Catering to the Masses

In theatrical productions, the same play could be performed identically two nights in a row, one with an incredibly enthusiastic audience and a standing ovation, and the other with a few scattered claps. It depends on the energy of the audience for that particular evening, and that makes all the difference...to the performers, the future of the production based on reviews.

Whether it’s film, theater, music, or any other media of mass communication, the make-it-or-break-it factor isn’t the talent, it’s the audience. So the question is at what point should plots be compromised and lyrics toned down in order to target a larger market, versus one of a more selective nature.

Let’s take “Shutter Island” as an example. I thought it was another genius film by Scorsese. Really well done. But it got some pretty mixed reviews.

(From Rotten Tomatoes, professional critics)

“DiCaprio and Scorcese are a dynamic movie duo but when you add in the brilliant storytelling of Lehane you get movie magic.”

and then...

An overlong, nauseating thriller lacking palpable suspense and clever twists which can't be saved by its exquisite production values and solid performances.

But movie goers were just as conflicted: (From Moviefone.com)

CQBRA03

This movie is a complicated mess that has an ending that for me was very unrewarding and a letdown. Is it all really happening, or is it just in his head? The acting was excellent, but the coming attractions were a lot better than the movie. Just a little to weird for me.

JZekeRed

one star for decaprio...pretty darn good acting BUT, what a sucko storyline - not cohesive, twisted, interesting, frustrating...save your money .

Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion, but clearly these people just didn’t get it. But does that mean that the movie industry should cater to the less, shall we say, adept. There is a “type” of entertainment for everyone, so perhaps verbal members of the public need to admit if a certain genre isn’t their cup of tea, instead of just ragging on it.

I don’t think there is anything wrong with critics and reviewers saying, “this movie is fabulous if you have an inquisitive mind, don’t bother if you’re just looking for entertainment”. But they don’t differentiate because of the fear of alienating the audience. Rather, they take it out on the film makers.

Perhaps critics should just take a little step back from their self-proclaimed lime-light. Just because you hated or loved it doesn’t mean everyone else will. I know it’s your job to be critical and offer you opinions, but keep in mind is only opinions that you are offering.

Bottom line: offering different perspectives for different audiences would be much more effective than only taking your own views into account.

Play to your strengths.

There is a concept of “multiple intelligences” within the psychology discourse. Essentially, it says that intelligence cannot be based purely on IQ, but 8 other factors like interpersonal intelligence, spatial intelligence, etc. need to be included. I agree with this, and I have expounded on this theory that people should be judged primarily on their stronger intelligences within their fields of work and study. For instance, Amy Winehouse would be considered “musically smart”, so maybe her mishaps in the interpersonal realm should not affect her career.

Naturally this doesn’t always apply, like when a scandal affects the majority of the public. [see Bill Clinton]. But a certain group of professionals, namely athletes, should be seen as bodily-kinesthetically intelligent, and if they’re lacking in the social department so be it.

Which brings me to Mr. Woods.

CBS NEWS

NEW YORK, Feb. 20, 2010

Did Tiger's Body Language Betray Him?

Expert: It Made His Mea Culpa Seem Staged, Too-Rehearsed

There is a lot of scrutiny on whether or not his apology in Friday’s press conference was sincere or contrived. Does it matter? He made the statement, and obviously he’s not an actor or improvisational artist. To go into a press conference cold would have been disastrous. So I’m sure he had some help preparing, but that doesn’t mean it should change the outcome of his words. Not to mention he had quite some time to practice before going public. So judge the guy all you want on his lifestyle choices, but not the way he apologized.

And back to my point about the intelligences. I think that if the public is to pass judgment on certain “smarts”, then the athletes should keep that in mind as well. Yes they have been extremely successful in their fields, but this whole “god-complex” that so many of them have is extremely irritating.

Sir Charles, I know you were a great basketball player in your day. Yet you are still a US citizen and can’t just use your name to get out of charges for drunk driving with simultaneous sexual acts. Nothing personal Barkley, I’m just using you as a scapegoat for so many athletes that have that same trait.

Sports figures are important to our society for entertainment value. But society and the sports stars alike just need to keep in mind the limits of that spheres of influence.

The Secrets of the Universe Unveiled

Quarks, bosons, the Large Hadron Collider, and dark matter are all terms that are seemingly only understood by a few brilliant particle physicists. For the rest of us, they seem beyond mental grasp and comprehension. But guess what? The Einsteins of the world are not that much further ahead of you and I in that department.

Last week, I went to a presentation on “Grand Challenges” in today’s society. One of the speakers worked for CERN, the leading world research base in particle physics located in Geneva, Switzerland. He discussed the huge amount of data and resources that were required to discover the secrets of the universe. They’re trying to recreate the Big Bang, find out why particles have mass, look into antimatter and investigate black holes among other projects.

