 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
We just got back from This Is It. It was amazing. While I've always enjoyed the big Michael Jackson hits from the '80's, I never considered myself a fan. But I'm so glad I saw this movie. It's a documentary of the rehearsals for the Michael Jackson "comeback" show that was to have begun in London and continued for fifty performances. It makes clear the tragedy of his loss, but, somehow, the stronger feeling it produces in me is gratefulness that it was filmed, rather than sorrow that it turned out to be the end of his life. While Michael's features bear the marks of multiple ill-conceived plastic surgeries, the expressions that animate the strange face provide a glimpse of inner joy. And, his moves are godly. It's surprising enough that a fifty-year-old man could move with such fluidity, but the real surprise for me is witnessing a species of talent I hadn't even been aware existed. He seemed to posses a singular genius for creating a world of gesture within a dance. For a non-fan, whose primary exposure to Michael Jackson for the past fifteen years has been through the lenses of paparazzi, where he appears as a withdrawn freak, it's also stunning to witness the powerful charisma he exudes as he quietly insists on artistic perfection from the cast of thousands who back him up as singers, dancers, musicians, and technicians. He leads with absolute confidence, but a complete lack of ego. He's the antithesis of prima dona. As the people he works with fall into adulation, his standard reply of "God Bless You" becomes oddly moving. There's no falseness to the modesty. It really was the music, and the rhythm, and the dance, that he loved. Tags: fandom, film, music
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Someone on Twitter linked to an article about the failure of the new movie "Precious" to be nominated for an award. The author speculates about whether the promotion of the movie by Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry might be partly to blame. I don't have any opinion on this question, but one sentence in the article got me quite annoyed. "It may be true that Winfrey's promotional shoulders aren't as strong as they once were, and I do think Perry's 'Madea' movies debase their audience rather than uplift them. (italics mine. source)" Given that Perry's movies (which I haven't seen, but based on what the article itself says) strive to be nothing greater than lowbrow humor, why in the world would anyone demand that they "uplift" the audience? It seems to me that the author is assuming that a black entertainer has a duty to be the "voice" of his "people." Now, I don't dispute anyone's right to find Perry's films offensive. That's a legitimate opinion. But to say "this low-brow comedy produced by a black person failed by being low-brow comedy" is ludicrous, unless one is opposed to all lowbrow comedy. I am reminded of the infuriating tendency of many people to criticize overtly sexual women by saying that such women are not promoting "respect for women." Again, it's certainly possible for a specific woman to be offensive. If you find a specific media portrayal of and/or by a woman offensive, say so, by all means. But it is not the duty of any woman to fashion every act or performance around the goal of "respect." "Respect" is not any woman's only goal in life, and other goals do not necessarily preclude respect. Tags: film, gender, internet, tv
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yuck. This "news" report is shit on so many different levels. First, it tells us again and again that it's horrible that a BEAUTIFUL woman developed a neurological disorder. This was the complaint of the person who posted this in a comment elsewhere on LJ. I agree that the way a woman's external physical attributes are singled out as reasons to care about her difficulties is vile. No, the problem isn't that a woman who enjoyed the physical activity of cheerleading, and who generally benefited from the relative feeling of physical freedom people without movement disorders have, now has to adjust to the unwanted restrictions of her disorder. The tragedy is that a BEAUTIFUL WOMAN is now tragically disabled. (I think there may be some ableism going on here too, but I'm not personally sensitive enough to the issue to make that call.) Despite the sexist equation of female attractiveness with female worth, I'm actually much more offended by the way the report very strongly insinuates that the flu shot caused the neurological disorder, without providing any evidence whatsoever that there's any connection. This makes me think that there simply isn't any such evidence, and the report is fear-mongering for ratings in a way that's likely to actually cause a number of deaths by dissuading people from getting vaccinations. When millions of people undergo a similar medical procedure (such as a flu vaccine) inevitably a small number of these people will develop some other medical problem that they would have developed whether they'd had the first procedure or not. To insinuate so strongly that the vaccine caused the disability, in the total absense of any evidence, is the height of journalistic irresponsibility. Tags: gender, journalism, video
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directions: 1) Put your media player of choice on shuffle. 2) List the first fifteen songs that come up add "in my pants" to the end. 3) Bold the ones that actually made you laugh. 1. The four of us are dying in my pants2. The Marshalls are dead in my pants {I sense a worrisome theme...} 3. Crash Crash in my pants 4. Schwartzer Stern in my pants {??} 5. Issues in my pants 6. Oxidados in my pants 7. Forgive me in my pants 8. Billie Jean in my pants 9. Come on home in my pants 10. Every planet we reach is dead in my pants 11. Focker in my pants 12. Bohemian like you in my pants 13. Weird science in my pants14. Cavaddu Cecu De La Minera in my pants {I don't know what this means, but the song sounds very sad} 15. First it giveth in my pants. (Meme via ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) n00dlesbff314) Tags: lyrics, memes, music
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think Don may have done a good, decent thing by letting the epileptic brother of his current fling get out of the car, instead of driving him to where he was supposed to go. It sounded to me like the guy would have been institutionalized along with psychotic and/or severely retarded people, and leaving him to "fend for himself" might actually have been the better of two bad possibilities. I mentioned this possibility at ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif) madmen_tv but no one answered my comment, so I'm back here, dying to discuss it. The only person who mentioned the situation so far seems to be assuming that Don did something heartless, which strikes me as quite bizarre. I think maybe giving the young man a chance to live as a free adult in a society that still treated people with epilepsy as pariahs may be one of Don's rare, solidly decent actions. Tags: ethics, lj, mad men, tv
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(Poll is almost totally anonymous. I can see your responses, but no one else can, and I won't tell anyone what you chose. You may comment to let people know what you think, if you want to. However, please be polite to other commenters, even if you find them completely rage-inducing.) Poll #1464154
Open to: All, detailed results viewable to: None, participants: 21 Which is closest to your belief Tags: ethics, law, news, polls
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
17 (81.0%)