Black Americans - commodity, criminals, or something much more

“Have you lost your mind? I mean, how is it that you can disrespect a man’s ethnicity when you know we've influenced nearly every facet of white America... from our music to our style of dress. Not to mention your basic imitation of our sense of cool; walk, talk, dress, mannerisms. We enrich your very existence, all the while contributing to the gross national product through our achievements in corporate America. It's these conceits that comfort me when I am faced with the ignorant, cowardly, bitter and bigoted, who *have* no talent, no guts. People like you who desecrate things they don't understand when the truth is - you should say thank you, and go on about your way. But apparently you are incapable of doing that!"
Cedric the Entertainer as Sin LaSalle in Be Cool

I just was bored earlier and ran across this scene while flipping channels. And I just had to think about that.

Now the movie Be Cool was bad. No question. But this line is perhaps the best and most important of the whole movie. It’s honest and true. It hits home, and likely was overlooked by the millions that have seen the film since its release. When most watch a comedy, bits of social commentary are obscured or disregarded.

This one quote is so visceral to me. It is such a direct statement and applies to so many things. This could be said to politicians (Democrat and Republican), Hollywood executives, major news media editors, and music industry executives, corporations of all kinds of sizes, and probably Spain and Argentina.

This quote is a statement. Being Black is not a commodity that can be bought, though more than a few retailers are making BILLIONS trying to convince people they can. Respect of our past and present is not a burden for America, and should be embraced in the same manner that I was taught European history. Police need to remember this the next time they get the urge to “get their gun on” because an African American crosses the street.

But I wonder something. I know how people of color might take this statement. Latino/Hispanics can say many of the same things. So can Asians. But how do White Americans look at this? What did this quote make you think?

This isn’t about a right or wrong answer. Obviously a blatant racist comment will be responded to in kind. But any answer made with respect and intelligence is more than welcome. Because I really would like to know if you have ever considered this when you watch the news, see a kid walking down the street, celebrate Columbus Day, or just generally go through your life?

Movie preview alert: Bill O'Reilly in An American Carol

Well the ultra-liberal fanatics will surely be up in arms about the latest item to be presented on the O’Reilly Factor last night. It seems that Bill O’Reilly has landed a small roll in an up-coming film. The film is a satirical look at people like Michael Moore, and many of the Hollywood Liberals that are just one step from Hanoi Jane Fonda.

Here is the video of the film



So what do you think of it? I found it to be very funny.

Michael Moore and many of the far-left nuts need a bit of air taken out of their blustering. And I think the concept of using A Christmas Carol as a format is original. Considering one of the writers and director here is the same man, David Zucker, responsible for Airplane, Top Secret, and the Naked Gun series, I expect the jokes to be pretty good.

The cast is filled with notable actors, including Kelsey Grammer, Robert Davi, Jon Voight, James Woods, Leslie Nielsen, Dennis Hopper, Kevin Sorbo, Travis Schuldt, and Trace Adkins.

That’s a lot of talent. I should mention that Kelsey Grammer and Dennis Hopper were previously paired in a movie that just came out – Swing Vote. I already panned the film in my preview of the film. Reviews by Rotten Tomatoes give it a 39% negative approval rating, and most reviews believe its ok to bad and a DVD pick at best. No surprise to me.

But Grammer and Hopper should redeem themselves in this film. Not that the liberals aren’t complaining already

“This is just more of the right wing believing their own BS to make themselves feel better. They know their time is almost up. A great deal of effort is put forth daily to keep morale up (see talk radio, right wing blogs/forums, Fox News) among the true believers. This film is another example…

Come October, the film may do well, if a campaign like the one for "Passion of the Christ", along with a "let's stick it to the liberals" message is ginned up via the usual outlets.

So go and have fun liberal-haters, laugh all the way into the political graveyard, you are proud to be part of an ugly history which will not be judged mercifully.”

I’m sorry, the self-important and more-righteous-than-thou attitude of Moore needs a pin to pop his balloon. In fact most on the far-left need a hit as well. Not that they haven’t been trying to, unsuccessfully, sell the “horrors” of America in films for the last few years.

I expect this film will be decent, based on the writer and actors involved. And America will likely flock to a film that pokes fun at the groups that are so serious and so sure they know what’s best for everyone. My bet is that the film makes more money than Redacted, Swing Vote, Lions for Lambs, and War Inc. combined. Actually since that isn’t much of a number to beat (Swing Vote is the big winner of the group having made about $13 million, still less than what it cost to make the film) I will say it makes $20 - $25 million it’s first week and nets a total of $40 million at least.

