So, we are down to the final five on my guilty pleasure, American Idol. This week's theme/guest mentor, Neil Diamond, proved to be pretty dull. In fact, most of it bored me so much I don't even want to talk about it. Highlights: David Cook's 2nd song, All I Need is You (or something like that-if its not Sweet Caroline I don't know much Neil Diamond), and Brooke White's I Am, I Said which got her back on the right track after weeks of bad song choices and barely hanging on performances. Lowlights: Brooke White, who had the bad sense to choose the Monkees version of "I'm a Believer" probably the most well known song choice of the night, since its been covered in virtually every generation. It was so icky. And as much as I like him, Jason Castro's first song was OK but the second, September Morn, was another case of him having no connection to the song and I agreed with the judges that he has lost "who he is" the past couple of weeks and sadly, that is his moneymaker since his vocals are not as strong as some of the others.
I was mad at Archie for doing Sweet Caroline, because I LOVE that song and he was just so bland doing it. I was more upset with Randy for calling it da bomb because clearly he got paid to say that. It wasn't bad, it just wasn't anything special either.
So overall I was disappointed. I think Brooke will go home because a) even though Jason probably deserves to, the ladies love him; and b) even though Brooke is more interesting than Syesha, Syesha is not a bad singer and manages to squeak by each week; and c) Brooke had her best night in several weeks (ignoring the Monkees fiasco) and people always leave when you think they are safe. That's what gets you the ratings! And lets face it-we all know neither of the Davids are going ANYWHERE.
So, I am way more interested in next week at this point. I hear they are doing Songs that influenced Rock, via the Top 500 list from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. A lot of these songs have already been done this year by the Top 12 in other theme nights.
http://www.rockhall.com/exhibithighlights/500-songs/
Early song choice predictions-just by scanning the list-
Archie-My Girl-DUH! But really, I think anything in the genre of Everly Brothers, Drifters, Four Tops, etc is right up Archie's cheese-paved alley and he has gone more upbeat in the past couple weeks.
Cook-Who the heck knows? I think he could sing the phone book at this point and still make Top 2. I would like to see a modernized version of Cream's Sunshine of Your Love and a rock version of Ray Charles I Got a Woman. Of course, he could also take this opportunity to make me love him forever and do Johnny Cash. He is the only one who should attempt this. Hear that, Archie and Castro? You are not cool enough for JC.
Syesha-this will be her chance to pull out some Diana Ross/Supremes and Aretha Franklin but I would love to see her do the Crystals He's a Rebel or Da Doo Ron Ron just because I love those songs! I like her better when she is not overdoing a ballad anyway.
Brooke-if she survives, there is not a lot on this list that fits her that has not already been done so maybe Peter, Paul, and Mary If I had a Hammer? I bet she is now sad that she already did Carole King's You Got a Friend!!!! I could also see her trying Patsy Cline's I Fall to Pieces (maybe that's just me wishing for the irony of it all) but I don't think she has the pipes to do Patsy.
Jason-also tough-not a lot here that fits him and the judges clearly warned him that if he is back, he needs to get back to what he does best. Maybe the Allman Brothers Ramblin Man? Marvin Gaye's What's Goin On? There are Beach Boys songs on the list, but I think that is too obvious.
I must mention that there are also several Bob Dylan songs but I kind of hope that no one takes those on. I also hope Archie stays away from the Jackson 5 choices. And Stevie Wonder, since they always act like he is the 2nd coming of Stevie.
Anyway, if you care, check out the list and tell me what you think!
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Monday, April 28, 2008
Oh My, Oh Miley....
So unless you live under a rock, you are familiar with the mini-mogul that is Hannah Montana aka Miley Cyrus. She's 15, cute as a button, little girls love her. And for a while there, she had a pretty spotless repuation as Disney's little darling. However, in the last year or so, particularly the last few months when Britney has actually started flying under the radar, the paparazzi and entertainment media in general have taken up following Miley and her family around, trying to find the "dirt" that for awhile did not seem to exist. Might we actually have a good role model on our hands, an anti-Britney-Lindsay-Olsen Twins?
