

George Burns did not only live another 20 years, but he worked and worked and continued to work. He was not a face of classic television that children would see glances of while changing the channel on cable television. Instead, a new generation of audiences would see him in new movies for years to come. I remember in the early 1990s seeing him in an advertisement for Little Ceasars (Here is the commercial on YouTube). George Burns stayed in the spotlight until he died. I viewed him as the Grandfather of Hollywood. When he died in 1996, Hollywood was without its true elder statesman, or stateswoman.

There were other very famous celebrities who lived until their 90s or reached the age of 100, but most of them were done performing. Katherine Hepburn only died a few years ago. She had won an Oscar in the 1930s, two in the 1960s, and one in the early 1980s. But the last twenty years of her life, she was quiet and enjoying retirement. She is arguably the greatest actress of all time, but she was out of the spotlight. Bob Hope was considered to be a true entertainer. He is also the most honored entertainer of all time. But just like Katherine Hepburn, Bob Hope was essentially retired for years. With two of the most impressive careers in Hollywood history, neither Hepburn nor Hope had chosen to be highly visible in the public. They worked for many decades and then moved on.

Recently, I realized that the torch has been passed from George Burns to Betty White. I remember seeing Betty White on the Golden Girls in the 1980s. I remember seeing her in recent years on Boston Legal. She has received several awards recently for her long career in the entertainment industry. She even had the best commercial of the Super Bowl. She’s a funny woman and continues to make audiences laugh.

I must admit that my I have not been able to see her work from the decades prior to the 1980s. While she has acted since way before I was born, I am not familiar with her work when she was younger. To me, she is the Golden Girl who stayed in the spotlight. Betty White is 88 years-old right now and I hope that she can be around for years to come. She is not the oldest person in Hollywood, but she is the Grandmother of Hollywood with her warm, friendly personality and the talent to continue to be hilarious.

Recently, with the support of over 400,000 fans, it looks like Betty White will get to host Saturday Night Live. I am one of those fans.

It’s clear that Betty White has received a lot of attention in the last year. Probably more attention than she has received in the last 20 years. I would assume that Betty White is busier now than she has been in a long time. But that did not stop her from mailing an autograph to my sister. Regardless of how much attention that Betty White has received recently, she appreciates her fans.

Why should anyone retire when they are doing the work that they love to do? Betty White does not appear ready to retire. I look forward to seeing her continue her career. As the Grandmother of Hollywood, Betty White is continuing to make new generations of audiences laugh. I think what makes her so likeable is that she seems to appreciate her audience. Joy can help a person live long years of happiness. Betty White has the willingness to show her audience that she appreciates their support. Even in a time when she is receiving more attention that she has in decades, she still took the time to send my sister an autograph.

Many celebrities could learn something from Betty White. If you treat your fans with appreciation, you may keep them as fans even when you are receiving less attention. I think of celebrities who make millions of dollars for a few months of work on a movie. They are getting paid well because fans want to see their films. For a celebrity to refuse an autograph to a fan just shows a lack of appreciation. If that celebrity becomes a has-been in the future, I wonder if he or she would regret not treating the fans better.

Long live Betty White: The Grandmother of Hollywood.

Southwest: No Fatties

2010-02-18T02:10:00.000-08:00

Southwest Airlines kicked off a passenger because they claimed that he was too fat to fit into his seat and fly. I’m sure that this has happened before, but this is the first time it has been known to happen to a celebrity, the director Kevin Smith.

I hate when I hear a celebrity say, “Do you know who I am?” because it appears that the celebrity wants extra special treatment. In this case, if I was Kevin Smith, I would say it to warn them that throwing off a celebrity is a bad idea. In this case, it was a very bad idea for Southwest. Customers now have the message that Southwest is even willing to throw a celebrity off the plane if they feel that he weighs too much.

Southwest has already issued a public apology, but the real question is, “What are you going to do in the future?” I’m not a skinny guy, but I also don’t think that I’m too fat to fly. At the same time, it makes me wonder if I could be given the Kevin Smith treatment in the future. I think it would be nice if Airlines can have some kind of standard that would help a customer avoid walking onto a plane and then being escorted off. That must be humiliating. Everyone watches the fat guy being pulled off the plane… and they will all know it’s because he’s fat.

I guess I’m also wondering why Kevin Smith was flying on Southwest in the first place. They are known as the discount airliner. He’s rich. He can easily afford a first-class ticket and those seats are big enough that no one would question his weight. But he also has the right to fly on cheaper airliners if he chooses to and spend the money that he saves on whatever he wants.

I think that Southwest has just entered a public relations nightmare of their own making. It was also so avoidable. Kevin Smith is a celebrity. The crew on the flight probably could have asked one skinny teenager, “Hey, would you like to sit with the director of Clerks, Dogma, and Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back?” I bet that there were people on the flight who would have loved to have sat with a celebrity.

Southwest should be prepared because I am guessing that Kevin Smith will make fun of them in his next movie. For what they did to him, they deserve what they are going to get.

John Mayer: Dumb Cracker Or A Racist Dick?

2010-02-13T21:50:00.000-08:00

Is John Mayer just a dumb white guy who used the N-word but is not really racist, or is he a white supremacist like he accuses his penis of being?

For those who may have not followed the story, John Mayer recently did an interview with Playboy in which he said several controversial things. I am not going to focus on his comment that his relationship with Jessica Simpson was “sexual napalm” because that’s really a compliment. If that was the only controversial thing in the article, I’d be defending him because a comment like that, at least from a male viewpoint, is a huge compliment to an ex-girlfriend, even if it is too much information.

Instead, I will focus on the comments that he probably regrets making. I will focus on 1) his comment that his penis is a white supremacist that doesn’t like black women and 2) his use of the N-word in the interview.

First, I will discuss John Mayer’s white supremacist penis. If you are a black woman with a crush on John Mayer, sorry but it appears that you’re not John’s type. Human beings have the right to decide who they are attracted to and who they are not attracted to. If John Mayer is not attracted to black women, that is his right. It doesn’t make him a bad person. But to refer to his penis as a white supremacist is just offensive. He also called it his “David Duke” cock. Does that mean that he would never have sex with a Jewish woman either? Would he turn down Natalie Portman? The reason why using the term white supremacist and the name David Duke is so offensive is because of what those people have done. White supremacists have committed many acts of violence against blacks and David Duke has said many horrible things about Jews. John Mayer might be a talented musician, but he’s not that good of a comedian. I think that he was trying to be witty, but it backfired.

Second, John Mayer actually used the N-word in the interview. I’m going to make things very clear on this issue. White people should never use the N-word in any situation. Not even when you are talking in context about it. As I am currently blogging about it in context, I am saying N…word. I am not actually using the real word. The only situation in which I could say it could be acceptable is if an actor is playing a white supremacist in a movie. Playing a character in a movie, actors have to sometimes portray horrible people. Just because an actor will play a rapist or a murderer in a movie does not mean that the actor would rape or murder people in real life. A movie that had a racist character would not be realistic if the white supremacist said “N-word” instead of the real word. Besides the performance of an actor, I do not think the use of the real N-word could be justified in any other context.

Is John Mayer an actual racist? I don’t think that he is, but I think that he’s a moron for actually using the N-word, even without bad intentions. When a white person gets caught using the N-word, it makes me wonder how often he or she uses that word in private life. People either believe that the N-word is okay or not okay to use. I believe that it is not okay. I do not say it in public and I do not say it in private. It is such an offensive word that I think it should be avoided by both black and white people. I truly do believe that rappers should stop using it in songs. For some reason, John Mayer has thought that it is okay to actually say the N-word. While I don’t believe that he is an actual racist, he deserves to pay for his actions. I have not been a fan of his. I do not own any of his albums. In fact, I think that most of his music is crap, although I can respect that he has the creativity to write his own songs. I do believe that for saying the actual N-word, John Mayer is a moron who deserves some backlash against his comments. To give it back to him, I’m going to say that he’s just a dumb hick cracker and he probably felt okay with using the N-word because he’s probably used it a number of times before. Yes I’m calling him a cracker. John Mayer is just another musician who has used his fame to have sex with as many women as possible. But instead of making good music like heavy metal, he makes sensitive music that makes women think that he has actual feelings for them. That is, until he refers to them as “sexual napalm” in the future.

John Mayer, it might be time that you take a break from the music business and take the time to realize what a douche you have been.

No Acting Nominations For Avatar: Here’s Why

2010-02-07T06:13:00.001-08:00

Think fast: Name the male or female lead from the movie Avatar.

Don’t worry. I’m not going to pretend that I knew the answers either. The answer are Sam Worthington and Zoe Saldana.

Now join me as I cry my eyes out over the fact that neither of these talented people were nominated for an Academy Award for Avatar. Wait. I’m not crying. Why am I not crying? The answer is that I was not sad that the cast of Avatar was passed over for acting Oscars and I am not surprised either.

I am going to bring up two characters from previous movies to make a point about mixing acting with animation. The first character I am going to bring up is Jar Jar Binks from the first prequel to the Star Wars series. Jar Jar Binks was the first fully animated CGI character in a live-action movie. He did not look like a cartoon interacting with humans like the characters in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Instead, he looked like an alien that would interact with humans. We not only heard his voice, but could see his personality in his physical actions. While Jar Jar Binks was complete CGI, his actions were not based on the movements of an actor. This is different from the characters in Avatar, who had sensors placed on their faces so their real acting ability would be translated into movements on film. This method has been done before with the performance of Gollum by Andy Serkis in the Lord of the Rings films and by multiple performances by Tom Hanks in The Polar Express.

When I think of the character of Jar Jar Binks, while I deeply hated the character, it felt like I saw more of a performance in the non-performance of Jar Jar Binks than what I saw from any of the actors in Avatar whose performances were covered by CGI. The truth is that besides the voicework, none of Jar Jar Binks was a performance at all. His actions were completely designed by CGI animators.

When I look at the performances of the actors covered by CGI in Avatar, I really believe that the heart of the matter is that the performances themselves did not appear to be difficult. It felt like I was watching actors who were fitting into roles that did not require much character development. The character of Jake Sully did not seem unique at all. There was nothing special about Sam Worthington's performance. The character of Neytiri by Zoe Saldana seemed to be based on Native-American stereotypes. I cannot say that Zoe Saldana is a bad actress. I think that she was asked to perform her character in a way that did not make the performance look impressive. I really believe that the key to the performances not being nominated for Academy Awards is that they were not great performances.

The second character that comes to mind is also not a performance at all. In 1992, I saw the movie Aladdin by Disney. This was a pure two-dimensional cartoon. One of the characters, the genie, was voiced by Robin Williams. The genie character did many imitations of celebrities and characters throughout the movie. Robin Williams was able to voice those characters because he is very talented in performing imitations. The audience knew that Robin Williams did the voice of the genie and they could see his personality in the character, although the only thing that Robin Williams provided to the role was his voice.

Avatar could have had great performances by actors who were under the CGI effects, but the film did not include great actors or decent character development. Let’s say one of the characters who was hidden under CGI was played by Jack Nicholson, Robert DeNiro, or Al Pacino. We may be able to recognize the voice and personality of the character, leading to our ability to judge a familiar actor without seeing his face directly. That is something that is completely missing from this film. We have nothing to truly judge the actors by because the leads in the movie were played by C-List actors (who will probably be A-List actors soon, due to the success of Avatar). Without seeing distinct personalities, the audience saw actors merely fill the roles in the film.

Overall, I cannot blame the Academy Awards for Avatar receiving no Oscar nominations for the acting categories because the performances were not that special. There are a few films in which I can say that the director is the star of the film. This is one of those situations in which the true star is the director, James Cameron. His success with Titanic gave him the financial clout to make a film with such a high budget and so ambitious with using new technology. James Cameron is a true innovator in the film industry. Two times, he went “all in” to make a film, and won. Had Titanic been a failure, it would have been very hard for him to ever get the financing to make another big-budget film. Titanic became the highest grossing film of all time. Had Avatar failed at the box-office, he would have thrown away the clout that he received from the success of Titanic. In the end, only he was able to make a film that could actually earn more money than Titanic did. The true star of Avatar is James Cameron and he has three Oscar nominations for the film.

Taylor Swift: Anti-Britney Superstar!!!!!

2010-02-01T18:06:00.000-08:00

This article is dedicated to Kevin Starace, the biggest Taylor Swift fan who I know.

Taylor Swift just won the Grammy for Album of the Year, making her at age 20 the youngest musical artist ever to do so. Her win represents the end of the 2000s decade, but I think it also represents a change from the typical artist of the 2000-2009 decade. When I think of the artists of the previous decade, I think about the focus on style over substance, sexuality over talent, auto-tune over vocal ability, lip-syncing over singing, and people who call themselves artists without any ability to actually….. write a song! Most of these problems can be summed up with one name, Britney Spears.

Britney Spears came into the music scene at the end of 1998/beginning of 1999 with “… One More Time”. She started out as a wholesome girl who said that she didn’t smoke, drink, or do drugs. She also claimed to be a virgin waiting until marriage. A few years later, Britney was using nothing but sexuality on stage to sell albums. She would lip-sync at concerts. She was caught smoking in photographs. Later, she went nuts and entered rehab. Britney Spears was a train-wreck of a fake image of wholesomeness ready to explode. She represented style over substance, sexuality over personality, and setting bad examples for her young fans over setting good ones. After one decade, Britney Spears feels like she has been used up and spit out on the floor.

Taylor Swift is everything that Britney Spears is not. First, she has the ability to write her own songs. This makes her an artist, not just a singer. Second, she does not use sexuality to sell records. Taylor Swift is an attractive girl, but she does not focus on sexualizing herself in photographs. I would say that she looks like a pretty girl who doesn’t know that she’s pretty. While Britney Spears would choose outfits to emphasize her looks, Taylor seems to try to deemphasize her appearance. If Taylor Swift wore schoolgirl outfits like Britney Spears wore in her first video, I think that Taylor could look more attractive than she currently does. But she’s not trying to be “the sex object”, instead choosing to be the normal girl who has had her heart broken. Third, Taylor Swift has not done anything controversial. She’s not been caught drinking underage, using drugs, or getting in trouble with the law.

Let’s see. Taylor Swift focuses on her musical ability over her looks, can write her own songs, and has not done anything controversial (yet). It appears that Taylor Swift is everything that Britney Spears is not. I don’t have to just pick on Britney Spears to make my point. I could turn to Ashlee Simpson getting caught lip-syncing or Justin Timberlake exposing Janet Jackson’s breast during the Super Bowl to find examples of immorality in the music industry. There are many other musicians who have set a bad example in the last decade, but I feel that Britney Spears is the queen of style over substance. After a decade of her crap and the crap from other singers like her, it is refreshing to see an artist, yes…. artist, like Taylor Swift.

I hope that Taylor Swift represents the future of musical focus. A focus of attention going to actual artists who write their own music and can live normal, humble lives. Maybe Taylor Swift will disappoint me in the future, but I hope not. I’d rather see people like her succeed in the music industry than most of the musicians that came out of the last decade.

Don’t Scrap Spider-Man 4!

2010-01-11T23:25:00.000-08:00

There were so many new stories in the Entertainment Industry for me to talk about, but when I read this one, I had to address it right away. Columbia Pictures has decided not to make Spider-Man 4. Instead, they are going to reboot the series in 2012 without director Sam Raimi or actor Tobey Maguire.

There are times when a series is due to be remade. The Batman franchise from 1989-1997 went from an exciting part one to a cheesy part four. Remaking that series, the films were made darker and more serious. With the success of The Dark Knight being the second highest grossing film in U.S. history (Avatar may change that), it is safe to say that rebooting the Batman franchise was an excellent idea.

It appears that the Spider-Man franchise was getting very expensive to make. Tobey Maguire had his salaries for Spider-Man 2 and 3 already locked in when he made the first film. There were reports that he would have received a huge raise to make Spider-Man 4. Add his potential salary of $40 million to the already high cost of making another Spider-man film, Columbia Pictures could risk losing hundreds of millions of dollars if Spider-Man 4 does not deliver the same audience as the first three films.

Who said that Spider-Man has to spend so much time in the air? I loved the Spider-Man franchise, but they can use a good story and great action to replace battles in the air between Spider-Man and another villain. There are ways to reduce the amount of special effects that a film uses and still make the film more exciting.

I think part of the problem is that the recent Spider-Man franchise felt like a trilogy and part 4 could feel like just adding an episode to it. Issues that developed in the first Spider-Man were resolved in part 3 and there was a feeling that the series had ended on the proper note. That being said, rebooting the series so soon will probably be a huge mistake. Unlike the four Batman films from 1989-1997, the Spider-Man series only had one man playing the lead role (Tobey Maguire), not three. I have a feeling that a reboot of the Spider-Man franchise would be a big mistake and the film could potentially be a box-office flop.

I say that you don’t fix something that is not broken. Spider-Man 3 was the highest grossing film of 2007 inside the United States. Does the franchise really need to be rebooted? I do not think so. I believe that blocking Spider-Man 4 in favor of rebooting the franchise is one of the worst decisions in the Entertainment Industry.

He Took Jay’s Job!