Do you agree?

Bad tattoo ideas from Lindsey Lohan and India

So as I was wandering the web reading thru a few posts, websites and news reports for something of interest in the tattoo world I ran into 2 items. One is on Lindsey Lohan; the other is on tooth tattooing.

All I have to say about the normally alcohol and cocaine besodden entertainer is that the tattoos she has gotten to match her girlfriend is a stupid thing to do. Just as I would never advocate getting the name of a spouse or partner (though children and especially deceased parents makes perfect sense) tattooed anywhere on a body, the same applies to tattoos of any symbolic nature. Though the stars and hearts they have now seem rather basic, if these women ever break up (Hollywood entertainer splitting-up? Impossible) they will have the same situation as if they had inscribed the other former-significant other’s name on them.

As for tooth tattooing, what? I didn’t know such a thing was possible let alone desired. But in fact it is. It’s becoming popular in India at the moment, and I would have to imagine that it’s only a matter of short time before some rapper abandons their silly metal filled mouth accessories for this new event.



The positive about a tooth tattoo is the fact that it is easily removable. Of course like all tattoos a professional should be the one doing the work, lest damage be caused.

But I still have to wonder why? I understand the fact that like most tattoos this would only be visible if it is shown off. My 4 tattoos can’t be seen unless I remove my shirt and display it, this would be the same idea. Except at a distance – say in an interview – it would look like you have spinach in your teeth.

And what might you put on a tooth? You really can’t put in a lot of detail, it’s too small. Too many colors and your teeth look diseased to a casual observer. Too many tattoos and you look like a stereotype of a redneck. It just seems to promote the look of anything but clean and attractive.

Now I’m not saying that tattoos look unclean or unattractive. I think they can look great. And I’m not saying that teeth that look so white as to be reflective are any more attractive than a bar of soap. But there is a line for my preferences.

I’d love to hear from someone in India that has one of these tattoos. Maybe that would shed some light on the subject.

Until then I suppose I just have to wait for the inevitable rapper to ‘highlight’ yet another fad for their teeth that will be done in a manner that only entertainment executives with products to sell would love.

Wesley Snipes vs IRS - I owe how much?

Ah the lovely major news media. Rarely has there been a more jaded and fickle industry, exceeded by perhaps the Hollywood machine only. Once again they have proven why I dislike their actions.

Wesley Snipes won another major blow against the Government and it’s silly case about tax evasion. The major news media acted in its usual biased and obtuse form. They avoided the story.

The major news media wasted neither time nor space in alleging that Wesley Snipes was hiding from the Government when this case first became public. They were like flies around feces when they manipulated the perceptions of Snipes previously agreed upon surrender to authorities – once he got news of problems in America while he was filming in remote areas in Africa. And Snipes stood his ground, claiming his innocence as the Government tried to allege that he was a mastermind behind 42 people evading taxes – which included his accountants that filed the taxes for him.

In the end Wesley Snipes faced a potential sentence of 16 years in Federal prison. A jury found him innocent of all charges except 3 misdemeanors. It was a slap in the face of the Government, and the media that was pounding away with pundits claiming his absolute guilt. But the Government fought back, giving Snipes an over-the-top and unprecedented (for anyone that wasn’t Black) sentence of 3 years and a fine.

Today the fine was announced, $217,000. Wesley Snipes trial claimed that he owed in excess of $14 million. That all that Wesley Snipes owes the IRS.

So in retrospect it seems that the Government, and the major news media, lied to the American public. Since the same reaction never occurred from Willie Nelson (who owed and lost a case for $35 million in taxes he evaded) and others, I am left with the thought that race and stardom were the driving factors of this farce. And rather than face criticism or have the general public realize what they’ve done, they buried this latest piece of news, just as they buried the fact that every serious and important charge against Wesley Snipes was found to be wrongly charged against Wesley Snipes.

Snipes is currently appealing the incredibly, and potentially racially driven, overreaching punishment. The fine is sure to be added to that appeal. A realistic penalty for what he did get found guilty for, given to most Americans – and definitely White Entertainers that the media likes, is 6 months of probation. Think about it, entertainers have been caught with excessive amounts of drugs, intoxicated while driving, and/or armed with illegal weapons and walked away with less time. What reason can you think of for this penalty?

