TV: You can learn a lot from documentaries -- more than they intend to teach

It's a funny way that stories get told. HBO, for example, picks a narrative for their documentaries and facts be damned.

Therefore, we weren't all that surprised a few months back when Alanis Morissette began objecting to an HBO documentary that she herself had participated in. It's not uncommon that the subject is bothered by a documentary or a profile or any coverage. When the coverage is done by a fan, as is the case with JAGGED (an episode of HBO's MUSIC BOX), there's usually something more going on.



We like Lily Tomlin but we're rolling our eyes because it's one of those times when we have to go there And it will result in e-mails of "Why are you so hard on Lily!!!!"

We love Lily. We've praised her many times. We just refuse to take part in the lie that she was always out. We noted, recently, that she was supposed to come out when THE CELLULOID CLOSET did. Vito said no closeted actress (he used another term) was gong to narrate his documentary. And she said she'd come out but then didn't. It was a big deal which is why we objected to the positive spin put on Lily when TCM recently aired the documentary and includes a discussion of it.

If you think we were rude -- we weren't -- we'd be afraid that Ian McKellen's remarks would leave you in tears. He was supposed to be the narrator and wanted to be. Then Lily showed up and said she'd use the opportunity to come out. That was a huge sticking point for Armistead Maupin who wrote the narration.  He wrote Lily's big announcement and was filmed and then Lily . . . cut it out of the film.

 

It does matter.  It matters because it happened and truth matters.  It also happens because there's a documentary about Lily Tomlin that Lily didn't like.  Lily sued Joan Churchill and Nicholas Broomfield who made the documentary LILY TOMLIN and the perception (the court tossed aside the lawsuit) was that it was clear, from the footage, that Lily and Jane Wagner were a couple. (Lily's team has always been hypersensitive to any attempts to attach lesbian to her name). So Lily sued and she lost.

And if Alanis sued, we think she'd lose as well.

And we think she should lose. When people sue, they're usually seeing things that most won't notice.

Let's leave documentaries for another example. Joni Mitchell has written many amazing songs. One of which is "Free Man In Paris." She saw it as a loving song about her friend David Geffen. David was obsessed with the idea that the song would reveal to the world that he slept with men. Only he was hearing that in the song.

So what's Alanis seeing in JAGGED?

We hope she's seeing a lot she's done wrong because that's what we saw.

There's her Queen Bee moment, for example. The flattering documentarians offer that her all male band on the JAGGED LITTLE PILL tour were probably fairly normal for the time and she couldn't have had an all female band. Alanis wants to disagree. Instead, she explains that her history with women is such that she wouldn't do a female in a band, too much competition.

Well take a bite of the lime and slam that shot of bitchy back, girl.

That's a pretty big confession -- one that sails over the heads of the film makers. It's not a surprise to us. We remember how she refused to tour with Lilith Fair in 1998 and made rude remarks about that tour.

So Alanis who is supposed to be all about female empowerment turns out to disappoint.

It only gets worse.

Alanis inspired a lot of girls and young women with her JAGGED LITTLE PILL album in 1995. And when they showed up for the tour? Listen to the boys brag. The boys in the band were just picking those females off. Just sleeping with them and using them. Alanis, in the documentary says she was opposed to it.

We don't believe her.

Did you see DEATH BECOMES HER? Goldie Hawn's Helen is having a party to celebrate her best selling book. Meryl Streep's Madeline, an old friend shows up:

 

 

• Helen : Oh, gosh, I'm glad you came. I didn't know if you would. I spoke to my PR woman and she said Madeleine Ashton goes to the opening of an envelope. Oh, those people can be so cruel!

  Madeleine : Mmmm.

  Helen : I fired her.

  Madeleine : [pleased]  Oh!

  Helen : Well, I almost fired her.

 

Yeah.

Alanis is kind of like that. She was appalled, she insists in modern day. Appalled. And she told those boys to cut it out!! Did she threaten them with being fired or think of firing them?

Uh . . . no.

Now when she felt that one or more of them had a problem with working for her, she made it clear to them that they could hit the door or get with the program.

But as long as they were 'just' cherry picking, she didn't care.

That's a funny attitude for a woman to have -- especially one who has made her whole career about how she was victimized.

It's this anti-woman attitude that she repeatedly exposes that is probably behind her slamming the documentary. The film makers never make a judgment on her and don't appear to really register what she is saying. But we did and we are appalled.

We're also appalled by Alanis' music career.

Unlike the 'experts' offered in the documentary, we don't think she's amazing. A laundry list song is not a sign of insight or skill ("Ironic") no .matter how many spoons you have when you only need one fork is nether poetry nor indicative of the human condition. In fact, laundry list songs are among the worst form of songwriting (see also "50 Ways to Leave Your Lover"). There's also a hilarious claim that Alanis is a great singer. She's not a great singer. She is someone who owes a huge debt to Maria McKee who is a great singer and paved the way for Alanis' copycat attempts. But back to songwriting. The documentary insists that poor Alanis did not get credit for her songwriting because she wrote with Glenn Ballard and she's, please note, no Wilson Philips!

Indeed. Wilson Phillips had talent.

It's really hard for Alanis to face the fact that she is not that talented. She cried like a baby after she basically grabbed -- physically grabbed -- Joni Mitchell and insisted that they were the same equivalent when it came to songwriting. No. Never. She's not even up to Wilson Phillips level, let alone a master like Joni.

She wishes she were Carole King and seems to feel that she can ape Carole. In other words, how many damn times -- ask it to the tune of "Perfect" -- is she going to rerecord JAGGED? Like Carole dipping into the TAPESTRY well yet again, Alanis keeps relying on JAGGED over and over. She'd do better to try to write something new. She'd do even better to stop turning her journal entries into 'songs.' Carole has rested on TAPESTRY, yes. But that's a solid album, track after track. Alanis's JAGGED is not a solid album. She got famous for having a potty mouth.

In fairness, she got famous for one other thing: Being an assertive female. That's a good thing but, like too many female artists before, she quickly gave up her strength.

"Thank You Psychobabble" was really the end for Alanis. She had a massive hit with "You Ought To Know" and then earned respect with her "Uninvited." And that was it. She wanted to do sappy. Apparently, one episode of BOY MEETS WORLD mocking her (a detail the documentary missed) left her reeling. She was accepted as rock. She sent many fleeing (and Limp Bizkit and others were a response to her success). And she became timid and dull. When it should have been all over for her, she released "Hands Clean" in 2002 and she got embraced. But then came more wimpy garbage.

Why do women fear their own strength? Why does Alanis prefer to play the victim?

Who knows?

But she destroyed her own career and, watching JAGGED, we didn't feel the least bit sorry for her. She threw young girls to the wolves (and she can claim she was appalled but then we see tour footage from 1995 where she's laughing with the boys about their 'cherry picking'). She should be very upset over this documentary but its her own mouth that got her in trouble.

Janet Jackson was the subject of an FX NYT documentary that started airing last Friday. It was a confusing documentary. That's only surprising if you don't pay attention to THE NEW YORK TIMES. They have never liked Janet. From 2004 through 2006, they carried out a repeated war on Janet.  And, in 2006, when they did a hit piece, they though they could get away with it.  One of us complained about the coverage  and the person over that desk was dismissive. Big mistake. The matter was then taken to the publisher and the  article got a correction. Because, besides being a hit piece on Janet, it was factually incorrect.  They thought they could get away with it.  They couldn't.  But that goes to how Janet was truly beaten up so forgive us if we're not going to pretend like NYT can just sneak in the door today and do so without facing any real criticism.

For those who missed it, Janet Jackson was performing at the Superbowl in 2004.  Justin Timberlake was on stage with her.  He ripped her top off.  Her breast was exposed.  He got away with it and she was crucified.

We don't expect NYT to get it right, they couldn't in real time.  But their bad 'documentary' is full of errors.  From the beginning, they blamed Janet.  But, check NYT's e-mails the night of the Superbowl, check the FCC complaints and you'll see that people bothered were bothered by Justin, not just Janet.

In fact, some could have cared less about a bared boob.  They were offended that a White boy -- emphasis on boy -- ripped off the top of an African-American woman.

The media never wanted to get it right.  

That includes the whorish 'left' media which wanted to reduce it to 'oh, they can't handle a bare breast!'  

