Pee-wee Herman is back

Some of my readers probably never have heard of Pee-wee Herman, nor his real world creator Paul Reubens. That can either be taken as a plus or a negative depending on your taste in comedy.

Either way there is no question that for a time, Pee-wee was the hottest comedian on television. He had a successful Saturday morning show that was good for kids, but held lots of laughs for adults that could read between the lines. He had made 2 successful films. All was going well.

Then Reubens did something that nearly killed Pee-wee completely. Reubens was caught doing a very adult act in a quite seedy film theater. The reaction was hardly the minor inconvienence of George Michael, it was more akin to the image bash that Tiger Woods is currently living.



Every sponsor disappeared, and Reubens was unable to find any kind of work. He languished in this realm for a time until he got a break with a "minor" role in the original film of Buffy the Vampire Killer. His take on a vampire death was a scene stealer and reminded some that talent is not the same as media exposure.



There were several other minor roles over the years, but nothing to the level of Pee-wee.

Of course Reubens was in a love-hate relationsip with Pee-wee. Not unlike Leonard Nimoy's feelings towards Spock, perhaps even the relationship of Gollum and The Ring, Pee-wee was what Reubens was known for.

But now, decades after the event, and at a time when the youth are more than prepared to see for the first time the great hits of the past, Reubens has made peace with his famous alterego and brought him back to life. The only question is how big a return will it be?

I say how big because Paul Reubens is funny. As annoying as the Herman persona can be, it works. On the big screen and on the small it conveys something to audiences of all ages. And it's far more original than most anything else out now in any medium you can name.

I'm hoping all goes well for Reubens and Herman alike. I thought he was a funny man, and the onslaught of negative publicity for something that hurt no one was unfair (though it was a bit creppy - like George Michael). He's paid his dues, more than most entertainers.

So I think it's time that another generation learn how to dance to Tequila!

Music Video: Beyonce and Lady Gaga - do I need to say more?

By now I'm sure many have seen the new music video by Beyonce that features the popular Lady GaGa. Of course I'm sure there are just as many that might not have seen it yet considering how few music videos get played on MTV these days. But this video is special and I think even reviewers have missed the joke in the video. Read on and tell me if you get it too.

The song is called Video Phone. It's a very Lady Gaga song in that it is simplistic in the vocals and catchy at the same time. I'd also say that the major influence in the video comes from Lady Gaga and her people. It is a new direction for Beyonce, from what I saw. But like the song, the video works.

Of course, movie buffs (and others) like myself may find the video interesting for far more reasons than just the look and the eye catching colors. Then again there are more than a few that have issues with the video (though they missed the big thing - or were too embarrassed to mention it if they did get it).

"I will admit the video is pretty to look at, and Lady GaGa holds her own next to a major captial D Diva, but the womanizing undertones and dance for your dinner chair routine have my tummy feeling icky." - Ryan Brockington, NY Post

and

The Bad: Why exactly was Lady Gaga in this video? Her voice adds nothing to what was actually a pretty mediocre song. And the dance sequence with Beyonce and Lady Gaga? Hey, Gaga can’t keep up with Beyonce’s poppin’ and shakin.’ (But, then, who can?!) On top of that, Gaga looks a little emaciated next to the more athletic B. Regarding other aspects of the video, what’s up with all the guns? Not sure what that has to do with a video phone." - Creative Loafing

I see their points, (though Beyonce is just a normal Black woman that doesn't conform to the Hollywood fetish with anorexics) but I saw a whole lot of other things. First though, here is the video. [Sorry for the ad at the bottom of the video, but this is the video with the least obtrusive ad I could find]



Ok, so now you have seen it. Did you catch all the apparent homages in the video? Did you figure it out?

