Supplemental Post: Madonna at Coachella

Growing up, I discovered Madonna by playing an American Idol video game where my character had to sing “Like a Prayer”. I knew all the words to the song after a while, but I had no idea who sang it. Later, my mom told me it was Madonna, someone who she later described as “weird before Lady Gaga was weird.” I knew about her infamous kiss with Britney Spears and that she had a song called “Like a Virgin.” My impression of Madonna was that she used to be a pop star that was ‘out there’ but now she’s trying too hard to stay relevant.  After seeing Madonna: Truth or Dare, my opinions changed a little bit. 

For the first half of the film, I cringed at almost every scene. Sorry if I sound like a sixty year old, but her obscene dance moves, her narcissistic behavior and her language turned me off. Not that I have never seen any of that before, but coming from her made her just sound like a Diva. I ruled her out as completely crazy. However once the documentary went on, I finally got her. I understood her. Madonna was and is real. She’s herself. Although she is very ‘out there’ and unconventional, she has integrity, artistic ambition, and isn’t afraid to stand up for what she believes in. She doesn’t give a fuck about what people think, and although at first it can be off putting, it’s actually quite admirable. She does what she wants, when she wants, and is not fake, which is a rare quality in Hollywood. 

Last night during Drake’s set at Coachella, Drake brought Madonna out to sing a song. At the end of her song, she made out with him. He was taken aback, as we all were, and she walked off the stage saying “I’m Madonna, bitch.” If this had happened before I saw the documentary, I would have thought who is this grandma kissing drake? Is she trying to stay relevant? While those thoughts are somewhat valid, post-documentary viewing I have a new understanding. At 31 and 56, Madonna is still the same. She doesn’t care what anyone thinks and isn’t going to let her age get in the way of staying wild. When I saw the kiss I cracked up because I understand her. She’s still the same Madonna who simulated masturbation on stage, still the same Madonna who has no filter, and still the same Madonna who was weird before weird was cool. She refuses to let her age define her and if it’s something she is comfortable with, why can’t we be comfortable with it too? Stay crazy, Madonna. 

Elvis and White Trash Core Post 5

It’s very rare to find someone today that doesn’t know who Elvis Presley is. They may not know his name or his face, but they definitely know one of his songs. His cult following still thinks that he may be alive out there somewhere, or if not, they remember him in some elaborate way on the anniversary of his death. Before Bieber Fever and Beatle Mania, there was the Elvis Obsession. He was like a religious leader that offered hope and rebellion during the postwar period. In chapter one of Erika Doss’ book “Elvis Culture”, she writes “Elvis's was a spectacular, rhythmic body, and it was offered for consumption and imitation to millions of visually fixated and physically responsive postwar teens. "It's impossible to sit still while Elvis is on the stage," Janie Butterfield of Beaumont, Texas, told the editors at Life . ‘His belting style drives us wild. We have to do something. Kick the seat in front or let out a 'rebel yell’ or something’" (Page 4). His energy gave people something to hang on to and he inspired them to rebel. People still visit his Graceland home and listen to his music on a daily basis.

However when Gael Sweeny writes in her piece “The King of White Trash Culture”, she challenges this obsession and questions why the world could fall in love with a man who is so trashy. She defines the term ‘White Trash’ in several ways, but the sentence that stood out the most to me is “white trash lives in a trailer, but aspires to a deluxe double-wide with purple shag carpeting, red crushed velvet sofas, and gold foil wallpaper” (Page 250). She basically is saying that their idea of wealth isn’t class, but it’s excess. While reading this article, I couldn’t help but compare Elvis to Justin Bieber. They obviously have their differences, however they are alike in many ways. Both men came from poor, broken families and rose to fame quickly. The both have cult followings and their persona takes precedence to their art. They are both talented but their talent was overshadowed by their personal drama. For example, the average adult couldn’t tell you a Justin Bieber song, and many Elvis fans could have never seen an Elvis B-Movie. But their presence was enough to form a strong bond to and obsess over and create an uncontrollable mania. Bieber is flashy and gaudy and is on a fast track to his fall. Elvis died young because of a pill overdose, all the while during a high in his career. No matter how much success and money one may have, you cannot mask white trash. 