Again, the original complaints -- including the ones NYT received -- called out Justin Timberlake.

And they were right to do so.

Janet didn't cooperate with NYT's documentary -- and she was right to refuse to do so.  They crucified her and did so with glee.

As two who know Janet and who consider her a good friend, it hurt to read NYT's coverage.  It was cute, watching the piece of garbage 'documentary' and seeing how NYT pointed fingers at many but never at themselves.  

Janet will tell her story in the new year on LIFETIME and A&E --  and it will be a better documentary.

Will it be better evaluated?

We ask because NPR's got a real problem with African-American women.  Diana Ross, a living legend, releases a new album about making it through the pandemic -- new tracks, most of which she co-wrote and NPR ignores it.  During this same time, Barbra Streisand -- who's voice is gone -- releases an album of tracks going back decades.  And NPR rushes to interview her.

No woman charted on BILLBOARD's HOT 100 more than Diana in the 20th century.  She's a legend, she's a pioneer and NPR thinks they can get away with ignoring her and that Americans won't notice.

[We covered this last week in "NPR, stop the racism (before you break our hearts)..."]

And now comes the attack on Janet.  Eric Deggans -- one of those effete males you hear on Terry Gross' NOT-SO-FRESH AIR -- decided to weigh in.  Why?  Apparently to sport his own stupidity.

His column is a text book sexism.

This isn't a new idea; Jackson's fans have complained for a long time that Timberlake paid a much smaller price than she did when their stunt went wrong in front of a massive TV audience.

But the film also implies that the idea for the stunt came from Jackson or one of her staff, quoting former MTV executive Salli Frattini, a senior vice president at MTV who worked on the halftime show. Frattini says Jackson left the stadium immediately after the incident and never really explained to CBS or MTV staff onsite what happened, though the star later issued several public apologies.

According to the film, people who worked on the halftime show recall watching a rehearsal with Timberlake where he pulled her skirt off, concluding it didn't work. MTV was producing the halftime show; with a roster of performers that included Nelly, Kid Rock and P. Diddy, the lineup had already spooked the NFL and the network, which made it clear they didn't want anything overly risqué to occur.

The film notes news reports implying Jackson's stylist may have purchased new wardrobe items, including a sunburst-shaped nipple shield, after the rehearsal. According to Frattini, Timberlake met with Jackson and her stylist privately for a few minutes before the performance and they did the show, where Jackson's naked breast and a sunburst nipple shield were exposed for an instant.

"I felt betrayed," Frattini adds during the film. "My instincts told me that there was a private conversation between wardrobe, stylist and artist, where someone thought this would be a good idea. And it backfired."

And while it is tragic to see how much criticism and backlash Jackson endured, the film never quite contends with the notion that this was a mess which may have originated with the singer herself, at a time when everyone involved knew that sexual content on TV was a hot-button issue with CBS, the NFL and the general public.

What a load of nonsense.

Reality, it doesn't matter if Janet was the mastermind.  That's not the issue, you sexist pig.

Janet and Justin did that nipple-gate.  They were both responsible.

But Justin never was held responsible.

Quit your b.s. garbage that if she helped plan it, it should be on her head.

You're a sexist piece of trash.  Justin participated.

 

Janet's career was destroyed.  And Justin got to play the big man.  She gets pulled off pop radio while he becomes the king of pop radio.  

And there's more reason to be appalled by Justin.

Dropping back to March for this from our "TV: Clark Kent reported the truth but then he was fictional:"
 

 

Ask yourself also what role the media played in the dog piles on women.  No we're not talking about Tara Reade.  We could but we're talking about that fey sprite Justin Timberlake.  BLACK SNAKE MOAN should have never been made but, if it had to be made, there was no reason to cast castarati Justin Timberlake.  Long before Lance Bass came out, the big rumor about NSYNC was that Justin was gay.  He wasn't gay.  He was effete. In our society, thanks to the narrative popularized by Hollywood (to protect in the closet money makers), effete equals gay. So Justin went through the early '00s with a chip on his shoulder and another one on his smug ass.  As a result, he felt the best way to shore up his questionable manhood was to objectify women.

Last month, Timberlake realized he could no longer ignore his past actions -- because people weren't letting him anymore.  In 2018, he suffered the first significant wave of backlash over what he did to Janet Jackson.

That year, his poorly received Superbowl performance came on the heels of weeks and weeks of outrage over how he'd progressed just fine, after Nipplegate (the 2004 Superbowl performance where he ripped off Janet's top leaving her breast exposed).  

Janet was banned from the Grammys that year, he performed.  Les Moonves ordered all CBS radio stations to stop playing her songs, Justin's continued to be played.  While Janet was banned and lost out on one opportunity after another (including the lead in a TV biopic about Lena Horne), Justin had endless opportunities and people endlessly applaued him -- endlessly applauded his theft and appropriation of Janet's brother Michael's musical style.

What changed last month? Britney Spears.  Justin's ex-girlfriend received attention over the unfairness that is her currently life situation.  Justin was part of the anti-Britney drama, using her to advance his melodramatic "Cry Me A River" single.  A lot of people used Britney.  We didn't.  We noted at one point during her struggles that we don't do do pile ons and we had other things to cover. Britney's life has been difficult in the last two decades as she has fought for the basic right to run her own life.  And Justin has coasted.

As the outrage grew, Justin finally issued an apology or 'apology' last month.  

Too little too late? How about: Not one damn bit believable?

The media should have told everyone that -- should have, but didn't.  Kylie Minogue.  Those two words were missing from most of the coverage. (One notable exception here.)  In 2003, he made a big point to grope and cup her ass.  Again, he felt the world saw him as gay.  So what to do, what to do?  Demean a woman, objectify her.  That's all he's offered his entire solo career -- that and trying to rip off Michael Jackson.  It was disgusting, please note, in 2017, when THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER did a musical roundtable and Tori Amos (who knows better) was making nice with Justy. 

Justin's stunt at the Superbowl was not new.  He'd already done similar with Kylie Minogue.  Poor little Eric, so unaware of anything and unable to do research.  He could start by reading Rick Fulton's 2003 report:

KYLIE MINOGUE gave Justin Timberlake the bum's rush at the Grammy Awards - after he tried to grope her rear again.

Justin, 22, wanted to repeat his antics at the Brit Awards when he fondled the star's rear during their raunchy duet. He has admitted being "obsessed" with Kylie's bum and rates it 58 on a scale of one to 10.

As they met on stage to present an award for Best Pop Vocal Album, Justin asked the Aussie beauty: "By the way, can I grab your ass again?" But Kylie flatly refused his naughty request and yelled: "No!" leaving Justin looking shocked.

 

He used women to look 'like a man.'  Because he was just a squeaky voiced  boy trying to steal Michael Jackson's act.  The documentary -- like Eric -- leaves that out.  It happened.  It's reality.  And they should have asked all the MTV and Superbowlers -- the ones who praised Justin because he "manned up" (honest to goodness, that was a quote on the documentary made by a woman) -- why they allowed Justin to be part of the Superbowl after what had already happened with Kylie.

Eric insists:

 

 

 That may be the biggest reason why this documentary feels less impactful than other projects urging us to reconsider past scandals distorted by sexism and racism; unlike Spears' conservatorship, what happened to Jackson is not ongoing as the film airs.

She survived the scandal, was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and has a two-night documentary of her own set to air on A&E and Lifetime early next year, promising to tell her life story her way.

 

She survived the scandal?

Okay, that explains everything.  Eric's saying the woman didn't drown so she's a witch and she got what she deserved.   

NPR really thought that garbage was worth publishing?  

 

Sometimes the most telling thing about a documentary is what it presents; however, sometimes what's most telling is the way the media reacts to a documentary.

 

 

 

 

Media: Passing (race and sexuality)

A documentary, a drama and an action-comedy are all offered on streaming services.  Do they have anything else in common?  Actually, a great deal.

 

 

Let's start with PASSING.  This is a first rate drama offered by NETFLIX.  Rebecca Hall directs this adaptation of Nella Larsen's 1929 novel.  Ruth Negga stars as Clare who is passing in NYC -- she's African-American and she's passing for White.  In NYC, she stumbles upon her friend from Chicago Reenie (Tessa Thompson) who is doing some passing of her own.  She's assumed White in a store where she picks up a racist doll that two White women have dropped.  She's in a hotel cafe where she is nervous about being found out.  That's where she bumps into Clare.