But lately some cracks have started to show. Various "scandalous" photos began cropping up on the internet-Miley in a bikini (because no one else wears those), having a sleepover with girlfriends (again, totally un-teenager-like activity), and more recently, showing us a peek of her green bra and laying up against a boy (they are both FULLY clothed). I do feel sorry for her, because she's 15, and when I was 15 I took stupid pictures with my friends (although, we used FILM back then and you did not really take photos that were too crazy because you know someone had to look at them at the photo lab-aaahhhh, the digital age has made us so much more free). I have defended Miley for awhile now, because my friend and I did randomly meet her in the mall one day and I was sooo impressed by how down to earth she was, how NORMAL she seemed for a 14 year old gazillionare, and by how well she carried herself as hysterical little girls followed her around. She was nice to everyone, from the sales associates to the moms and girls that came up to her asking for autographs or just to say hi as a fan. We did not approach her, she approached us to comment on my friends' bag; she was covered up, had on little makeup, and just seemed like such an average teenage girl. No way will this girl end up like Britney, I thought. She's just too well behaved. Not to mention, her dad, Billy Ray Cyrus, has seen all sides of fame-the good, the bad, the mistakes, the comeback...surely they will be smart about this and keep her head on straight.
Cut to April 28, 2008. One of the leadoff stories on Good Morning America this morning as I am getting ready to leave the house-Miley Cyrus poses topless for "Vanity Fair" magazine. I heard that sound of the screeching record in my head. What? So naturally I run out of the bathroom to see what the heck is going on. Sure enough, my little Miley, our hometown Tennessee girl, so well behaved, is shown in a photo covered by a blanket, bare back showing, "smiling with her eyes" for all of you Top Model fans, into Annie Leibovitz's camera.
Miley pleads innocent, saying she was manipulated and tricked and is now embarrassed. "Vanity Fair" says that Miley and her parents approved of all the shots and thought they were "artistic."
I don't care how artistic they are-she is 15. And not almost 16. Or 18. She's 15, 3 years from being able to legally consent to do that kind of photoshoot on her own, so clearly her parents had to approve this. Trust me, no magazine-or reputable photographer like A.L.-is going to go foward with a photo shoot with an underage girl without a parent's signature. There are plenty of laws about that kind of thing. Obviously, Billy Ray and/or his wife approved of Miley taking her top off for the cameras. And that is my main concern here. What were her parents THINKING? Who thinks it is ok for their 15 year old to pose topless-or insinuating that she is topless, as some have suggested that she might have something on under that sheet? Well then why didn't she pose in whatever she was wearing underneath? This is not a case of snapshots that may or may not be intended for public consumption as some of the other photos, nor was this for a private family photo session to be hung on the wall at home-this was for a major magazine, to be seen all over the world. I am so disappointed in the lack of good taste here-on Miley's part, her parent's part, the magazine's part, and the photographer as well.
Now, on one hand, if you forget that she is UNDERAGE, the photo is not that bad. The only skin you see is her back, she is not overly made up, and its very natural. But, everyone involved should have known better-she is only 15 and a role model for girls as young as 4 years old. I know plenty of actresses have posed for "artistic nudes" for magazines-an adult Britney for one, Jen Aniston, Demi Moore, the list goes on. They are old enough to decide for themselves what kind of pictures they want to take. But Miley's parents failed to protect her by making a bad decision on her behalf, which may very well end up costing the entire family a lot in the long run. Disney is sticking by her for now. And judging by the folks calling in to the radio this morning, a lot of parents are pulling the "Hannah Montana" brand from their home for good.
Miley, get it together. You could have said no to taking those pictures. So while most of the blame should be laid on your parents, who could have refused to consent, you also should have stood up for yourself, thought about all those little girls who follow you around at the mall, and thought better of it.
I'm all for second chances, so don't screw this one up. You might not get another one.
But lately some cracks have started to show. Various "scandalous" photos began cropping up on the internet-Miley in a bikini (because no one else wears those), having a sleepover with girlfriends (again, totally un-teenager-like activity), and more recently, showing us a peek of her green bra and laying up against a boy (they are both FULLY clothed). I do feel sorry for her, because she's 15, and when I was 15 I took stupid pictures with my friends (although, we used FILM back then and you did not really take photos that were too crazy because you know someone had to look at them at the photo lab-aaahhhh, the digital age has made us so much more free). I have defended Miley for awhile now, because my friend and I did randomly meet her in the mall one day and I was sooo impressed by how down to earth she was, how NORMAL she seemed for a 14 year old gazillionare, and by how well she carried herself as hysterical little girls followed her around. She was nice to everyone, from the sales associates to the moms and girls that came up to her asking for autographs or just to say hi as a fan. We did not approach her, she approached us to comment on my friends' bag; she was covered up, had on little makeup, and just seemed like such an average teenage girl. No way will this girl end up like Britney, I thought. She's just too well behaved. Not to mention, her dad, Billy Ray Cyrus, has seen all sides of fame-the good, the bad, the mistakes, the comeback...surely they will be smart about this and keep her head on straight.
