There are a lot of names that flash across the tabloid conscience, and while they all milk their fifteen minutes, we can, for the most part, recognize the foundation of their fame. Not that there is a discernable relevance to these figures in relation to our own trials and tribulations, but watching the rise and fall of public figures can sometimes add humor to our own life experiences. Some of us can relate to the unfortunate relationship a certain intern held with a person in high powerful office. Others can sympathize with a celebrity's addictions. We read "US Weekly" and "InTouch" to form a connection with those in the spotlight; similarities can bind us to our most beloved Hollywood figures.
There is also a type of celebrity that cause instantaneous disdain, derision, and disgust: the "why-are-they-famous ?" celebrity. Not knowing how or why this person is on the cover of "The Star" can pique ire rather than curiosity.
My case in point: Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt.
They're famous for being on a reality soap-opera that was actually scripted. In "real life" they have become engaged. With the engagement has come Star Jones-sized demands.
They have demanded (and I use that word puriently) that every aspect of the wedding be donated, ala Star Jones. They expect to pay for nothing.
These are two bimbos that have blown their paychecks on night after night of partying, being out at "hot spots" to ensure they catch the media's eye. Now that the biggest days of egoism have arrived, they are left unprepared.
They have turned being pseudo-celebrities into a cash cow, only they've milked the teat of fame dry and the pail is empty.
So like every member of the "me" generation they have decided that the public owes them everything fo, forgetting the land-slide of negative press Star Jones received after her donated wedding.
I didn't have anything donated for my wedding.
We made our invitations on a laptop and printed them, at our own expense, on colored copy paper at the Kinko's. We couldn't afford to go home to Illinois for the ceremony, let alone have everyone come out to the west coast, either. There was no reception, no cake, no limo. We made the best of what we had and we managed to have a rather spectacular day. Everything came out of our own pocket.
My Dad didn't have his health insurance or mortgage paid for by others when he was laid off. He didn't have Volkswagon buy the van we took on family vacations. Wall Drug Store didn't pay for us to get to South Dakota to see Mt. Rushmore.
A donation is a charitable gift, for one not able to buy the given item. Food is donated to starving Third World countries, books to schools that operate on shoe-string budgets. Disaster relief is an answer to a cry for help. Donations are given to a good cause.
For the life of me, I cannot phathom how these two self-absorbed ego-freaks believe they constitute a good cause..
Wamt to experience a day as recipients of donated goods? Walk your fake-and-bake asses down to the Goodwill. That tent you want? Sleep under one in a reugee camp in Chad. Free food? Wait in the soup kitchen lines of New York.
It's not that they are celebrities for no reason that bugs me, but rather, that the centerpieces of the "me" generation are ironically asking that same generation to give to others.
To be fair, you are supposed to get something "old, somthing new, something borrowed"....
Showing posts with label reality tv. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reality tv. Show all posts
Monday, June 16, 2008
Friday, June 6, 2008
I'm sorry, Jesus, you didn't make it through to the next round
Okay, I'll admit it: I watch, with unabashed enthusiasm, "So You Think You Can Dance."
There are a lot, and I mean a lot, of sub-par reality/competition programs on the air. This one is different in that it puts the performances of professional dancers in the hands of professional judges. The contestants are put through paces that very few accomplished athletes could keep up with. The work is hard, artful, expressive, beautiful, and demanding. Each dancer striving to become one of the top twenty has pushed themselves beyond their limits and have had to reach deep within to find that extra push to get them over the competitive edge. They have acknowledged personal demons, friends and relatives as guideposts, tragedies that have given them second chances. A myriad of impetus has been expressed.
But I refuse to acknowledge that Jesus had anything to do with your making it to the next round.
Like many on the awards stage, a sobbing young lass, after being cut from the program, told the world that Jesus got her there.
"Excuse me, starving, beaten, homeless refugees of Darfur," says Jesus to his suffering flock. "I have to excuse myself to attend to a young attractive American girl and help her through a grueling dance competition on national television."
To think and claim that Jesus would belittle his own ministering to clear a path toward victory in a reality-TV competition is insulting to anyone who believes in Jesus in the first place.
In her acceptance speech at the 2007 Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Award for Best Reality Show, Kathy Griffin, star of "My Life on the D-List", joked:
"A lot of people come up here, and they thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus...suck it, Jesus, this award is my God now!"