Reenie goes with Clare to her hotel room and they relax up until Clare's husband John (Alexander Skarsgard) arrives.  He's happy to meet Reenie and he assumes she's White.  He goes on to share that he teases Clare that she's getting darker and may turn into a Black person (the n-word is used).  He further shares that he can't stand people of color, nor can Clare who won't even have them as her maids.  

Reenie is rightly insulted and quickly departs.  

Clare doesn't want to let go that quick and, really, neither does Reenie.  So the two women continue to see one another while Clare is in NYC.

It's a penetrating film that gets under your skin quickly.  It's also shot incredibly well. It's the sort of drama that we probably all hoped for back when the US had an active and thriving independent film scene.  Rebecca Hall really accomplishes something with the film and all the actors mentioned are first rate.  Our only complaint is that there is not any real magnetism coming off of Brian (Andre Holland), not when with his wife Reenie nor when he's with Clare.

PASSING is a first rate film.  Although not nearly as ambitious, RED NOTICE is nothing to dismiss.  This tight action-comedy is also streaming on NETFLIX.  Rawson Marshall Thurber wrote and directed the film.  We're much more impressed with his screenplay which shows real skill in transitions as well as in twists.  (His directing is not bad and on par with his earlier film WE'RE THE MILLERS.)

 

Dwayne Johnson, Gal Gadot, Ryan Reynolds and Riu Arya make up the main cast and they bring so much life to their roles that the film comes alive in ways you might not expect in this genre. It's a fast and pleasurable ride.

 

And then there's the documentary:  MAYOR PETE which AMAZON PRIME is streaming.  MAYOR PETE is directed by Jesse Moss and documents Pete Buttigieg's failed run for the Democratic Party's 2020 presidential nomination and, in fact, many more of Pete's failures.

This is a cringe-inducing documentary.  Is Pete a human being?  He may be now but he wasn't then.

Your heart goes out to Chasten Buttigieg throughout.  That's Pete's husband (this fall, the two became parents).  Do you remember the way the media beat up on Dr. Judith Dean in 2004?  She was the spouse of Howard Dean and some in the media felt she wasn't doing enough for Howard's campaign while others felt that her removal from many elements of the race had nothing to do with her being a practicing doctor but instead with her having no real enthusiasm for her husband's run.

Of all the spouses of also-runs in the 21st century, we tend to believe that Judith had it the worst -- or we did until 2020.  That's when we thought Chasten had it the worst.  However, the documentary really makes the argument that the media wasn't the issue, it was Pete.

Chasten's ready to face the media, wanting to, ready to be part of the campaign.  It's Pete that can't come across.  

Which is a real shame because the media really pimped Pete, they wanted him to be a major contender and if he hadn't kept Chasten in the wings, Pete might have been able to have been a real competitor.

Pete apparently had a limited notion of what gay was and of what he would allow We The People to see.  

Passing.

We're back to that topic.  In PASSING, Reenie turns on Clare.  Is it because Reenie disagreed with Clare for passing as White?  Possibly.  But there's also an undercurrent to the film: Reenie seems to be passing as straight.  She seems to be attracted to Clare, something more than friendship.  Take her reaction when she finds Clare relaxing with Zu, for example.  Take the way she embraces Clare.  Or the way she looks longing at her throughout.  By the way, what we're talking about?  It's long been a part of the historical debate about the novel -- whether Reenie is sexually attracted to Clare (and, yes, we read the novel several years ago which may have impacted our take on the film).  

If Reenie is bi-sexual or a lesbian passing for straight, that would explain why, as we noted earlier, that Brian lacks magnetism.  That would explain why Reenie might end up with him.  They really don't have much in common (he's concerned that their children know what the world is really like for people of color and Reenie never wants to discuss it and actively stops Brian when he attempts to speak the truth).  If she is passing as straight, that offers other dimensions and explains why she may have killed Clare.  Again, she judges Clare for passing but we first meet Reenie when she's passing for White.  She hates Clare doing the same and, if she's sexually attracted to Clare, that would explain why she might have killed her.

 

 

Passing for straight?

It's also an issue with RED NOTICE.  Ryan Reynolds and Dwayne Johnson are constantly making homoerotic comments to one another.  This isn't that surprising because jokes like that exist among the working class and, within the entertainment industry, are a staple among crew members.  It can just be men trying to be funny.

But these jokes are really what put RED NOTICE over.  And certainly Ryan Reynolds has made a career out of them.  In RED NOTICE, it really does border on queerbaiting.  If someone argued that it crossed the line into full on queerbaiting, we wouldn't argue with them.  

RED NOTICE works around one twist and turn after another.  It's like WILD THINGS in that regard.  The 1998 film had a series of cons taking place.  And near the end, it appeared that we were going to learn that Matt Damon and Kevin Bacon were actually playing lovers (some couldn't handle that at showings and got very uncomfortable when one actor stepped out of the shower).  RED NOTICE wants the same twists and turns and, 23 years later, looks hopelessly out of touch as we find out that Gal and Dwayne are lovers but not Dwayne and Ryan or even a thruple involving the three.

It really is enough for Ryan Reynolds.  The jokes -- on Twitter and social media -- about his longings for a man and the jokes from his characters.  It's getting old.  It's past time for him to either drop it or play a gay man who kisses another man on screen -- not a peck, a real romantic relationship.

For those who don't remember, Ellen DeGeneres came out at the end of the fourth season of her sitcom ELLEN.  The fifth season was all about ABC attacking the show and attacking Ellen herself.  And along comes Ryan in that awful sitcom that ABC replaced Ellen with: TWO GUYS, A GIRL AND A PIZZA PLACE.  To vanish the lesbian character and the lesbian actress, ABC resorted to that hideous sitcom.  Ryan kind of owes the gay community for his role in that.

CRAPAPEDIA defines queerbaiting as follows:

Queerbaiting is a marketing technique for fiction and entertainment^[6] in which creators hint at, but then do not actually depict, same-sex romance or other LGBT representation.^[7] They do so to attract ("bait") a queer or straight ally audience with the suggestion of relationships or characters that appeal to them,^[8] while at the same time attempting to avoid alienating other consumers.^[6][9]

Queerbaiting has often been observed in popular fiction such as films and television series, but also has been observed among celebrities who convey an ambiguous sexual identity through their works and statements.^[6] It arose in and has been popularized through discussions in Internet fandom^[10] since the early 2010s.^[11]

Queerbaiting describes too many movies in Ryan Reynolds' filmography.  As FILM DAILY noted:

Deadpool: Deadpool (2016 & 2018)

Portrayed as being undeniably pansexual in the comics, the movie adaptation of the Merc with a Mouth has so far failed to completely deliver upon the same LGBTQI representation of the superhero’s sexuality.

Despite Ryan Reynolds (X-Men Origins: Wolverine) suggesting he wants Wade to have a boyfriend in a Deadpool movie and the suggestion from writer Rhett Reese (Zombieland) that the character’s pansexuality would be honored in Deadpool 2, the only time his sexuality is made apparent is in the occasional loaded one-liner. Still, at least Deadpool 2 has managed to debut the first LGBTQI superheroes in film even if Deadpool isn’t quite one of them yet.

If he'd only made BUYING THE COW (he wakes up drunk convinced he had sex with a man -- ha ha! apparently -- and he decides to come out of the closet -- ha ha even more!), Ryan Reynolds would owe movie goers a real gay romance film.

He's basically become Robin Williams -- who was problematic for the LGBTQ community -- and no one has bothered to notice.

He needs to lay off the jokes and the one-liners unless/until he can play a gay character with an active love life.  (Meaning none of that b.s. where Cam and Mitch have a quick peck but Phil and Claire are forever being shown in bed together about to have sex.)

It's insulting.  It may have passed for progressive 23 years ago.  It doesn't today.  Not in the same year that Macaulay Culkin can turn up in AMERICAN HORROR STORY as a gay male prostitute offering Harry (Finn Wittrock) frottage and then explaining that it's "French for rubbing our dicks together."