Cut to April 28, 2008. One of the leadoff stories on Good Morning America this morning as I am getting ready to leave the house-Miley Cyrus poses topless for "Vanity Fair" magazine. I heard that sound of the screeching record in my head. What? So naturally I run out of the bathroom to see what the heck is going on. Sure enough, my little Miley, our hometown Tennessee girl, so well behaved, is shown in a photo covered by a blanket, bare back showing, "smiling with her eyes" for all of you Top Model fans, into Annie Leibovitz's camera.
Miley pleads innocent, saying she was manipulated and tricked and is now embarrassed. "Vanity Fair" says that Miley and her parents approved of all the shots and thought they were "artistic."
I don't care how artistic they are-she is 15. And not almost 16. Or 18. She's 15, 3 years from being able to legally consent to do that kind of photoshoot on her own, so clearly her parents had to approve this. Trust me, no magazine-or reputable photographer like A.L.-is going to go foward with a photo shoot with an underage girl without a parent's signature. There are plenty of laws about that kind of thing. Obviously, Billy Ray and/or his wife approved of Miley taking her top off for the cameras. And that is my main concern here. What were her parents THINKING? Who thinks it is ok for their 15 year old to pose topless-or insinuating that she is topless, as some have suggested that she might have something on under that sheet? Well then why didn't she pose in whatever she was wearing underneath? This is not a case of snapshots that may or may not be intended for public consumption as some of the other photos, nor was this for a private family photo session to be hung on the wall at home-this was for a major magazine, to be seen all over the world. I am so disappointed in the lack of good taste here-on Miley's part, her parent's part, the magazine's part, and the photographer as well.
Now, on one hand, if you forget that she is UNDERAGE, the photo is not that bad. The only skin you see is her back, she is not overly made up, and its very natural. But, everyone involved should have known better-she is only 15 and a role model for girls as young as 4 years old. I know plenty of actresses have posed for "artistic nudes" for magazines-an adult Britney for one, Jen Aniston, Demi Moore, the list goes on. They are old enough to decide for themselves what kind of pictures they want to take. But Miley's parents failed to protect her by making a bad decision on her behalf, which may very well end up costing the entire family a lot in the long run. Disney is sticking by her for now. And judging by the folks calling in to the radio this morning, a lot of parents are pulling the "Hannah Montana" brand from their home for good.
Miley, get it together. You could have said no to taking those pictures. So while most of the blame should be laid on your parents, who could have refused to consent, you also should have stood up for yourself, thought about all those little girls who follow you around at the mall, and thought better of it.
I'm all for second chances, so don't screw this one up. You might not get another one.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Film Festival Part 2-Politics and Religion
The next film we saw is called "Join Us" about a cult in South Carolina and several of the families who left the cult and their struggle to rehabilitate themselves after years of psychological torment, physical abuse, and financial abuse. What is so scary about stories like these is that we are all at risk for this type of thing. Most of us think that we would never get involved with anything crazy like that, but these people thought the same thing. They got invited to a new church-and, thinking that church is harmless, started to attend. Religion can be such a personal and passionate belief that people often don't realize when it starts to become extreme. Add mind control, along with every aspect of your life being controlled by the church-where you live, where you work, how you spend your money, how you raise your children-and you are no longer able to make any decisions on your own. It always seems to affect the women more deeply than the men-maybe it is just that women are more likely to open up about their feelings and experiences-but the women in this film were emotionally wrecked. Their guilt over the things they allowed to happen to their children drove most of them to suicidal thoughts. The children told of the disturbing ways that they were punished by the pastor when they were "rebellious."
