Media Hype over Sex and the City Movie

Ever since the announcement of the Sex and the City movie, the date May 3oth has taken on a sort of mini-holiday for women everywhere. There is some major advertising and promotion going on! I must admit I am a biased author here, because I own every season on DVD, so I too have high hopes. I already have my agenda for May 30th planned out group of friends. High expectations are riding on the film that will either honor, or dishonor the HBO cult phenomenon series.

The Simpsons was another television hit turned movie that had high hopes and was met with positive reviews. Rottentomatoes.com, my go to movie rating guide, gave The Simpsons movie a 89%, pretty darn high for the website that mixes hundreds of reviews into one single score. The Simpsons made about $185,000,000 at the box office, very respectable. But there is always a risk of tarnishing the image of a well known and loved sitcom.

Part of the plot line for the Sex and The City movie has been given to the public, the women are now older and more mature. The major plot line is that Carrie's (Sarah Jessica Parker) relationship with Big (Chris Noth) is serious, and there is a wedding being planned for. Whether or not there will be a major dilemma, or antagonist, for the Sex cast is left unknown, although the television series was known for its light, fun material. However, Jennifer Hudson's role as Carries assistant is supposedly left a secret because of a major plot twist she is involved with. HMMM..

Here is my blog prediction: Mr.Big (Chris Noth) is going to have some serious cold feet about getting married, Jennifer Hudson is going to be an assistant who somehow tries to sabotage Carrie, maybe she is a spy for another publication (Carrie works for Vogue in the movie). I also see the movie making $200,000 + at the box office.

Can't wait to "Get Carried Away"!

All Colors Together

As a prospective advertising student, I saw this Obama '08 poster and I was so inspired by its simplicity and originality that I had to find out more about it. I did a little research and found out it was created by a Brazilian graphic designer named Daniel Molin. Incredible work! It's so effective.

The Costume Institute's Party of the Year.. Best and Worst Dressed!

Worst Dressed: Stephanie Seymour

Best Dressed Selections:

Lauren Remington Platt in Dolce and Gabbana

Allison Sarofim in Alexander McQueen

Crazy, but fun: Zac Posen and Kate Mara both in Zac Posen

Tom Brady in Tom Ford and Gisele Bundchen in Versace

David and Victoria Beckham both in Armani

This may not be media news to all, but yesterday The Costume Institute's Party of the Year was thrown at the Metropolitan Museum and as some may know it's one of the best style events of the year. The invitations go out to only a select few and the celebrities and socialite's wear some of the most daring pieces you will see all year . None of those boring Academy Award dresses here! Above are my choices for the best dressed, and sorry Stephanie Seymour but the worst as well. Seriously Stephanie there is no excuse for that dress! Not flattering at all.

To see more pictures of the event go to http://www.style.com/peopleparties/parties/scoop/050608MET

Update: Vanity Fair's Piece on Miley Cyrus

Last week I blogged about the controversy Miley Cyrus is facing over a Vanity Fair photo shoot (another controversial photo is shown above) but I had not actually read the article that Bruce Handy wrote on Cyrus, which by the way is entitled "Miley Knows Best". The article itself was well written and I thought it was very interesting. Handy wrote about Miley's struggle to remain grounded and frankly not go crazy like the child stars before her. Here are some interesting quotes from the article:

Between sold-out concerts, multi-platinum records, and a hit TV series, Hannah Montana star Miley Cyrus has some serious business riding on her 15-year-old shoulders—not to mention paparazzi on her tail and tabloid editors praying for her to pull a Britney.

... That said, I can’t imagine that her minders at the Walt Disney Company want to see Miley Cyrus’s name anywhere near the word “sex,” not in an era when every under-age actress in Hollywood is stalked by the Ghost of Britney Future. And not when so much money is riding on this one’s continued public innocence.

.... The series premiered in March 2006, was an instant hit, and what with everything else going on, Cyrus says, she hasn’t had more than a day off since Christmas 2006 and doesn’t expect to get another break until at least this Christmas. She hasn’t been in regular school since the sixth grade; she’s in 10th grade now, tutored on set or on the road for three hours a day. At least she doesn’t have homework.


The real question is: How do you grow up in public, both as a person and as a commodity? For every Jodie Foster or Brooke Shields there are a dozen Gary Colemans. Michael Jackson’s face speaks volumes. So did Judy Garland’s medicine cabinet. In Cyrus’s case, there has been a concerted effort, on the commodity side, to slowly draw her out from under Hannah’s shadow.

The full Vanity Fair article can be found at: http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/06/miley200806?currentPage=1

Ready for Battle

On Tuesday, Indiana and North Carolina will have its primaries that could very well determine who the democratic candidate will be in the 08' campaign, but it will also measure the damage of the Reverend Wright scandal on Obama's campaign. The media has milked Reverend Wright for all the drama he could give and now it's time for the voters to decide if Obama's appeal was tarnished from the situation. We'll see what happens!

UPDATE: Obama won the North Carolina primary by 14 points and Hilary Clinton won a narrow 2 point victory in Indiana. Hilary plans to continue in her campaign for the presidency.

The Last Disney Princess?