I’ve followed this case from the beginning, and I continue to do so. The major news media may have a bias and care nothing about truthful reporting, but I do.

Eva Mendes - the new Janet Jackson?

So Eva Mendes has committed the mortal Hollywood sin of exposing a breast on television – in a commercial for Calvin Klein for all of… an intolerable 1 second. Considering the outrage expressed against Janet Jackson – for her earth shattering 2.3 seconds, and the subsequent blacklisting of the entertainer, I have only one question:

**The following video is so tame as to be even less of an issue than when Diana Ross played with Eve’s breast on national TV. But this is the banned commercial.**



So this means that Eva Mendes should not get any work in movies and/or television and will be ostracized by the major media, right?

Movie Preview: Babylon A.D.

Vin Diesel (Mark Sinclair Vincent) will have a new movie out this summer, and as an added bonus he is going back to the roots of what made his film career flourish. The latest film will be his 10th and is a sci-fi film.

The world of the film is reminiscent of William Gibson’s Mona Lisa Overdrive. Sprawls exist, as do bio-enhancements of both the chemical and mechanical varieties. In this crowded, violent world upgrades to strength speed or enabling connections to computers seem to be necessary for anyone that wants to move up from the dregs of society. Of course in a world where people are more resilient weapons become more deadly.



That’s where the plot comes in. Based on Babylon Babies, there is also the element of other films here. Gloria or the more recent (and horrendously bad revision of Gloria) Ultraviolet, come to mind. As does a bit of Mad Max, Soylent Green, and maybe a dash of D.O.A.

Essentially, from what I have read of the film, bio-weapons are common in this world. Unlike the randomness of say anthrax, these future bugs are very specific in nature. That’s why Vin Diesel’s character – a loner out for himself (ala Han Solo maybe) – is given a job of transporting a woman form Russia to Canada and then America. This woman is not ordinary at all. She is enhanced with defensive tools and carries the ultimate prize – a baby unlike any other in the world.



The question becomes how deadly is her baby, does she want to give up her child, should Vin Diesel complete his contract, and what is actually the best thing to do for the world. Of course his one immediate question is what is best for him, and does the fate of the world include or conflict with that answer.

The video clips of the film look interesting. It’s gritty, dark and seething with impending doom. This is the Vin Diesel we all have come to enjoy. The Triple X/Riddick style of quasi-good guy that he does well. I expect that there is no good guy in this film, just gradations on bad. And Diesel shines in that kind of role.




Of course he is not alone. Michele Yeoh is in this film as well. Likely as a sometimes competitor/ally that is familiar with some aspect of the world that Diesel needs to complete his mission. Which means she will be kicking ass in a major way. If Jackie Chan thinks she can do her own stunts, then any film not allowing her to bloody up a few opponents has failed. According to the trailer they didn’t fail in that respect.

Add in the fact that Lambert Wilson is in the film. You may recall him from the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies. He has a nice polished Euro-trash villain look so that could be a bonus as well.

And for those tattoo enthusiast, or those that notice details, the tattoo Diesel wears is from the Necronomicon as designed by Khem Caigan.

Is this going to be a blockbuster film? Possibly not. It’s coming at the end of the summer season. Meaning that Hollywood execs didn’t think it was strong enough to compete with Iron Man or Dark Knight films. Yet Pitch Black was in a similar situation and while not on the record-setting pace of some films it was a huge success.

Sill I look forward to seeing this film. Vin Diesel and Michelle Yeoh are pretty well known for picking good films to be in (with the glaring exception of the Pacifier). That ups the odds of this being a solid film. But it’s only another 25 or so days til the movie hits the theaters so we won’t have long to find out.

Oliver Stone - an ultra-liberal pissing on America - movie preview

It would seem that for some in the American ultra-liberal far left wing, otherwise defined as fanatics, it is not enough that Senator Obama stands a solid chance at winning the American Presidency. It is not enough that the major news media are fawning over Senator Obama – treating his recent trip overseas as if he were a sitting President, and refusing his opponent the opportunities they give him (ie. New York Times editorial). Even the fact that a movie highlighting the very liberal Democratic Presidential candidate is in post-production is not enough (and the film will be out just before the election – nice timing).

No for those like Oliver Stone something more must be done. Something over the top. Something insulting. Something that has never happened to a sitting President in any medium. Oliver Stone feels that now is the time to make up a movie about President Bush, while he is in office.