I think what may have struck me the most about the movie was a little montage at the end that took one or two liners from various Pastors and church leaders about God or religion or something-all things that sounded totally crazy when just listened to as one line when you have no idea what the sermon may have been about. But, it makes you realize that most religious groups have the potential for crossing what is a very thin line between faith and extremism. It also made me think of the current "scandal" about Barack Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and his "inflammatory" remarks from the pulpit. Since this story began, I have been in some ways defending him-not necessarily his exact remarks, but his freedom to speech as well as the fact that the context of most of these comments being pulled out and splashed across the media is not being presented as well. (I also think that there are some African-American church culture issues here that not everyone has taken into consideration.) So, they do seem extreme-but maybe some of the things my Pastor or yours has said during a passionate sermon would also seem extreme if you took out one line. But rather than supporting a man he obviously respected enough to attend church with for more than 20 years, Obama threw him under the bus in order to distance himself from what he knew would be bad PR. This disappointed me-because I don't expect him to agree with everything his Pastor says just as I certainly don't agree with everything my Pastor says. Unlike the families that are in these cults-I can think for myself make my own decisions. In my opinion, Obama's denouncement of Rev. Wright only seemed to make it look like he AGREES with those who are trying to say that Wright leads a cult-like congregation. I would have much rather Obama said that while he may not agree with all his Pastor's ideas, but that our country gives him the right to say what he thinks, that people attend this church voluntarily, and that many of the comments being reported may be taken out of context. I mean, he kept going to church there for years, so you know he was never that offended by anything the guy said! So come on-now all of the sudden we are supposed to believe that you were disturbed by his remarks? No...because either culturally or in the context of the day's lessons, the remarks either made more sense OR Obama felt he could disagree with the Pastor and the issue was not enough of a moral conflict to leave the church over. For example-one of Wright's comments was actually him quoting Ronald Reagan! Was he quoting him in agreement or quoting him to disagree? No one seems to want to take the time to find out. This is what is dangerous-whether in religion, politics, culture, etc.....people closing their minds to an idea or a person without first trying to understand what the big picture is.
So....Whether you agree or disagree with me on all of the political stuff, "Join Us" was a thought-provoking movie and quite relevant with current political stories and all of the FLDS/Texas child abuse stories in the news.
You can read all about the film, cults, mind control, and the families featured at:
http://www.joinusthemovie.com/all.php
I think what may have struck me the most about the movie was a little montage at the end that took one or two liners from various Pastors and church leaders about God or religion or something-all things that sounded totally crazy when just listened to as one line when you have no idea what the sermon may have been about. But, it makes you realize that most religious groups have the potential for crossing what is a very thin line between faith and extremism. It also made me think of the current "scandal" about Barack Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and his "inflammatory" remarks from the pulpit. Since this story began, I have been in some ways defending him-not necessarily his exact remarks, but his freedom to speech as well as the fact that the context of most of these comments being pulled out and splashed across the media is not being presented as well. (I also think that there are some African-American church culture issues here that not everyone has taken into consideration.) So, they do seem extreme-but maybe some of the things my Pastor or yours has said during a passionate sermon would also seem extreme if you took out one line. But rather than supporting a man he obviously respected enough to attend church with for more than 20 years, Obama threw him under the bus in order to distance himself from what he knew would be bad PR. This disappointed me-because I don't expect him to agree with everything his Pastor says just as I certainly don't agree with everything my Pastor says. Unlike the families that are in these cults-I can think for myself make my own decisions. In my opinion, Obama's denouncement of Rev. Wright only seemed to make it look like he AGREES with those who are trying to say that Wright leads a cult-like congregation. I would have much rather Obama said that while he may not agree with all his Pastor's ideas, but that our country gives him the right to say what he thinks, that people attend this church voluntarily, and that many of the comments being reported may be taken out of context. I mean, he kept going to church there for years, so you know he was never that offended by anything the guy said! So come on-now all of the sudden we are supposed to believe that you were disturbed by his remarks? No...because either culturally or in the context of the day's lessons, the remarks either made more sense OR Obama felt he could disagree with the Pastor and the issue was not enough of a moral conflict to leave the church over. For example-one of Wright's comments was actually him quoting Ronald Reagan! Was he quoting him in agreement or quoting him to disagree? No one seems to want to take the time to find out. This is what is dangerous-whether in religion, politics, culture, etc.....people closing their minds to an idea or a person without first trying to understand what the big picture is.
So....Whether you agree or disagree with me on all of the political stuff, "Join Us" was a thought-provoking movie and quite relevant with current political stories and all of the FLDS/Texas child abuse stories in the news.