Crude? Yes. Truthful? Yes.
To assume that Jesus would take his attention away from real human suffering and calamity to focus his attention on one individual's drive toward self-promotion and recognition is beyond all definitions of ridiculous. If anything, these apostates are worshiping at the feet of false golden idols. If they were truly religious and believed that Jesus was the guiding force in their lives, they would not need a golden statue or a silver medal to represent their achievement. It is anathema to the teachings of Christianity and humility before God.
The reward for me, though, was knowing that Jesus was only half-heartedly interested in our young blonde friend. She didn't make it into the top twenty.
But Kathy Griffin's Life on the D List certainly made it into my top twenty...
There are a lot, and I mean a lot, of sub-par reality/competition programs on the air. This one is different in that it puts the performances of professional dancers in the hands of professional judges. The contestants are put through paces that very few accomplished athletes could keep up with. The work is hard, artful, expressive, beautiful, and demanding. Each dancer striving to become one of the top twenty has pushed themselves beyond their limits and have had to reach deep within to find that extra push to get them over the competitive edge. They have acknowledged personal demons, friends and relatives as guideposts, tragedies that have given them second chances. A myriad of impetus has been expressed.
But I refuse to acknowledge that Jesus had anything to do with your making it to the next round.
Like many on the awards stage, a sobbing young lass, after being cut from the program, told the world that Jesus got her there.
"Excuse me, starving, beaten, homeless refugees of Darfur," says Jesus to his suffering flock. "I have to excuse myself to attend to a young attractive American girl and help her through a grueling dance competition on national television."
To think and claim that Jesus would belittle his own ministering to clear a path toward victory in a reality-TV competition is insulting to anyone who believes in Jesus in the first place.
In her acceptance speech at the 2007 Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Award for Best Reality Show, Kathy Griffin, star of "My Life on the D-List", joked:
"A lot of people come up here, and they thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus...suck it, Jesus, this award is my God now!"
Crude? Yes. Truthful? Yes.
To assume that Jesus would take his attention away from real human suffering and calamity to focus his attention on one individual's drive toward self-promotion and recognition is beyond all definitions of ridiculous. If anything, these apostates are worshiping at the feet of false golden idols. If they were truly religious and believed that Jesus was the guiding force in their lives, they would not need a golden statue or a silver medal to represent their achievement. It is anathema to the teachings of Christianity and humility before God.
The reward for me, though, was knowing that Jesus was only half-heartedly interested in our young blonde friend. She didn't make it into the top twenty.
But Kathy Griffin's Life on the D List certainly made it into my top twenty...
Monday, June 2, 2008
Ryan Seacrest: Prophet of Doom
I'm not a Trekkie by any means, but I do watch it occasionally for a good laugh. Everyone is a scientist, an engineer, a diplomat. Earth is a place of communal peace. Technological wonders abound, from transporters to the spaceships themselves. Again, I watch it as a comedy because our future will look nothing like that.
Which movie will it look like?
"Idiocracy."
The premise: A regular Joe and a prostitute get sent 500 years into the future and because society has gotten so dumb, are the smartest people in the world (regular guy: Luke Wilson).
I realized this was the course we are taking after watching a post-sweeps evening of television.
Sure, there are some smart programs on the air and channels dedicated to education, but sandwiched between are the hints of what our culture is devolving into. Nevermind shows like "American Idol" where more Americans vote for an over-commercialized forgettable vocalist than they do for the Congressional representatives who oversee the laws and budget allocations that govern their lives outside the "idiot box."
No, I'm referring to programs like:
"Hurl" where contestants participate in eating contests then are put on a gyroscope. Whoever pukes last wins $1000. Seriously.
"Legally Blonde: The Search for the Next Elle Woods" where a mediocre Broadway musical trolls for "talent" to replace it's lead actress.
"A Shot at Love With Tila Tequilla": in it's second season, overly-hormonal jocks and lesbian-for -the-sake-of-being-on-TV-lesbians compete for the affections of a plasticine spit receptacle famous only for having over a million MySpace friends.