2010-01-10T11:09:00.000-08:00

I remember when Johnny Carson retired after being the host of The Tonight Show for 30 years, Jay Leno was chosen to replace him. When Johnny Carson left The Tonight Show, he truly retired from the entertainment business. The point I am trying to make is that, Johnny Carson left The Tonight Show because he wanted to retire.

Jay Leno did not retire from The Tonight Show. He was booted after being the host for 17 years. He was not booted for saying something offensive or for declining viewership. He was booted because NBC was too scared to imagine Conan O’Brien leaving them for another network to have his show on at the same time as The Tonight Show.

This is the Entertainment Industry’s version of “Younger, Faster, Cheaper, Better.”

But it is backfiring big-time.

David Letterman used to joke around about being #3 in the ratings behind both Jay Leno and Conan O’Brien. Now David Letterman’s show is ranked #1 in front of both of them. Why is this? In my opinion, it is because no one messed with his show.

NBC executives were so worried of losing Conan O’Brien, that they took The Tonight Show away from Jay Leno and gave it to Conan. They announced this a few years ahead of time so everyone can prepare for the change. It was also reported that Conan’s contract includes a $40 million penalty if NBC takes away The Tonight Show from him. What were they thinking? Did they really have to make the penalty on themselves that high? Conan O’Brien is funny, but NBC completely tied their hands behind their own backs by doing this.

Now The Jay Leno Show, which is on for an hour before Conan, is tanking in the ratings. In addition, Conan’s show is doing poorly to The David Letterman Show. When I would watch some of the new Tonight Show, I cannot hold back the feeling that I am watching a man (Conan) who stole another man’s job. It feels different to me to watch Conan now than it did when he was on at his old time slot. I believe that Conan is probably an extremely nice guy, but not only did he step on Jay Leno’s toes, it feels like he smashed them and you can see the bloody footprints on the floor as Jay had to walk away. In a way, NBC has turned Conan O’Brien into the villain, Jay Leno into the victim, and thrown their ratings into the toilet.

Now there is talk of moving Jay Leno back to the 11:35 time slot for a 30-minute show and then have The Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien afterwards. Will this work? I don’t know, but it is clear that NBC made some bad decisions and any change would be better than the status quo.

I want to clarify that I love NBC. I also prefer to get my news from NSNBC than from any other organization. I also think that Jay Leno is one of the nicest human beings in Hollywood. But from my view, I just have a negative view about Conan O’Brien because I feel that he stole, not inherited, Jay Leno’s show from him. Did anyone at NBC ask themselves this question, “Will people be angry at Conan O’Brien for taking Jay Leno’s show from him?”

I think that Conan should address that question, because a lot of people are secretly thinking it. From my view, Conan took Jay’s job while knowing that Jay Leno wanted to continue to host The Tonight Show. I have always viewed Conan as being very funny and talented, but I cannot help but to have a negative view of Conan O’Brien.

Brown-Eyed Hoax

2010-01-01T16:33:00.000-08:00

This article is dedicated to Courtney Herrell, who is proud to be a Brown-Eyed Girl.

It is not often that I have to completely side with a celebrity over reporters, but this is one of those few situations. Normally I feel that celebrities choose to be famous so should not complain when their personal lives become public news, but in this situation, the personal life of Van Morrison became fake news. Van Morrison did not deserve for this to happen.

It was reported on the website of Van Morrison, who is known for songs like Brown-Eyed Girl, that the 64-year-old singer had recently become the father to a newborn baby. I was surprised to read this and felt that this was another situation of an old-male celebrity who had a baby that he will probably not see graduate from high school. But in this situation, it turned out that a hacker had posted the news of the newborn on Van Morrison’s own website.

I do not blame the media for following this story because it is usually safe to assume that what a celebrity has posted on his or her personal website is true. Celebrities use their websites, Twitter, and Facebook to directly reach out to their fans. Sometimes we can assume that the celebrity has someone posting the updates for them, but we should never have to assume that the websites have been hacked.

Some people may feel that a hoax like this can be easily dealt with, but it would be difficult for a celebrity to have to take charge of correcting the hoax. Van Morrison probably received congratulations from friends and relatives. He may have had to call each of his children who had heard through the grapevine that they had another sibling, just to tell them that this was false. Imagine if you lived far from your parents, and then heard that one of them had another child, without you ever being informed that a child was on the way? Then you may feel the excitement of knowing that you have another brother or sister. Then you find out that the story was false. It is possible that a lot of people were hurt by this hoax.

There is no moral to this situation. Van Morrison was a victim. I hope that a situation like this does not discourage other celebrities from using websites, Twitter, and Facebook to reach out to their fans, because direct communication is usually the most honest way to hear news about celebrities.

Jimmy Carter: Apology Without Book Removal

2009-12-25T20:21:00.000-08:00

I try to keep my blog out of politics and to focus on entertainment, but when a famous politician uses his or her name to write provocative books, those books can have an impact on our culture.

A few years ago, Jimmy Carter wrote a book called Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. The book was very offensive to Jews who believe that Jimmy Carter was comparing the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to the Apartheid that occurred in South Africa.

As Jimmy Carter’s grandson is preparing to run for a state senate seat in Georgia, Jimmy is now apologizing for offending Jews.

I am happy that Jimmy Carter is apologizing, but there are two problems that I see with his apology.

First, the timing could not be worse. The fact that his grandson is running for the state senate in a district with many vocal Jews makes this apology look like it may have been done for his grandson’s benefit, not out of random sincerity. Had he given this apology last year, Jimmy Carter would not appear to have another motive. So I have to question the timing of his apology and the motive for choosing this period of time to make it. While I question the timing of his apology, I will give him the benefit of the doubt on this one issue for one reason. His book was released the year that his son, Jack Carter, was running for the U.S. Senate in Nevada. The son lost that election and his father’s book probably did not help him with the Jewish vote. The fact that Jimmy Carter did not hold off the publication of that book until after the election means that he had no fear of his book harming his son in the U.S. Senate race. But I also have to consider that there is a possibility that Jimmy Carter did not realize how big the backlash against his book would be in 2006 and is apologizing now because he sees the damaging effect that the book had on both him and possibly his family’s reputation.

Second, Jimmy Carter’s book is still being sold. If he is apologetic for what he did, then he should have his book recalled. The sin is the book. How can he be sorry if he is still willing to sell the book? Or at least he could have the book pulled from the shelves and re-released it with a new title.

I want to overlook the fact that Jimmy Carter’s grandson is running for the state senate at the time of this apology. At the same time, I must say that Jimmy Carter is not doing enough to show that he is sorry because he is still profiting from sales of this book today. I do not know how many copies of his book are being sold today, but he is still profiting off of what he claims to be sorry for.

Jimmy Carter needs to clarify that if he wants to show that he is sorry, he must remove the book from the shelves and online stores immediately. Otherwise, how can anyone believe that he is really sorry? It would be like if Senator Al Franken apologized to Rush Limbaugh for offending him, yet still sold the book “Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot” at stores and online. Would we believe that Senator Franken was sorry? Of course not (But we also know that he would never change his views on Rush Limbaugh in the first place). But this example illustrates that Jimmy Carter must remove his book from circulation or else his apology has no meaning.

Grammy Awards: No Losers for Album of the Year

2009-12-12T08:47:00.000-08:00

This article is dedicated to Vijith Assar, who has a greater appreciation for music than anyone who I have ever met. He writes about music and his website is http://www.vijithassar.com

In the last two decades, the top award at the Grammys, Album of the Year, has been given to older artists who may or may not have truly deserved the award. Rock & Roll started in the 1950s and had some amazing artists in the 1960s and 1970s, but many of those artists lost awards to other talented artists of the time. It seems like in recent years, the Grammy Awards have tried to right many past wrongs by giving Album of the Year to make up for the mistakes of the past.

In the 1990s, the older artists who won Album of the Year did so against really weak competition, so the feeling of them robbing younger artists was not felt the way it was in the 2000s. Quincy Jones beat MC Hammer for the year 1990. Eric Clapton truly deserved the award in 1992 for the album that included the song Tears From Heaven (a beautiful song about the loss of his son). Tony Bennett won for the year 1994 against extremely week competition (probably the worst year for the Grammy Awards). Santana won for the extremely successful album Supernatural for the year 1999. The only major robbing of the decade was Bob Dylan's Time Out Of Mind winning for 1997 over Radiohead’s masterpiece OK Computer. Can anyone name a song by Bob Dylan from that album, or even from the 1990s?

What really started with the honoring of Bob Dylan for 1997 turned into a decade of truly undeserving artists winning in the 2000s. Unlike in the 1990s, these artists faced strong competition by younger artists who may have to wait decades to rob a future artist for Album of the Year. For 2000, Steely Dan won the award over Eminem’s second album. This was Eminem’s year and the best album that he had ever made. For 2004, Ray Charles won, but many people feel that he won for two reasons. First, he died in 2004, adding to the desire to honor him. Second, Jamie Foxx had just starred in the excellent film Ray, about Ray Charles’ life. For 2007, Herbie Hancock won over strong competition from Kanye West and Amy Winehouse. Does anyone remember a song from the Herbie Hancock album? This win for Herbie Hancock was a tragedy of older Grammy voters choosing to honor the older artist over the deserving ones. Many people felt that after losing Album of the Year in 2004 and 2005, Kanye West would finally receive the award for 2007. Maybe he’ll get his award in 30 years. It was the night of Herbie Hancock and the best album of 2007 that no one purchased.

When I saw the nominees for 2008 and noticed that Robert Plant and Alison Krauss were nominated for an album together, I knew that Grammy was being Grammy again and set to honor another undeserving piece of junk over deserving artists. I was right. Coldplay’s most successful album and the new album by Radiohead must be ignored so we can honor Robert Plant, who never got proper acknowledgement for his work with Led Zeppelin. I have an idea. How about instead of honoring his recent album, they just give the 2008 Album of the Year to the album Led Zeppelin IV and give Record of the Year and Song of the Year to Stairway To Heaven? If we are going to honor him, we should just be honest about it. He deserved Album of the Year for Led Zeppelin IV, not for the current album.

When I saw the nominees for Album of the Year for 2009, there were no older, undeserving artists. Beyonce, Taylor Swift, Lady GaGa, Black Eyed Peas, and Dave Matthews Band were all nominated for attention grabbing albums. Maybe the Grammys will give it to Dave Matthews because he is the oldest of the nominees, but he’s not in irrelevant territory. Maybe Beyonce or Taylor Swift will battle it out. Maybe Black Eyed Peas will win for their feel-good album that makes you want to dance. Or some voters may feel that Lady GaGa should be honored for being the pop singer who can sing and actually write her own songs. We will see, but the most important thing about this award is that these are the artists who truly made an impact in 2009. When future generations look at the Album of the Year award for the year 2009, they will find an album that was actually listened to by society in that year. The award will actually honor one of the best albums of the year and not be used as a lifetime achievement award.

Brian Bonsall Arrested Part 2

2009-12-08T19:03:00.000-08:00

For those of you who don’t remember who he is, Brian Bonsall played the little boy on the show Family Ties back in the 1980s. Now I could have used this article to talk about how the mother on the show, Meredith Baxter, had recently admitted that she is a lesbian, but I feel that this “Family Ties” situation is more important.
This is not the first time I wrote about Brian Bonsall. On March 31, 2007, I wrote an article about him being arrested for assaulting his girlfriend. The article is available for you to read here:

Brian Bonsall Arrested (March 31, 2007)

Now he is arrested for hitting a friend with part of a broken stool during a fight in which Brian was drunk. This is a pattern. In both articles, I have written about Brian Bonsall getting arrested for committing violent acts on others. I really do not like what I am seeing.

In the first article, I posted a picture of Brian as a young child when he was on Family Ties. I wanted people to remember who he is. Now I am posting a picture of his old photo next to his arrest photo. I want people to see who he is now. I wanted to focus on the huge tattoo on his neck. I am not judging people for having tattoos, but usually people are smart enough not to get them in areas that are difficult to cover up during a job interview. He cannot wear a turtle neck like the one he wore as a child to ever job interview.

I believe at this point, Brian Bonsall is probably a hopeless cause. Maybe he should turn to rehab to quit drinking if his use of alcohol makes him a violent person. I do not know if he is dating the same girlfriend from 2007 or if he is dating anyone at all. But I would advise any woman to just stay away from him. His violent actions have continued and I fear that this story will lead to a very sad ending.

Brian Bonsall is the type of former child actor who I can only predict the worst for. If he beats someone to death, I will not be surprised. If anyone is close to him and reading this, please understand that I am not against Brian Bonsall. I believe that he desperately needs an intervention before he hurts someone else or possibly himself. I hope that this is the last article that I write about him, but I feel that this story will sadly continue…

Trojan Condoms Should Sponsor Tiger Woods

2009-12-04T20:18:00.000-08:00

Does a human being deserve privacy if he earns $100 Million a year promoting products? Do people on reality shows deserve privacy when their personal lives take a turn for the negative side? How much can a person say “Look at me! Look at me!” before that person deserves the right to say, “I would like some privacy”?

Tiger Woods at only age 33 has been able to earn more money than Michael Jordan in endorsements. Unlike most famous athletes, Tiger Woods may have a career that lasts 25 or more years because golf is a sport in which athletes may be able to be competitive even in their late 40s. It may be possible that we may see Tiger Woods golf career last even 30 years, while the average great football or basketball player has a career of 10-15 years. He is on track to become the first billionaire athlete.

Recently, there was a lot of speculation that Tiger Woods’ car crash was due to him trying to drive away from his wife, who was violently confronting him over possible affairs. After a phone message was leaked to the press of Tiger Woods trying to cover up his involvement with one woman, he has admitted that he has made some mistakes without clearly saying, “I cheated on my wife.” Instead, he said, “I have let my family down and I regret those transgressions with all of my heart. I have not been true to my values and the behavior my family deserves. I am not without faults and I am far short of perfect. I am dealing with my behavior and personal failings behind closed doors with my family. Those feelings should be shared by us alone.”

Hold on, buddy! What gives Tiger Woods the right to say that he deserves privacy when he’s been one of the least private athletes on the planet? I do not think that every athlete deserves to have his private life made public, but not every athlete has endorsements that dwarf his or her sports income. There are many athletes who are one of the top in their sports yet still do not receive any income from endorsements. Let’s say there is a defensive lineman who plays well in the NFL, but does not receive a single endorsement. If he gets caught cheating on his wife, he still did not put himself out in the public the way that Tiger Woods has. Sure the defensive lineman plays a sport that can bring a lot of attention, but he is not doing things to bring more attention to himself off the football field. So the lineman can be just like some other person with a private life, who happened to have an affair.

Tiger Woods could have been just the top golfer in the world, but he used his fame to earn way more money off the golf course than he ever would earn playing golf. People see Tiger’s face on commercials endorsing products that have nothing to do with golf, like Gillette razors. By choosing to draw more attention to himself, he has lost the right to privacy. He is too famous and his actions prior to getting caught cheating are too self-promoting for Tiger Woods to expect any privacy.
The sponsors of Tiger Woods are sticking by him for now. If it turns out that he’s a sex maniac who has cheated with many women, some of those sponsors may walk away. He will never have to worry about money, but you cannot buy a good reputation. That is why I think that he should just try to laugh this off by taking a sponsorship with Trojan condoms.

One more note. Tiger Woods looks like the offspring of Yoda having sex with a frog. His wife is a Swedish model named Elin Nordegren. Part of me was thinking, “He cheated on her? She is way more attractive than him.” But I think that Tiger Woods has a super-sized ego and is completely full of himself. I no longer consider myself to be a fan of his and I don’t care what happens to him in the future. There are better people in the world than Tiger Woods and they deserve better than he does. Tiger Woods is a schmuck.

Britney Spears vs. Australia

2009-11-07T18:19:00.000-08:00

This article is dedicated to Gabriella Ilisco, who helped me understand the true Britney Spears fan.

There are some things in the entertainment business that are just well-known facts. One of them is that Britney Spears lip-syncs in concerts. This is not a shock like when Ashlee Simpson was caught lip-syncing in 2004. Instead, this is a continuing problem that Britney Spears has no intention of changing.

Before Britney Spears performs in Australia, the Australian Government wants ticket purchasers to be informed that part of the show is “pre-recorded.” What they really want is for fans to be warned that Britney Spears will be lip-syncing in at least part of the concert.

There are two ways that we can look at the intentions of the government of Australia. First, they may want to protect the few fans of Britney Spears who do not know that Britney lip-syncs in concerts. This is a question of consumer protection. If one fan has not heard it through the grapevine that Britney Spears lip-syncs, that fan can be informed prior to buying a ticket. After being informed, the fan can choose whether or not to buy a ticket to a show that he or she knows will include lip-syncing.

The second way we can look at this is that the government of Australia wants Britney Spears to admit publicly that she lip-syncs. I don’t have a problem with this because if an artist chooses to lip-sync, the artist should acknowledge the truth. I personally believe that it should be public record that an artist will actually lip-sync during concerts.