The LGBTQ community needs tired people like Ryan Reynolds to get off their ass and start doing things.  That community needs it and the American people need it.  We still need to move towards equality.

And that's what so upsetting about MAYOR PETE.  Pete wants to pass for straight.  That's not fair.  When he was running for the presidential nomination, he wanted to pass for straight.  He was reluctant for Chasten to really be a part of the campaign (Chasten even asks in the film if Pete's really going to let him be the only spouse of a candidate in the primary not to be allowed onstage when a debate concludes).  

Pete came out relatively late.  And he almost immediately hooked up with Chasten.  We'll assume it was love at first sight.  We'll also assume that Pete has traditional ideas about relationship (that's not an insult).  All of that's fine.  In 2020, he could step out onstage being an openly gay man but he struggled with being a gay man in a relationship.

Ryan Reynolds needs to look at his role in that.  He and actors like him need to grasp that things aren't so easy.  Thanks to Ellen and others who followed her (as well as those who preceded her), American can conceptualize a gay person even if they don't know anyone who is openly gay.  If we could move from cute little one-liners about same-sex relationships to actual film portrayals of relationships, people like Pete would feel they could be not just themselves in public but who they are with their partner in public.

MAYOR PETE is a hard film to watch.  It did make us appreciate Pete more (not his politics, he's far to the right of us).  And we really felt for and rooted for Chasten.  Mainly, it made us ponder the damages of passing -- something all three films made us think about.

 

We didn't know Al Sharpton had gone into labor (Betty, Marcia, Ava and C.I.)

We really didn't.

Truly, we didn't even know he was pregnant. But Thursday we saw the baby photo over at NBC NEWS -- Isaac Bailey's the baby's name -- is that Isaac Sharpton-Bailey?

Before we go further. Al was known as a race hustler. Yes,  MSNBC presents him as a god but he did a lot of real damage and the only one who ever got rich was Al. He did a little shakedown and got companies to pay out to him -- a little like an early Michael Avenatti. Al's not a Civil Rights leader. He's a liar and it goes far beyond Tawana Brawley. In the Black community, there are leaders. We have never seen Al as one of them. Listen to Black radio and grasp how much we laugh at him. He created his poor image and little Issac Bailey is doing the same.

 

Issac lies and NBC lets him which says a great deal about both. He also uses inferences to smear an 18-year-old kid who has had the weight of the world on his shoulders for over a year now.

Kyle Rittenhouse, in an unusual move for a defendant, took the witness stand Wednesday. He cried. His defense team then made a motion for a mistrial with prejudice, which means Rittenhouse couldn’t be retried. But whatever the court rules, he has already won.

He’s charged with ​​reckless homicide, intentional homicide and attempted intentional homicide for shooting three people (killing two of them) who were protesting the police shooting of yet another Black man, Jacob Blake, in Kenosha, Wisconsin, last summer. The protest followed many George Floyd-inspired ones that erupted across the world calling for police accountability and justice for Black lives. White allies, like the ones Rittenhouse shot, were among the protesters. Rittenhouse has pleaded not guilty. 

 

"He cried." An over 40-year-old man mocking a teenager. What a proud moment for Isaac. Understand his life's been full of proud moments, like when his own brother committed murder. By the way, he teaches at the college he graduated from. Which tells you all you need to know about his lack of qualifications.

The move towards a mistrial? Not because Kyle cried. Because the prosecution was given strict instructions about what could and could not be said and they violated it. The judge, in fact, stopped the testimony to order the jury out of the courtroom and to again warn the prosecution about their misconduct.

You don't learn that from liar Isaac. 

 

Let's go to a legal expert, Jonathan Turley:

 

The prosecution stumbled out of the gate in the trial. Gaige Grosskreutz was the third person to be shot by Rittenhouse. Grosskreutz admitted under cross-examination that Rittenhouse did not shoot him when he had his hands up after their confrontation. He admitted that it was only after he pointed his handgun at Rittenhouse and moved toward him that Rittenhouse fired.

Likewise, a prosecution witness, Ryan Balch, testified that one of the other people shot, Joseph Rosenbaum, said that he intended to kill Kyle Rittenhouse. Other witnesses described Rosenbaum as “belligerent” or “hyperaggressive.” 

Later, the prosecution called Richard McGinniss, a journalist with The Daily Caller who was reporting from Kenosha that night. He was near Rittenhouse when Joseph Rosenbaum was shot. The prosecutor told McGinniss, “I mean you have no idea what Mr. Rosenbaum was ever thinking at any point of his life. You have never been inside his head, you never met him before.”

McGinnis said, “I never exchanged words with him, if that’s what your question is.”

The prosecutor then pressed McGinnis on how he had no idea what Rosenbaum was thinking because it “is complete guesswork, isn’t it?”

That is when McGinnis delivered a haymaker, noting, “Well he said (expletive) you, and then he reached for the weapon.”

The prosecution’s own medical expert, Dr. Doug Kelly, appeared to confirm that the forensic evidence of soot injuries on Rosenbaum’s hand could be consistent with Rosenbaum trying to grab the barrel of Rittenhouse’s rifle when the gun was fired.

It got worse from there, including a glaring constitutional violation by the prosecution when Binger began his cross examination of Rittenhouse by commenting on his decision to remain silent.

The judge correctly tore into the prosecutor. Any first-year law student knows that you cannot comment on the silence of a Mirandized defendant after an arrest under the Fifth Amendment – let alone ignore a court order.

Biased media viewers

Even without the unforced errors by the prosecution, this was always a difficult case. Wisconsin has a strong self-defense standard. After a defendant claims to have acted to repel a threat, the burden is on the prosecution to rebut that claim beyond a reasonable doubt.

Instead, the prosecution prompted its own witnesses to create layers of doubt in the case. In doing so, it seems to have reduced the range of possibilities to somewhere between a hung jury and outright acquittal on the major charges.

The problem is that many people may be unaware that the case is collapsing due to such evidentiary or tactical failures. Any hung jury or acquittal will come as a shock, and the level of outrage is likely to be greater. This case began with violent rioting in Kenosha, and the news coverage is fueling the danger of renewed violence.

Those are realities and you won't find them in what the dishonest offer.  Here's Issac:

 

To his supporters, and even many of his detractors, Rittenhouse isn’t a monster. Not really. He was a young, dumb kid hyped up on the Foxification or Fox News effect of American discourse on the Black Lives Matter movement in a country that fetishes guns — for show, for sport and for killing — not a white supremacist, like, say Dylann Roof. Not really. He wore no hoods and didn’t wrap himself in the Confederate flag. He’s a patriot who tried to bring calm to chaos because, as Fox News prime-time host Tucker Carlson told us at the time of the shooting, the adults around him wouldn’t “maintain order.” He was so nonviolent that police officers greeted him and those like him like fellow guardians of the community before he killed anyone. 

 

Brother man, stop the okey-doke. That's outrageous and it goes to how awful the media has become that NBC NEWS is posting that garbage. You don't know what -- if anything -- the kid was hyped up on.

These were rioters, not protesters, so let's start telling that truth. The media was drooling over the prospect of the streets being in riots while Trump was president. They refused to call riots "riots." It was a riot.

So Kyle is wrong, Isaac, for having a gun? But the liar who got shot isn't wrong for having a gun? The one who lost his gun license because he was part of a burglary?

Quit your lying.

We're sick of this nonsense.

Kyle shot three people.  Little Gaige Grosskreutz was one of them. All those Kyle shot were White, by the way. Little GG admitted on the stand that Kyle only fired on him after GG pointed his gun at him. Prior to taking the stand, GG lied to the police and should be behind bars. GG is not a kid. He's an adult.

Joseph Rosenbaum is one of the two people Kyle shot dead. Again, all three that Kyle shot were White. Joseph? Just released from the mental ward. Before that? Long stint in prison for child molestation. Sorry that we're not members of Joseph Rosenbaum's fan club.  He threatened a child (Kyle was 17) yet again only this time the child was armed.   He was verbally threatening Kyle. Some say, some witnesses, that he was no threat. That's your judgment call and the crazy wasn't yelling at you or throwing stuff at you. The evidence shows that either he was lunging at Kyle when he was shot or he was falling towards Kyle.