The one show, though, that really illustrates my point is returning for a second season, and if this year is anything like the first run, it will be the single biggest indicator of our nations collective failure in the appreciation of culture and intelligence. I refer, of course, to "America's Got Talent." A redneck ventriloquist, and I repeat, ventriloquist, was determined to be the most talented person in America by not only the esteemed panel of experts led by David Hasselhof, but by the millions of votes from average America.
That same average American who gets sent into the future in "Idiocracy."
I'm not sure which is worse: who dreamed up these travesties, who green-lit these pile of offal, or the millions who participate in these insults to intelligence.
It is the sheer number of votes that are received on these programs that are the single biggest indicator of where our country is headed. We will vote over and over again for "America's Best Dance Crew", but less than half of the country is registered to vote for President. With this kind of real-world apathy it is no wonder we elect scallywags like George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Katherine Harris, or Larry Craig. If we listened to politicians the same way we listen to contestants on Idol, we wouldn't be in the stagnant state we are now.
Perhaps we should give the Presidential candidates 877 numbers and allow Americans to text their vote.
Then again, if we chose a ventriloquist, then we'd probably elect another Cheney, hand up W's butt, speaking out the side of his mouth hoping people will think it's Georgie.
So for the sake of our country, for the our children's children, for the safety of the universe, please please please turn off your televisions this summer. Close the laptop. Muffle those texting fingers with gardening gloves. Every child dreams of being a super-hero. Here's your chance to be one and save the world...
,,,from stupidity.
Which movie will it look like?
"Idiocracy."
The premise: A regular Joe and a prostitute get sent 500 years into the future and because society has gotten so dumb, are the smartest people in the world (regular guy: Luke Wilson).
I realized this was the course we are taking after watching a post-sweeps evening of television.
Sure, there are some smart programs on the air and channels dedicated to education, but sandwiched between are the hints of what our culture is devolving into. Nevermind shows like "American Idol" where more Americans vote for an over-commercialized forgettable vocalist than they do for the Congressional representatives who oversee the laws and budget allocations that govern their lives outside the "idiot box."
No, I'm referring to programs like:
"Hurl" where contestants participate in eating contests then are put on a gyroscope. Whoever pukes last wins $1000. Seriously.
"Legally Blonde: The Search for the Next Elle Woods" where a mediocre Broadway musical trolls for "talent" to replace it's lead actress.
"A Shot at Love With Tila Tequilla": in it's second season, overly-hormonal jocks and lesbian-for -the-sake-of-being-on-TV-lesbians compete for the affections of a plasticine spit receptacle famous only for having over a million MySpace friends.
The one show, though, that really illustrates my point is returning for a second season, and if this year is anything like the first run, it will be the single biggest indicator of our nations collective failure in the appreciation of culture and intelligence. I refer, of course, to "America's Got Talent." A redneck ventriloquist, and I repeat, ventriloquist, was determined to be the most talented person in America by not only the esteemed panel of experts led by David Hasselhof, but by the millions of votes from average America.
That same average American who gets sent into the future in "Idiocracy."
I'm not sure which is worse: who dreamed up these travesties, who green-lit these pile of offal, or the millions who participate in these insults to intelligence.
It is the sheer number of votes that are received on these programs that are the single biggest indicator of where our country is headed. We will vote over and over again for "America's Best Dance Crew", but less than half of the country is registered to vote for President. With this kind of real-world apathy it is no wonder we elect scallywags like George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Katherine Harris, or Larry Craig. If we listened to politicians the same way we listen to contestants on Idol, we wouldn't be in the stagnant state we are now.
Perhaps we should give the Presidential candidates 877 numbers and allow Americans to text their vote.
Then again, if we chose a ventriloquist, then we'd probably elect another Cheney, hand up W's butt, speaking out the side of his mouth hoping people will think it's Georgie.
So for the sake of our country, for the our children's children, for the safety of the universe, please please please turn off your televisions this summer. Close the laptop. Muffle those texting fingers with gardening gloves. Every child dreams of being a super-hero. Here's your chance to be one and save the world...
,,,from stupidity.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Will you accept this rose?