There is the Quentin Tarantino Resevoir Dogs shot, with a bit of the Cray 8's from Kill Bill. Then after a bit it gets all fetishy with the Zentai hoods and male bondage. It gets way more BDSM, in clothing, as I believe both ladies are in Rubber or Latex neon day-glow outfits with matching boots, and the Latex halter that Beyonce wears. Which makes sense if the thought is to show female dominance over the men in the video, and that explains all the guns plus the Tarrantino references.

But there is also a bit reference to Betty Page. Often seen on WWII bombers, it is also a reason for the guns, I suppose. By the way, the weapons are in dayglow colors to be PC and not promote guns - I think. It would make sense that the record label would want to avoid some liberal nutjob from making such an allegation and potentially losing anti-NRA viewers. And it prevents any connection of this video with the violence normally promoted in rap and occasionally hip hop. [Oh, the rifles are not AK-47's, they are AR15's also known as a M-16. Though I've never seen one with a silencer before. Plus a Tommy Gun, also with a silencer which I never saw before. And Lady Gaga has a .45]

Oh, and a possible homage to the classic Memorex television commercial too. Like I said, this video has a lot in it.

But what is the big secret? What does this video mean (at least visually)?

The director was thinking hard on this video. I mean he went all the way out there. The ghettofabulous Betty Page homage, the further reference to WWII with the Rising Sun flag based bikini and the gestapo styled hat - no idea why she is carrying a bow in those scenes though. But I suppose that explains the guy with all the arrows in him. Well that and the fetish of BDSM - inflicting pain but not killing the guy (he does move later in the video).

So here is what I think.

Actually I think the whole thing is just a big fetish video cleverly disguised, with obvious inspiration to Quentin Tarrantino (who seems to have a foot fetish himself), hidden in an innocuous song. Everyone is so busy watching Beyonce pop and somewhat exposed, plus trying to get a glimpse of any extras on Lady Gaga, that the rest of it just flies past everyone.

I like this video ever so much more now. It's the biggest joke, that everyone will be watching this and yet NO ONE will likely figure out what it is that's going on. I'm sure the director will be rolling on the floor with laughter as review after review misses the obvious yet praises the video; not realizing they are praising BDSM publicly. That's just hillarious.

Ok, so if you agree, do me a favor and pass around the word that I figured out the video first. I can't wait to hear the response once we spread this around the net.

Spike Lee talks with Ed Gordon about Tyler Perry and "post-racial" America

I received an interesting email earlier today. It was from Black Entertprise, a company that I respect and occasionally hear from. The subject was an interview with Spike Lee by Ed Gordon back in May 2009 that I think few have seen before.

I found the interview to be interesting and yet another facet of Spike Lee that is often overlooked by the major media's rush to paint him as simply "controversial". While I do not agree with most of the political beliefs of Spike Lee, I am a fan of his 24 films. I believe that he has a great insight to art and American life that is often missed in the race to be exploitive or ghettofabulous.

Perhaps the most interesting thing I found in this interview are the discussion about Tyler Perry and the "post-racial" claims for America with President Obama at the helm.

I thank Black Entertprise for providing me with this video.

George Carlin: 1937 - 2008

Rather than comment on the impact of George Carlin I will let his words speak for him.

WARNING - the following videos probably contain objectionable words and language!

R Kelly - next stop Neverland Ranch

I have been following the news of the sudden death of Tim Russert when I was sent a message from a friend. R Kelly has skipped justice.

As many who have read my many political thoughts know, I am a political junkie. Tim Russert was a large figure in accurately reporting the political news. He was fair and grounded, and well researched. His loss makes a large difference in politics. My condolences to his family and friends.

As for the travesty of justice, R Kelly. I can’t say I’m amazed that the jury came out with their answer on a Friday and late in the day. Even if the news currently wasn’t filled with the shocking news of Mr. Russert, I think the R Kelly news would have still been buried.

The media knew this would be the outcome. The courts knew this was a set-up.

After delays for 6 years the defense finally allowed this case to come to court when they knew that the celebrity star power of this alleged pedophile would outshine the crime he was accused of. Obviously I feel this was a failure to punish someone that needed to be punished.