Miley Cyrus is a teen phenomenon whose television show, c.d's and concerts are wildly consumed by her loyal tween base. "The Hannah Montana brand includes 15 million related books sold, two multi-platinum records, a sold-out concert tour and film, as well as fan gear, like lunch boxes, bed sheets and MP3 players. Reports in the New York Times and New York Post suggest that if her popularity continues to grow, the teen star could be worth $1 billion by the time she is 18. " Source: Susan James, author of "Should 'Hannah Montana' be sexy?"

But now Miley's image that has long rested on her being a wholesome teenage role models is being tarnished by a "revealing" photo shoot by Annie Leobovitz (controversial photo shown above). The photo which one can judge for themselves is being said to be highly provocative for the 15 year old, and Disney is speaking out that the young star was manipulated by Vanity Fair for their own self promotion.

Photos like these are not unusual in 2003, a 16 year old former Disney mousekeeter, named Britney Spears posed for a racy cover of Rolling Stone magazine. The cover introduced Britney's sexuality and it wasn't long before she was dancing half naked with snakes and singing songs like "I'm a Slave for You". Jamie Lynn Spears is another Disney princess gone array, the 16 year old star of Zoey 101 recently revealed she is expecting a child.

Child stars gone wild is not a new phenomenon, it's a trend that just continues to repeat itself. However, call me nuts but I don't think Miley Cyrus is going to be another Britney, in the past Miley has demonstrated responsibility in her new found celebrity and has publicly stated she tries to be a role model for her young fans.

Miley has come out and publicly apologized for the photographs that she says she's "embarrassed" of. My opinion of the photo: The only thing that shocks me about it is how badly she needs a tan. I think she still has a chance of being the celebrity that young girls can look up to, hang in there Miley! These teenage years will be the biggest temptation to sexualize your image, but it's possible to make it to the other side, just look at Hilary Duff ( a former Disney princess).

Reputation on the Line: The Texas Showdown

Warning: Biased and Controversial Material Ahead

When Texas stormed the Fundamentalist Church of Latter-day Saints compound in El Dorado, Texas, many felt that the move was justified. The raid was prompted be a 16 year old girl named "Sarah" claiming she was married at 14 years old to a man who was now abusing her. Although, many believe that the Texas authorities had been waiting for their chance to storm the ranch, as they had been practicing the procedure that would take place had they ever had to go into the compound.

Texas authorities used the Jaws of Life, to open the large gate enclosing the compound, then broke down doors inside the facility to raid. The police had weapons, and shields ready for opposition, but none occurred. The men prayed and some cried while the women and children were being taken away.

The move although dramatic was defended by officials who said it was necessary. But now, officials have come forward to say that the infamous "Sarah" may have in fact been a mentally-ill Colorado woman named Rozita Swinton. According to ABC News, "A phone number used to allege abuse at a polygamist ranch in West Texas is associated with a woman in Colorado who has been accused of making several unrelated false abuse claims in calls to authorities, court documents say."

Uh oh. One has to wonder why this claim was not thoroughly investigated pre-raid? How would a 16 year old with no internet, television, or permission to leave the compound she calls home come across the number to an abuse hot line? With 417 children taken away from their mothers and now being placed in temporary foster homes, many question how this may play out for Texas.

Meanwhile, the mothers of the cult who normally never reach out to society, are begging the media and public for help. A group of mothers allowed themselves to be interviewed for Larry King Live, where they even gave Larry a tour of their compound and adamantly insisted throughout the broadcast that their children were happy there.

While Texas courts deal with the daunting task of the largest child custody case in United States history, one has to ask is this justified? The U.S has always tip-toed around persecuting polygamists (polygamy is illegal in the U.S) because of the separation of church and state. But while a 16 year old girl marrying an older man is illegal (unless permission is provided by her parents) and perceived as morally wrong to most members of society, can we place our morals on these people?

Don't get me wrong I love children, I've been a nanny for years and any sexual abuse should be persecuted. But I present a simple question: If the men were doing the abuse, why were the men not removed? The women and children are the victims right? Why did they have to be uprooted?

Here is my very biased opinion on the situation and what I think should happen: Sexual abuse in one couple should not justify the separation of children and mothers in the whole community. ( To be fair there is more abuse being alleged than just from Sarah, but no abuse has been confirmed yet, other than the marriage of girls under 18). It's just not right to have young children away from their mothers.

Erikson's first step in emotional developement of children is Trust vs. Mistrust where infants must form a tight bond with their mothers. In his own words.. "For a trusting relationship to exist, there must be a consistent relationship". Erikson believes that children who do not form this bond will live their lives in mistrust of others. (Babies who are nursing have been allowed to stay with their mothers, but any other child will be placed in foster care)

I think if the members, men included, could get counseling and agree to open their doors to the government to regulate their marriages and other activities, maybe we can avoid displacing 417 children into a foster care system that would destroy them. If children received a proper education and an understanding that men should not be sexual without their partners consent, maybe we can create a relationship and a dialogue between the group and the government and avoid future raids.

Either way I think the case is sad and that no one wanted to take the kids away from their mothers, but Texas is putting it's reputation on the line and it will be an interesting case to follow.