Why can’t Oliver Stone give up his citizenship, move to France (or Russia, or Iran), and make whatever slanted version of history he wants. I’m sure the Taliban, Al Quida and a few other “see an American, kill an American” hate groups will be more than happy to pack theaters for his biased derogatory slime on film.

Obviously I have a problem with the upcoming film W. My problem is not so much political as it is decency. I don’t care that Oliver Stone has a political agenda the size of the Empire State Building. I don’t care, as much, that he is seeking to portray historical fact in a manner more akin to a scifi movie about they year 300,000 A.D. I don’t care that he is going to get about as many people in the audience (stateside) as there are members of Moveon.org – I’m sure they will all go see it 2x.

What I care about is the power and prestige of the American Presidency and thus America. America is the President on an international level, whether we love or hate any particular President. And Oliver Stone is so obsessed with his personal hate that he doesn’t seem to care what damage he does. He seems willing to do anything to place a(nother) blemish on President Bush, even if it means hurting every American and every American President to come.

This film, a supposed biography of President Bush – that seems to be focused squarely on the past according to the trailer - looks dumb. What may be even more dumb is that it was greenlighted by a Hollywood studio, and that actors of ability have taken several prominent roles.

Josh Brolin, Elizabeth Banks, Ioann Gruffudd, Ellen, Burstyn, should all be embarrassed that they would do this to an American President. I really thing that James Cromwell, Richard Dreyfuss, and Scott Glenn should have known better. I mean they couldn’t wait until President Bush finished his term of office?

And as for Jeffery Wright and Thandie Newton I am at a loss. Do they believe that a movie built upon diminishing the office of the President of the United States is going to help their careers or in any way highlight African Americans (who are routinely seen and expected to be Democrats only) in a positive light? Colin Powell and Condelezza Rice have succeeded in becoming exceptional political figures, a fact that did not exist in any other Presidency before President Bush. And Wright and Newton believe that a film that insults America is the best way to immortalize these 2 accomplished, educated, Black figures? I think they deserve far better.

I will show this movie trailer clip. Because I do believe in Freedom of Speech and artistic expression. But I in no way suggest that anyone should see this film. I in no way support any actor’s portrayal in this film. I denounce what Oliver Stone has done, and am angry at Thandie Newton and Jeffery Wright.



Could I be wrong about the film? Until it is released sure, and it is mathematically probable that I can fly, piss on the sun and put it out, and/or suddenly have a stroke and thus believe that Code Pink, Berkley, and San Francisco know what they are doing. But back in the real world, Oliver Stone is doing a wretched thing.

Imagine if someone did a hatchet job on President Clinton and Hillary back when he was in office while doing Ms. Lewinsky with a cigar; the Democrats and Hollywood would be raging and the nation embarrassed. How is this different?

Reader comment: Jorge on Tropic Thunder and Robin Kassner

This comment comes from Jorge at Black and White Blog, where I am co-author. In his comment I am questioned on my thoughts about Robert Downey Jr., the movie Tropic Thunder, and the event involving Robin Kassner at the Regan National Airport.

Jorge's comment verbatim is:

You ask for people to understand that double standard here is OK but in your article about the lady in the airport you’re outraged at the double standard. Sorry. Doesn’t work that way.

You either condemn all double standards based on race or you have to accept them all.

It is ridiculous to say that blacks air exempt of criticism or parody because of history but they can make fun of white lifestyles, mannerisms, and looks. Again, either accept the fact that like all double standards, such as those based on gender, racist double standards are a double edged swords and you cannot pick and choose which parts are convenient to you and which aren’t.

My response is:

Jorge,

I’m glad to see that you are an avid reader of my posts. I thank you for that and your comment.

It’s important for me to be honest and consistent in what I write. I don’t do this to create shock (though I admit that some of the things I say may shock some readers) or for self-aggrandizement. I speak my thoughts and often comment on the racial complexities that is race in America. So I went back and re-read every post on Tropic Thunder (Is Robert Downey Jr funny as an African American? - 3.5.2008.1 and Tropic Thunder draws questions of racism - 3.12.2008.1), and my comments about Robin Kassner.

Now you state that I

“...ask for people to understand that double standard here is OK but in your article about the lady in the airport you’re outraged at the double standard. Sorry. Doesn’t work that way.”