How do I know this was expected? How do I know that celebrity skewed justice? Well look at how Yahoo News reported this in their first sentence

“R. Kelly was acquitted of all charges Friday after less than a day of deliberations in his child pornography trial, ending a six-year ordeal for the R&B superstar.” [emphasis added by me]

His ordeal. Not the victim. He was attacked and don’t forget he is a superstar entertainer.

Pitiful.

Does the Black community know if R Kelly was guilty? Well here is one source that proclaimed what many, including myself, believed.



I again will say that I hope he loses all his money and never has another successful album or tour. It is only my opinion, but I feel R Kelly is a pedophile. I believe he is a troubled and sick individual. And I am bewildered that anyone continues to buy his music.

The jury felt I was wrong. After 6 years of delays, and practice to get their case figured out I’m not surprised. Give anyone 4 high-end lawyers and 6 years and you can get off of anything, even being videotaped violating the law and a child.

I’m not upset with the lawyers; they did their job and were paid well for it. How they sleep at night is their own issue. But I feel that the jury failed justice. And I have nothing else to say about it.

R Kelly waits for jury verdict

So what is going on in the R Kelly trial? If you were following the general media I’m sure you have no idea. I didn’t until I searched for the news.

For close to a decade nothing has been said so far. An initial blast of news, and then quiet. The quiet of lawyers shuffling papers and keeping R Kelly out of the courtroom or headlines. The strategy of the defense has been consistent and logical. Say nothing, do nothing, Delay to make sure the girl in question grows up enough to absolutely look nothing like the child in the video. Delay to allow the jurors and public to forget. Delay to give every excuse of doubt possible. Then show up in court and keep quiet.

R Kelly said nothing. He refused to speak in this trail. Yet 14 others spoke instead. They identified him as being in the video, 12 recognized the girl. And only Kelly’s lawyer had anything to say about it.

The prosecution connected the infamous video to the residence of Kelly. They provided a woman that testified under oath to have performed sex with R Kelly and the underage girl. 2 video experts testified that fabricating the tape was unlikely – without a decade of time – and how the male in question had the same mole on his body as R Kelly.

The defense has denied the mole connection with a video “expert” – a self-taught expert with about 1/10 the experience of the prosecution experts. They denied the videos look like, let alone finger, either the victim or Kelly. And the defense has proclaimed that everyone involved is in a conspiracy against R Kelly for his money and to damage his fame.

I left out one important thing. The girl who was the victim, allegedly, did not testify. She has denied being in the video. The defense says it’s because she wasn’t there and this wasn’t R Kelly. The prosecution says they don’t want to drag her thru more hardship. And I would say that the fact that R Kelly has employed her father for years since the event, the embarrassment, and the social stigma of being eternally remembered as the young “whore” (as described by the defense) in the video are all plenty of reasons not to show up in front of jurors and the paparazzi waiting on the court steps.

That is the nutshell summary of a case that has taken 6 years to get in front of jurors. Those are the positions of both sides. Some will decry the innocence of R Kelly. I am not one of them.

From his well documented social life and actions, his manipulation of the courtroom, and his employment of the alleged victim’s family I have an opinion. The jury is debating their answer now. Mine would be guilty.

Not only do I think that R Kelly is a repulsive child molester who needs to be jailed, I believe that every dollar he has earned since he committed this crime should be taken and used to help the public against pedophiles. Were it up to me, I would cut off every pedophiles balls and lock them up in a very small isolated room. Fame and entertainment ability is not an excuse or cover for their actions in my mind.
Some don’t care and support R Kelly because he is famous, or Black, or an entertainer of some skill. Others think he is innocent. Be that as it may, I am not swayed. But I am not on the jury.

It will be very interesting to see how the major media will react to the jury’s’ verdict, especially since they have avoided saying anything for 6 years. We will see.