Marlon Brando - Method Man Core Post 4

It’s hard to find many method actors today that are as famous as Marlon Brando was in his prime. Maybe Leonardo DiCaprio is a close example but the bulk of method actors usually play the supporting roles, or don’t have a celebrity life that other actors do. They are actors, and nothing more. Method actors today that come to mind are Matthew Mcconaughey, Mark Ruffalo, Edward Norton and Daniel Day Lewis.  In his article “Articulating Stardom”, Barry King understands the difference between stardom and acting in the mainstream cinema, and writes “the crux of my argument is that stardom is a strategy of performance that is an adaptive response to the limit and pressure is exerted upon acting in the mainstream cinema” (Page 167). Actors now have to adapt to the elements of celebrity and being known publicly. Many people cannot separate the character from the star’s persona, and that is troubling to many.

However, for Marlon Brando, method acting was a little easier. Even though he was in the limelight for his celebrity and multiple marriages, the media wasn’t as distracting as it is today. He completely encapsulated his characters and took his craft seriously. According to King, “the self-referentiality of Method acting—the so-called personal express of realism of Brando, for example—rather than representing the triumph of the actor as impersonator can be seen as a successful adaptation of impersonation to the pressures of personification, deploying impersonation to refer back to the person of the actor, the consistent entity underlined each of his or her roles” (Page 179). This idea of becoming a person and naturalistic acting is what Marlon Brando was famous for. He became Stanley Kowalski in A Street Car Named Desire, he became Terry Malloy in On The Waterfront and he became Vito Corleone in The Godfather. He represented the epitome of masculinity and could play brawny, rough, suave and charming. His raw presence on screen was what was so magnetizing about him and his ability to transform into a character right before your eyes is what made him a true method actor. There have been many great actors since him but not one that can be as method as he was.

Audrey Hepburn Core Post 3

While watching “Funny Face” I couldn’t help but draw comparisons to “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes” specifically between Audrey Hepburn and Marilyn Monroe. Both considered icons of their generations, these two women could not be more different. Marilyn is blonde, thick, curvy and oozing sexuality while Audrey is brunette, thin, flat and cute. But somehow they both became beauty and fashion icons. In William A. Brown’s piece Audrey Hepburn The Film Star as Event, he describes how stardom and fashion tie in with cinema. He explains “Marjorie Rosen might see the 1950s as dominated by the ‘Mammary Woman,’ as typified by Marylyn Monroe and Jane Russell, but in opposition to the mammarians, Rosen also sees the rise of the waif” (Page 33). The waif includes women like Audrey Hepburn and Grace Kelly.  According to the dictionary, a waif is “a homeless and helpless person, esp. a neglected or abandoned child: she is foster-mother to various waifs and strays” (Websters dictionary). Rosen defines this waif type of star as ‘continental’, but going by the dictionary definition of the term, this seems odd. She puts a positive spin on the term. After further reading, Brown further explains Rosen’s stance by stating that “in these films, Hepburn emerges as having and ambiguous nationality. White various audiences (American, Dutch, British) laid claim to her as “theirs”, other commentators have seen Hepburn as being neither American nor European” (Page 34). This idea that she belongs to everyone is what attributed to her star power and separated her from the rest of the girls. While Monroe pulled people in because of her dominant, sexual presence, Hepburn was appealing because everyone felt like they could see some of themselves in her and that she was approachable and relatable. 

Even though Hepburn was hailed as more relatable, he was still a fashion icon. She was most known for wearing Givenchy, but her “fans like to mimic the Audrey style in order to assert their own individuality, a paradoxical individuality, since it is inspired by Hepburn—together with Givenchy and, perhaps, Paramount costume designer Edith Head, and an individuality that can been seen as a response to social pressure but which also offers a rapprochement between the individual and her social role” (Brown). Audrey was a star in her own right and a fashion icon. Her ability to maintain her status in the film and fashion world and maintain her relatable nature is what kept her relevant and a huge star. She displays a different form of femininity than Marilyn Monroe, but she’s the ‘every-girl’. Beautiful and genuine.