In fact my comments about Tropic Thunder are not to accept the double standard but to highlight it. And I did not ask anyone to accept anything, other than the history of the work by actor Robert Downey Jr. has consistently been quality work which is a positive towards a movie that I feel unease about.

“This could be like the absurdity of Gene Wilder in Silver Streak. Or it could be Al Jolson. When you add in the nudge against Eddie Murphy, the undertone is not quite so positive.”

I have no problem with an actor portraying a character of a different race, if it is done with respect and done well. But I also do understand that far too often Hollywood has avoided using highly qualified and available actors of color, insteasd using sub-standard White actors in a manner that is degrading.

“A Black entertainer making a bad portrayal of Whites is seen as a failure on the entertainer’s part. A White entertainer in the reverse position (for most of the history of Hollywood) had been seen as making an honest attempt at portraying Negroes, which were considered below them. That’s the history of the situation.”

The question is the intent of the portrayal. Too often it has been to embarrass or humiliate those being imitated. Too often it has been an act of White privilege to presume they can accurately portray other races, and that their depiction was more than fair. That is where I have conflict.

But in regard to Robin Kassner the issue is how the media portrays reality. This is not a film, there are no characters. The reality is that Kassner was treated in a manner that many Muslims and people of color have experiences since 9/11 in airports across the nation. But instead of taking the same lazie faire attitude that has come from the media, or blaming those persecuted, the major news media has taken sympathy on her plight.

That is a different double standard.

Either Kassner was presenting a danger to the public interest, as was the excuse for the reaction when Muslims and people of color were treated in this manner, or all the other victims were over-reacted against and deserve the same sympathy and funds claimed in her lawsuit.

Whether it’s the presumption of innocence as in the Duke rape case, or the avoidance of the topic like in the Megan Williams case, or the near total absence of fact like in the number of reported missing Black, Hispanic, Asian children in the nation the major media is playing a double standard that is not only unfair but potentially damaging.

When I highlighted that fact how is it the same as questioning the ability of an actor to make a respectful portrayal?

When Eddie Murphy made a portrayal of a White man on Saturday Night Live, was that wrong or funny? I say funny because it was honest and respectful. When Joel Grey played a Korean it was honest and respectful and he got a Golden Globe nomination for it. When the Wayan brothers portrayed 2 White girls it was stupid and ignorant. When Gene Wilder tried the Black face in Silver Streak it was funny because it was an admission of absurdity and the ignorance (stupidity) of some people.

Robin Kassner was either being treated like a threat or abused. There was no respect, humor, social commentary in it. The news media coverage of the event was biased, but in similar events the bias goes in the opposite direction.

How am I wrong to point that out? How is that like questioning if the storyline in a movie is respectful and humorous? How is pointing out when the news media identifies Blacks in chest high flood waters as looters the same double standard as questioning the script a White actor in make-up follows?

Hollywood has long believed that a White actor can portray another race in any manner and it’s ok – which I disagree with. The media has long believed that people of color, especially African Americans, can be portrayed as dregs of society – which I disagree with. I believe my posts highlight those views.

If I am incorrect, please do show me where I was wrong.

Megan Fox must eat cake!

Megan Fox (no relation to Michael as far as I know) is a stick. She has a couple of curves, but overall a stick if you ask me. Seriously there are 14-year olds that have more of a body. If you don’t believe me ask director Michael Bay.

It seems that Bay feels women should have curves and look like a person as opposed to the near-anorexic looks usually found in actresses these days. In fact he is making Megan Fox GAIN 10 lbs. for her next film Transformers 2.

Megan Fox makes it sound like it’s a hard thing to do

“I eat red velvet cake before I go to bed every night," she said. "And if you eat meals later, you'll put on weight faster, so I had dinner at 10 p.m.”

Well here is another beauty secret for Ms. Fox; eat a couple of Big Macs or Whoppers if you prefer. 10 lbs is nothing, but having more than bones and skin is always a plus when it comes to the warped ideals in Hollywood. I mean if not she can always look like this instead [The left photo she at least looks ok and definitely looks like a human female. The right looks like a praying mantis. Sexy huh?]



{By they way – ever notice that the least talented and most neurotic of celebrities and entertainers are the thinnest? A correlation perhaps?]

Net net, I give congratulations to Fox for meeting up with food, and a Thank You! to Michael Bay for not filling a movie with matchsticks in place of women. Now if he could just get the writer’s to take something to help with the scripts.