Whether the Australian Government is trying to protect consumers or to get Britney Spears to admit that she lip-syncs, I support their decision. Those who buy tickets to a concert should be made aware of what they will get when they see the performance. The seller of the tickets has an obligation to the ticket buyers to make sure that they understand that they will be buying tickets to watch Britney dance, but not necessarily sing to songs. If the consumer is informed of what he or she is getting prior to the purchase of a ticket, then the consumer cannot complain about being ripped off.

I personally believe that this should be the law in the United States as well. While I have no interest in ever going to a Britney Spears concert, who can predict the next artist who will decide to lip-sync at concerts? I may become a fan of a new singer who will do the same thing without my knowledge. I feel that I deserve to know if the singer will actually sing in the concert or not.

One more question has been on my mind. Why would anyone want to go to a concert in which the artist is lip-syncing? Do they really want to go see Britney Spears dance to songs or is it the performance that entertains them? I turned to a fan of Britney Spears named Gabriella Ilisco for her viewpoint.

Gabriella said, “After all the years, I know after buying hundred dollar tickets that she most likely will be lip-syncing. The thing is, she is probably the only artist that I would be willing to see who lip-syncs. The reason is because her shows are ridiculous. Honestly, even if she cannot or doesn’t want to sing and dance at the same time, she is an amazing performer. The shows that she puts on are seriously an experience. She’s just Britney. She can do what she wants and still own the world. She’s phenomenal.”

My take on this is that there are fans that enjoy the overall experience of a Britney Spears concert and are willing to watch even if Britney is lip-syncing. This is why I believe that even if Britney Spears admits that her concerts will include lip-syncing, she will still sell every ticket. If an artist can be honest with her fans and the fans will still buy tickets, there should be no problem with the artist admitting that she will be lip-syncing.

It is time for Britney Spears to admit publicly that she lip-syncs in concerts. She should be honest with all of her fans, including the very few who still believe that she sings at concerts. With her honestly and their loyalty, she will still sell the same number of tickets.

Abigail Breslin vs. The Blind and Deaf Advocates

2009-10-30T16:20:00.000-07:00

Oscar Nominee Abigail Breslin has been hired to play Helen Keller in the Broadway revival of “The Miracle Worker.” The Alliance for Inclusion in the Arts has complained that Abigail Breslin was hired without any consideration for talented actresses from their community. Abigail Breslin is a very talented actress, but she is neither blind nor deaf.

I’m going to take a stand on this one. I am siding with the producers who hired Abigail Breslin. The first reason why I am siding with the producers is because Abigail Breslin is famous. She is not famous for being on some kids show. She is famous for being in popular and well respected films. Ever since she was in Little Miss Sunshine, she has become very recognizable. In addition, she has not done anything yet to upset the mainstream media. She has not done anything controversial like Britney Spears or Lindsay Lohan.

The second reason why I am siding with the producers is because having a famous actress can help the show make more money. They are in the business of making money. If I was going to see a Broadway Play, I’d rather see one with a famous actor or actress that I recognize, so I get a chance to see that celebrity perform live. Just like a movie will make more money if you hire Tom Hanks, a Broadway Play will make more money if you have someone famous in the cast.

I feel for actors and actresses who have disabilities. In fact, I want to point out that some of them have done very well in movies. In World War II, a man named Harold Russell lost both of his arms. He was hired to star in a film called “The Best Years of Our Lives” as a soldier who lost his arms in the war. He won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor and he received a special Oscar for “bringing hope and courage to his fellow veterans.” He is the only person to receive two Oscars for the same role. I want to highly recommend this film. His performance was excellent. He deserved the Oscars.

In 1986, Marlee Matlin, who is deaf, was cast in the role of a deaf character in the film “Children of a Lesser God.” I have not seen the film yet, but she did win the Oscar for Best Actress. I will try to get around to seeing this film.

Performers with disabilities are talented and have been recognized by Hollywood. I cannot fault the producers of “The Miracle Worker” for hiring a celebrity who can help them sell tickets. If they hired an unknown actress, then I could say that they were wrong for not giving a deaf or blind actress a chance. But they landed a famous Oscar nominated actress, and she will help them sell tickets. There is not another 13-year-old actress who is as famous as Abigail Breslin. I do not feel that the choice of Abigail Breslin was about having a child actress without disabilities. I feel it was about having an A-List star in the play.

Ashlee Simpson Fired From Melrose Place

2009-10-22T20:57:00.000-07:00

I remember the original Melrose Place. It was about a bunch of fun-loving people in their 20s until Heather Locklear came on board. Then it turned into a show about people who were all sleeping with each other.

When I started to watch that show when I was young, I remember they booted one of the most attractive actresses, Amy Locane, because her character did not fit well on the show. She left the show after the first 12 episodes.

Sometimes a character does not fit into the mood of a television show. Sometimes you cannot just make the villain become the fun guy. When characters take certain directions, you cannot easily reverse them.

I have not seen one episode of the new Melrose Place, but I knew that the star would be Ashlee Simpson. She was the one famous person cast on the show. A lot of the first season revolved around the murder of a character. It appears that when the murder will be solved, Ashlee Simpson’s character and the character of a guy named Colin Egglesfield will be leaving the show.

One thought comes to mind is that one of those two characters was the murderer.

The other thought is that Ashlee Simpson was fired because her character did not fit well into the show.

She is trying to act like this was the plan all along. She’s as full of it as she was when she lip-synced on Saturday Night Live back in 2004.

The reason why I brought up Amy Locane was to compare her departure from the first Melrose Place to Ashlee Simpson’s departure from the second. Years later, how many of you know who Amy Locane is? I remember the actress was also in the film School Ties, but I did not remember her name. I had to use Wikipedia to figure that part out.

When Amy Locane was given the boot, it was no big deal because the entire show was a cast of unknowns. But Ashlee Simpson was the only famous person on the new Melrose Place. When a show hires a famous person, the producers tend to give more screen time to the famous person to draw in an audience. That is why the firing of Ashlee Simpson is not like the firing of Amy Locane. Ashlee Simpson was the star of the show. It was “Ashlee Simpson and several anonymous schmucks!” They built the show around her, and now they want her off of the show.

I cannot judge Ashlee Simpson’s acting because I have never seen an episode of the show. But if she is as good of an actress as she is a singer, then she won’t be getting an Emmy for this show.

As someone who watched the first few seasons of the original Melrose Place and would not watch a single episode of the new one, I can say that I felt the casting of Ashlee Simpson was a bad idea from the start. Ashlee Simpson is a very conversial person because many people feel that she became famous just because she had a famous older sister. Her older sister, Jessica Simpson, has beauty and an amazing voice. Ashlee Simpson was not an attractive girl when she entered the music business, but plastic surgery was used to hack off her nose. She had a horrible voice which has not improved over the years. Basically, Ashlee Simpson has rode on the coattails of her talented sister for too long and many people think that she is what is wrong with the music industry today. She is not a well-respected person in the entertainment industry and some of her controversial actions over the years have made her even less respected.

There are people who either love Ashlee Simpson or hate her guts. I am on the side that hopes she will retire from anything involving music, film, or television for good. Placing Ashlee Simpson on Melrose Place was a bad move from the start because of her polarizing nature. Now that she is fired, maybe people will be willing to tune in so they can see a cast of unknowns (also un-hated) and the return of Heather Locklear. Or maybe those who did not tune in before will say, “Well I already missed the first season and I don’t want to see Ashlee Simpson act.”

In addition to firing Ashlee Simpson, the producers should consider firing themselves for casting her in the first place.

Kanye West Is Not Dead

2009-10-21T18:49:00.000-07:00

I just logged into Twitter and I saw that one of the trending topics was “RIP Kanye West.” Immediately I thought that he had died and this was the first news that I had heard about it. So I went to Yahoo and searched his name. He is not dead. It was a hoax.

One of the problems with Twitter is that if enough people post comments with certain words, those words may be one of the few words chosen as a trending topic. The problem is that the trending topics are not checked for accuracy.

Twitter is a source of news. During the Iranian election, Twitter was used for people to communicate with those outside of Iran as to what was happening.

Twitter is getting very big and when companies get big, they need to start policing themselves for user fraud. Maybe have one employee, just one person, check to see if a trending topic is a hoax. If it is a hoax, pull it from the trending topic section.

Twitter, is that too much to ask?

Like or hate Kanye West, I think that any news outlet has an obligation to squash any false rumor as quickly as possible, especially if the rumor involves someone’s death.

The sooner Twitter takes “RIP Kanye West” off of their trending topic, the sooner this rumor can die down. Those who run Twitter are being irresponsible for keeping “RIP Kanye West” as a trending topic and are only adding fuel to the fire of this hoax.

Phil Collins Can No Longer Play The Drums

2009-10-20T18:13:00.000-07:00

Some people reading this may be younger and not care about Phil Collins, but I want you to know what he means to me.

When I was young, I practically hated music because the only music I would hear would be on the radio when my mom was driving the car. I mainly remember hating The Four Seasons and the high voice of Frankie Valle. Yes I hate Frankie Valle’s voice and hearing the Four Seasons was torture to me. The only music I liked was the songs of Michael Jackson, but the Thriller album was a few years old.

Then one day in the car I heard the song “Invisible Touch” by Genesis. I instantly loved the song. My parents could tell that I was becoming a fan of the group. One morning, they gave me my first cassette, the album “Invisible Touch” by Genesis. This was in 1986.

Phil Collins was the lead singer of Genesis at the time. I loved his voice. I wanted to know how I could try to sing like him. I thought that his voice was beautiful. But I could not sing.

To me, Phil Collins and Genesis are my introduction to music. I started to watch MTV and then was introduced to other groups that I began to enjoy. I loved getting new cassettes of different music groups. One of my next albums was “Slippery When Wet” by Bon Jovi. In 1987, I became a big fan of “The Final Countdown” by Europe and “Crazy Train” by Ozzy Osbourne. Being introduced to these groups and these songs was like a child being introduced to candy for the first time. The period of time from 1986-1987 had so many songs that still have the same effect on me today.

I cannot name the first film that I ever saw, but the song “Invisible Touch” was the clear start of my appreciation of music.

Today I found out that Phil Collins can no longer play the drums or the piano. This greatly saddens me. He not only had a success with Genesis, but was a very successful solo artist, winning the Grammy for Album of the Year (1985) for “No Jacket Required.” Phil Collins has lost feeling in his hands.

It saddens me when a musician is very gifted, but a disability comes in the way of him or her making music. Beethoven is the classic example, being a composer who was deaf. Stevie Wonder has been blind since birth, but still able to write beautiful music. While Stevie Wonder can compose music, without sight, he cannot just write down the music on paper as it comes to his mind. He has had to work with others to write down the music that he composes.

I fear that Phil Collins’ days of composing may be over. It must be hard to have a fully functioning mind and not have the hands to work on a piano to discover new music.

The story is not completely sad. Phil Collins is working on a CD of him singing 30 Motown songs. He still has his beautiful voice.

Randy Quaid Arrested Over An Unpaid Hotel Bill

2009-09-25T16:02:00.000-07:00

I have never heard of a story like this before and frankly, could not happen to a normal person like myself.

Randy Quaid and his wife were arrested for not paying a $10,000 hotel bill.

Before I begin on the case, I want people to know something about Randy Quaid. He is actually a really great actor. Most people know him as the kooky cousin in the National Lampoon Vacation films. But Randy Quaid has done a wonderful job in other films earlier in his career. At the age of 23, he was nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in a film called The Last Detail. Jack Nicholson was nominated for Best Actor. The film is highly entertaining and proves that Randy Quaid is talented. But there is another performance of his that I came across by accident. In college, I was writing a paper about how films have portrayed Lyndon Johnson. I saw a film that was made for television called LBJ: The Early Years. Randy Quaid was excellent as Lyndon Johnson. He won a Golden Globe for his performance. Above this article I inserted a picture of Randy Quaid as Lyndon Johnson. I am using this picture because I want people to see this performance if it is ever on television.

Now back to the case. Why does Randy Quaid owe so much money to a hotel? This probably happened because the hotel did not follow procedure and get a credit card number when he arrived to check in. Stars can receive special treatment, but in this situation, I cannot feel sorry for a hotel that decided not to get Randy Quaid’s credit card number prior to giving him a hotel key.

There is a hotel that I visit often when I go down to Charlottesville. They have my credit card on file because I have stayed there a number of times. When I arrive at the hotel, some of the staff recognizes me. One of them said that their hotel is my home away from home. I would have to agree. But when I check in, they still need to see my identification.

Every time I check into a hotel, they need my credit card information and to see my driver’s license prior to checking in. Unlike Randy Quaid, it would be impossible for me to skip a hotel bill. The hotel has my credit card number. They can charge my credit card for the nights that I have stayed at the hotel.

Why did Randy Quaid allegedly skip out on a hotel bill? I don’t know, but this would not have become national news if the hotel just treated him like a normal guest by asking for his credit card before giving him a key to one of their rooms. Then the bill would be on his credit card and Randy Quaid would have no choice other than to pay his monthly credit card bill.

Sometimes treating a celebrity in a special way can have negative consequences. In this situation, trying to treat Randy Quaid different only turned out negatively for Randy Quaid himself when he was treated like a criminal. I don’t know the name of the hotel where he stayed, but I think that I should go there. When checking in, I’m sure that they will ask for my credit card information. At that time I should just ask, “Don’t you know who I am?” They would say, “No.” Then I would say, “I’m Michael Rubin. I own http://www.michaelrubin.com." They would say, “Well we need your credit card information so we can let you check in.” I will give them my credit card and let them see my identification if needed. It beats getting arrested for an unpaid bill.

Patrick Swayze: The Final Fred Astaire

2009-09-17T19:39:00.000-07:00

I dedicate this article to my sister, Emily Rubin, who wanted to see Patrick Swayze return to the top of Hollywood. True fans are those who stand by stars during the difficult times.

Why am I comparing the late Patrick Swayze to the late Fred Astaire?

How many actors today are truly known for their skills as trained dancers? I cannot think of one. Patrick Swayze was a gifted dancer who became a talented actor. In addition, he could also sing. I’m comparing him to Fred Astaire because there is a period of time when being a great dancer was important if you wanted to make it in Hollywood. If you look at films in the 1950s and 1960s, many of the top films were musicals. In recent years, a few musicals made it to the big screen, but the days in which we had actors who happened to be great dancers has died. The final one was Patrick Swayze.

Many people would not have known much about Patrick Swayze’s ability to dance if it was not for his most popular film, Dirty Dancing. For those who have not seen Dirty Dancing, it is the closest thing to a dancing musical that is realistic. The actors are dancing to different songs throughout the film, but the dancing does not seem random and crazy like in a musical, where someone will just start dancing and singing down the block. In Dirty Dancing, Patrick Swayze plays a dance instructor teaching Jennifer Grey how to dance. So in a non-insane world, the characters have an excuse to dance throughout the film.

In Dirty Dancing, Patrick Swayze also sung and co-wrote the song “She’s Like The Wind”. His voice was very beautiful. The film did to Patrick Swayze’s career what Rocky did for Sylvester Stallone. After Dirty Dancing, Patrick Swayze was in a number of films. Action films like Roadhouse. Romance films like Ghost. Now that he passed away, it will feel different if I ever watch the film Ghost again.

It’s also sad for me to think of his famous skit on Saturday Night Live in which he is competing with Chris Farley for the last position at Chippendales. It is sad for me to think that both of them have now passed away.

He was very hilarious playing a drag queen in To Wong Fu: Thanks For Everything, Julie Newmar. Seeing him play so many action parts made it funny to see him pretending to be a woman.

But sadly, his career faded after 1995. As someone who examines the entertainment industry, I have to say this….. His biggest mistake was not making a sequel to Dirty Dancing.

In 2004, he made a cameo in the prequel Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights. The truth is that the film Dirty Dancing was so popular that a well-made sequel would have been a blockbuster. If the film was to be made, it would have to center around his character. Jennifer Grey sadly had such a major nose job that she looks unrecognizable. She would have looked too different to be in a sequel.

I wish I could ask the creators of Dirty Dancing: Havana Nights….. What were you thinking? Why didn’t you just make a film around Patrick Swayze? Now it is too late for them to do so.

But Patrick Swayze’s life was not woulda-shoulda-coulda. He had a very successful career. I think what also stands out about him as a person is that he was married to his wife since 1975. Fame did not get in the way of his marriage. This is rare in Hollywood and he deserves recognition for that. Patrick Swayze succeeded in Hollywood and in his marriage. A lot of celebrities could have learned from the good example that he set.

Who is the next Patrick Swayze? I don’t think that we are going to have one. The days of great dancers becoming great actors is over. Now Hollywood is filled with young people who pursue acting for the sake of acting (or fame). It is not likely that we will find someone who will spend years perfecting the ability to dance….. who then succeeds in Hollywood. Patrick Swayze is the last of his breed of actors.

Teardrops On Kanye West’s Overinflated Ego

2009-09-14T12:49:00.000-07:00

I dedicate this article to Kevin Starace and Matt Brensy, two of the greatest fans of Taylor Swift.

I will begin by saying that I am a fan of Kanye West and I am not a fan of Taylor Swift. I am stating that to show my music preference, even though I side with Taylor Swift 100% in this case.