I was fortunate enough to visit CERN a few months ago and get an inside look into what the scientists are really doing. For the most part, I think the scientists were as perplexed by all the information as I was. They don’t even know what exactly they’re looking for. There’s this whole thing called the “Higgs Boson”, which supposedly will help aid the quest for why matter has mass. Except, there is no proof that this Higgs Boson even exists, or what it “looks like”. It’s just an overgrown hunch. (That’s a little bit of an understatement).

Well that’s the nature of science, I guess. Yet over 20 countries are pouring gross amounts of money into this research in search of answers to the unknown.

Granted, CERN is responsible for the development of the World Wide Web and little things like that, but still, my issue is why is there a pretense that these elite scientists are so much more entitled to the knowledge that defines our universe than the rest of society?

I think it’s because of the jargon, which goes for most professions. In training for one’s profession like doctors, lawyers and even reporters, new vocabulary becomes second nature. So due to my interests in the secrets of the physical world, I took it upon myself to rise to the level of basic proficiency in quantum physics. I know, impressive, right?

While it took a lot of repetition and hands-on exhibits at CERN to get through to me, I found this video that I think can make anyone who wants to have a basic understanding of what particle physicists are trying to find.



It’s actually very accurate. There you go, the universe in a nutshell. If you don’t get that reference, you have a little bit more work to do before you can fully count yourself an expert in the profession. As do I. But hey, it’s a start.

The Paradox of Materialism

My mom is the most down to earth person I know, and when I was a kid that did not exactly bode well for me. Remember all those fads like yo-yos and beanie babies? Lets just say it took some very convincing puppy faces to acquire a few of those overpriced beanbags.

A few years later during my pre-teens, when the “in-but-not-quite-designer” brands came into play I was ready to make my move. I wanted to start shopping at Abercrombie, where all my friends were getting the “coolest” new fashions. The Abercrombie Empire is a mystery in itself, as the clothing is mainstream, outrageously-expensive, nothing-special attire. But thanks to the A&F marketing geniuses, every middle-school girl wants to have their entire wardrobe from that shop. I remember saying to my mom, “what if my friends and I don’t shop there…the store will close down!”

BINGO.

Not that my mom was entirely convinced by that argument, but it has supported my own social conscience for spending too much money on clothes, entertainment and other material goods that I do not need. I justify my spending because of the mentality that if no one buys these seemingly “immaterial” products, the companies will go out of business, unemployment will increase and the economy will shrink. Moral of the story…shop till you drop (on a macro scale of course).

Designers, entrepreuners, inventors, and other business professionals have created a world of wealth based on toys. Not to mention the impact material goods have on globalization. These items are not only helping the US, but other national economies as well based on product exports and imports on which we thrive.

But just because these playthings are popular and exist, should we really regard those driving the industry with that much more clout?

New York Fashion Week starts Friday and in honor of the soon-to-be-released fall 2010 trends, I would like to introduce you to those who are dictating your lives based on your desires to keep up with the Jones’.

From last year’s Fashion Week….

It might be nice to be able to make a fortune off of the above. These outfits may be seemingly ridiculous, but in fact they make up the majority our GDP. Well, that is clothes combined with other non-durable goods and services. Maybe these designs specifically aren't a huge contributing factor, but so much of our consumer spending is on material items. Whatever keeps the world turning.

As Derek Zoolander was once told, "Fashion, a way of life inspired by the very homeless, the vagrants, the crack whores that make this wonderful city so unique."

Just look at that smile.

We have a European Union and an African Union. We can form an Asian Union, and converge all the unions into a World Union...or something to that effect. That is the vision that has been ingrained in my mind since I heard His Holiness, the Dalai Lama speak at a conference on "Democracy in a Multipolar World" in Prague a few months ago. A “World Union” is a dream of a united society bridging all borders and roadblocks into a world of cooperation, collaboration and unimaginable growth and peace. The Dalai Lama’s words were idealistic and impractical, yet something about his presentation helped me visualize the big picture, the ultimate goal for all international efforts. His Holiness has not preached, but shared his views on democracy and non-violence with students and teachers alike across all nations, religions and cultures. He is a Nobel Peace Prize recipient, a many-time-over honorary scholar. He has been THE leader for the international protest movement against the “cultural genocide” of Tibet, as well as teachings of interfaith harmony and Buddhism. The Dalai Lama defines a public intellectual through his integrity in teaching his world views to the world of academia, but making them accessible to the general public as well.

His Holiness is an emblem of the ability to preserve religion and international diplomacy through interfaith efforts. Yes, America is built on the principle of freedom of religion, but it was also founded on the Protestant work ethic. The key word for making miracles happen according to His Holiness: FAITH. America isn’t that far off. Stephen Mack’s essay on “Wicked Paradox: The Cleric as Public Intellectual” elaborates.