You can read all about the film, cults, mind control, and the families featured at:
http://www.joinusthemovie.com/all.php
Film Festival Part 1
This past week was the Nashville Film Festival. I got to see a couple of good documentaries, which I will tell you about in 2 parts. The first one we saw was "Sons of Lwala" about two college students from Kenya who were sent to America to go to college from their little village of Lwala. The community's residents all sold property to raise money for the brothers, Fred and Milton Ocheing, to come to Dartmouth for college. After college, they both came to Nashville to attend Vanderbilt Medical School. They had a dream to build a medical clinic in their village, and after their father's death they were determined to see it through in his memory. The movie chronicles their journey as they try to raise the funds to build, supply, and staff the clinic. It really is amazing what communities can do together-and the people of Lwala get that in way you don't see a lot here in America. The brothers are so charming ans sweet, it's no wonder that as they traveled to churches, colleges, sporting events, etc. to promote their vision and raise money that people were fascinated by their story and their determination not to forget about where they came from. You can read more about them and their inspiring stories at
www.sonsoflwala.com and www.lwalacommunityalliance.org/
www.sonsoflwala.com and www.lwalacommunityalliance.org/
Adios Carly!
Carly was eliminated from American Idol-probably after one of her better performances and good comments from the judges. Brooke and Jason, the worst of the night, both escaped being in the bottom 2. But, I can't say I was shocked-the only thing that could shock me would be either of the Davids getting eliminated. So what went wrong for Carly? She probably was not going to win but she was a better singer than some of the others and had loads more personality than Syesha, who was also in the bottom 2.
My theory is two-part-first, I really think that all three of the boys left have large enough fan bases to save them no matter what they do. I think the girls all had pretty equal fan bases, so their votes were more split. Secondly, when a contestant does poorly, they rarely end up in the bottom because it rallies their fan base to vote and ensure their safety. Therefore, contestants who do well and may not have the largest fan base at this point (in my opinion, any of the girls) are in danger of elimination.
Anyone agree/disagree with my theory?
My theory is two-part-first, I really think that all three of the boys left have large enough fan bases to save them no matter what they do. I think the girls all had pretty equal fan bases, so their votes were more split. Secondly, when a contestant does poorly, they rarely end up in the bottom because it rallies their fan base to vote and ensure their safety. Therefore, contestants who do well and may not have the largest fan base at this point (in my opinion, any of the girls) are in danger of elimination.
Anyone agree/disagree with my theory?
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Idol Extra...
So apparently Brooke was not the only one to flub lyrics-she was the only one who called attention to herself as she did it! I did not notice but Archie apparently screwed up the 2nd verse of "Think of Me" and Carly the first chorus of "JCS" but I don't know the songs well enough to notice-and probably most others won't either-so I guess that is good for them!
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20007164_20171835_20194264,00.html
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20007164_20171835_20194264,00.html
Idol Thoughts
Ok, of the three people that may actually read this blog, I am thinking maybe one of you watches American Idol, so for the rest, I am sorry. I am going to try and write about the two documentaries I watched but I wanted to put in something fun before I go serious. Its my blog...I can do what I want.
So, on to Idol! I had to tape it-which is really better because then I can fast-forward through Ryan Seacrest-it was Andrew Lloyd Webber night. I figured most of the remaining 6 would be OK, I was worried about Jason and Brooke, who are more of the singer/songwriter style, and my worries were totally justified. Here's what went down-
Syesha-She did some song about Rock and Roll that I had never heard. I liked that it was uptempo, I have only heard her do ballads and I was so sure she would do Memory from Cats or something from Phantom-so it was out of her box, and she did it well, I just still am not that interested in her. She's just does not have that star quality to me, even though she has a lovely voice and a pretty face. I could totally see her on Broadway though.
Jason-Oh no. JASON is doing Memory? I'm scared. Even more scared when he admits he knows no showtunes, and he had no idea that the song was sung by a Diva-Cat. Not only is the song out of his league, but if he can't connect to the song, it will be Mee-chelle my Bell all over again-and it was worse!!! I am a fan of his-he's totally cute and even when his vocals are not the best in the bunch, his emotional connection to the song usually saves him. I have a feeling he has the fan base to get him through, but he better be glad that he was only the 2nd-worst of the night.
Archie-I DO NOT get the judges over-praise of him. He sang "Think of Me" from Phantom. He's cute as a puppy, has a nice voice, and I know that they probably think they can mold him because he is young a la Jordin Sparks last year-but Randy said he was the one to beat after THAT performance? Simon, the voice of reason, put it in perspective-he's good, he's not going anywhere, but that was not stellar. For me, I did think it was the most "commercial" I have heard him sound-so maybe there is hope.