Kanye West has been known to have an ego. But in the past, that ego has not been placed in the way of the hard work of other musical artists. Kanye West can brag about his music all he wants, while Ray Charles, U2, and Herbie Hancock win Grammy Awards for Album of the Year. In the past, the ego of Kanye West has only been a roadblock in the way of ..... Kanye West.

As Taylor Swift gives her speech after receiving the MTV award for Best Female Video, Kanye West takes the microphone from her hand. It is hard for me to imagine what it would have been like to receive an MTV award at the age of 19. Kanye West became huge star in 2004, when Taylor was only 14 years-old. When a huge star goes up to you and grabs your microphone, you would assume that they want to compliment you on the stage. I think Taylor thought that he grabbed her microphone to do so. But it wasn’t to compliment her. It was to show how much he disagreed with her receiving the award.

When I think about this situation, I remember years in which the person who lost an award would go up on stage himself to speak, trying to take the spotlight away from the actual winner. This is always rude. If you lose an award, you don’t take the spotlight away from the winner.

But what makes this situation even worse is that Kanye West wasn’t trying to take the recognition for an award that he lost to Taylor Swift, but to give recognition to Beyonce. It was not his place to do so.

Even Beyonce herself was shocked when he did this. I saw the clip on YouTube where she was saying “Oh My God” as Kanye West spoke of Beyonce’s video being one of the best videos of all time.

I feel that Kanye West was being a bully. Kanye West has been in the spotlight for half a decade and he received many awards over the last few years. The spotlight was not new to him. He has had the time to enjoy his fame, success, and newfound wealth. Taylor Swift is a new celebrity who is probably still in awe of other celebrities who she meets. This was her moment to be in the spotlight. Her chance to thank the fans who have supported her. Her chance to connect with people who may or may not be there in the future.

I think that Taylor Swift may have a long career, but if she doesn’t, this could have been her only chance to really enjoy stardom. Many stars come and go from the music world, while a few of them are around for years. Imagine if this was the year of Taylor Swift and if her career had a short span (which I doubt). What if this would be the only time she would win an MTV award? Imagine having your only chance to speak being interrupted by an established artist who has already had the time to enjoy the fruits of success.

What angers me the most about Kanye West’s interruption of Taylor Swift’s speech was the fact that he was interrupting a new artist who may or may not win future MTV awards. Had he interrupted Eminem, at least I could say that Eminem had accepting an award numerous times on stage. Kanye West interrupted a rookie who has no guarantee of what will come in the future of music.

Many people may say, “But Taylor Swift is so talented. She will definitely be around for years to come.” I hope you’re right. I’d rather see Taylor Swift on stage than Britney Spears, Miley Cyrus, Ashlee Simpson, or Amy Winehouse. I remember that MC Hammer was the biggest artist of 1990. I would have never predicted that he’d be old news in 1992. That is why interrupting the speech of a new artist is so much worse than interrupting the speech of a veteran to the music world. Every award you receive could potentially be your last. Kanye West was willing to risk Taylor’s one shot on that stage. How would he feel if that would be the only MTV award she would receive and she never had the chance to give one full speech?

I think it is humble when an artist wins an award and says that another artist should have won. I am not a fan of Justin Timberlake at all. In fact, I hate his music. But when he won Best Male Video over Johnny Cash, who was dying), Justin made it clear that he would have preferred for Johnny Cash to receive the award. He used his time on stage to acknowledge the work of another artist. It was a wonderful gesture. That’s the kind of thing we should see happen more often at awards shows.

I was very happy to see that Beyonce used her time after winning the top award to give Taylor Swift a chance to finish her original speech. Beyonce corrected the horrible treatment that Kanye West gave to Taylor Swift by giving her the final speech of the night.

Now Kanye West has apologized. I think I’d rather see Kanye West do something for once to show that he is actually really sorry for his actions. I’m sick of hearing apologies by celebrities over and over again. I want to see action. Kanye West should do something very nice for Taylor Swift.

As much of a fan as I have been of Kanye West, his latest actions may hurt his future in music. He needs to understand that his ego is now turning people away from him. It is now time that he work on his greatest enemy, his ego, before it ends his career.

Shawne Merriman is Innocent!

2009-09-13T09:23:00.000-07:00

The words don’t come out that easily. Instead you will hear that charges have been dropped because there was not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shawne Merriman choked Tila “Tequila” Nguyen.

The charges have been dropped in the case of Shawne Merriman assaulting Tila “Tequila”. This did not surprise me. Instead of keeping quiet, Shawne went public with his side of the story. He said that he tried to restraint her from leaving his house drunk. If she would be driving, then she would be a danger to herself and to the public. His decision to come out and give his side of the story shows that he really wanted to prove to the public that he was innocent.

It is easier to declare that there is not enough evidence than to just say that the accuser is a liar. But to say that there is not enough evidence is to say that either side could be telling the truth. It would also be like saying, “He could be guilty, but we don’t know for sure.”

I’m going to take a stand. I say that the evidence shows that he’s actually innocent.

If Tila had bruises on her neck, this case would be closed. I remember the photographs of Rihanna after being beaten up by Chris Brown. Chris Brown does not appear to be a very strong person and I would love to step in the ring with him. Yes I would be happy to fight Chris Brown.

I remember the face of Nicole Brown Simpson, the deceased ex-wife of O. J. Simpson. I remember the bruises.

Tila “Tequila” is 100 pounds and very small. If Shawne Merriman actually did choke her, not only would there be bruises, but it would be a murder trial. She would be dead. If Shawne Merriman choked me for any short period of time, if I wasn’t killed, I’d at least have a cast on my neck. Shawne Merriman is the type of person who if I bumped into at a bar, even if it was clearly his fault, I would say, “I’m sorry, sir!”

I really do not believe that Tila “Tequila” could survive being choked by Shawne Merriman. I am glad that I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my last article. Being willing to talk when you are accused of a serious crime is an indication of innocence. I have no doubt that he is innocent now.

I’m Giving Shawne Merriman The Benefit of The Doubt: For Now

2009-09-08T03:41:00.000-07:00

I want to begin by saying that I do not yet take sides in the case of Shawne Merriman and Tila “Tequila” Nguyen. If he is guilty, then I want him to go to jail. But I’m not rushing to judgement for a few reasons.

I want to also clarify that I’m not a fan of Shawne Merriman or the San Diego Chargers. I am a fan of the Washington Redskins. I am saying this to show that I am not biased to the side of Shawne Merriman because I am not one of his fans.

When Chris Brown was arrested for beating Rihanna, it was a cut-and-dry case from the beginning. When the pictures came out of Rihanna’s face, it was obvious that there could be no other side to this story. I think that Chris Brown’s career is over and if it is not over, then I am ashamed of anyone who would buy a Chris Brown album.

Chris Brown never denied anything before or during his trial for beating Rihanna. There was no “other side” to the story. It was not a question of innocence. It was a question of how much trouble would Chris Brown be in. There was no “he said, she said.” Not only did Chris Brown not have any defense for his actions, but he was so uncomfortable with what he did that he could not even go into detail about it when he was recently on Larry King even after he received probation.

Recently, Chargers linebacker Shawne Merriman has been arrested for choking reality TV star Tila “Tequila” Nguyen. Her side of the story is that she was trying to leave his house, he stopped from leaving and choked her. She went to the police and made a citizen’s arrest.

I was horrified when I heard about this. Unlike Chris Brown, Shawne Merriman is an NFL linebacker. The guy is very strong and an excellent athlete. There is no doubt in my mind that in a fight with him, I would definitely lose. Then there is Tila Tequila. She is under five feet-tall. She would have less of a chance than I would if someone like Shawne Merriman was fighting her.

Now here is why I am actually giving Shawne Merriman the benefit of the doubt for now.....

Before trial and before even being charged, he has already given his side of the story. He said that Tila was trying to leave the house intoxicated and he tried to restrain her from doing so. Not only is he giving his side, but it would make sense to prevent an intoxicated person from leaving a house to prevent that person from driving.

So I believe that he should be given the benefit of the doubt for the meantime for two reasons.

1. He is speaking out instead of remaining silent.

2. His excuse for keeping her in the house due to his concern for her safety actually makes sense.

Do I believe him? I’m not sure, but guilty men are less likely to talk than innocent ones. Chris Brown did not comment at all or have a different side of the story in his case because he was absolutely guilty. For Shawne Merriman to come out this early and give a different account is an indication that he may possibly be innocent.

There’s a line that police officers say when they arrest someone. “Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.” For Shawne Merriman to make a statement this early, he is giving a story that can be used against him in court if he is lying. Guilty people usually try to work with their lawyers on a judgement instead of making up a public denial. If he is really guilty, then his story can get him into worse trouble than if he would keep quiet and get probation like Chris Brown did.

I have a feeling that Shawne Merriman spoke out because he really believes, or could be, innocent. Those who are innocent want their stories to be known because the public will judge them way before they are in court.

So until we know more, I am giving Shawne Merriman the benefit of the doubt. He could be innocent or guilty, but his willingness to speak out so soon after his arrest makes me think that he may possibly be innocent.

I Do Not Feel Sorry For DJ AM (Here’s Why)

2009-08-29T12:52:00.000-07:00

A year ago, DJ AM and Travis Barker were the only two survivors of a plane crash that killed the other four people on board.

Less than a year later, DJ AM is dead.

This is not the plot to the latest Final Destination movie. This is another case of a celebrity dying from drug use. Keith Richards will not be invited to the funeral.

Every time a celebrity dies of drugs, I joke that the person was outlived by Keith Richards.

The truth is that I do not feel bad anymore when a celebrity dies from using illegal drugs. I feel sorry for the passing of Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, and Jim Morrison. When they died, it was the early stages of the grim reaper taking away musicians due to drug use. There were others who died earlier like Charlie Parker, but the loss of Jimi, Janis, and Jim in a short period of time was shocking.

That being said, when celebrities would die from drug use in more recent years, all I can think of asking is, “What were you thinking?” If drugs took the lives of so many talented musicians, why did you think that you would be different? When Shannon Hoon of Blind Melon died from a drug overdose in 1995, I remember really thinking how foolish he was. In 1971, Jim Morrison made a mistake with his drug use. In 1995, Shannon Hoon should have known better. I did not feel sorry for Shannon Hoon one bit.

In 2009, we lose another celebrity to drug use. DJ AM is one of very few well known DJs. The only other working DJ who is as well known is Samantha Ronson, who dated Lindsay Lohan. Just like Ronson, DJ AM was well known for one of his relationships. DJ AM was engaged to Nicole Richie a few years ago.

I’m not just complaining about DJ AM’s drug use and I have no argument against him for dating a celebrity. My big problem is that he just survived a serious plane crash less than a year ago. He could have used this as an opportunity to try to make the most out of his life. Travis Barker reunited with his wife after the plane crash. I have to compliment Travis Barker because I think almost losing his life made him realize how much he loved his wife. I think Travis Barker gained something from almost losing his life.

The fact that DJ AM is dead in less than a year after his plane crash angers me. Four people died on that crash. Had one of them survived, maybe that person would have cherished his or her life more than DJ AM. He was given a second chance in life and he destroyed himself. I don’t feel sorry for Shannon Hoon, but I feel angry at DJ AM for throwing his second chance at life into the trash.

To clarify, I feel sorry for the death of Michael Jackson because he used doctors to try to administer a way for him to sleep. Michael Jackson was not an expert on sleep medication, so he hired a personal doctor to help him sleep. The doctor was reckless with the medicine and will probably be charged with manslaughter. Illegal drugs are different. They are not approved or even allowed to be used by the public. DJ AM is not a doctor and he did not have one with him. He decided that he can use illegal drugs and not get the same results as Jimi, Janis, Jim, or Shannon. He was wrong and now he’s dead.

I dedicate this article to the four crew members who did not survive the plane crash last year. Any of them would have cherished a second chance at life more than DJ AM.

Rolling In His Grave Over Marilyn Monroe

2009-08-25T09:13:00.000-07:00

This story upsets me greatly.

I believe that there are certain things that you just cannot sell. One of them is the grave that a body is already resting in. An unoccupied grave is one thing, but once a body is in a grave or a crypt, it should be off limits legally.

Years ago, Richard Poncher bought the crypt right above the crypt of Marilyn Monroe and the crypt right next to the first one. His goal was to be buried right above Marilyn Monroe and have his wife buried right next to him. Not only that, but he would be buried facing down so he and Marilyn Monroe would be facing each other.

Richard Poncher died in 1986 and was buried faced down right above Marilyn Monroe. That does sound creepy, but that was the choice that he made and his body has been facing Marilyn Monroe for the last 23 years.

His widow, Elsie Poncher, has decided to sell her husband’s crypt above Marilyn Monroe and move his body one spot over to where she was to be buried.

The crypt was sold for $4.6 million on Ebay. This money would more than help pay off the $1.6 million mortgage on her Beverly Hills home. Justice may occur because the person who won the crypt on Ebay has backed away from the bid. So the crypt above Marilyn Monroe has not been sold yet.

Elsie Poncher had admitted that her husband had told her, “If I croak, if you don’t put me upside down over Marilyn, I’ll haunt you the rest of my life.” I think that he meant that he would haunt her for the rest of her life. Apparently she must not be worried about that if she is willing to take his crypt away from him.

Now here’s my opinion. It is creepy that Richard Poncher wanted to be buried face down over Marilyn Monroe, but not wrong or immoral. This act of silliness would hurt no one. Yes it is not only creepy, but silly. With everything between the two bodies, it would be like facing someone with a brick wall in the way.

But the actions of his widow are not silly or creepy. They are deeply immoral. His body has been at rest for 23 years. He wanted to be buried there for eternity and he bought the crypt above Marilyn Monroe for that purpose. The dead should have some rights to not have their resting places taken from them. In this case, they are not moving a body to build a mall or new roads. They are not moving it for any reason that is necessary. They are moving it for money against the wishes of the dead. Why should someone have the right to move the body of a “loved” one? I really wish that there was a law against this because it really offends me that someone can sell the resting place of a loved one for money.

What about the body of Richard Poncher? The body has been faced down for 23 years. If they really do move his body, are they going to then flip it right-side-up? Should he have to have his body faced down above some other dead person? Hugh Hefner will eventually be buried in the crypt on one side of Marilyn Monroe, so that could mean that Richard Poncher could be facing the founder of Playboy Magazine for all eternity. I’m not sure which side that crypt would be, so I cannot verify whether he would be above Hugh Hefner or someone else.

When I die, I want to be buried facing up. I would never want to be buried faced down, even if I was in the crypt above Marilyn Monroe. But Richard Poncher made a decision for his resting place and he should have had the right to not have his body moved after death… especially not for a winning bid on Ebay.

I don’t know if Richard Poncher really would have the power to haunt his wife. But if he does have that power, he should do it right now.

Megan Doesn’t Want A Murdering Millionaire

2009-08-20T18:06:00.000-07:00

Some stories do not have happy endings. This is one of them.

On VH1’s reality dating show Megan Wants A Millionaire, one of the contestants, Ryan Jenkins, is currently on the run from the law. He is a “person of interest” in the death of his wife. At first, I was thinking, “His wife? If he is married, then why is he on this show?” Then I remembered how Tailor Made was in the process of getting a divorce from his first wife when he was competing on I Love New York for the love of Tiffany “New York” Pollard. He won that show even though he had a soon to be ex-wife.

VH1 is suspending Megan Wants A Millionaire in the meantime. I think that they are worried that people will be too uncomfortable watching the show knowing that one of the men is a potential murderer.

In the previous episode, Ryan won a solo date with Megan. Through the first three episodes of the show, I would say that he is one of the frontrunners on the program. I think part of the reason why they are suspending the show is because he probably went very far on the show. I would guess that he would be in the final three.

It has also been reported that he was a contesting on the show I Love Money 3. VH1 has not made the list of contestants on I Love Money 3 public yet, but with the suspension of Megan Wants A Millionaire, it has been reported that he was also to be on I Love Money 3. This could cause them to have to reshoot the show whether he is the winner or not.

Here’s my take on the situation. I am very surprised that this is the specific VH1 show where a person is wanted for a serious crime. The men on the show are very wealthy. Unlike the other shows, I have not seen any fistfights. Since they are millionaires, they could stand to lose a lot of money if they are sued for violence.

I remember an episode from Flavor of Love 2 in which Becky “Buckwild” quit the show because she was on parole and feared that she could go to jail if she harms Tiffany “New York” Pollard. I was not surprised to see that one of the contestants was on parole because of all the fighting I had seen on Flavor of Love 1 and 2. But Megan Wants A Millionaire was different. One punch, a man could lose a lot of money. I feel that having more to lose, these men were less willing to commit crimes.

Violence is different than murder. While I do not know if Ryan Jenkins is innocent or guilty, the thought of seeing a potential murderer on a “Love” show just seems a little creepy.

I completely understand why VH1 is suspending the show, but I will admit that I want to see the remaining episodes. Watching the show, I will view Ryan differently, but I still want to see what happens. I don’t watch the “Love” shows on VH1 thinking that these people will seriously find love. I watch for the entertainment value. I have been entertained very well by VH1 for the last three years and hope that they film more “Love” shows. When Ryan Jenkins is caught, I hope that they return to air the show. If they feel that it is not worth airing in its normal time, I will be willing to watch a marathon of the show.