 
Anthony Huber looks like smart mouth trash in every photo we see of him. Doesn't mean he deserved to be shot. He was shot by Kyle while he had a skateboard in one hand and was reaching for Kyle's gun with the other. His girlfriend wants the world to know that he was intelligent. Nope. He was a f**king idiot. What a sense of White entitlement to think you could grab a gun out of someone's hands. You didn't catch any African-Americans playing the fool. 

 

Playing the fool is how this has played out.   Grown ups, news outlets and loony bins like WSWS have repeatedly lied and distorted to turn a 17-year-old into whatever they needed so they could scream 'racist!'  This was especially true if the one yelling 'racist!' was a White person.  They really need someone else to point to so that they can pretend that they're pure and good -- most likely they are not.  If they were, they wouldn't work so hard to lie about a young person, to try to destroy someone's life with lies over and over.

The trial is over.  The jury is deliberating.  We fear that regardless of the verdict, it will be very difficult for people to face the truth of what happened and why.  The American people deserve a better media -- at the very least, they deserve a functioning one.

[Ava and C.I. note -- please check out Betty and Marcia's sites and we're mentioning that to include links to our co-authors of this piece.]

 

NPR, stop the racism (before you break our hearts) (Ava and C.I.)

NPR likes to pretend it is a fair news outlet.  Reading some of the coverage of the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, we'd beg to disagree.  And that's before you factor in their lies and attacks on THE NEW YORK POST for the POST breaking the Hunter Biden laptop story and before you factor in the whole Iraq War that they helped push.

 

Why are we accusing NPR of racism?

Well, we're not the first to do so, after all.  The statistics -- on guests, on on-airs, on topics -- have long indicated the racism.

But we were reminded of that when we came across a report on NPR:

You know, also, I felt like when I was listening to this album, a lot of the songs almost sound like pep talks for yourself or for a friend.

Oh, great! NPR's finally covering Diana Ross.  Her new album, THANK YOU, is about learning to live and love in the pandemic, learning to find our blessings and . . . 

Oh, wait, NPR was speaking with an Australian singer.

Anything to avoid Diana Ross, right?

 

Oh, NPR, Think it over, before you break our hearts, think it over.

 

 

That's Diana Ross "All Is Well" from her new album THANK YOU.

Barbra Streisand releases an album of tired and old recordings (RELEASE ME 2) and NPR rushes to speak with her.

When has NPR ever bothered to speak to Diana Ross?

She's a legend releasing a new album and they just aren't interested.  FRESH AIR has never seen fit to sit down with Diana.  NPR just doesn't care.  Diana charted in the Hot 100 more than any other artist last century.  She continues to chart on the dance chart.  She is a legend and a trail blazer around the world -- except in the offices of NPR where, apparently, an African-American woman has to accomplish even more than Diana has.

Grammy winner, she's sang on 73 songs that made the Hot 100, over 80 songs that charted on the R&B charts, 22 hits on the dance charts (including four number ones in 2020), 30 songs on the AC charts, 1 Academy Award nomination for Best Actress, 7 American Music Awards, 1 Tony Award, 1 Golden Globe Award, 1 Grammy (and 13 more nominations) . . . 

How many honors are required for Terry Gross and company to be interested in interviewing you?

Diana Ross' video for "I Still Believe" below.

Please check out Kat's "Kat's Korner: No, Diana Ross, Thank You" -- her review of Diana Ross' new album. Yes Kat covered the album.  Yet NPR, in their musical roundtable (NEW MUSIC FRIDAY) last week managed to cover six albums released that day but didn't manage to include Diana's THANK YOU.  They're rushing off to interview Robert Plant this week, by the way.  Pretend not to notice the racism that keeps Diana from being interviewed and her album from being noted.  Or maybe smarten up and let NPR know you're not donating a penny until they rectify both their racist past and their racist present.

 

 

Media: Save us from the know-it-alls

We live in a world of know-it-alls. And how's that working out for the country?



Rachel Maddow has long played a know it all despite knowing nothing. She went from a pro-war radio pundit to AIR AMERICA RADIO where she demonstrated that she didn't know anything including publication dates. She's show up for AAR's UNFILTERED on Monday mornings talking about how "in this morning's WASHINGTON POST," this or that had been reported. Problem?

It wasn't Monday morning's POST. It was from Sunday or Saturday or Friday. But she would repeatedly insist that it was that morning and here she was, the first to break it to you.

That's really disturbing when it happens over and over. It goes to a dishonest core and it goes to the ability to lie about even the smallest thing. Lie? Yes, lie. It happened over and over. Elaine was an UNFILTERED listener and she knew everybody on that chat board -- knew them online. And the regular listeners knew Rachel was lying. How? They pointed it out on the boards during the show, think Rachel had misspoke. She hadn't. And she never self-corrected. It became a hallmark of her AAR radio career. She was lying. And she lied all the time.

When Lizz Winstead was informed that UNFILTERED was being pulled off the schedule in one month and would be replaced by a Jerry Springer show, Lizz walked. Not Rachel. Rachel went on every day and lied to listeners that Lizz was sick. When Elaine and others challenged that on the message board of the show (one of us had passed on to Elaine what had actually happened), they would be dismissed. When Elaine posted on the board what had actually happened, Rachel decided to comment or 'comment.' Lizz would not want anyone talking about this, Rachel insisted, and it was hurtful to talk about it.

Really? Because what would have helped Lizz is if no one would have lied. If AAR listeners had been given a month's notice that UNFILTERED with Lizz, Chuck D and Rachel was being pulled to be replaced with a radio show from trash TV's Jerry Springer, there would have been a huge pushback that would have made it very difficult to remove UNFILTERED.

But Rachel was part of the lies that let the show get removed.

Instead of saving the show, Rachel worried about setting herself up so she'd have a job. To ensure that happened, she lied repeatedly on air and off air? Little girl got her daddy to post to the show's message board. He did it under multiple names and no one was the wiser for a bit. They did wonder where all these new people -- with all the same thoughts -- were suddenly coming from. Then one of the longterm posters informed everyone that these seven or so 'new' posters all had the same IP address and were, in fact, Rachel's father.

After UNFILTERED, Rachel did get two opportunities from AAR; however, she couldn't deliver an audience. Not a real surprise. Her approach was haughty and she didn't come across as warm. Without seeing her Scott Baio mug, she was just an annoying voice. She began appearing on the cesspool that was MSNBC. Yes, it had moved past extreme homophobia but it was still massively sexist. And Rachel spoke with AP about that. Some wrongly thought Rachel wanted to address sexism and make some changes. No, as soon as AP published the interview, MSNBC gave Rachel her own show and that shut her up.

They were very sexist. Hillary Clinton was seeking the Democratic Party's presidential nomination and you had all these MSNBC men saying vile things about Hillary -- she was "pimping her own daughter." You also had so called reporters for NBC NEWS appearing on MSNBC and bragging on air that they couldn't be objective because they were such huge fans of Barack Obama. When Katie Couric called some of this sexism out -- sexism that continued after Rachel got her own show -- Keith Olbermann -- remember that woman hater -- declared Katie "the worst person of the week." That's how it went back in the 'glory days' of MSNBC.

It's always been a sewer and Rachel quickly ended up the network's very own gutter girl. She wasn't calling out her male peers for their rank sexism -- that continued long after 2008. In fact, Chris Matthews -- whom Rachel spoke against in that AP interview that MSNBC rushed to cover up -- didn't leave the network until 2020 and Rachel was his on-air best pal.

MSNBC made her wear make up -- a lot -- and even that didn't bother her. At times, she appeared like a heavily painted fun house but as long as they were paying her salary, she didn't care. What's self respect to a whore but something that might cause you to lose sleep?

She lied on air over and over repeatedly and began to really 'shine' as a liar who would whip up the crazies (her core audience, by the way). So when Russia-gate came along, it found the perfect mid-wife in Rachel Maddow.

Russia-gate was nonsense and Rachel pimped it endlessly.

Aaron Mate. We wanted to give him a gold star and brag on him. We kept hearing he'd done a great job in the last days by nailing down Rachel's lies about Russia-gate with a brand new column.

 

Yea! We could praise him.

And then we read it.

"Russia-gate has no rock bottom" is the title and right below the title there's a photo of Rachel Maddow.

Good, he's going to get to the point and document and explain her various deceptions, right?