Reality television piques my interest. Most of the time, I hypothesize my own performance and roundly criticize those actually participating (I could cook circles around the "chefs" on Hells' Kitchen). The range of programming sways from the pseudo-highbrow (Extreme Makeover) to the criminally insane (Flavor of Love). It occured to me that while most of these shows were competition-based, the majority of that sub-set were grounded in the dating world:
Flavor of Love 1, 2, and 3. I Love New York 1, 2, and 3. Mr. Personality. Shot at Love with Tila Tequila. Date My Dad. Farmer Needs A Wife. Rock of Love 1, 2, and 3 . Outback Jack. Paradise Hotel. Temptation Island. Joe Millionaire. Average Joe. Who Wants to Marry My Dad?
Just to name a few...
And then there is The Bachelor.
Never a favorite of mine, I have watched this last season with increasing interest. The network just aired the reunion program as a prequel to the finale. In this yawn-inducing bitch-fest I found myself struggling to find any of the women attractive. Not the two finalists. Not any of the contestants. And after scrutinizing their features, their mannerisms, their attitudes, I realized just why none of them held any appeal for me:
Their lack of principles and shame.
To have launched themselves upon this bloke (he's English this year, so he has an accent that makes him sound classy) in a public forum, espousing profound feelings of true love after only a few days and a few cocktails provided by producers, these women have demeaned the very poetry of wooing. Just as unbelieveable as Luke Skywalker becoming a Jedi in all of about a day and a half (re-watch Empire and you'll realize just how long he really goes through his training)(yes, I totally belong on Beauty and the Geek) is these women believing that they'll be proposed to at the end of a few weeks. How selfless are you if you need to be on camera 24/7? How can someone truly be devoted to the idea of a singular love when carousing with fifteen other women at the same time? In the real world, he'd be a "player", and the women around him "sluts". But on television, the third runner up gets to be the Bachelorette.
The Bachelor has contributed the death and dearth of courtship. Women now feel the need to flay themselves of the digital altar, spewing obscenities and physical threats. They become carricatures of real women looking for real love, not shots at fleeting "US Weekly" fame. Even the one couple who DID end up staying together as a result of said program, Ryan and Trista, whored their nuptuals out to the network and paraded their baby before the paparazzi the way Paris Hilton does boy-toys. What's more appalling than the content is the continuing popularity of this show. Are we really to believe that this is going to be the most romantic rose ceremony ever?
Back to the original argument, that this diminishes the art of relationships. If anything, this, and all reality dating shows illustrate the decline of the committed heterosexual relationship. They are tabloid adventures in titulation. The tabloids themselves exploiting the participants in splashy exposes, reducing them to late-night fodder. Pick up any tabloid and it will contain two constants: who's banging who, and who's split up. Forty pages of this, every week of every year. Think of the major headlines recently that you've secretly peeked at while waiting in line at the checkout counter. Paul McCartney and Heather Mills. Starr Jones. Brittany and K-Fed. Divorce, divorce, divorce. Paris Hilton and this week's Son-Of-A-Greek-Shipping-Tycoon, Lindsay Lohen and some rock band flunkie, Jessica Simpson and the athelete of the moment. Emotionless trysts, at best. If anything, the tabloids do nothing but illustrate the impending extinction of the healthy committed hetrosexual relationship.
Why do I keep specifically mentioning "heterosexual"? The conservative right-wing of America constantly harps on the importance of traditional family values and the importance of defining marriage in our Constitution. The hypocrisy is beyond evident. The Senator who sponsored the most anti-gay legislation is busted in a bathroom stall. Evangelical leaders are caught with gay prostitutes. As we look to our leaders to provide examples for which to follow, the governor of Nevada is trying to evict his wife from the Governor's Mansion as they battle in divorce after 21 years of marriage. Donald trump, who roundly crticizes those who are unloyal to him and don't finish projects, himself has violated his own tennants by divorcing twice. Country music legend Garth Brooks left his wife of 16 years to run off with Trisha Yearwood, herself a married woman. Robin Williams is divorcing after 26 years of marriage. How can the right point to gays and say that their marrying would destroy the sanctity of marriage when there are far more examples of hetero impropreity? How have straight people, in even just this last decade, shown proclivity toward sanctifying the union of a man and a woman?
If you need any more convincing, tune in to the finale of the Bachelor next Tuesday, 10 pm PST on ABC.