My enjoyment of the show is secondary to the real issue. A woman was murdered. That is the most important issue. As much as I love the show, I cannot disagree with VH1’s decision to suspend it, at least until Ryan Jenkins is caught and questioned in the case of his murdered wife. I have included a picture showing Ryan and his wife on purpose. I could have just shown him. But his wife is a real person named Jasmine Fiore. This is a tragedy. I am older than she was and her life is over. For everyone who will miss watching Megan Wants A Millionaire on Sunday, I feel for you and will miss it too, but what happened to Jasmine Fiore is more important. While my blog is about the entertainment industry, life is more important than any show, movie, or song. VH1 has made the right decision.

Who Is The Most Famous Actor In India?

2009-08-17T20:43:00.000-07:00

If you asked the average American, "Who is the most famous actor in India?", most people would say that they cannot name one Indian actor. Others may say, "That guy from the Harold & Kumar movies."

I know that this is unfair. Famous actors in the United States are usually famous throughout the world. That is because American movies are played in movie theaters in many countries. I would be surprised if people in India did not know the names of Brad Pitt, Tom Hanks, or Clint Eastwood.

But foreign films usually do not do that well in the United States, with a few exceptions. Many British films do well in the United States. The film Slumdog Millionaire had mostly Indian actors (with a few non-Indians playing tourists), but the film was made by a British filmmaker.

Recently, the most famous actor in India, Shahrukh Khan, was briefly detained while traveling to the United States. He felt that the treatment that he received was degrading. I cannot disagree with him. It must not feel good to enter a country and be treated like a potential terrorist. I am not defending his treatment at all.

But I have to sadly point this out. You can be the most famous actor in India and go completely unrecognized in the United States. I call this “The Walmart Test.” If a celebrity can walk around in a Walmart and go unrecognized, then we can tell that the celebrity is not that well-known in the United States.

To clarify my points in this article, they are:

1. The treatment that Shahrukh Khan received was wrong, but…

2. None of the authorities could tell that he was a celebrity because he is virtually unknown in the United States.

There are foreign actors and non-white actors from around the world who are very recognizable in the United States. The actor Djimon Hounsou is a great example. He is French, has an unusual name, and is black (I would say African-American, but wasn’t born in the United States). While he is foreign and from a non-English speaking country, he has starred in many American films and has been nominated for two Oscars. Djimon Hounsou would be recognized in public. Many people would probably pronounce his name correctly too. While he is not from the United States, his work in American films has gained him an American audience.

Back to Shahrukh Khan. I decided to look him up on IMDB.com (Internet Movie Database), to see what movies he has starred in. He has not been in one American film. In this situation, while I feel that it may have not been fair for him to be questioned by the authorities, it is fair to say that in the United States, he is not a well-known person. He would probably not pass “The Walmart Test”. He may be the Tom Hanks of India, but still be a random visitor to the United States in the eyes of Americans.

Some may argue that Americans should know more about other cultures. I agree, but I think that we are improving. Actors around the world have come to America and made it big. Earlier this decade, Russell Crowe was the biggest actor in the world. He is Austrailian. At the 80th Academy Awards show (For the films of 2007), all four acting catagories were won by non-Americans.

Bollywood is very famous for the quality and quantity of Indian films, but Bollywood films have not yet made an impact on American culture. Shahrukh Khan is the most famous actor in India, but the most famous actor of Indian origin in the United States is… yes… Kal Penn from the Harold & Kumar movies.

If Shahrukh Khan can become the superstar of Bollywood, he should at least consider making a film or two in… Hollywood. After that, he will be recognized by Americans. Then if he ever gets stopped unfairly, maybe someone will recognize him.

Dane Cook Was Right

2009-08-11T21:35:00.000-07:00

I want to begin by saying that I have never been a fan of Dane Cook and I have never seen a show or film starring Vanessa Hudgens. I am not a fan of either person.

Recently, Dane Cook may have said the most hilarious comment of his comedy career.

Vanessa Hudgens is the star of the High School Musical films. Before making High School Musical 3, she was caught having taken some nude photos that were made public. I do not know how these photos were made public, but it was very humiliating for her.

Disney had decided to keep her as one of the stars of High School Musical 3. This was controversial because Disney stars usually only become controversial after leaving Disney. The fact that they kept Hudgens in High School Musical 3 was their way of giving her a second chance.

Key words- second chance. Celebrities make mistakes in their lives. Sometimes their mistakes can be very controversial. In the case of Vanessa Hudgens, she made the same mistake twice.

Recently, another group of nude photos of Vanessa Hudgens had surfaced. It appears that she has not learned her lesson.

At the recent Teen Choice Awards, Dane Cook decided to make a joke of this.

He asked where she was in the audience. She waved. Then he said,

“Girl, you got to keep your clothes on!”

I’m taking sides in this situation. I say that Dane Cook was right. It would be one thing if this was the first time that nude photos of Vanessa Hudgens came out, but she is a repeat offender. She did not learn from her original mistake and made the same exact one.

To make a mistake is human. To make the same mistake twice is stupid. I will be clear when I say this. Vanessa Hudgens is a moron. I don’t think that I called anyone else a name on my blog since I started it in 2004. I predicted (correctly) that Pamela Anderson would get a divorce. I gave Albert Haynesworth the nickname “Dr. Evil”, but that is a nickname for him receiving a contract to receive $100 Million over seven years. To understand that reference, see the Austin Powers movies. My nickname for Albert Haynesworth is a compliment because he is worth having the Redskins pay him so much money. But I am insulting Vanessa Hudgens because I do believe that she is an moron for repeating her mistakes.

Let’s look at other celebrities who messed up and imagine if they did it twice.

1. Paul Reubens (no relation to me) who played Pee-Wee Herman. He was arrested for doing something indecent in a movie theater. Imagine if he was caught doing the same thing in a movie theater a year later.

2. Hugh Grant was arrested for being with a prostitute. Imagine if he was caught with another prostitute a year later.

3. Former Senator Larry Craig was arrested for the foot-tapping situation in a public bathroom. Imagine if he was arrested in another public bathroom for the same thing.

Vanessa Hudgens is a repeat offender, so she deserved to be called out for her actions. She’s a Disney star and the Disney company took a chance keeping her in High School Musical 3. I think that it’s time that she leaves the child movies and television programs. It is time for her to do work that is considered more adult (I do not mean porn).

I’m going to point out the real reason why someone could be offended by this. Dane Cook was implying that Vanessa Hudgens was a dirty girl. To imply that a girl is less angelic is to imply that she is slutty. The fact that the girl sent out nude photos of herself is an indication that she is not as innocent as her High School Musical character.

Vanessa Hudgens deserved this because she did not learn the last time she messed up. In a way, Dane Cook making fun of her may actually get her to be more responsible. I have a feeling that she won’t be taking nude photos of herself again. Had Dane Cook said the same comment to Vanessa Hudgens a year ago, she may have avoided taking a second group of nude photos. Maybe he prevented her from taking nude pictures a third time.

One more important note. Young people need to learn the lesson that they should not use their cell phones to take nude photos because the photos can become public in the future. I hope that kids at the Teen Choice Awards can learn from this and not do what Hudgens did. If anything, Dane Cook has taught young people what not to do.

Larry David is The Perfect Woody Allen

2009-07-06T17:55:00.001-07:00

Woody Allen usually makes comedies, but has made a few drama films as well. Besides looking at a Woody Allen film as a Woody Allen comedy or a Woody Allen drama, I really look at Woody Allen movies under these two catagories:

1. Woody Allen movies starring Woody Allen

2. Woody Allen movies that don’t star Woody Allen

I honestly prefer to see Woody Allen films in which he is one of the characters. The films by him that don’t star him usually don’t truly feel like Woody Allen films to me… until now.

For the first time in his long career, Woody Allen has finally found an actor who can take the place of himself in movies. That actor is Larry David, the co-creator of Seinfeld. Many people, including myself, did not know about Larry David until he had his own show, Curb Your Enthusiasm. In that show, he plays himself. Woody Allen seems to be the person who takes actors who have made it big in Hollywood and then find a way to fit them in his movies.

If I was a fly on the wall, I would have loved to have heard Woody Allen watching Curb Your Enthusiasm and saying, “That’s me!”

Watching Woody Allen’s newest film, Whatever Works, what stands out to me the mosts is how Larry David fits perfectly into the role that seemed perfect for Woody Allen to play himself. Watching the film, I did not miss Woody Allen the way I miss an actor in a sequel who decides not to reprise the role of a character. Watching the movie Hannibal, I really wished that Jodie Foster played Clarise. When a character is memorable, replacing the actor or actress can make watching the film difficult. However, watching this film, Larry David was able to fit into the role perfectly.

Larry David essentially played the same kind of person he did in Curb Your Enthusiasm, which would be himself. Woody Allen also usually a character who is just like himself in films. The reason why this works so well is because Larry David is so much like Woody Allen that he was able to fit into the role without having to alter his personality. In a way, Larry David’s performance of Woody Allen is either an amazing portrayal of Woody Allen or not a performance at all.

Seeing a Woody Allen film without Woody Allen was perfectly alright for me because Woody Allen found his ultimate match in Larry David. I hope that Woody Allen uses Larry David again in more of his films.

I have to also say, I really enjoyed the film Whatever Works and recommend that others see it as well.

Billboard Denying HIStory

2009-07-04T16:19:00.000-07:00

I always liked how Michael Jackson named an album HIStory because it is the story of his career. The album HIStory is not the one that is being denied, but instead, Michael Jackson’s history is being obscured by a rule that won’t actually help anyone.

There have been times in the past when an artist has two albums that hold the top two positions on the Billboard 200 list. This has happened when an artist releases two albums at once. I remember it happened when Guns ‘N Roses released Use Your Illusion Vol. I and II on the same day. I bought both of those albums that week.

I could be wrong, but I think that this is the first time that one artist had the top three positions in album sales in one week. This is history and should be celebrated as a possible once-in-a-lifetime achievement.

The problem is that when you look at the Billboard 200 list, The number one album is listed as the Black Eyed Peas. You may be wondering why this happened. The reason is because Billboard has a rule that prevents older albums from taking up spots on the list.

I understand the thought that they want the Billboard 200 list to bring attention to new albums and new artists, but this is a record that has to be covered up to almost no one’s advantage. I can imagine if a new artist had an album that would have been number one on the list, and that artist would have been pushed down to number two, three, or four. I could see an artist saying, “I would have reached number one had Michael Jackson not died.” But that’s not the situation here.

The Black Eyed Peas album had already reached the number one spot previously. In fact, the highest new album is by Regina Spektor and is ranked number three without the Michael Jackson albums included. To say that Regina Spektor is ranked number three instead of number six is not much of a career boost. She would not have been number one that week, whether Michael Jackson’s albums were included or not.

The Billboard 200 did not include Michael Jackson’s 2008 re-release of Thriller on the Billboard chart for the same reason. When it was re-released to mark the 25^th anniversary of the album, it would have been the number two album on the list.

But this could possibly be the only time that an artist would ever sell the top three albums in one week, and to pretend that it did not happen is like trying to re-write the history books.

Why should we even have the Billboard 200 if it is not going to be the true test of album sales? Couldn’t another company be responsible for publishing who really has the most sales? What gives the Billboard organization the right to disqualify real results and pretend that the Black Eyed Peas were the top selling artist of the week?

I think to pretend that history did not occur is a slap in Michael Jackson’s face and an insult to the intelligence of the public. Furthermore, it is a very bad public relations move on the part of the Billboard organization. I will say that they are consistant, because they denied Michael Jackson entry last year with the re-release of Thriller. But this practice by the Billboard organization is wrong and it only makes them look bad in the eyes of the public during a time in which many fans are grieving the loss of the greatest artist of at least the last three decades.

Ten Best Picture Nominees!

2009-06-30T16:16:00.000-07:00

I have not seen the movie Brüno and I am not predicting that it will be nominated for Best Picture.

This year, there will be ten films nominated for Best Picture instead of the usual five. Some people think that is a bad move. I think with the recent problems that the Oscars have had, it is needed badly.

I will first give my one objection to this change. Since 1997, I have seen all five films that were nominated for Best Picture before the Oscars would take place. This has allowed me to judge all five films and guess what will win Best Picture. From 1997-2008, I have only been wrong twice. I guessed that Saving Private Ryan would win for 1998 and Brokeback Mountain would win for 2005. Going 9 out of 11 is not bad though. Now I would have to see all ten nominated films to continue my streak. If one of those films is not in the theater or on DVD, my streak will end.

The reason why the Oscars should have ten films up for Best Picture is because in recently years, we would have five films up for the big award that few people have seen. Before 2004, big budget films that grabbed audiences like Forrest Gump, Braveheart, Titanic, Gladiator, and the third Lord of The Rings movie had also won Best Picture.

After the third Lord of the Rings film won Best Picture, the last five years have had low budget films nominated and winning the top award. I think that the main problem in recent years is that film studios are scared to try to make dramas that have a big budget because if the drama does not touch audiences, then the film can lose the studio potentially over $100 million.

That is why the big budget movies tend to be based on comic book characters because those are fun movies that usually are safe bets at the box office. Recently The Dark Knight was both a critical and financial success. Not only did the movie become the second highest grossing film in the United States (right behind Titanic), but critics and audiences thought that the film had a great story. When the Oscar nominations came out, The Dark Knight was not nominated for Best Picture. Instead, The Reader was nominated without a chance of winning.

This is where the Oscars have been messing up. Looking at the five films nominated for Best Picture last year, they were all low-budget dramas. To make the Oscars more exciting, I would have been okay with them plucking The Reader from the list because it was the least likely of the films to actually win Best Picture.

The Dark Knight was the closest thing that the Oscars had to a big budget movie that could get people to watch the Oscars. Now they are not going to bump films like The Reader, but I think that allowing ten films to be nominated will give films like The Dark Knight a chance of receiving a nomination.

It may also stop certain films from running away as the clear winner. Slumdog Millionaire was great, but the lack of competition made this one of the least exciting year for the Oscars in recent memory. The Oscars need a more diverse group of films to be nominated for Best Picture if they expect to have a big audience. I’m not saying that they should nominate Twilight, Transformers, or Brüno, but they should nominate at least one movie that had a large audience. Maybe Public Enemies with Johnny Depp will be the movie that grabs audiences and critics. It is time that Hollywood puts a new focus back on big budget movies that can also get Roger Ebert’s thumbs to point up.

If ten Best Picture nominees helps honor the big audience films that have been truly overlooked in the last few years, then the Oscars will be like they used to be. I want to make it clear that in most of the years, I do believe that the Best Picture winner actually was the best movie, but I think that the awards will be more relevant to society if they have at least one very successful film nominated for Best Picture.

People want to root for their favorite film, even if it is a based on a comic book.

Billy Mays Here!

2009-06-28T17:46:00.000-07:00

In a week where we lose Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett, it may seem weird why I would also write about Billy Mays. I’m writing about him for two reasons. First, he is one of the few TV pitchmen who people can actually recognize and remember his name. Second, his impact on the entertainment business was to catch people’s attention by annoying them.

Yes this is a negative article. Sure I should never speak ill of the dead. I am not judging him as a person. I don’t hate him personally at all. I just hated his commercials and won’t miss them.

As someone who has been in sales myself, I can tell you that those in sales who annoy people make it harder for salespeople who are trying to just be heard. Billy Mays’ in-your-face style is what is wrong about sales. People don’t like to be annoyed by salespeople.

One of the problems that I had with Billy Mays is that he spoke about more products than Michael Jordan. Initially, I remember him talking about OxiClean. He was the OxiClean guy. When you would think of the OxiClean commercials, you would remember him. That’s okay to me because many companies have one spokesperson. Then he started to be in commercials for more and more products. I don’t know what the companies who hired him were thinking, but from my view, when you speak about too many products, you seem to be less credible. It started to feel like Billy Mays did not represent OxiClean. Instead, he represented any company that was willing to pay him.

His selling style was loud and aggressive. He was not as loud and aggressive as the late Sam Kinison, but I liked Sam Kinison because his voice added to the effect of his humor.

I am going to explain my views on celebrities in a simple way. Here is a scale from 1 through 6.

6 – I’m a big fan. Example- Keith Olbermann and Bill Maher.
5 – I think that the celebrity is good, but I’m not a fanatic. Example- Sam Kinison.
4. I think that the celebrity is okay. Neither positive or negative. Example- Mariah Carey.
3. I have no opinion about or not enough knowledge to make one. Example- Lady GaGa.
2. I have a negative view of the celebrity. Example- Billy Mays, Bill O’Reilly, 50 Cent.
1. I hate the celebrity and would celebrate if the celebrity died- Britney Spears, Justin Timberlake, O.J. Simpson, Robert Blake, and Karl Rove.

There are other names that would fit on the list, but I don’t want to say every celebrity who I have a negative view of or hate.

I have a negative view of Billy Mays, but I feel sorry for him and his wife. He may have annoyed me with his commercials and I may not miss him, but I take no pleasure in his passing.