North by Northwest and Masculinity Core Post 2

I’ve seen North by Northwest six times now but every time I see it, I notice a new layer that Alfred Hitchcock included. After reading the assigned essay, I viewed the film in another way. The film isn’t really a thriller about government secrets; it’s a portrait on masculinity. Specifically, Cary Grant’s masculinity. Back in the day, Cary Grant had the persona of being charismatic, nonchalant in his actions, suave and the epitome of manhood. However in North by Northwest, Alfred Hitchcock brilliantly subverts Grant's persona by casting him as Roger Thornhill. Thornhill is the opposite of manhood and embodies the traits more akin to a little boy. He’s a spoiled momma’s boy, he lies, he’s immature, naïve, helpless and is very dependent and entranced by women. He cannot fend for himself successfully and is reliant on on the help of others. In Steven Cohan’s piece “Masked Men”, he discusses Grant’s masculinity as it appears on the movie poster. He writes, “as depicted by the poster, Cary Grant’s ‘fall’ is a rather haunting image of masculinity in crisis, and the film itself cannot completely exorcise this anxiety even though its closure on Mount Rushmore gives every appearance of doing just that.” Page 4. He also makes an interesting point later in the piece explaining that Roger’s masculinity, the collapse and rise of it, represents America and the Cold War. This film came out during the Cold War therefore the idea of subverting his masculinity and then prevailing was very metaphorical to the times.

What grabs my curiosity the most is when people discuss manhood, I wonder what the certain qualities a man must have in order to be considered masculine. What is the checklist? Cohan points out some of the more obvious traits however I believe that the idea of masculinity is subjective. One actor cannot physically represent a whole nation. That’s the president’s job. However Cohan talks about Cary Grant’s wardrobe, which I thought was interesting because people usually associate fashion with women. The title of his section is ‘Clothes Make the Man’ where he really puts emphasis on clothing and how it affects a man’s image. He explains that what determines a man’s identity is his “presentation of self in everyday life” Page 16. Roger is seen wearing nice tailored suits throughout the film. Eve even makes a comment to Roger about pressing his suit when they are in the hotel room.

This idea of image and masculinity trumped all in films pertaining to war and nationhood, just like they do now. Look at American Sniper for example. Although Chris Kyle was a soldier and not an advertising executive, this film has become a symbolic gesture of what it means to be American. Bradley Cooper is the ultimate alpha male and many Americans take pride in the film. His masculinity offers security that we have a strong face to our nation and we will prevail.

Kanye West and his so called “Respect For Artistry” Supplemental Post

Why are we so forgiving of our favorite stars when they prove time and time again that they are arrogant, rude, and self entitled? Kanye West has created a successful career for himself from his first big hit ‘Gold Digger’ to his newest collaborations with Paul McCartney ‘Only One’ and ‘Four Five Seconds’. He’s best friends with power couple Jay Z and Beyoncé, and is married to reality star Kim Kardashian. He’ll always be surrounded by A-Listers and will always find a way to stay relevant, even if it’s not through his music. Kanye has become increasingly notorious for his unpredictable rants, stating his opinions as if they are scripture.  He says what he wants, when he wants, and he knows that he is right, even if he’s not. Last night Kanye showed his arrogance and naivety once again. It first started out as a joke, but when Beck beat Beyoncé for ‘Album of the Year’ at the Grammy's last night, Kanye West walked up to the stage to mock himself for his infamous show stealing moment with Taylor Swift in 2009. As you can see, Beyonce’s reactions for both instances are basically the same. “Kayne, don’t do it.”

 But, he quickly backed down assuring the audience that it was only a joke. Everything was fine and people thought it was funny. The show went on. But the real problem occurred during the post-Grammy interview where Kanye went on a rant about ‘respecting artistry’. He said “I just know that the Grammys, if they want real artists to keep coming back, they need to stop playing with us. We ain't gonna play with them no more. And Beck needs to respect artistry and he should've given his award to Beyoncé. Because when you keep on diminishing art and not respecting the craft and smacking people in their face after they deliver monumental feats of music, you're disrespectful to inspiration. And we as musicians have to inspire people who go to work every day, and they listen to that Beyoncé album and they feel like it takes them to another place."