Brooke-OH BROOKE-My friend Wendy texted me and said it was a trainwreck-when she told me she sang "You Must Love Me" from Evita I knew it was BAD before i saw it. First of all, WRONG SONG. This was the song ALW wrote for Madonna in the movie version. Brooke just can't seem to handle the pressure. She sang the first line, forgot the words, and asked to start over. Which might have been OK-she has done this once before and delivered a good performance-but this time, her nerves were just shot and she warbled through looking like she might break down and run off the stage at any moment. On the radio this morning the DJ compared her to a fawn in the woods that needs to be taken care of, if she's a fawn, I think she is dying and we need to put her out of her misery! I like her but now its just painful-this is the 2nd or third week her nerves have been CLEARLY visible and affected her singing. I don't think she can handle it anymore.
Carly-After ALW told her that her first song choice, "All I Ask of You" from Phantom (one of my faves) was not right for her-he told her to try her 2nd choice-"Jesus Christ Superstar" and he was SO right. She does really well with uptempo songs and after weeks of ballads she came alive. Yay! I do like her and I think that holding up the t-shirt that said "Simon Likes Me (This Week) will get her personality points with those that vote!
David C-In the "Pimp Spot" as the last spot of the night is called-So my closet dream all week was that David C would sing Phantom's "Music of the Night" and just sing it-no crazy arrangements-because he can sing, but I think that is often overlooked because his musical arrangements are so unique. So lo and behold, my dreams come true! Apparently he has a background in musical theater (who knew?) and he just came out and belted it and it was lovely and mysterious and sexy. I was a little creeped out during the rehearsals when ALW asked David to sing it to him and pretend that ALW was a 17-year old chorus girl-WHAT??? But it was comical when DC said, "Hey Man, I'm 25...." The other thing-was David's hair dyed darker this week or was it just my TV?
So....I am hoping Brooke goes home for her mental stability. At this point, anything could happen though, and I am only confident that both Davids-Archie and Cookie-are moving on. Guess we will find out tonight!
So, on to Idol! I had to tape it-which is really better because then I can fast-forward through Ryan Seacrest-it was Andrew Lloyd Webber night. I figured most of the remaining 6 would be OK, I was worried about Jason and Brooke, who are more of the singer/songwriter style, and my worries were totally justified. Here's what went down-
Syesha-She did some song about Rock and Roll that I had never heard. I liked that it was uptempo, I have only heard her do ballads and I was so sure she would do Memory from Cats or something from Phantom-so it was out of her box, and she did it well, I just still am not that interested in her. She's just does not have that star quality to me, even though she has a lovely voice and a pretty face. I could totally see her on Broadway though.
Jason-Oh no. JASON is doing Memory? I'm scared. Even more scared when he admits he knows no showtunes, and he had no idea that the song was sung by a Diva-Cat. Not only is the song out of his league, but if he can't connect to the song, it will be Mee-chelle my Bell all over again-and it was worse!!! I am a fan of his-he's totally cute and even when his vocals are not the best in the bunch, his emotional connection to the song usually saves him. I have a feeling he has the fan base to get him through, but he better be glad that he was only the 2nd-worst of the night.
Archie-I DO NOT get the judges over-praise of him. He sang "Think of Me" from Phantom. He's cute as a puppy, has a nice voice, and I know that they probably think they can mold him because he is young a la Jordin Sparks last year-but Randy said he was the one to beat after THAT performance? Simon, the voice of reason, put it in perspective-he's good, he's not going anywhere, but that was not stellar. For me, I did think it was the most "commercial" I have heard him sound-so maybe there is hope.
Brooke-OH BROOKE-My friend Wendy texted me and said it was a trainwreck-when she told me she sang "You Must Love Me" from Evita I knew it was BAD before i saw it. First of all, WRONG SONG. This was the song ALW wrote for Madonna in the movie version. Brooke just can't seem to handle the pressure. She sang the first line, forgot the words, and asked to start over. Which might have been OK-she has done this once before and delivered a good performance-but this time, her nerves were just shot and she warbled through looking like she might break down and run off the stage at any moment. On the radio this morning the DJ compared her to a fawn in the woods that needs to be taken care of, if she's a fawn, I think she is dying and we need to put her out of her misery! I like her but now its just painful-this is the 2nd or third week her nerves have been CLEARLY visible and affected her singing. I don't think she can handle it anymore.