One very morbid comment that will catch some people off-guard. This is the first celebrity who I can name with a Twitter page who has died. He even posted two messages on his Twitter page yesterday. If you want to look, his Twitter page is http://twitter.com/realBillyMays

The Life of Michael Jackson

2009-06-27T19:39:00.000-07:00

This article is dedicated to Imran, the biggest Michael Jackson fan I have ever met.

“We are out of our joy and he is out of his pain.” – Jesse Jackson

When I heard that comment by Jesse Jackson while watching Larry King, I knew that I had to write it down. I think that is the best way I would describe losing Michael Jackson.

I am writing two articles. The first one is dealing with the life of Michael Jackson. I am going to wait until we have more information on the cause of Michael Jackson’s death to discuss that issue. I want to wait for the final results to be in on the cause of his death and how his doctor may have been involved in the treatment of Michael Jackson before I point fingers.

A few years ago, I said that had Michael Jackson died in 1985, he would be bigger than Elvis. Since Elvis had died before I was born, I do not have the same understanding of where his career was and where it it was going.

Let me begin with a shocking comment. I believe that the worst thing that ever happened to Michael Jackson was making the Thriller album. Had he had okay albums after Off The Wall, he would have been remembered as a former child star for his work with the Jackson 5. There will be people who will argue that Thriller was not their favorite album personally, but I have to say that it is the most important album of the last three decades. I believe that if I had to compare Thriller to other albums, then it was more important than any album from the year 1970 to today. I believe that you would have to look at the work of the Beatles in the 1960s to find something that can compete with Thriller’s importance in the music world.

Thriller was an album that could never be topped by Michael Jackson. His album Bad was great, but did not have the same impact. Bad was nominated for the Grammy for Album of the Year, but lost to U2’s album The Joshua Tree. I would have to say that The Joshua Tree was U2’s best album of all time and better than Bad. Michael Jackson’s masterpiece could never be topped if he had lived to be 100 years-old.

In the 1980s, even Ronald Reagan in his 70s was a fan of Michael Jackson. Thriller make Michael Jackson the most famous celebrity in the world. When the sky is the limit, and you reach the sky, you can only go down.

The last two decades were sad for Michael Jackson. Two accusations of molestation changed how people viewed him and his obsession with children. Michael Jackson loved children and the accusations made people question the nature of his relationship with them.

The million dollar question is this… Was Michael Jackson asexual, straight, gay, or a pedophile?

I am going to give my guess and my reasons for this guess, with full knowledge that I could be wrong. I believe that he was asexual and that he wanted to be a child himself. None of his child celebrity friends had ever accused him of trying to touch them inappropriately. He never took advantage of Macaulay Culkin, Corey Feldman, or Emmanuel Lewis. If Michael Jackson was gay and let’s say he was interested in boys who looked young, then I think he would have had a relationship with a very attractive 18-year-old homosexual guy who looked young. As a famous celebrity, he could have had all of the opportunities to be with men or women had he chosen to do so. The fact that he spent all of those years without a female or male lover makes me think that he really had no interest in sex.

I truly believe that Michael Jackson was innocent of the accusations and that he could never hurt a child.

That being said, the accusations haunted him because it removed the trust of the public. The one issue that I really had difficulty figuring out was the fact that he continued to spend time with children after the first accusation. For Michael Jackson to continue to spend so much time around children after the accusation gave the impression that his interest in children was something he could not do without.

I believe that Michael Jackson missed his childhood and felt that he was robbed of it. Therefore, he wanted to permanently be a child himself and have child friends.

Since Michael Jackson released Bad in 1987, he released three more albums. I liked Dangerous and History, but they were not outstanding. His album Invincible was critically panned, and his accusation that Sony did not promote it well because the head of Sony was racist was a horribly false accusation. The man in question, Tommy Mottola, had married Mariah Carey, who is half-black.

In my opinion, Michael Jackson did not want a busy career. I have doubts that he was ever going to release a new album again. I could be wrong, but we will never know for sure.

I have a feeling in my heart that an artist cannot be truly great unless there is something unusual about that artist. I think that some are good and have normal lives, but the best have to have something unusual about them to truly reach greatness. I look at Michael Jackson’s weirdness with acceptance as part of the package. I do not think that the man who made Thriller and moonwalked could have been that good unless there was some madness behind the greatness.

Even if his career was virtually over. Even if he would never make another album and the London tour the next month would truly be his last tour. Even if the days of him making art were gone, Michael Jackson became the single greatest musical artist of this century. He will be studied and written about not only for decades, but centuries to come.

While I am grateful to have had the opportunity to listen to his music and the music of the Beatles, I hope that an artist will come out who will top them. I hope that we have not seen the best that will ever come. I hope that there will be another album that will take over the world in the way that Thriller did. For Michael Jackson, Thriller was the best that was to come and he could never top it. I hope that is not the case for the future of music. I would rather know that Thriller could not be topped by Michael Jackson than to think that Thriller could never be topped by another human being. Sadly, I do not think that there will ever be an achievement greater in music yet to come.

Black Eyed Peas vs. Black Eyed Perez

2009-06-26T14:46:00.000-07:00

This story is too good to be true. In a confrontation between will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas and Perez Hilton, the tour manager of the Black Eyed Peas gave Perez Hilton a black eye. Well, I’m not sure it’s going to become a black eye, but you can see in the photo that Perez Hilton has a cut under his eye. I just had to point out the irony that comes from the name of the band.

What I know so far is this. Perez Hilton had an argument with will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas, Perez called will.i.am a word that is gay slur, Perez got punched in the face. I do not know the order in which those events occurred.

The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation asked for Perez Hilton to apologize for calling will.i.am the offensive word. Perez has decided to apologize for using the word.

Here’s how I see it. First, Perez Hilton is not homophobic because he is gay and out of the closet. He is not someone who hates gay people. So a gay slur said by him is different than one said by a straight person. It is not like the situation in which Isiah Washington from Grey’s Anatomy used a gay slur.

But on the other hand, the reason why I strongly believe that it’s not right for Perez Hilton to use it against another person is because Perez has a history of trying to expose that certain celebrities are actually gay. He believes that they should be forced out of the closet. In this situation, calling will.i.am a gay slur can be an accusation that Perez actually thinks that will.i.am is gay.

I have defended Perez Hilton when it came to the confrontation with Carrie Prejean, but in this situation, I feel that he needs to do one thing. Even if he does not want to apologize, he needs to just say that he does not actually think that will.i.am is gay.

An accusation of being gay by Perez Hilton has more credibility than from any other celebrity, due to the fact that he helped to out Lance Bass from ‘Nsync and actor Neil Patrick Harris. This is why it is important for Perez to at least admit that he was only trying to insult will.i.am, and not actually accuse him of being gay.

On the other side, I will admit that I’m sick of hearing about employees of celebrities assaulting individuals. If a celebrity is in danger, I understand that a bodyguard may protect that celebrity. But if an employee of a celebrity commits assault, then the celebrity should be sued. Perez was assaulted and probably will have reasonable grounds to sue will.i.am. Maybe will.i.am will countersue for defamation of character over the gay slur.

I cannot praise either side in this situation. I cannot side with either person. I think they both did something wrong and no one did anything right.

The RIAA Has Gone Too Far

2009-06-20T09:00:00.000-07:00

You know when a story feels like it should have been told five years ago? This is one of them.

In the first few years of this decade, many people downloaded music files illegally. Then it was made clear that if people continued, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) would crack down and sue individuals. This story should have been over in 2003.

The RIAA just won a judgment of $1.92 million against Jammie Thomas-Rasset. She downloaded at least 24 songs, which would be $80,000 per illegal download.

The problem is not that the RIAA had the right to sue her. The problem is not that Mrs. Thomas-Rasset was wrong. The essential problem is that the issue feels like the RIAA is trying to make up for wrongs that have been long over with. It feels like they chased this woman to the ends of the earth.

Had this ruling occurred in 2004, it would make sense. The fear of lawsuits caused people to stop downloading music on Kazaa. They did not want to risk being sued. This fear changed the habits of music listeners. Now iTunes is the number one seller of music in the world. People are willing to pay for music legally and are doing so. This problem has been solved. The public has responded to fear by choosing the legal option of buying music.

If the RIAA wanted to make a point, that point was made. But the fact that the public has already changed its habits means that at this point, the lawsuit feels overbearing and tedious.

To the defense of the RIAA, it was reported that Mrs. Thomas-Rasset could have settled with the RIAA for $3000-$5000 but she refused. Why would she refuse this amount? She was obviously guilty, as was most of America. To not settle for a small amount and risk a trial, she risked a higher judgment against her.

What I do not know is when she had the option of settling. This could have been in 2003 or 2004, which would have made the settlement made sense considering the time of the offense. It may have been Mrs. Thomas-Rasset who dragged this on, and the RIAA decided not to reward her lack of cooperation.

I truly believe that I have to side with Mrs. Thomas-Rasset because this is a dead issue in 2009. It’s not a question to me of her being innocent or guilty. It is a question of the RIAA being willing to move on and not make themselves the villain of the music world.

If they wanted to sue someone for stealing music, they should have focused on a wealthy celebrity or someone who was at least wealthy in general. Had a famous millionaire actor been caught downloading music illegally, the public would feel less sorry for him. To go after this woman with a judgment this large just seems like a horrible public relations long after the problem of illegal downloading of music had been solved.

Adam Lambert’s Gay: So What?

2009-06-12T10:25:00.000-07:00

Remember when someone came out of the closet and people were surprised? I think that the last time I was actually surprised to hear that someone was gay was when Neil Patrick Harris came out of the closet. I did not see that one coming. But recently, when Adam Lambert came out of the closet, it was even less surprising than when Clay Aiken came out.

When Clay Aiken was on American Idol, his sexuality was questioned before the season was even over. Over the next few years, Clay Aiken denied over and over again that he was gay. After a woman gave birth to his son (they did not have sex), he decided to admit that he is gay.

Bill Maher put it best when he said, “You can’t call it coming out of the closet when the door was wide open, the closet was made of glass, and everyone could see you in there having gay sex. Clay Aiken says he came out because he didn’t want to lie to his infant son. Dude, even the baby knew you were gay.”

When Clay Aiken came out of the closet, it was not a surprise at all. I feel that by the time that Clay Aiken admitted that he was gay, no one was surprised. This was not a shocker.

Unlike Clay Aiken's experience during the second season of American Idol, photos surfaced of Adam Lambert kissing another man during the recent season of the show. At the time, my view was, “He is gay, case closed.” So when he decided to out himself in an upcoming issue of Rolling Stone where he would be on the cover, I felt that all he was doing was admitting the obvious.

If Adam Lambert denied being gay like Clay Aiken did, no one would believe it. He just confirmed what everyone knew. He is gay. He did not out himself. He was outed when the photograph of him kissing another man surfaced.

I think it is good that he decided to confirm that he was gay early on instead of drag things out. But all he did was confirm what everyone already knew.

I think that the only sad thing that I can say about this is that the two most obviously gay people to come out of the closet have both come from American Idol.

I did not follow American Idol this year. The only year I really followed it was during season six when Sanjaya was on. But it appears that a lot of people were shocked that Adam Lambert lost the competition. I have a feeling that just like Clay Aiken, he will outsell the winner of his American Idol season.

From what I have heard, Adam Lambert has amazing vocals. He sounds like he could really do a good job singing Hard Rock, Classic Rock, or Heavy Metal. I hope that being gay will not stand in the way of his future success.

Drop the Tonight Show name.

2009-06-02T19:43:00.000-07:00

Sometimes a name is just a name, and sometimes it means more.

Johnny Carson hosted the Tonight Show for thirty years, until he no longer wanted to do so. Then Jay Leno hosted the show from 1992 until last week. He had no plans to retire, but NBC wanted to give the Tonight Show to Conan O'Brien. It appears that they were more worried about Conan leaving the network than they were about losing Jay Leno.

David Letterman used to be in the Conan O'Brien position of having his show right after the Tonight Show. Letterman wanted to become the new host of the show when Johnny Carson was going to retire. Since he did not get the Tonight Show, Letterman skipped town to CBS, developed his own show, and has earned more money per season than Jay Leno or Conan O’Brien.

Unlike David Letterman, Jay Leno is not leaving NBC. Instead, he will have a show on at 10 pm that will be followed by the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien.

Let me just ask this. What is the big deal with the name the "Tonight Show"? Is there anything really that special about the name that would drive David Letterman to another network or to make Jay Leno and Conan O'Brien play musical chairs with their time slots?

I think that there was some prestige related to the name. When Johnny Carson hosted the show, it was the premiere show. David Letterman was the follow-up person. I guess Letterman didn't want to follow-up Jay Leno and I cannot fault him for that. But now, there are so many competing shows. I don't think that the name "Tonight Show" should be that big of a deal anymore. During most of the years that Johnny Carson was on television, families did not have cable television. I know my own family got cable in the mid 1980s. When there were only three or four main channels, people did not have many options of what they would watch at 11 pm. Now the “Tonight Show” has a number of shows competing at the same time.

Is the fact that Conan O'Brien will now have the Tonight Show actually give him some big advantage? Will they put more money into his show than before? Is his show going to be different at all?

Will Jay Leno's show be any different either?

People watch shows for the host and the jokes. The fact that they took the Tonight Show away from Jay Leno and gave it to Conan O'Brien makes me think that focus on the name should not be important.

I think that after Conan O'Brien retires (or has someone take his show from him before he retires), they should just drop the Tonight Show name. Conan O’Brien is very talented. I don’t think having the Tonight Show name will improve his ability to entertain audiences. I have too much faith in his talent and the talent of Jay Leno to expect their talent to change with the addition or subtraction of the Tonight Show name.

I hope that Jay Leno's show is as good as his old one. I hope that Conan O'Brien's show is has good as his old one as well.

I think that David Letterman got it right. Have your own show with your own name, own the rights to it, and make more money.

Chris Brown: You Are A Monster!

2009-05-28T08:30:00.001-07:00

Chris Brown, who is “accused” of beating up his ex-girlfriend Rihanna, recently made a YouTube video claiming that he is not a monster.

In the news today, it is also reported that a photographer was roughed up by Chris Brown’s bodyguards for taking a photograph of Mr. Brown.

Let’s take a look at this:

1. Chris Brown is accused of beating the crap out of his now ex-girlfriend.

2. Chris Brown is trying to level with the public that now hates him.

3. His employees have just committed violence against someone trying to take a photograph.

Mr. Chris Brown, or as I will now refer to you as “Girl Abuser”, if you are really trying to change your image, you may not want anyone to commit violence on your behalf.

When the bodyguards of celebrities beat up a photographer, the celebrity should:

1. Fire the bodyguards.

2. Offer to testify against his or her own bodyguards.

That is, unless the celebrity, being Chris “Girl Abuser” Brown, actually told the bodyguards to do so. Then he should be charged for his part in their actions.

In regards to the beating he put on Rihanna, I cannot put myself in his shoes because I would never hit a woman. I do not feel bad for him at all. Honestly, I would love to beat the crap out of him.

What Chris “Girl Abuser” Brown needs to understand is that he did one of the things that people don’t get forgiven for in Hollywood. Those two things are:

1. Saying something racist or Anti-Semitic.

2. Beating up a woman.

As you can tell by my previous article, I don’t like people who hate Jews. I also don’t like racists.

Chris Brown did the other unthinkable thing when he beat up a woman. Let’s look at two other woman beaters.

Ike Turner maybe have been one of the founding fathers of Rock & Roll, but he will always be remembered for beating up Tina Turner. When Ike Turner died last year, he was remembered more for abusing Tina Turner than anything else. It did not matter that he was an extremely talented musician who had just won another Grammy. His talent and the memory of him will always be overshadowed by the evil things he did to Tina.

Mike Tyson was not only violent to Robin Givens, but he also is a convicted rapist. I believe that Mike Tyson was the greatest boxer of my lifetime, but his personal problems prevented him from returning to the glory of his earlier career. He will always be remembered as being an abusive person.

The loss of Mike Tyson’s four year-old daughter only days ago actually makes me feel really bad for him. I think it takes something like that for people to feel bad for him. Regardless of Mike Tyson’s past, I do feel that he lost a daughter.

Chris “Girl Abuser” Brown’s career is probably over. At least he probably has enough money to retire. If he wants to change his image, he should do things like volunteer at a battered-women’s shelter. Seeing him on a jet ski having fun does not give the image of someone very remorseful. It also doesn’t help when his own employees use violence while guarding him.

I suspect that we have seen the end of Chris “Girl Abuser” Brown’s career… and I don’t feel bad for him one bit.

Mel Gibson: Adultery and Wedlock.

2009-05-26T08:43:00.000-07:00

I want to make this very clear: Mel Gibson's Anti-Semitism has NOTHING to do with his religion. Catholicism does not teach hatred. Mel Gibson chose to hate Jews by himself or through the teachings of his Anti-Semitic father, Hutton Gibson.

I won’t pretend not to prejudge Mel Gibson. I cannot stand him because he’s an Anti-Semite. The guy has a real problem with Jews. I remember seeing elements of Jewish hatred in his movie The Passion of the Christ when every Jew had a hook-nose except for Jesus. But it could not be proven at that point if he really hated Jews. Then he was caught saying a lot of hateful things about Jews when he was arrested for DUI. He does not like my people and I don’t like him.