Teen pregnancy: the Hollywood connection

I recently noticed a couple of things about various celebrities and entertainers that are either giving birth, pregnant, or otherwise in an issue with their children. It’s been hard to not notice this of course, just scanning cable channels will give you all the facts you could care less about (or at least I do) in 15 seconds or less.

But there is a bit of other news that factors directly with that. Far less covered or mentioned is the fact that teen births are up. Not a lot but up all the same.

In the past year we got to hear about Jamie Lynn Spears. Very young, unwed, and now a parent. The fact that she is currently engaged to the father of her child does not change the fact that she was unwed when she got pregnant at 16. The fact she is looking to live in Louissianna to give her child a “normal life” belies the fact that it’s really not possible since she is so young, no matter what money she has made or her celebrity status. In fact, if we look at most young Hollywood entertainers, the money and celebrity status make them even less normal than their peers. Adding a baby just ups the ante on this.

Yet she is being placed on magazine covers like she won an Oscar Award.

Of course there is always the older Britney Spears. Hollywood fame, money, and celebrity status has done wonders for her. I’m sure her children won’t be the least bit screwed up, nor have any affect on their cousins.

Then there are the older celebrities. Matthew McConaughey just received a healthy 7 lb 4 oz son. He is unwedded to the mother. Nicole Kidman just had her 6 lb 8 oz daughter. She is unwedded to the father Keith Urban. Jessica Alba had her daughter recently and is unwedded. Nicole Ritchie and Halle Berry can say the same. And Clay Aiken can’t even say that he has a girlfriend he got pregnant. His friend/producer Jaymes Foster was artificially inseminated and though they are not a couple will share parenting.

Can Hollywood get any more screwed up?

Now I know there are feminists and others that will say this is all positive. That it shows women can raise their kids without help. That each of these couples love each other (with the exception of Aiken I suppose) and that is all that matters.

Bullshit.

I know women can be great mothers and raise children by themselves. I know because my mother is a strong Black woman that raised me and my siblings. Her 4 children have all gone to college, 2 own houses, all are well-employed and successful. And she did this on an income most would be shocked to know of. Suffice to say there were days mom did not eat.

But that is a great success story. And my mother had her first child (me) in a world that was far different than today [and my mother is still 30, don’t you dare question her age]. Then the world was kinder, people cared and helped to a degree. Kids playing on the block had every parent on the street watching out for them. Today you’d be lucky to have someone notice your kid exists (if they aren’t doing something wrong to that person’s property).

And children today are having kids in numbers that are unprecedented. It’s not just a few girls having kids without any fathers. It’s most of them. And they don’t have skills, unless you consider text messaging a skill. And like most of the youth today they are clueless. [Sorry to my young readers, but on average the youth of today have the common sense and abilities of 6th graders back when I was young.]
And their numbers are increasing.

“In 2007, 57 percent of children were white, non-Hispanic, 21 percent were Hispanic, 15 percent were black, 4 percent were Asian, and 4 percent were of all other groups. …

The report describes a long-term increase in the unmarried birth rate between 1960 and 1994, followed by a "relatively stable" unmarried birth rate between the mid-1990s and 2002 and a rapid rise since 2002. A related measure, the proportion of births to unmarried women, also saw an increase; 38 percent of all births were to unmarried women in 2006, up from 37 percent of births in 2005….

The adolescent birth rate (among married and unmarried adolescents) increased from 21 births per 1,000 teenage girls ages 15–17 in 2005 to 22 births per 1,000 girls in 2006. The 2006 increase was the first seen in this measure since the increase between 1990 and 1991…”

Do the numbers sound huge? Well look at in a different way. There are roughly 22,500,000 teenagers in the nation right now (my quick math). If we just look at girls we get about 11,475,000. That means about 546,000 are pregnant right now. That is larger than virtually every city that I have a reader in, across the globe.

Is this all the fault of Hollywood? Of course not. But when children are making pacts because they want attention and think being pregnant is cool, and Jamie Lynn Spears is on the cover of magazines I see a correlation.

50 years ago there was a shame to being an unwed mother. That was wrong. But Hollywood supported that image. Today Hollywood supports the thought that being a teenager and pregnant is the new James Dean. That is equally wrong.

Maybe it won’t sell as many magazines, or get people to watch the latest celebrity news show, but how about we admonish this reckless action in Hollywood. Just a little. Or do we have to wait for the unwed daughters of the Hollywood moguls and Congress to get pregnant (or god forbid infected with an STD like AIDS – another factor that is connected) before anything is said??