(Michael did NOT meet his wife on a reality dating show, but they are hoping to one day be contestants on "The Amazing Race")
this blog may also be viewed at:
www.myspace.com/mcmuppet
don't forget to read Chicken's blog at:
www.myspace.com/chickenlovesmillie
Flavor of Love 1, 2, and 3. I Love New York 1, 2, and 3. Mr. Personality. Shot at Love with Tila Tequila. Date My Dad. Farmer Needs A Wife. Rock of Love 1, 2, and 3 . Outback Jack. Paradise Hotel. Temptation Island. Joe Millionaire. Average Joe. Who Wants to Marry My Dad?
Just to name a few...
And then there is The Bachelor.
Never a favorite of mine, I have watched this last season with increasing interest. The network just aired the reunion program as a prequel to the finale. In this yawn-inducing bitch-fest I found myself struggling to find any of the women attractive. Not the two finalists. Not any of the contestants. And after scrutinizing their features, their mannerisms, their attitudes, I realized just why none of them held any appeal for me:
Their lack of principles and shame.
To have launched themselves upon this bloke (he's English this year, so he has an accent that makes him sound classy) in a public forum, espousing profound feelings of true love after only a few days and a few cocktails provided by producers, these women have demeaned the very poetry of wooing. Just as unbelieveable as Luke Skywalker becoming a Jedi in all of about a day and a half (re-watch Empire and you'll realize just how long he really goes through his training)(yes, I totally belong on Beauty and the Geek) is these women believing that they'll be proposed to at the end of a few weeks. How selfless are you if you need to be on camera 24/7? How can someone truly be devoted to the idea of a singular love when carousing with fifteen other women at the same time? In the real world, he'd be a "player", and the women around him "sluts". But on television, the third runner up gets to be the Bachelorette.
The Bachelor has contributed the death and dearth of courtship. Women now feel the need to flay themselves of the digital altar, spewing obscenities and physical threats. They become carricatures of real women looking for real love, not shots at fleeting "US Weekly" fame. Even the one couple who DID end up staying together as a result of said program, Ryan and Trista, whored their nuptuals out to the network and paraded their baby before the paparazzi the way Paris Hilton does boy-toys. What's more appalling than the content is the continuing popularity of this show. Are we really to believe that this is going to be the most romantic rose ceremony ever?
Back to the original argument, that this diminishes the art of relationships. If anything, this, and all reality dating shows illustrate the decline of the committed heterosexual relationship. They are tabloid adventures in titulation. The tabloids themselves exploiting the participants in splashy exposes, reducing them to late-night fodder. Pick up any tabloid and it will contain two constants: who's banging who, and who's split up. Forty pages of this, every week of every year. Think of the major headlines recently that you've secretly peeked at while waiting in line at the checkout counter. Paul McCartney and Heather Mills. Starr Jones. Brittany and K-Fed. Divorce, divorce, divorce. Paris Hilton and this week's Son-Of-A-Greek-Shipping-Tycoon, Lindsay Lohen and some rock band flunkie, Jessica Simpson and the athelete of the moment. Emotionless trysts, at best. If anything, the tabloids do nothing but illustrate the impending extinction of the healthy committed hetrosexual relationship.
Why do I keep specifically mentioning "heterosexual"? The conservative right-wing of America constantly harps on the importance of traditional family values and the importance of defining marriage in our Constitution. The hypocrisy is beyond evident. The Senator who sponsored the most anti-gay legislation is busted in a bathroom stall. Evangelical leaders are caught with gay prostitutes. As we look to our leaders to provide examples for which to follow, the governor of Nevada is trying to evict his wife from the Governor's Mansion as they battle in divorce after 21 years of marriage. Donald trump, who roundly crticizes those who are unloyal to him and don't finish projects, himself has violated his own tennants by divorcing twice. Country music legend Garth Brooks left his wife of 16 years to run off with Trisha Yearwood, herself a married woman. Robin Williams is divorcing after 26 years of marriage. How can the right point to gays and say that their marrying would destroy the sanctity of marriage when there are far more examples of hetero impropreity? How have straight people, in even just this last decade, shown proclivity toward sanctifying the union of a man and a woman?
If you need any more convincing, tune in to the finale of the Bachelor next Tuesday, 10 pm PST on ABC.
(Michael did NOT meet his wife on a reality dating show, but they are hoping to one day be contestants on "The Amazing Race")
this blog may also be viewed at:
www.myspace.com/mcmuppet
don't forget to read Chicken's blog at:
www.myspace.com/chickenlovesmillie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