Carly-After ALW told her that her first song choice, "All I Ask of You" from Phantom (one of my faves) was not right for her-he told her to try her 2nd choice-"Jesus Christ Superstar" and he was SO right. She does really well with uptempo songs and after weeks of ballads she came alive. Yay! I do like her and I think that holding up the t-shirt that said "Simon Likes Me (This Week) will get her personality points with those that vote!
David C-In the "Pimp Spot" as the last spot of the night is called-So my closet dream all week was that David C would sing Phantom's "Music of the Night" and just sing it-no crazy arrangements-because he can sing, but I think that is often overlooked because his musical arrangements are so unique. So lo and behold, my dreams come true! Apparently he has a background in musical theater (who knew?) and he just came out and belted it and it was lovely and mysterious and sexy. I was a little creeped out during the rehearsals when ALW asked David to sing it to him and pretend that ALW was a 17-year old chorus girl-WHAT??? But it was comical when DC said, "Hey Man, I'm 25...." The other thing-was David's hair dyed darker this week or was it just my TV?
So....I am hoping Brooke goes home for her mental stability. At this point, anything could happen though, and I am only confident that both Davids-Archie and Cookie-are moving on. Guess we will find out tonight!
Monday, April 21, 2008
Positive PR spin on Polygamy?
I have to say, I am fascinated with this recent news story about the 400+ children in Texas removed from the "Yearning for Zion" ranch amid allegations of child abuse-namely, underage girls married off as young as 13 to old men to start having babies. Initially, I thought, wow, its about time that someone stepped in and tried to save these girls, to man up and not be scared of the "freedom of religion" that has allowed these groups to commit crimes in the name of a higher power for too long.
Now I am fascinated by the "PR" blitz that the FLDS church has gone on-to try and improve their public image. Seriously? What kind of good are we supposed to find in a religion that allegedly physically and sexually abuses its children, and where a man's worthiness is determined by the number of wives he owns (I mean, has). Is is possible to spin this in a better light? I hope they are hiring professionals. They say they are misunderstood-I think we all understand just fine, thank you! Church members-men and women-have been all over the news saying they just want to be left alone (I bet you do) and that there is no abuse, that the enemies of the outside world have fabricated this evidence (so....that call from the 16 year old girl was fake?), and that they are free to come and go, no one is being held against their will at the ranch, we just don't understand their simple way of life....blah blah. Well.....then why are they also admitting that most of these children have never been outside the gates of the ranch? Sounds an awful lot like imprisonment to me. And seriously-I am sure the women ARE free to go-but they are also conditioned to believe that leaving the religion is condemning themselves to eternal damnation. And where exactly would they go? They have no experience in the "outside world" and most of them have so many kids its impossible that they could leave and support that many children with no education or work experience to speak of. Unless someone on "the outside" is ready to help them, they are stuck.
I am sure that for the mothers who have been separated from their children, it is heartbreaking. I am sure that their children is what keeps them going, and to be on the ranch with those men alone is not a picnic right now. But, they are also accomplices to the abuse, allowing the men to have complete control, watching and witnessing the innocence being stripped from these little girls as they are married to men two and three times their ages. I did find it bizarre that the mothers were allowed to go with their children when they were removed from the ranch-um, DCS here in Nashville does not go to remove a child and tell the parents, oh, you can come too! I don't understand that. But now that they are all separated (well, unless your mother is under 18, in which case the whole happy family is still together) the mothers are crying-abuse! exposure to drugs! Unfair! Why were all removed over allegations of one? Well, because that is the law-in a home where a child reports abuse, the state may remove all children-in this case, over 400 of them-in order to investigate each child's welfare.
I hope that this all gets sorted out quickly-and I hope that the community will come together and prepare services to aid these families should any of them decide to leave the FLDS church and start over. Because they will need HUGE amounts of help. Starting over is difficult even when you have great support-these women and children have all the disadvantage in the world. Kudos to the 16 year old girl that made the call that started it all-that kind of strength and courage is what these families will have to find in order to escape. I don't know how it will all end up...but I do know that I will keep following the story and hoping for some kind of happier ending.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24234987/ Polygamist sect unleashes PR campaign
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24237472/ Sect Members: We just want to be left alone
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24155914/ Sect members deny teens forced to marry
Now I am fascinated by the "PR" blitz that the FLDS church has gone on-to try and improve their public image. Seriously? What kind of good are we supposed to find in a religion that allegedly physically and sexually abuses its children, and where a man's worthiness is determined by the number of wives he owns (I mean, has). Is is possible to spin this in a better light? I hope they are hiring professionals. They say they are misunderstood-I think we all understand just fine, thank you! Church members-men and women-have been all over the news saying they just want to be left alone (I bet you do) and that there is no abuse, that the enemies of the outside world have fabricated this evidence (so....that call from the 16 year old girl was fake?), and that they are free to come and go, no one is being held against their will at the ranch, we just don't understand their simple way of life....blah blah. Well.....then why are they also admitting that most of these children have never been outside the gates of the ranch? Sounds an awful lot like imprisonment to me. And seriously-I am sure the women ARE free to go-but they are also conditioned to believe that leaving the religion is condemning themselves to eternal damnation. And where exactly would they go? They have no experience in the "outside world" and most of them have so many kids its impossible that they could leave and support that many children with no education or work experience to speak of. Unless someone on "the outside" is ready to help them, they are stuck.