The Andromeda Strain – A&E telemovie review

A&E Television has stepped forward with a dramatic movie, highlighting its steps to join FX and Spike Television (among others) with unique programming that sets itself apart from broadcast television. In that aspect it has succeeded. The choice they have done this with is a remake of the Andromeda Strain.

For those unfamiliar, The Andromeda Strain is a book from 1969 and then a movie first done in 1971. It’s a tale of a virus that hits the earth via a meteorite. It devastates an entire remote town in the U.S. and a highly specialized team of scientists is organized to destroy or contain the virus. The only clue that the scientists have to work with is the fact that an old drunk and a baby are the only survivors of a town with a few hundred people.

While that is the basis of the remake there are significant changes. Some are quite good, others not as much. And most of the intensity of the film is destroyed in this 4-hour extended made-for-TV film.

I will note that I hate the current trend of re-visioned movies and programs that an idea starved Hollywood is rife with these days. In almost every re-visioning the effect is a sledgehammer to the original idea, seemingly made by someone who never saw the original and basically just read a Cliff note on the subject in question. This film is not a re-visioning because most of its first 2 hours are true to the original. Beyond that, it starts to deviate.

A&E’s version (AS) isn’t bad, though it’s incredibly too long. They took a 90 minute film and dragged it out as far as it could be taken. And you feel it. Add to this the addition of several storylines that are blatantly obvious in their political underpinnings and you get a story that is reaching for high moral ground and failing to be as entertaining as it could be. That is not to say the original was not political as well, it was just concise and not overburdened by it.

This version is weighed down with the baggage of an attack on the U.S. military’s stance on gays, distrust of the Government, international bioweapons development, environmental conservation, the Patriot Act, infidelity, and seedy journalism. That leaves out the questionable physics of a wormhole, the abilities of the Andromeda strain organism and a conspiracy theory. Oh, and a minor love story too, nearly forgot that.

There are huge plot holes in the storyline because of this expansion and focus on everything but the threat at hand. Add to that ok but not stellar acting (of Braugher, Benjamin Bratt, Rick Schroeder, Viola Davis, Daniel Dae Kim, Christa Miller. Competely useless were Eric McCormack, Ted Whittall, and the other background characters) and you have a watchable but not rewarding mix.

Problems of the movie include the origination of the Andromeda strain in the first place, time continuity, how the strain sample was recovered since it was capable of escaping it’s container, how the radiation in the mechanical shaft did not kill the lead scientist, how the scientist trapped with the released strain survived, why the baby and old man continued to survive, and how the strain took so long to start to spread since buzzards were present immediately after the outbreak, and the intelligence of an organism that is sulfur based without DNA that communicates with parts that are completely seperated.

Plus the cover-up which included the murder of Andre Braugher seems inconsistent and useless since the reporter with all the details escaped. Of course the dig at President Bush and his administration is hard to miss (though little is shown of a better Presidential choice). Also the inevitability of the U.S. Government causing the death of mankind because of a shadow organization seems consistent with the current stance of Hollywood’s anti-military stance.

I could go on, but you get the point.

Like I said the movie is ok. It might have been far better had they stuck to the issue at hand, a mystery disease of extraterrestrial origin. The attacks on non-liberal ideas and Presidents (unless you think the connection of underwater mining being run by the fictional President’s corporate election backers is just coincidental) really just makes the other shortcomings too big and long.

If you want to rejoice in the horrors of global warming I-told-you-so, or paranoia over the government listening to everything you do, I’m sure this is on your must see list along with JFK and Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Otherwise, skip this unless you are really bored or are stuck in Binghamton New York.

Speaking of prostitution...

While the focus of New York, and perhaps the nation, is turned towards former-Governor Eliot Spitzer there is some other news on a famous (or infamous) john. Lesser know for his strong political views, Danny Bonaduce, had some news of his own today.

Now there is no question that Bonaduce is less than perfect. In fact he is a prime example of how child stars can go very wrong in their lives. A fact that he has always been one of the first to admit. But in recent years he has made strong efforts to improve his life, getting clean and sober, and avoiding the pitfalls his fame allowed him to fall into often.

But while scandal is no stranger to Bonaduce, his most recent claim to fame is not really his fault in my opinion. You may not recall the event I’m speaking of, since it occurred on the ‘reality’ cable television network. So for those of you unfamiliar h