There are many problems with his statement. Sure Beyoncé’s album was more popular in the mainstream this year and most people of our generation know don’t know who Beck is, however to say that Beck doesn’t respect artistry and isn’t an artist is flat out delusional and wrong. Beck was putting out platinum albums when Beyoncé was just starting out. People on the Internet pointed out that Kanye was naïve by defending a woman who needs four writers to write one song over a man who can play almost a dozen instruments.

I’m a huge fan of Beyoncé and think that she deserved a Grammy for her album. I also think most nominees did, but that’s not the point. The point is this unwarranted vicious attack on Beck, an artist that has been around for thirty years and was long overdue for a Grammy. To add even more to Kanye’s naïveté, in Kanye’s song 'Get Em High', he even QUOTES Beck by rapping "My teacher said I'se a loser, I told her why don't you kill me?" This line was taken from Beck’s 1994 hit ‘Loser.’

Variety wrote on opinion piece also suggesting that Kanye should respect artistry by adding “Most galling of all, West depicted his actions Sunday as some kind of admirable self-restraint he demonstrated on behalf of his child. “I’m not gonna do nothing to put my daughter at risk, but I am here to fight for creativity,” he noted at the post-show show press conference.” Kanye believes that he’s some sort of creative messiah that we are waiting for, however he is just an arrogant and delusional rapper that is not approaching his artistic beliefs with an open mind. Maybe it’s time that Kanye West started to respect artistry and realize that there are many different types of artists in this world with different talents and beliefs, and that he could learn a thing or two from them and how they approach their artistic vision. But first things first, he needs to respect the other artists in his industry.

Just because he’s achieved a level of star power doesn’t mean that we should allow this behavior to go on. If it was an up and coming artist who spoke out like this in such disrespectful ways, we would be quick to dismiss him. People might even claim that the young artist could ruin his career. We need to stop letting stars get away with everything just because they are stars and Kanye West needs to learn that he and Beyoncé are not the only worthy artists out there.

Supplemental Post: Mila Kunis Caused Me To Lose Weight

Mila Kunis Caused Me To Lose Weight. No, not in the way you’re all thinking. I didn’t see photos of her and think that my body had to be a certain way. That had nothing to do with it. It all started in June of 2012 when my best friend Lindsey convinced me to take a spinning class with her. She had been trying to get me to go for a while but I was petrified. I played sports in high school but having been in college for a year, I kind of fell out of shape. She told me that Mila Kunis was in her class the other day and apparently goes all the time, so I decided to give it a try. It would be cool to see her; she’s a big star! This was a year or so after Black Swan came out and she was still a pretty big deal, as she typically is. We went to class that night and she wasn’t there, but we spun anyways and worked our butts off. Somehow Lindsey convinced me to go again the next morning.

We walked in the class and guess who was there; Mila Kunis, in all her Lululemon glory. She was there alone, making small talk with some of the other students. Lindsey wanted to say something to her but we didn’t know what to say. We made sure to think of something that could generate a conversation but not come off like big fans. In hindsight it’s so silly, but at the time we were very excited. Lindsey ended up asking Mila where she got her spinning shoes since Lindsey and I had regular tennis shoes on. We were expecting a short answer, but she ended up telling us about a few places and the different kinds of shoes they had. We felt special that she gave us that much of her time.

The class began and I quickly realized that me being there was a big mistake. I couldn’t feel my legs and my butt was sore. I didn’t eat breakfast either and as we began to spin, a part of me knew that I wasn’t going to finish the class. Fifteen minutes in, I started to feel light headed and told Lindsey that I felt like I was going to faint. She assured me that I was fine. I then assured her that I wasn’t. I got off the bike and it happened. I fainted in the middle of class. A few people helped me up and dragged me to the lobby, where they gave me crackers and water. I was mortified. I tried to laugh it off but I don’t know if anyone thought I was cool enough to brush it off. After class, Lindsey came out to me and made sure I was okay. Mila then came out and mockingly told me that Lindsey is a bad friend because she continued to spin after I fainted without making sure I was fine. She asked if I was okay and then told us a story about her friend who fainted and cracked her chin open. The three of us then walked over to Starbucks and chatted some more. We never talked about her being in the industry or who she was. She was just a girl in our class and these fifteen minutes were more than we ever expected.