That is, American politics “uses” religion in the sense that it draws something vital out of it, redefining it in the process as something secular, essentially social and not at all dependent on the belief systems of particular faiths. In short, liberal democracy takes from religion what it cannot supply on its own: a deep sense of belonging.

And from this stems the “American Dream”, that anyone can be anything, and contribute significantly to the nation that we have built from the ground-up. The Dalai Lama has taken these concepts and internationalized them. I don’t believe his dedication to religious teachings has inhibited or clouded his ability to effectively convey his diplomatic views. He is merely using faith in general terms as a propeller for world harmony.

His Holiness can indeed be identified as a public figurehead, but he is not limited to such. He is in all ways a public intellectual, yet many suggest that this term is becoming less and less relevant. No, he didn’t get a Ph.D from Harvard and pursue a career of academia and discourse. But he is in all ways a representative of “intellectualism” brought to the public. I believe that there is therefore a demand for the widening of the definition of a public intellectual, which is depicted in Stephen Mack’s essay, “The “'Decline' of Public Intellectuals?”.

Our notions of the public intellectual need to focus less on who or what a public intellectual is—and by extension, the qualifications for getting and keeping the title. Instead, we need to be more concerned with the work public intellectuals must do, irrespective of who happens to be doing it.

You may not agree with the Dalai Lama’s views, but he is the type of individual that we should be aspiring towards, not the rich and famous. America is based on materialism, and the Dalai Lama bases his views on simplicity and contentment. And look what he has accomplished for the world. AND HE IS HAPPY. FILLED WITH JOY. I can vouch for that myself. I have never seen someone speak with such an eminent glow of hope and peace. All the money in the world can't buy that kind of cerebral smile. If only I could move past my own upbringing’s necessity for material wealth and success to go be a monk and teacher. And being referred to as "Her Holiness" wouldn't be so bad either. But I guess caring about that title would negate the whole principle of contentment with bare essentials and simplicity.

For Some, Fame Is Not Enough

An admittedly guilty pleasure of mine has been One Tree Hill on the CW since the inception of the show. It's had its eccentric bumps in plot lines and character development throughout the years, but last week the real life of one actor became more absurd than his characters'.

One Tree Hill's Skills Heading to Prison

What did he do? Classic DUI...embezzlement...NO.

Antwon Tanner (who's name is actually Antwon on the show- Skills is just his nick name) was sentenced to three months in prison after being found guilty of selling social security numbers.

There isn't too much information on where he got those SS numbers to begin with. I mean, he could probably sell some of his co-workers for a pretty penny. Turn them into fake IDs. You know.

What if celebrities started having their identities stolen? They really don't look that different from you or I on the street without the stage makeup, I promise.

So as disappointed as I am in Antwon, he reminded me of something. A family friend, Britney, was in Spain, and with the language barrier, she as a hooded-sunglassed-blonde girl was mistaken as Britney Spears. Let me tell you, she did not have to pay a dime that night.

Antwon, if you did steal Chad and Sophia's ID's you should argue in court that you were selling images and the opportunities for the rest of the public to taste the wonders of fame and fortune that you just so carelessly threw way. Why shouldn't the "common people" be entitled to a better everything? Because society capitalizes on everyone else wanting to do as the celebs do.

I propose a " LOS ANGELES IMPERSONATE THE CELEBRITY YOU LOOK MOST LIKE DAY". see if it gets you anything nice.

Haiti Needs Help...no matter where it's coming from...

In all the devastating stories that are coming out of Haiti, I think the headline that struck me the most was

Police kill man in Haiti over allegedly stolen rice

According to CNN, "Haitian police shot and killed a man they suspected of stealing rice in earthquake-ravaged Port-au-Prince on Thursday, leaving his body on the sidewalk for hours as his family mourned." Later on in the story it said witnesses reported that there was no looting going on at the time.

This man died not as a casualty of the earthquake but as a casualty of the ensuing anarchy that international forces have not had the power to contain.

So celebrities have been forced to take up the slack. Yesterday's headline compliments of MSNBC:

Star power helps garner more Haiti donations

Clooney-led telethon is one way celebrities use fame to aid in disasters

Yes, the leaders of Hollywood are turning the crisis in Haiti into another red-carpet event, but in truth, their help will be far more significant than those who are criticizing their glamorous donation process. If the celebs were donating quietly, they would not be able to raise as much $$ from the rest of society. I spoke with several people who were waiting for this telethon to donate because being a centimeter closer to the fame and beauty of Hollywood via a phone call is so appealing. And I do believe that the celebrities truly are committed to the cause.

Matt Damon didn't wait for the earthquake. He's been trying to raise money for Haiti for a while now.

The point of my first entry: this blog will satirize the tippy tops of the entertainment industry as well as others, but I am not insensitive to the benefits that they add to our daily lives.