Even if I did like him, I have to say that it is always funny when a conservative gets in trouble for a sex scandal. The more conservative a person is, the more funny it is when they get caught in an affair.

Mel Gibson, like him or hate him, was married for 28 years. Unlike many celebrities who are handsome and filthy rich, Mel Gibson was loyal to his wife. This was actually expected. Mel Gibson is a practicing Traditionalist Catholic. To clarify, they still have Mass in Latin. I want to make it clear that his Anti-Semitism is not related to his faith. I hold nothing against any Catholic person because Mel Gibson shares the same religion.

But the reason why I bring up his background is that he is, or was, more deeply religious than most people in Hollywood. Some people were born into a religion and believe in their religion. Mel Gibson lived it.

Recently it was reported that Mel Gibson and his wife Robyn were getting a divorce. What came between them? An affair. Not only did Mel Gibson cheat on his wife (a major sin), but he has now admitted that his current girlfriend is pregnant with his child.

Mel Gibson reminds me of someone who goes from a veggie diet to pigging out on beef. He has gone from one of those people who held himself to a higher standard, to falling below the morals of most average people.

I really wonder if his marriage was hurt by the DUI arrest when he made the hateful comments against Jews. It is one thing to be the wife of Mel Gibson, People Magazine’s first choice for Sexiest Man Alive. It is another thing if you are married to Mel Gibson, Jew-hating drunk. Even if their marriage was doomed, he should have gotten a divorce before impregnating another woman.

I may not be a very religious person, but I feel a lot more proud of my morals than Mel Gibson should.

Sean Penn: Robin Wrong or Robin Wright?

2009-05-22T08:33:00.000-07:00

Sean Penn and Robin Wright Penn had filed for divorce in December of 2007 and then they reconciled. Last month, Sean Penn had filed to separate from his wife. He just withdrew his petition to separate from his wife.

Let me begin by saying that I am happy that Sean Penn and Robin Wright Penn are staying together. Both times that they were breaking up, I felt bad for them. They are one of the Hollywood couples that I actually liked.

I think that the main reason why I like them as a couple is because their relationship has been low-key. While Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s relationship is tabloid fodder, Sean Penn and Robin Wright Penn’s relationship has been rather normal.

Keep in mind, Sean Penn has been a newsmaker himself in recent years. He has been very vocal about his political views. He just won the Oscar for Best Actor. Sean Penn played Harvey Milk in the film, Milk. The issues of gay rights in the film are parallel to the current issues dealing with gay rights.

Robin Wright Penn is best known for the film The Princess Bride, which has become a cult classic. While Sean Penn has kept himself in the news, I cannot tell you a think about her personal life. This is because she has not done things in her personal life that would put her in the spotlight.

Usually, when two celebrities get together, they become more famous as a couple. In this case, Robin Wright Penn’s lack of controversy (which is a good thing) has kept them as normal as can be. For Sean Penn, Robin Wright is Mrs. Right.

From 1985-1989, Sean Penn was married to Madonna. The combination of two extremely outgoing celebrities is what the paparazzi dream of. Sean Penn is remembered for punching a member of the paparazzi while he was married to Madonna. He went to jail for this.

I would say that Robin Wright Penn’s calm social persona is truly what Sean Penn needs. They appear to balance each other out. I am very happy that they are going to stay together.

Jon & Kate's Fate

2009-05-20T09:19:00.000-07:00

I will begin by saying that I have never seen the show Jon & Kate Plus 8, so I am not judging the content of the show. I don’t know if it is entertaining, educational, or just gives audiences the voyeuristic joy of looking into the life of an odd family of ten people. My comments are about the alleged affairs, the choice of using reality television, and the fate of the show.

The first reality television show about a famous family was The Osbournes. It was interesting for an audience to imagine what it would be like to have Ozzy Osbourne as an actual father. Sharon Osbourne was not well-known prior to the show, but at this point, she is now a recognized celebrity. Another show that was similar in style was Hogan Knows Best, in which the audience could see what it would be like to have Hulk Hogan as a father.

What those two shows had in common was the fact that the families were rich enough that they already did not have to work. The first problem that I have with Jon & Kate Plus 8 is that the salary from the show allows the parents to stay at home, which makes the show not reality television in the first place. The show changes reality because the lives of Jon, Kate, and their eight children are different because of the wealth that the show brings them. We are not seeing what it would be really like for a family with eight children. We are seeing what it would be like if we took a family of ten and gave them enough money so the parents could stay at home. This is not the life that they would have without the show.

I do not have a problem with them filming the family. While their reality has been changed, it is probably an advantage for the children. I could be wrong though. If I had the choice as a young child, would I want my parents to be able to take care of me all day and have cameras around, or would I want them to be working and I’m stuck at a babysitter? As a young child, I would probably prefer the first option. While it is not reality, it may be easier for the children.

Now the real problem that I have with the show is that one or both of the parents may have had an affair. I do not want to seem like the moral police, but after you have eight children, you may want to try to keep a family that large from splitting up. I cannot imagine having eight children and then leaving a wife or having her leave me.

If Jon and Kate get a divorce, I would bet that their show would be cancelled. Who wants to see the sad story of eight children being driven back and forth from the mother’s house to the father’s house? I don’t want to even see the show the way it is.

I also have big problem with people who believe that Jon and Kate should be left alone. Why do they deserve any privacy? They chose to be paid to put their lives and the lives of their children on television. They are exploiting themselves. Anyone who is on reality television does not deserve privacy, because they are already getting paid to air their dirty laundry.

If Jon and Kate get divorced and they lose their show, it serves them right. They hit the gravy train. Never have to work. Just raise your children. All we ask is that you keep it in your pants and be loyal to your family. If the show is cancelled, I would love to see either of them back at work for the first day. You are willing to give up a life without work to have an affair? Enjoy your new bosses!

If Jon and Kate never had affairs, then I wish them well. Unlike the Octomom, they didn’t choose to become the parents of eight children. They had a set of twins and then the next birth gave them six more children. I hope for the sake of the children that the parents stay together. If they do stay together, I hope it’s not just for the sake of money.

Everybody Wins and The Issue

2009-05-12T13:33:00.001-07:00

Unlike Celebrity Apprentice, Donald Trump did not tell Carrie Prejean, “You’re fired!”

I’m going to try to be as unbiased as I can when writing about this issue.

I will admit that I support gay marriage and I wanted Carrie Prejean to lose her crown today. I did not want her to lose because she is against gay marriage. I wanted her to lose because I feel that she was taking a stand as to what she thought was not moral, and then we saw her own immoral actions.

I am not a very conservative person, but if I had a seventeen year-old daughter and she needed a parent to sign off to let her pose without a top and cover her breasts with her arm, I would not only say “No!”, but I would enroll her as the only Jewish member of the local Catholic high school.

That being said, I want to focus on Donald Trump. He had to be thinking right now, “Why me?” He is in a situation in which he is going to upset either the people who are for or against gay marriage with his decision to fire or keep Carrie Prejean as Miss California. Either way, someone is not going to be happy with him.

Let’s start with the rules. The rules state that she would not have been allowed to have posed nude or semi-nude in the past. Did she break that rule? Yes she did.

But rules are not laws. Donald Trump is the owner of contest. It’s his call no matter what. He decided not to go directly by the book when he decided to let Carrie Prejean keep her crown.

Why did he break his own rules? In my opinion, and I could be dead wrong, he knew that he would upset the fewest number of people if he let her keep her crown. Let’s say that you have two groups of people. Group A wants you to take something away from Carrie. Group B wants you to let Carrie keep something. It would upset Group B more if you take the crown away. It would just annoy Group A if you don’t take it away. Group B (those against gay marriage) would be more likely to boycott Donald Trump products and shows. They may refuse to ever watch the Miss USA competition or Celebrity Apprentice again. Group A (those who support gay marriage) are annoyed, but as a member of that group, I’m not going to boycott anything by Donald Trump. I’m annoyed, but not hurt.

So Donald Trump made the safe choice. As a business man, I will not fault him for that. But I have to say, he was very selective about his own rules.

Winner: Donald Trump

I will also admit that Carrie Prejean is in a better position to make a career than the actual Miss USA, Kristen Dalton. Carrie is recognized throughout the nation. She is celebrated by half of the people and vilified by the other. You don’t need most of the nation liking you to make a career. You need followers who will support you. I would bet in a few years she will be hired by Fox News. I think that the attention that she was given will provide her with an audience and potentially wealth.

Winner: Carrie Prejean

Donald Trump said that he would love to have Perez Hilton back as a judge next year. Perez has already stated that he would love to be a judge again. This controversy made him a symbol for gay rights, not just a symbol for celebrity hatred. This controversy has made him a bigger celebrity than before.

Winner: Perez Hilton

Finally, the issue of gay marriage. When Perez Hilton asked Carrie Prejean about gay marriage on April 19th, only four states allowed gay marriage. As of today, May 12th (less than one month later), five states allow gay marriage. Maine is the newest state to do so.

Since 2004, the increase in discussion about gay marriage has led to states allowing it to become law. Gay marriage was not a very public issue in the 1990s. No discussion led to no progress. So in my opinion, the debate over gay marriage in the Miss USA competition has been a positive thing for those who support gay marriage.

It looks like this is a trend that will grow over time. Carrie Prejean may be against gay marriage, but progress on this issue can only be held back. It will not be prevented. Over the next few years, I think it is safe to say that more states will allow gay marriage.

Winner: Gay Marriage

Carrie Prejean has the potential to turn into the next Anita Bryant. I did not know who Anita Bryant was until I saw the movie Milk. If you do not know who Anita Bryant is, then look her name up. I think that Carrie Prejean needs to think long and hard before she walks in those shoes.

Facebook 1, Twitter 0

2009-05-10T12:50:00.000-07:00

This post is dedicated to January Williams, who suggested that I write about viral entertainment with examples like YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter. Since most people use YouTube to watch videos and not to make their own, I have decided to compare Facebook and Twitter.

I will admit that it may take more time for me to fully evaluate Twitter. Just like Facebook, Twitter may change over time. But right now, I have to say that Facebook is winning.

I will begin by saying that I was one of the first people to use Facebook. In fact, when I signed up for Facebook, it wasn't even at facebook.com. Instead, it was located at thefacebook.com. Facebook started at Harvard University and then became open to the other Ivy League schools. After that, Facebook was opened to other top schools. When I signed up for Facebook in April 2004, it was only available at about 20 schools.

Facebook continued to evolve over the last five years. Not only can you updated your status, but your friends can comment on your status. You can post comments on the walls of profiles and people can comment on your comments. These comments and responses can lead to open discussions among friends. I have actually made a few friends based on conversations that I have had with people I knew from college. You can also join groups and even create your own groups on Facebook. I have gained friends through different groups and sometimes those friendships have formed between people who actually disagree on topics.

Twitter is a great format for celebrities to give small updates to their fans. Updates can quickly be sent out for others to see. Fans choose to follow the celebrity, but the celebrity does not have to follow or befriend the fan.

Here are the problems that I have with Twitter:

1. Without requiring mutual friendship, the one-way friendship leads to one-way conversations. It is possible that you may try to be very active on Twitter without receiving any responses.

2. When you respond to updates on someone's Twitter page, your response does not show up on the person's page. At least with Facebook, seeing the responses on the person's page can allow a multi-person discussion. Facebook is about more than updates, and it handles updates better than Twitter does.

3. While Twitter is great for celebrities, I don't think that it improves "interaction" between celebrities and their fans. If a celebrity uses a personal website, Myspace, Facebook, or Twitter, it is up to the celebrity to do the work to interact with the fans. While many celebrities praise Twitter, they are human beings and will only interact with fans as much as they choose.

I would say that Facebook is designed so you can interact with your friends. Twitter is designed so you can listen to, not interact with, celebrities. I will not declare Facebook the winner yet because I don't know how Twitter may change over time. I will say that:

1. Facebook is winning.

2. Unlike when I started to use Facebook, the lack of interaction on Twitter is making me bored of it.

If Twitter does not improve, then not only will I declare that Facebook is the winner, but I may cancel my Twitter account.

Dom DeLuise and Emily Rubin, My Sister

2009-05-06T07:46:00.000-07:00

Most people who will write about the passing of Dom DeLuise will probably focus on his funny movies. They will tell you what a great actor he was. He was a great actor and starred in great movies, but I want to focus on the real Dom and his kindness to a fan of his, my sister Emily.

Emily teaches high school English in Arizona. For a class assignment, Emily gave her students a choice of four celebrities to write a letter to requesting an autograph for their teacher. Dom DeLuise was one of those four celebrities. I will not say the names of the other three because I do not want to appear critical of them. Emily estimated that seventy percent of her students wrote to Dom.

I do not blame the other three celebrities for not writing back because they did not get that many letters. I cannot judge how one of them would have reacted if the celebrity had received the attention that was given to Dom.

If I said that Dom gave my sister an autograph, you may think that it was very nice of him, but he did a lot more than that. He sent a package to my sister containing:

1. An 8 x 10 head shot that was signed, "To Emily, the best teacher ever. Love, Dom DeLuise."

2. A postcard of Dom and a parrot that he signed with a message for her students letting them know that he loved their letters.

3. Two children's books autographed by him.

4. A picture of a cat that he drew personally for my sister which he also autographed.

What Dom DeLuise did for my sister and her students went above my expectations for any celebrity. He showed a level of appreciation that is rare in any person, celebrity or non-celebrity. It is not only the kindness that he showed my sister and her students that touches me, but the fact that their letters meant so much to him. He appreciated the students for writing to him.

This is how I will remember Dom DeLuise.

Millionaire Bratmaker

2009-05-01T08:30:00.000-07:00

Yes I’m using a cute title for Millionaire Matchmaker. I love the show, but have been a little disappointed lately. The problem is that the majority of the couples that are set up are doomed from the start because the millionaire men are the bachelors from Hell.

For those who have not seen the show, it is about the Millionaire’s Club which is run by Patti Stanger, a third-generation matchmaker. The reason why she is matchmaking for millionaires is because they can pay her enough to keep her business successful.

Her company does a lot of work to get new millionaires to turn to her for love. She then usually sets up an event in which two millionaire men get to mingle with a number of women who were picked for the event based on how much of a match they are for the men. Some men have very picky standards. Many of them may only want to date someone of his religion or a woman with a certain color of hair. He then picks usually two women to go on a brief ten minute date right there, and then picks one to go on a separate date later.

The problem with the show in the second season is that the majority of the men really appear to be jerks. Their egos are larger than their bank accounts. That can be expected. What cannot be expected is the treatment that they give to these women.

On a recent show, a millionaire who claims that he has $400 million was set up by Patti to date a girl who was not only gorgeous, but seriously looking for love. During the date while they were playing golf, he decided to urinate behind a bush. The worst part about that is that it looked like he was merely yards from his house. Without washing his hands, he went back to playing golf with her.

He may have had $400 million, but when he called her after the date, she hung up the phone on him.

Some of the men were showing strong interest in the women during the dates, only to admit to Patti after the date that they did not feel a true connection. If a guy does not feel a strong connection, then he shouldn’t pretend otherwise.

Sometimes there just isn’t a connection. That is life. The problem with the show in the second season is that the majority of them men appear to be extremely rude to the women who they are trying to date. The women appear to be more interested in the men on the show. Let’s face it, the men are wealthy and the women know if they find love, they may also never have to work. But the problem is I am seeing such a lack of effort on the part of the men. They are rude, selfish pigs.

For every one man who really appears to want love, I see three who appear to just want the attention of the camera. In my opinion, that is the problem with the second season. Knowing that they will be on national television, I believe that a number of those millionaires are paying Patti to find them dates because they really just want to be on television. What I don’t think that they don’t realize is that their family and friends will be watching. I bet some of those relatives are ashamed of what they see.

I truly believe that Patti is doing exactly what she should be doing. She is being tough with the millionaires. She is trying to find them love, not sex. I cannot fault her in any way because she cannot stop these men from showing their true selves. I just would prefer that the men who do go to her show a little more respect for their potential girlfriends.

The Perez Is Right

2009-04-22T12:24:00.000-07:00

I have never been a follower of Perez Hilton. I’ve gone to his website once, but I prefer to get my celebrity news from other locations. He is a celebrity who I’m okay with. I’m not a fan, but I’m also not someone who has anything against him.

Well, maybe I have recently become a fan after his recent actions…

Perez Hilton was a celebrity judge at the 2009 Miss USA Competition. I did not watch the competition and really don’t care about who wins. Maybe I would be happy to hear that Miss Virginia would win, because I’m one who supports the home state. Other than that, I have no stake in the competition and no interest in watching it.

This year, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, was asked a question by Perez Hilton in the question and answer section of the competition. He asked her, “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?”

Her response was, “Well I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one way or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. You know what, in my country, in my family, I do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anybody out there. But that’s how I was raised and I believe that it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you.”

She lost the competition and overall was in second place.

Perez Hilton later stated that she did not lose because she was against gay marriage. She lost because she gave a horrible answer that would divide people. He stated that Miss USA is supposed to be someone who unites people.