Wrong. Not counting pull quotes (even his own from previous articles) or Tweets, just the new words he typed for this article, he's at 1387 words before he gets to a sentence with Rachel Maddow's name in it.

1387.

By way of comparison, we're not even at 1000 words yet and we've already established Rachel's shady character -- something we've been doing for years

1387. Does Aaron have a point to make about Rachel because we really don't have that kind of time. More to the point, we don't need to make that kind of time.

Russia-gate? We didn't need Aaron Mate to call that nonsense out for ourselves. Both of us knew the late Stephen Cohen and when we had a question regarding claims, he's the one we went to. But, here's the thing, we were already calling out Russia-gate before we had to consult anyone.

We were speaking to various groups and it started popping up. We knew, on its face, it was garbage and called it out from the start.

Aaron Mate? Sorry, we knew him only as one of the liars about Libya from when he was on DEMOCRACY NOW! The show through whatever tiny bits of integrity it had into the waste bin in order to push for war on Libya. They were downright hateful to the late Glen Ford of BLACK AGENDA REPORT. No, we don't forget things like that, sorry.

But we were happy to have a reason to praise Aaron. Or happy to think we would praise him.

Again, we made the mistake of reading him.

1387 words?

Who does he think is going to read the piece? The new 'hook' for him is to call out Rachel and her refusal to correct the record. That could get some new eye balls on the topic. But not if they're waiting 1387 words before he can get to the point.

A lot of people bought into the lies of Russia-gate. They did so because the media sold these lies. So calling out a media figure who sold the lies is a good idea. Expecting people read over 1387 words before you even mention the name of a media personality is more than a bit much.

If you're boasting on your Twitter feed that you're taking on Rachel Maddow and your article begins with a photo of her, you really should mention her not later than the last sentence in your first paragraph.

On the issue of Donald Trump and his scandals and his 'scandals' -- the latter being media nonsense and lies -- we had this little trick we used. We were there to talk about the wars and we were not speaking for people to hijack our discussion with the 'hot Trump topic' of the day. So what we would say is, "So they said this is happening any minute now? Then let's wait for that (arrest/removal from office/whatever). Let's give it 24 hours and if it doesn't happen and then you've been the victim of media malpractice yet again.

Preaching that practice to others saved us a lot of time and a lot of distraction. Following it ourselves did the same.

We're not know-it-alls. We don't pretend to know everything. There are many things we do not know. And we long ago followed Ellen Goodman's very wise advice regarding the Sunday Chat and Chews and how the same group of people showed up week after week to weigh in as experts when no one could be an expert on everything. As Ellen noted, it's just not possible. Of course that common sense would have to come from a woman -- far too many male blowhards think that they are an expert on every topic in the world.

Know-it-alls, sadly, usually don't know much at all. That's been the message of season three of HBO's TITANS though, strangely, we feel it's a message that the writers of the program missed. In other words, they sent message unknowingly

The know-it-all in season three is Dick Grayson -- the superhero without any powers and, sadly, without any brains. How many people was he trying to get killed accidentally this season? He was responsible for a lot of carnage. He only thought he killed Jason (Red Hood). He was responsible for the death of Hank (Hawk). And poor Barbara Gordon who had enough to put up with made the mistake of trusting him because he 'just knew' what was going to happen only to end up, yes, wrong.

Over and over, he was the know-it-all who knew nothing. So we were really confused when season three finally ending and he was still calling the shots on the team.

In terms of a trained leader of a group of fighters, we think it's really just Donna Troy (Wonder Girl). There's Kory Anders (Starfire) who is a trained fighter and was being groomed on her home planet to be the queen.

But, honestly, after the year Dick just racked up, even Krypto (Superboy's dog) could do a better job leading the Titans.

What's especially sad is that as inept as the character is? The performance Brenton Thwaites is delivering is just as bad.

Why did they, for example, kill off Hank?

Alan Ritchson delivered a wonderful performance and created a unique character. Mike was not the only one upset by Hank's death.

 

And Hank provided a different type of male character for the show. Strong performances are being delivered by so many -- Anna Diop and Damaris Lewis are amazing as sisters Kory and Komand'r (Starfire and Blackfire). Ryan Potter (Gar), Leslie Conor (Donna), Joshua Orpin (Conner), Savannah Welch (Barbara Gordon) and Karen Robinson (Vee) are wonderful. And then we get stuck with yet another scene where we're supposed to be impressed with Brenton Thwaites where we're supposed to be impressed with his acting and the character of Dick Grayson and the whole illusion just falls apart.

Which brings us to one of TV's supreme know-it-alls: Samantha Bee.

She was never that funny on THE DAILY SHOW and her personality has not transferred well to her own show on TBS. FULL FRONTAL WITH SAMANTA BEE was never a ratings hit. But it wasn't the ratings nightmare it's become since she returned last January. Long gone are the days of two million viewers. Gone also are the days of nearly two million and the days of 1/5 million and the days of one million and the days of . . .

This season, she's gotten her worst ratings ever. .45 was the most recent.

No one cares. In part, that's because her personality is grating and annoying. But what probably did her in even more this season was her announcement, last April, that she was and would be pulling her punches after Dan Rather asked her if that was happening on his podcast.

"I can't deny that that has happened. I mean, I think that's probably true across the board. You're like, OK, well we could be making jokes about, we could be making jokes about the infrastructure plan, but in general, I'm like, 'Wow, this is great. Why would I purposefully undermine something that is, seems to be a great idea, pretty much across the board?'"

Uh, because you're a comedian and you're supposed to traffic in jokes, not propaganda.

"Like I don't need to make jokes just to make jokes," she said, forgetting her occupation. "I like to make really targeted jokes. There are more worthy targets right now."

So the point everyone made from the start is true: She's one-sided and she's a propagandist for the Democratic Party. Don't mistake her whoring as something she's doing for the left. She's a whore for the Democratic Party.

How fitting that disgraced comedian Bee would confess to disgraced journalist Rather just how pathetic she was.

Know-it-alls like Samantha Bee always find the man to rub up against. Does it matter that Dan has a history of inappropriate interactions with women employed by CBS NEWS? Not to 'feminist' Sammy. Does it matter that he used sexism to try to destroy Connie Chung? Or Katie Couric? Or Diane Sawyer? Or Jane Wallace? Or . . .

Of course that doesn't matter to Samantha Bee -- just like it doesn't matter to her that Joe Biden probably assaulted Tara Reade.

Heaven save each one of us from the know-it-alls.

 

 

 

A note to our readers

Hey --

It's Monday night.


Let's thank all who participated this edition which includes Dallas and the following:

The Third Estate Sunday Review's Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess and Ava,
Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude,
Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man,
C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review,
Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills),
Mike of Mikey Likes It!,
Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz),
Cedric of Cedric's Big Mix,
Ruth of Ruth's Report,
Wally of The Daily Jot,
Trina of Trina's Kitchen, Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ,
Stan of Oh Boy It Never Ends,
Isaiah of The World Today Just Nuts,
and Ann of Ann's Mega Dub.

And what did we come up with? 

Not much.  Ava and C.I. wrote their weekly media piece.  We had hoped the rest of us could have a roundtable and that didn't work out.  So what were we going to do?

Meet up tonight and tomorrow night to finish up the edition?

Ava and C.I. were adamant that the edition note Diana Ross and her new album THANK YOU.

So we decided to repost community pieces on that topic and pair it with Ava and C.I.'s media piece and call it an edition.

 

• Media: Save us from the know-it-alls

Ava and C.I.'s media piece.

 

• "Kat's Korner: No, Diana Ross, Thank You"

Kat reviews Diana's new album.

• WHO IS THE GREAT EARTHA KITT? (and thank you, Dian...

Betty reviews a book and notes Diana's new album.

• I'm really tired of the every day racism (Ann)

Ann takes on the racism involved in a review of Diana's album.

• Diana Ross has a new album (Isaiah)

Isaiah notes his favorite tracks from Diana's new album.

• Diana Ross (Ruth)

Ruth talks about how Diana Ross helped change the landscape.

• Once upon a time AMAZON revelead they were a liar ...

 And a funny thing happened when Kat waited for delivery of her copy of Diana's new album.

 

 

Peace.

 

-- Jim, Dona, Ty, Jess, Ava and C.I.