The next day, we walked into class and she was there again. We could get used to this, we thought. Everyone got on his or her bike and Mila sat in front of us. Right before we began, she turned around to me and teased, “don’t faint.” We laughed and then had a great class. For the rest of the summer, Lindsey and I went spinning every single day hoping to run into Mila. Out of the 60 or so days we went there, Mila was in 40 or so of our classes. We chatted and had laughs, never once mentioning who she was or what she did for a living. I think it was refreshing for her especially on the days where she would walk in pissed off because of the paparazzi outside. She even told me that Lindsey and I reminded her of her and her friend. We often wondered how this experience was real. It wasn’t even anything life changing, but it was cool enough for us.

After we went back to school, we never saw her again. She had a baby and we’ve both been busy. Looking back on it, it’s crazy that one person and the idea of getting to know her could cause us to exercise everyday and spend so much money on spin classes. I wonder what we really thought could happen if we kept seeing her everyday. Would she take us to set? Would she take us to an event? No way. We knew none of that was going to happen. We also knew that we were crazy for caring so much. She’s a person just like anyone, but her celebrity status put her on a pedestal for us. We made fun of ourselves everyday like one would make fun of themselves for loving The Real Housewives. Even though we felt a little silly about it, our summer with Mila was fun and exciting and it gave us a memory we will never forget. Plus, it gave me a great ‘most embarrassing moment’.  

The Star Phenomenon - Core Post 1

         The idea of stars and celebrity in society is strange. The idea that anyone can rise up and become famous, with or without talent, to a point where people idolize them is odd yet attractive to many people. Richard Dyer talks about all of the different kinds of fame and celebrity manipulations, especially how we as a culture are transfixed and influenced by these stars. He also discusses the sociological and semiotic elements of studying about stars. The sociological focuses on the star being an “an influential or symptomatic, social phenomenon, as well as being an aspect of film’s industrial nature”, while the semiotic centers on that “stars are only of significance because they are in films and therefore are part of the way films signify” (Page 1). He then also talks about celebrity and the manipulation they uphold, suggesting that celebrity has nothing to even do with film at all. He says, “a star is well-known for her/his well-knownness, and not for any talent or specific quality” (Page 13). When we have celebrities like Kim Kardashian, Miley Cyrus and Meryl Streep, these different definitions of stardom are necessary, as different celebrities have different talents and impacts on society; Fame for no reason, fame because of their films, and a star power to catapult any film into massive success. 

          In the film All About Eve, Margot Channing, although very talented and famous, struggles with the idea that she many not be relevant anymore. She fears losing her status more so than not being able to act, and she worries that Eve will take over her star status in the theater. Margot lives the celebrity life. She is dating Bill Sampson, a prestigious director in the theater, and her best friend is married to famous playwright, Lloyd Richards. She has a personal assistant, a beautiful home and throws her mink on the floor like she has twenty more in her closet. Margot’s persona carries much farther than the play, to the point where her talent is irrelevant in the film. We never see Margot actually perform on stage or discuss the psychology of her character. It’s almost as if the work is there to supplement her star status. Eve studies Margot in her personal life because she wants to attain the celebrity status that Margot has. When Margot ultimately loses the role to Eve, her pride is hurt more than the missed opportunity to play Cora. She is aware that her celebrity status is waning and has to try and make peace with it. 

       This film still feels very timely, especially with female stars turning forty today. In recent interviews, Meryl Streep has stated that the year she turned forty she was offered to play a witch three separate times. Do you believe that we've made any progress since All About Eve came out in the 50s, or do you think we've backtracked with our unrealistic expectations on what beauty means and how we want our women portrayed on screen?