I think I would put it this way. From the view of someone who is not a fan or a viewer of Miss USA, I feel that the winner should have been someone who can give an answer that would show respect towards all groups, even if they have some disagreements. The problem with Carrie Prejean is that she had certain views and she never had to publicly express her views in a way that wouldn’t seem against one group or another.

What she could have said was this, “I will admit that this is a very difficult subject. I believe that it would be unfair for me to tell different states what to do. But the great part about this country is that we are given the right within states to consider these options. I would rather live in a nation in which people are allowed to consider what they believe in their heart is right, than a nation in which they have no choice but to have the government make decisions one way or another.”

Take a look at that answer. A person who is against gay marriage can give an answer like that, promoting democracy and states’ rights, without excluding anyone from the table.

What I see in Carrie Prejean is someone who is against something. But to be against something does not have to mean against people. This is why the question and answer section is great in beauty competitions. It forces people like Carrie Prejean to be judged on something other than her looks.

To show that I’m not just a liberal hack, I’m going to take an issue where I am against something, and show how I can express my view without being against anyone. I am against illegal immigration. I do not believe that people should be able to come to our nation and work without entering legally. That may seem like I’m against a group, but I’m not. If I was in a beauty contest (which would never happen in my case) and I was asked a question on illegal immigration, here is the answer I would give:

“The problem with illegal immigration is that it creates poverty in society instead of helping people succeed. I believe that the best way to help immigrants succeed is to make sure that they come in legally, and are then given the tools to succeed. I believe that when immigrants come to our nation, they should receive training to learn English and have the proper documentation to enter any job that they are qualified for. We want everyone who comes to this country to have the right to pursue happiness. With an equal playing field, I believe everyone can have the right to pursue success in our great nation.”

That is not against immigrants. Instead, it shows that I want them to enter properly and truly be able to succeed. I am not against any immigrant, but believe that illegal immigration prevents them from truly being able to move up in careers and fully pursue the American dream.

Had Carrie Prejean thought to herself in the past how she could be against gay marriage in a way that would not seem anti-gay, then she would have won the competition. But then again, maybe she is just against gay people.

Perez Hilton was right for asking her the question and he was right for criticizing her later for her bad answer. It’s easier to be for groups of people than to be against them. I’m not saying that Carrie Prejean should be for gay marriage. I think that if she is against it, she should give better reasons for her view than using George W. Bush's talking points. Also, if she is going to be against something like gay marriage, then maybe she shouldn’t have entered a beauty pageant. Doesn’t she realize how many gay men would be involved in running beauty pageants? That would be like a member of the KKK trying to make it big in rap music.

Then again, Carrie Prejean may just be a religious, moral person who is linked to Michael Phelps, who happened to be caught smoking pot at a party last year. I would have loved see her get asked in a competition about her views on marijuana!

Jackie Chan: Against Democracy?

2009-04-20T14:13:00.000-07:00

I want to begin by saying that I believe that celebrities should be allowed to say anything that they want. At the same time, they should realize that stupid comments can get them in trouble with fans who may choose to no longer see their movies. After Mel Gibson’s anti-semitic comments, I have chosen to no longer see his movies.

Jackie Chan had recently spoken out with comments that were critical of democracy. He said, “I'm not sure if it's good to have freedom or not. If you're too free, you're like the way Hong Kong is now. It's very chaotic. Taiwan is also chaotic. ... I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we're not being controlled, we'll just do what we want."

There is a difference between doing anything you want and having freedom with restrictions. In the United States, you are allowed to speak out when you disagree with the policies of the government. When President Bush was in office, people spoke out against the United States being in Iraq. Now that President Obama is in office, there are people on the other side of the political spectrum who are speaking out against our nation’s current fiscal policies.

As I said on a radio show that I called into recently, protest leads to discussion which leads to democracy. I respect and encourage those who disagree with me politically to speak out. Maybe they will have some valid points on certain issues. No political party is always right.

The government of China is not a democracy. They do not allow people to publicly speak out against certain policies. When one does not have the right to protest the policies of the government, it is possible that the few will rule in power against the wishes of the many.

What if the government of China decided that action movies were inappropriate for the people in China to view? What if that meant that Jackie Chan’s action movies were banned in China? Would he still believe that democracy may not be a good choice for nations?

In the United States, maybe our freedom has led to people not making the best choices in their own lives. Freedom means that people have the right to make their own choices, even if others think that those people say and do stupid things. I think it’s safe to say that Jackie Chan has definitely exercised his right to say something very stupid.

While I believe that it was a stupid thing for Jackie Chan to question if democracy is the best solution, I think he should clarify what he truly means. If he is against democracy, say so. If he prefers democracy, say so. If he is not sure if democracy is a good or a bad thing, then give some examples. I think that he was trying to appeal to a group that is also against democracy. What Jackie Chan should learn is that sometimes the opinion you take can actually cost you fans. Trying to be Mr. Nice Guy to those against democracy may not have been the best choice for him to make. Maybe it would have been better had he not spoken out at all.

Longer NFL Season

2009-03-31T14:54:00.000-07:00

The NFL is considering an increase in the length of the regular season from 16 games to 17 or 18 games. At first, I was against this. The first problem is that the NFL has too many injured players. The second problem is that the teams play from pre-season in August to early February if your team goes to the Super Bowl. The third problem is that it will be easier for future players to break records that are set with a longer season (most touchdown passes, sacks, tackles, etc.).

But something made me change my mind. To increase the length of the regular season, it looks like the NFL will reduce the number of pre-season games. This means that the NFL games will still be played over the same period of time, but they will reduce the number of meaningless pre-season games.

I have to admit that I hate the NFL pre-season. I feel that it is a step above two-hand touch football. Currently, the Washington Redskins are going to play four pre-season games. What normally happens in pre-season is that they:

1. Keep the starting quarterback off of the field for fear that he will be injured and miss the real season.
2. Put in players who are competing for an NFL position and are likely to not make the team.
3. Since it is the pre-season and the games don’t really count, it is more important that players don’t get injured than for players to play their best.

Okay I’ll admit that the players who are trying to make the team will play their best, but I don’t want to waste time watching them. I want to see the starters try their best to win.

The NFL is a very dangerous game with every single team having injuries. I doubt that there was one team in the NFL last year that did not have at least one starter injured. The NBA is not as violent as the NFL is, so a pre-season game of the NBA would probably be more entertaining. Sure players get injured in the NBA, but not as often.

For the NFL to cut two of the pre-season games and to increase the regular season by two-games would get me to watch … two more games! Instead of viewing this as a dragged out season, I would view it as removing two useless games and replacing them with two meaningful ones.

Now there are some NFL players who may not enjoy playing two more games a season. For a player who is paid $8 million a season, he is earning $500,000 a game … even if they don’t win! So now that player would only be earning $444,444.44 a season. I cannot feel sorry for someone in that position.

I feel that the NFL would make a lot more money and the fans would actually prefer a longer NFL season. That is, unless your team is losing every game.

Give me the paycheck you earn for two games and I’ll retire. Without endorsements!

Dr. Evil: Get a driver!

2009-03-14T16:38:00.001-07:00

As a Redskins fan, I was very happy to see them get Albert Haynesworth in the free agent market. I was surprised to read that they gave him a 7-year contract for $100 million. This made me think of Dr. Evil from the Austin Powers movies holding his pinky finger up to his lips, saying, “One Hundred Million Dollars!”

Albert Haynesworth was recently in a car accident in which someone was hurt. It does not appear that alcohol was involved. He has been charged for the accident and could face a maximum penalty of a $500 fine and six months in jail.

Now the $500 is practically nothing to him, but the timing of the jail sentence could have him miss his first season with the Redskins. That could be a loss of $14 million! In addition to losing the money, losing a year in the NFL can reduce his ability to perform well the next year. He may not have access or enough access to weightlifting equipment to stay in NFL shape.

While it appears that alcohol did not contribute to the car accident, he has to be accused of doing something criminal for him to be charged. He was probably speeding. I cannot help but to be reminded of Paris Hilton and Mel Gibson, who were both arrested for drunk driving.

These are people who are rich enough to afford personal drivers. In addition, they are famous enough to have fans willing to drive them for free! Paris Hilton recently had a reality show in which contestants were competing to be her new best friend. It is clear that a lot of people would be willing to drive her for free just to hang around her. She could have avoided that time in jail had she giving a fan a day to hang out with Paris.

In the case of Mel Gibson, had he allowed for some super-fan to hang out with him, he would have never had that public, anti-semitic tirade. He would have just been rumored to be a Jew hater.

I hope that Albert Haynesworth is innocent. If he is guilty, then I hope that he gets a personal driver. We know that he can afford it!

Just as I was about to upload this article, I just read that Browns WR Stallworth hit and killed a pedestrian. It is not clear if charges will be filed or not.

Dave Mustaine makes peace with Metallica

2009-03-08T14:44:00.001-07:00

I don’t usually believe that some of the successful musicians are actually “tortured artists”. How can anyone feel sorry for a rich rock star? To be a rich rock star means that you have fame, enough wealth to never have to work again, and enough female fans to easily find someone interested in dating you. There is one musician who truly is a tortured artist. He is Dave Mustaine of Megadeth.

A lot of people have heard of Megadeth but unless they are into Heavy Metal, they may not be able to name a single song by the group. That is, until you hear “Peace Sells” and remember the bass that was used by MTV News.

If you are into Heavy Metal, then you probably know the music of Megadeth. Technically, the music is referred to as Thrash Metal. The big four of Thrash Metal are Metallica, Megadeth, Anthrax, and Slayer. Anthrax had a changing line of lead singers. Slayer played a lot of songs about Satanism and references towards Nazis. Even though the members of Slayer are not Nazis, it kept them from gaining mainstream acceptance.

Dave Mustaine was the lead guitarist of Metallica and was later fired from the band before they released any albums. He formed Megadeth. Dave Mustaine would both play guitar and be the lead singer of the band. Megadeth became a very successful band, selling millions of albums. But… not as successful as Metallica.

It has to hurt being number two. It probably hurts more for an NFL player to lose the Super Bowl than to lose the NFC or AFC Championship game to get into the Super Bowl. But the only thing to hurt more than being number two is to have been fired by number one. For years, Dave Mustaine would try to make Megadeth the best Thrash Metal band. Had he never been in Metallica, he would be known as the leader of one of the best Thrash Metal bands of all time. Instead, he will always be compared to the band that fired him. Starting from scratch, he would form the number two band, but always be known as the man who lost his chance to be in the top band.

This feud between Megadeth and Metallica would last for years. The members of Metallica did not suffer from this feud. They were the top band. Had Metallica been outsold by Megadeth, then James Hetfield and Lars Ulrich of Metallica would probably have regretted their decision to fire Dave Mustaine.

Instead, the feud would torture Dave Mustaine for years. People would mock him for being fired from Metallica. Dave Mustaine was a truly tortured artist who could not overcome the pain of being fired by Metallica.

Recently, Metallica was chosen for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. Dave Mustaine was never on a single Metallica record so he was not eligible to be inducted with them. James Hetfield and Lars Ulrich decided to invite Dave Mustaine to the pre-ceremony and to the ceremony when Metallica would be inducted. Dave was truly touched by this invitation. Although he would be unable to attend the ceremony because Megadeth would be on tour, Dave decided to write an open letter to Metallica to thank them for their invitation:

“Metallica, as you know has been selected to be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame (on April 4th). So, it is with much respect that I say congratulations!

I also had the nice surprise of hearing that they called to invite me to the pre-ceremony party the night before, and then to the actual ceremony. Unfortunately as you all know, I will be winding down our European tour with Judas Priest so I will be unable to attend.

However, I’d like to say to Lars (Ulrich) and James (Hetfield), I am so very proud of all you have accomplished. I will continue to pray for the very best for you and your families as I always have.

Thank you for the invitation and thinking of me.

Respectfully yours,Dave Mustaine”

I really hope that this mends the rift between Dave Mustaine and Metallica. I hope this more for Dave because I believe that if he is at peace with his parting from Metallica, he will no longer have to compete with them. He will be able to work on making music with the focus on one thing: making great Megadeth albums.

Oscar Prediction: Slumdog Millionaire

2009-02-21T04:06:00.000-08:00

Why should anyone listen to my Oscar Prediction when it appears that everyone else is also predicting that Slumdog Millionaire will win the Oscar for Best Picture?

The first reason is because since 1997, I have seen all five films that were up for Best Picture before the Oscars occurred. In eleven Oscar shows, I have predicted the Best Picture Winner nine out of eleven times. In 1998, I predicted that Saving Private Ryan would win Best Picture. Shakespeare In Love won, and from that day, that was considered one of the biggest upsets in Oscar history. In 2005, I predicted that Brokeback Mountain would win Best Picture. The film Crash won. While Crash winning was a big surprise, many people believe that it was a better film. I think that Brokeback Mountain had the Best Picture film, but Crash was probably a more powerful film. I cannot complain about Crash winning.

The second reason why I think you should listen to me is because I can describe what works and doesn’t work about each of the nominees for Best Picture without ruining the film for you.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button was a good movie, but not a great movie. The film is about a man who lives his life going from the body of an old man and grows younger throughout his life. The problem is that his story is not really that compelling. Compare the film to Forrest Gump, by the same screenwriter. Forrest Gump lived an amazing life. I don’t think that Benjamin Button’s life was that amazing. The fact that this film has 13 Oscar nominations is really surprising. If it wins anything, I would guess it would win some technical awards. I still say that you should see the movie, on DVD.

The Reader is probably the least likely film to have been nominated for Best Picture. Kate Winslet had two films out at the same time. Her other film, Revolutionary Road, got more attention than the Reader prior to the Oscar nominations. This film is the least likely to win Best Picture. The problem with the film is that the story of a Nazi with a hidden past is less compelling than the other films that I have seen dealing with the Holocaust. There is a strong chance that Kate Winslet will win Best Actress. She was great in the movie, but she is also getting more attention than the film itself. While I wasn’t one of the people who was shocked and upset that The Dark Knight wasn’t nominated for Best Picture, I think it would have made more sense for The Dark Knight to receive a Best Picture nomination than The Reader.

Frost/Nixon is a great movie. I think that it is a solid film with an amazing performance by Frank Langella as Richard Nixon. The film showed that Nixon was wrong for what he did, but the film also gave him a human side. I think that Republicans and people who see the good in Richard Nixon could also enjoy the film. In a way, the film made me feel kind of sorry for Richard Nixon. While this is a solid film, it also doesn’t have that Best Picture feeling. It amused my intellect a lot more than my heart.

Every year, there are a few films that are actually competing for Best Picture, and the rest of the films are just nominees. This year, the only film that I feel is seriously in competition with Slumdog Millionaire is the film Milk. I have to say that Milk has that Best Picture feeling. To learn about a man, who decided not to just be a regular man, but to fight for what he believes in, is reminiscent of at least two other Best Picture winners that I can name, Gandhi and Braveheart. Sean Penn gives an amazing performance as Harvey Milk. I think that he is better in this film than he was in Mystic River. He is also the only person truly competing with Mickey Rourke for Best Actor. I highly recommend seeing Milk. In another year, this film could easily win Best Picture.

I predict that Slumdog Millionaire will win Best Picture. It is a very powerful film that shows the difficult life of the poor in India. The compelling story of what Jamal went through during his life is what makes this movie great. I don’t want to go deep into detail, but I think that just like Milk, the film has that powerful Oscar feel. I think that this film will be more popular with audiences. I felt great after watching the movie. It is very powerful. I will be very surprised of Slumdog Millionaire does not win Best Picture. I think that the attention that it is getting is truly overpowering the attention to the film Milk.

There is still a chance that Slumdog Millionaire could lose. It has been reported that some of the children who play leads in the early part of the film are still living in horrible poverty in India. People don’t like the thought of the stars of a film that they love actually living in poverty after making the film, especially if those stars are children.

If Slumdog Millionaire makes millions of dollars, the stars should not be stuck in poverty while the producers enjoy the feast of the film’s success. I have read that the filmmakers are trying to provide for the young stars. I do not know enough about this situation to render my own verdict. I would say that I don’t think that this controversy will be enough to alter the outcome of the Oscars.

Best Picture: Slumdog Millionaire.

Kate Winslet: Her Own Worst Enemy

2009-02-10T05:23:00.000-08:00

It is not often that an actor or actress can hurt their chances of winning an award by having two great films in the theaters at once. This has happened in the past and it is most likely to happen again. This year it is happening to Kate Winslet.

Last month, Kate Winslet won two Golden Globes. She won Best Supporting Actress for The Reader and she won Best Actress in a Drama for Revolutionary Road. Now she is nominated for Best Actress for The Reader for an Oscar. She wanted to be nominated for Revolutionary Road instead. Now Revolutionary Road does not have the same hype as it did before the Oscar nominations came out. Of the two films, I have only seen The Reader. I saw it because it is nominated for Best Picture.

Kate Winslet is a very talented actress. She may finally win an Oscar this year. She was great in The Reader. But had one of her two films come out next winter, she probably would have been nominated for both of them. I think that she would admit this too.