 

 

"Kat's Korner: No, Diana Ross, Thank You"

"Kat's Korner: No, Diana Ross, Thank You"  

Kat: Diana Ross has released THANK YOU and it's a great album -- one that allows us to look at the shortcomings in the system.

Such as?  It's been called Diana's 25th solo studio album released by the media and that's not accurate.  I may have repeated it myself online, that false claim.  I mentioned it to C.I. and she rolled her eyes.  Huh?  "Kat, THE WIZ."  Immediately, I knew two things (a) that it was a lie and (b) how the lie started.

This is Diana's 26th solo, studio album.  

Back in 2016, I wrote "Kat's Korner: Diana Ross releases a masterpiece (belatedly)."

She brings each song to life.

"Wonder Wonder Why" may be one of her strongest performances and, even if you're a fan of "Is This What Feeling Gets?" from the original soundtrack for THE WIZ, you'll love her version here even more.

Oh, and that's the thing.

This is not Diana's tracks from the film soundtrack being repackaged.


In 1978, she went into the studio with Suzanne de Passe and Lee Holdridge to record these thirteen songs.  In the years since, only "Home" has been released (in 2001).

And that's how you know Motown was over by the 80s.

When Diana was with the Supremes, Motown issued A BIT OF LIVERPOOL (1964),  THE SUPREMES SING COUNTRY, WESTERN AND POP and WE REMEMBER SAM COOKE (both in 1965), THE SUPREMES SING RODGERS & HART (1967) and DIANA ROSS & THE SUPREMES SING AND PERFORM FUNNY GIRL (1968).

These were not expected to be huge sellers or even strong ones.

The point was to make clear that Diana could handle more than top forty.

The point was to make clear that Diana was an artist.

This album was supposed to have been released in January of 1979, following the release of the film in October of 1978 (the film's soundtrack was released in September 1978).


The digital booklet notes:

When the film wrapped and Ross returned to Los Angeles, producer/arranger Lee Holdridge received a call from Motown.  "We've got to have her do some cover versions of these songs," he was told with some urgency.
"We literally ran into the studio in a great hurry to do this," Holdridge says.  Luckily, this was not Holdridge's first time working with Motown or Diana Ross.  "I did all the orchestrations and arrangements for the film MAHOGANY, and 'Do You Know Where You're Going To' was a big hit for her," he adds.  "So she knew exactly who I was.  We knew all the keys and stuff like that, so we tried to emulate what some of the film tracks were like.  Diana was excited about it."


Months later, Cher would star in her ABC's CHER .  . . SPECIAL featuring a 15 minute segment of her playing all the parts in the musical WEST SIDE STORY.  But before that happened, Diana should have been presented to the public playing all the parts from THE WIZ.

And the film could have been rescued somewhat by the album being released.

As it headed to the second-run houses, the dollar theaters, DIANA ROSS SINGS SONGS FROM THE WIZ could've provided incentive to check out the film.  It would have also telegraphed just how strong a singer, how great an artist, she is.

As she demonstrates on "Don't Nobody Tell Me No Bad News" and on "Believe In Yourself," she could have easily played the role of either Evillene or Glinda The Good Witch in NBC's broadcast last year.  Her medley of "You Can't Win"/"Slide Some Oil"/"(I'm A) Mean Ole Lion" argue she could have handled the roles of Scarecrow, Tin Man and the Cowardly Lion as well.

Do you get it?  DIANA ROSS SINGS SONGS FROM THE WIZ is a studio album.  It was recorded for a January 1979 release.  It didn't get released until 2015.  Like BLUE.  Diana recorded that album in 1971 and 1972 but it didn't get released until 2006.  CRAPAPEDIA rightly counts BLUE as a studio album.  But DIANA ROSS SINGS SONGS FROM THE WIZ is wrongly listed by CRAPAPEDIA as a "compilation" album and appears wrongly listed with various best of and greatest hits albums Diana recorded.  These are not recordings from the film soundtrack of THE WIZ.  These are recordings of those songs done by Diana in a studio after the film for an album.  Every song on this album was recorded after she had completed THE WIZ and was intended for this album.  It was Diana taking on the entire soundtrack and she did a wonderful job.

But she's a woman and she's African-American so CRAPAPEDIA doesn't give two s**ts about the truth.

I care about the truth.  Sometimes I'm a little slow on the take.  So when I read Friday's snapshot, a point C.I. was subtly making went right over my head.  I nodded along and thought I got it.  Then I talked to Ann (read her "I'm really tired of the every day racism.") and really got the point.  Brit critic at THE GUARDIAN was utilizing racism to dismiss Diana -- her new album and her accomplishments.  He was doing it by resulting to the sexist and racist criteria that allowed the male created the rock canon that tossed in a few tokens but otherwise excluded all women and men of color.    Ann's documented it far beter than I could so make a point to read what she wrote and grasp what we allow and what we ignore encourages racism.

THANK YOU, the 26th solo studio album by Diana Ross, is an amazing accomplishment.  And, if we include compilations and her work in the sixties with the Supremes, this is at least her 123rd album.  

That's a lot to compete with.

Is it Diana's best album?  

No, I don't think so.

I think THE BOSS is her best album.  That 1979 album features the title track, "It's My House," "I Ain't Been Licked," "No One Gets The Prize," "All For One," "Once In The Morning" and "Sparkle."  And, for me, it's Diana's finest album.  It's gorgeous -- the vocals are so powerful and crisp, the musical arrangements are perfection.  

THANK YOU?  Out of Diana's 123 or so albums, I would rank it . . . number two.

I have loved THE BOSS since I first heard it in 1979.  That's a lot to compete with.  And I also love her 1980 album diana, 1984's SWEPT AWAY, 1985's EATEN ALIVE, 1992's THE FORCE BEHIND THE POWER, 1999's EVERY DAY IS A NEW DAY, 1970's DIANA ROSS, 1971's SURRENDER, 1976's DIANA ROSS, 1972's soundtrack to LADY SINGS THE BLUES, 1989's GREATEST HITS LIVE, Diana Ross & The Supremes' 1968 REFLECTIONS, 1993's STOLEN MOMENTS: THE LADY SINGS . . . JAZZ AND BLUES, 1994's DIANA EXTENDED: THE REMIXES, 2020's SUPERTONIC MIXES, 2015's DIANA ROSS SINGS SONGS FROM THE WIZ, 1966's THE SUPREMES A' GO-GO, 1967's THE SUPREMES SING HOLLAND-DOZIER-HOLLAND, 1968's DIANA ROSS & THE SUPREMES SING AND PERFORM FUNNY GIRL, 1977's AN EVENING WITH DIANA ROSS, 1994's A VERY SPECIAL SEASON, 1973's TOUCH ME IN THE MORNING . . .

Against all of those albums and many more, THANK YOU ranks number two as the best Diana Ross album of all time.

It's that good.  It's that great.  It's truly wonderful.

Thirteen tracks of perfection.  Keyon Harrold's trumpet on "Just In Case" is moving and layered and nearly as textured as Diana's vocals on the song.  The music doesn't compete with Diana.  On every track, it enhances her vocals.  And it's real music.  The way some critics are describing the album, you'd think it was Madonna in the '00s.  As Ava and C.I. observed in the 2006:

The fear, for many, with Madonna was that, at age 80, she'd still be slithering across the stage, in her panties. After "Justify My Love," Erotica, dripping wax on a bound Willem Dafoe in Body of Evidence and the Sex book, that fear seemed valid for some. Us, we would have preferred that she pursue that track. It would have been interesting. Instead, the same fawning and thoughtless critics that led her to believe she was gifted and talented, stage managed her into something else: boring.

That's pretty much all she's been now for over a decade. Boring.

We blame the critics who applauded her 'soft' side move.

They're the 'thinkers' that were seeing 'meaning' where there was none for most of Madonna's career. (In better days, Madonna laughed and sneered at them. Choosing to embrace them has killed any excitement in her career.) They're the type who, as early as the Who's That Girl tour were seeing 'empowerment' in the performance of "Live To Tell" where, for the song's ending, Madonna slumps then stands erect. They penned over-thought, embarrassing praise like this:

". . . a pose that suggest surrender and desolation, and then . . . as if recovering her strength and courage through an act of titantic will . . ." (We'll be kind and not name the 'author' of that crap.)