I am sure that for the mothers who have been separated from their children, it is heartbreaking. I am sure that their children is what keeps them going, and to be on the ranch with those men alone is not a picnic right now. But, they are also accomplices to the abuse, allowing the men to have complete control, watching and witnessing the innocence being stripped from these little girls as they are married to men two and three times their ages. I did find it bizarre that the mothers were allowed to go with their children when they were removed from the ranch-um, DCS here in Nashville does not go to remove a child and tell the parents, oh, you can come too! I don't understand that. But now that they are all separated (well, unless your mother is under 18, in which case the whole happy family is still together) the mothers are crying-abuse! exposure to drugs! Unfair! Why were all removed over allegations of one? Well, because that is the law-in a home where a child reports abuse, the state may remove all children-in this case, over 400 of them-in order to investigate each child's welfare.
I hope that this all gets sorted out quickly-and I hope that the community will come together and prepare services to aid these families should any of them decide to leave the FLDS church and start over. Because they will need HUGE amounts of help. Starting over is difficult even when you have great support-these women and children have all the disadvantage in the world. Kudos to the 16 year old girl that made the call that started it all-that kind of strength and courage is what these families will have to find in order to escape. I don't know how it will all end up...but I do know that I will keep following the story and hoping for some kind of happier ending.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24234987/ Polygamist sect unleashes PR campaign
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24237472/ Sect Members: We just want to be left alone
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24155914/ Sect members deny teens forced to marry
Friday, April 18, 2008
Dr. Phil (quack! quack!)
Ok-I REALLY hate Dr. Phil. I have hated him from the beginning-he started getting popular around the time I was in college, working on my psych degree, and I always knew he was a total quack! But everyone was totally enamored with his no-BS style. He's so RAW! He tells it like it is! He doesn't let you get away with anything! Tough love made a comeback.
Even though he was not a licensed psychologist (he was in fact, STRIPPED of his license to practice) people turned to him for advice on how to better their lives, including WEIGHT LOSS-have you people seen the guy? Talk about blind leading the blind here! So anyway, I must say I am quite pleased that the chinks in his armor are beginning to show and people are wising up about this "doc" and seeing he really has no more clue than the rest of us.
http://tv.msn.com/tv/celebrityfeature/dr-phil/?GT1=BUZZ3
Even though he was not a licensed psychologist (he was in fact, STRIPPED of his license to practice) people turned to him for advice on how to better their lives, including WEIGHT LOSS-have you people seen the guy? Talk about blind leading the blind here! So anyway, I must say I am quite pleased that the chinks in his armor are beginning to show and people are wising up about this "doc" and seeing he really has no more clue than the rest of us.
http://tv.msn.com/tv/celebrityfeature/dr-phil/?GT1=BUZZ3
Welcome!
I Should Be Working, But...its Friday and I have been contemplating starting a blog for some time. I know no one really cares what I have to say, but I used to really love to write and now that I am not in school anymore I have no outlet. So here we are. My thoughts on random topics that you may or may not care about, but let's talk if you do!
Things I might blog about might include:
Politics
Current Events
Celebrities
GREAT TV shows like Lost or The Office
Not quality but highly entertaining TV shows in the reality genre like American Idol which I am fascinated by this year
Photography
Whatever I happen to be reading or listening to when I SHOULD BE WORKING!
Things I might blog about might include:
Politics
Current Events
Celebrities
GREAT TV shows like Lost or The Office
Not quality but highly entertaining TV shows in the reality genre like American Idol which I am fascinated by this year
Photography
Whatever I happen to be reading or listening to when I SHOULD BE WORKING!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)