People, she just stood up. The really bad rewrite of Joni Mitchell (lyrics) with the drone that would dominate in her later music had come to an end. She needed to do something on stage. (Another nitwit saw in that brief moment the battle against AIDS. We'll spare you his tripe.)

It was that kind of crap that led her away from actual songs ("Cherish," "Like a Prayer," "Holiday," "Angel," "Dress You Up," etc.) into what she is today: 'inspirational.'

With her more recent work (heavily on display in the concert NBC broadcasts) grafting banal lyrics onto the never ending wump-wump beat of a drone, some saw the influence of the Kabbalah. While she does now repeatedly present herself as the modern day Aimee Semple McPherson -- it's Church of the Madonna. Don't blame Kabbalah, these days it's all about her.

There was a time when that might have made for an interesting tour and, certainly in the past, she's been able to mount stage shows that grappled with the tensions between sexuality and spirituality, conventionality and iconoclast. These days, she's just another boring celebrity and who would have ever thought you could say that about Madonna?

Sister Madge's following eats it up, they pay hundreds for a ticket and (due to ticket pricing more than anything) the last two tours have been seen as financially successful. Anything resembling art (even pop art) long ago left the building, but there are people across the country, around the world, willing to waste a couple of hundred to listen to her dither on, with the drone behind her, about how tough it is to be Madonna.

The drone.  The lack of anything resembling music, let alone music that pops.  "Let's Do It" pops on Diana's new album.  It's a stripped down track with fluttering lines and strong percussion. 



The piano work by Charlie McLean on "I Still Believe" is right up there with the piano on "More And More" and Valerie Simpson's piano work on THE BOSS.  The song also features some of Diana's deeper register.  She really has a great lower register and I'm always surprised she doesn't feature it more.  Yes, I love it when she goes to the top of her range and, yes, that work clearly influenced Michael Jackson.  But she's also got a gorgeous lower register.  1982's "Fool For Your Love" is one of the few songs where she really resorts to the lower register for the entire song.

Diana co-wrote that 1982 song, by the way.  She also co-wrote 1982's "So Close"  and "I Am Me," 1984's "Fight for It" and "Swept Away," 1983's "Girls," 1987's "Shockwaves"  and1999's "Hope Is An Open Window."  

I mention that because one prissy critic wants you to know Diana co-writes nine of the thirteen tracks and he (you knew it was a 'he,' didn't you?) insists she's not really been a songwriter and really just previous co-wrote 1981's "Work That Body."  Uhm, no.  

She and the other songwriters do a great job on THANK YOU.  Those writers include her oldest daughter Rhonda Ross who wrote, all by herself, the delicious "Count On Me"  -- another song with great piano work and with a vocal from Diana that really delivers.

I love the background vocals on "Come Together."  I love all the extra touches and flourishes that go into this album to make it so special and wonderful.

In Betty's "WHO IS THE GREAT EARTHA KITT? (and thank you, Diana Ross!)," she notes:

I also highly recommend Diana Ross' THANK YOU. A fantastic album. I am loving it. It is wonderful and I cannot praise it enough. If you like Diana, you are going to love this album. One of the songs features a syncopated vocal like on "Now That You're Gone" (diana album) or "Not Over You Yet" (EVERY DAY IS A NEW DAY album). I love all the songs and even the ones that I loved as singles work so much better on the album in the context of the other songs.

She's talking about "In Your Heart" and it's really something with the syncopated vocal, the drum rumbles, the caressing musical notes.

I love this album.  I love the title track, I love "If The World Just Danced" -- all of it.  

I love the lyrics, I love the vocals.  In the album notes, Diana explains THANK YOU Is a "songbook of love."  That's truly what the album is.  It's a celebration and reflection of what we have and what we can have.

"The Answers Always Love" probably sums up the album.

Diana Ross' THANK YOU is an album you don't want to miss.  It's everything a musical album should be.

 

[Note: For this review, I used C.I.'s advanced copy of THANK YOU.  I have paid for my copy, it's just been lost in transit, see my "Once upon a time AMAZON revealed they were a liar" from Friday.]

 

 

 

 

 

WHO IS THE GREAT EARTHA KITT? (and thank you, Diana Ross!) (Betty)

WHO IS THE GREAT EARTHA KITT? (and thank you, Diana Ross!)

Monday night, I was watching COZI. A number of you e-mailed to say you caught an episode of THE NANNY and Eartha Kitt was on. Yes, she sang on the cruise. I didn't know she was on THE NANNY! I'm sure I did in real time because I did watch that show when it was new and I do catch it now on COZY.

Well that's a lie.

I've never watched all of the final season. We knew the show was coming to an end. I saw when Fran learned she was pregnant and Nora Dunne was her doctor. But I've never watched beyond that -- not even in syndication. Sorry.

I'm sure it's great and all, the end of the show. But I just couldn't say goodbye to it. I didn't watch the end of WILL & GRACE's first run until the revamp started. And Stan will tell you that he's never watched the final episode of FRIENDS despite loving the show and owning all seasons on DVD because he didn't want to see it end. So I guess I'm not alone.

But I did love the show.

Back to Eartha.

I reviewed John "John L. Williams' AMERICA'S MISTRESS: EARTHA KITT, HER LIFE AND TIMES" and I discussed it at THIRD "KINDLE UNLIMITED (Betty, Ava and C.I.)" and for $1.99, I can't complain about the digital book too much, I guess.

John L. Williams' AMERICA'S MISTRESS: EARTHA KITT, HER LIFE AND TIMES."

That said, America Selby's WHO IS THE GREAT EARTHA KITT? is a much better book -- and it's fre to read if you have KINDLE UNLIMITED. This providies the contexxt that is mssing from Williams' book. And it also doesn't reat Eartha like she's an idiot.

Or a liar.

Let me go to liar. I was really offended by the way Williams dismissed Eartha's conversations regarding her parents. I think she's better geared to know who her mother was. I also think that if she has no father of record Williams needs to grasp that he's proven nothing by advancing his claim as to who Eartha's father was. I might have been more charitable about his 'sleuthing' (years, after everyone is dead and all he knows is that the man was White) if he hadn't been so dismissive of Eartha over who her mother was.

Selby takes her at her word -- and why wouldn't you?

Now for the idiot aspect.

I didn't go into that. I had planned to in the discussion with Ava and C.I. because I knew C.I. would know.

In 1968, while playing Catwoman on TV, Eartha was invited to the White House and told Lady Bird some truths about Vietnam. This got Eartha banned for years.

According to Williams, she's an airhead that doesn't know what she's talking about and made no sense. White, British guy, do you think Eartha's skin color makes her stupid? Because that is how it came off. Selby, by contrast, quotes Eartha and notes that she was well spoken and a woman who had traveled the world by this point and spoke multiple languages, plus she was volunteering with a youth center. She's in her forties by this point and Williams doesn't think she's capable of making a coherent statement against the war?

That just really ticked me off.

Now America Selby's book is much briefer but it lets the moments register and it provides context. I highly reccomend WHO IS THE GREAT EARTHA KITT?

I also highly recommend Diana Ross' THANK YOU. A fantastic album. I am loving it. It is wonderful and I cannot praise it enough. If you like Diana, you are going to love this album. One of the songs features a synchopated vocal like on "Now That You're Gone" (diana album) or "Not Over You Yet" (EVERY DAY IS A NEW DAY album). I love all the songs and even the ones that I loved as singles work so much better on the album in the context of the other songs.

I scream, SCREAM, THANK YOU back to Diana because she's given her fans like me the greatest gift with this album.

 Trina did a book review this week that you should check out, "A A Novellie's Joan Rivers: The World's Funniest Funny Lady, Her Life & Tragic Death."  Also check out the following media and book coverage at THIRD:

• TV: How difficult is it in 2021 to do a special ab...
• Remembering Mort Sahl (Ava and C.I.)
• KINDLE UNLIMITED (Kat, Ava and C.I.)
• KINDLE UNLIMITED (Betty, Ava and C.I.)
• KINDLE UNLIMITED (Ann, Ava and C.I.)
• KINDLE UNLIMITED (Jim, Ava and C.I.)
• Magazines (Jim)

 

"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):