Log inskip to content

Archive for the 'Celebdom' Category

Whoopi vs The Salahis

Thursday, August 5th, 2010

To prove just how little I pay attention to the blight on entertainment that "reality shows" are (though I will cop to watching some on MTV now and again if nothing else is on every blue moon or so), I had no idea there was more than one Real Housewives show. I always thought it was the same however-many-women every time they talked about the show.  I had no idea the haughty harpies had multiplied out to different locales.

You know what they say:  You learn something new (and useless) every day.

I learned this while watching a couple of videos about the Whoopi Goldberg vs. Michaele Salahi.  (Note:  I do not know if I spelled her name incorrectly and I do not care.  It's a stupid name with an even stupider spelling.)

In case you weren't privy to the latest The View drama, let me bring you up to speed.  Now, normally, I am not myself "privy to the latest The View drama" because I do not watch The View.  I actually stumbled on all of this while reading People magazine online and depleting my rapidly diminishing cadre of brain cells.  But, to be frank, reading about celebrities and reality TV and Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston's magical back together-engagement-breakup will kill brain cells faster than a huff on a crack pipe.  Therefore, I limit my celeb/gossip ragmag readings to a couple of times a month.

This being one such time, I began reading about how Micheallele claimed - to the producers of The View no less - that Whoopi had "hit" her.  When Whoopi - not one to quietly sit back and let someone talk shit about her - confronted Mihcalele with some "choice words" backstage, Angry Husband Salahi (I honestly don't know - or care what - his name is) jumped in and started yelling at Whoopi and snapping pictures of her with his Blackberry (wtf?).  So Whoopi apparently told them both where to stick it (I'm Team Whoopi here, in case you couldn't tell).

Apparently, Michaleleleale was already upset (and "sobbing" - what a mature adult and strong woman she is) about her "treatment" on The View; "treatment" that was the result of how she acted/reacted.  If you won't answer simple questions and, instead, promote your forthcoming book all while accusing the hosts of "attacking" you because it's "what their viewers want", you sort of dug your own grave there, sweetheart.

It all started when Joy Behar and Sherri Shepherd started out asking Michaleleae about the infamous "White House party crashing" - that she claims didn't happen.  It got a little off-topic when it was mentioned that the bitch's husband could not join them onstage because of an "incident" that had made the other wives "uncomfortable" around him.  Yeah, no shit.

This asshole threw a glass of wine in a woman's face because she asked him to keep it down - because he was screaming his fat head off at two other women!  Sounds like quite a catch Micahalele has there.

So while the woman who had been wined tried to tell her side of the story - as the hosts asked her to do - Miaechele kept jumping in and interrupting and trying to tell her version of events - which, of course, quickly devolved into the two women trying to talk over each other and starting to yell and fight.  It was then that Whoopi Goldberg came in, side stage, touched Malchaldjfie on the side and arm and asked her to stay on topic/get back to the White House stuff.  That was the "hit" that Michalejala claimed Whoopi gave her (seriously?).

Here is the original show, where the Housewives appeared on The View (and you can see Whoopi come out and hit touch Michalalaeea) and here is the next day's taping (which was today, actually) where Whoopi explains what she actually did and what happened.

Miechilae whined that she was treated with hostility on The View, but I didn't see it.  Instead of answering their direct questions, she danced around the issue by saying "you're prejudging" (ok, so set the record straight) or "you're just saying that because it is what your viewers want to hear".

What all of that avoiding actually meant was this:  "the truth will come out when the book comes out - buy the book! - but I won't tell you now.  Did I mention my book - buy my book!  However, before the book - and the "truth" that I cannot tell you because it would ruin the whole reason for buying and reading the book - comes out, DO NOT by any means come up with your own conjecture of what may or may not have happened because then you will be "prejudging" me unfairly for ratings."

The Salahis - fine, upstanding Americans right there, folks.

An Open Letter to Dina Lohan

Friday, July 30th, 2010

So I'm reading in Popeater that Dina Lohan - over-protective, Hollywood mum to terribly-addled, near-hopeless actress Lindsay Lohan - is upset that Lindsay, during her (what will likely turn out to be all-too-brief) stay at a women's correctional facility in Lynwood, California for probation violation and charges stemming from an old DUI and drug arrest.  (You know, the kinds of things you and I would have been quickly thrown in jail for without the media claiming our sentence was "too harsh and unfair").

Dina had this to say about the deplorable conditions her daughter is being forced to suffer in:

"She doesn't have cell phone privileges, that's absurd. She doesn't even have a pillow to sleep on," Dina told Radaronline.com yesterday. "I talk to her through glass. There's a phone and we put her on speaker but I can't even hug my daughter. She's treated like a common criminal."

I would like to give Ms. Mama Lohan a little real life talking-to here; a bit of an explanation of how the world works for those of us that aren't treated as if we shit golden eggs.

Dearest Mrs. Lohan:

Lindsay is being treated like a "common criminal" because she broke the law and violated her probation.  Dina, that is actually the definition of "criminal", dear.

It should be noted that Lindsay's extended stay is taking place at a correctional facility.  No, I don't think you quite understand - that means jail, j-a-i-l.  She is in jail not the Ritz-Carlton.  Do you honestly not realize that if she wasn't Lindsay Lohan and was just some messed-up, drugged-out young adult off the street, she'd of gotten that sentence long before now and would have served it and then some?  You decry her punishment as "unfair" and "too harsh" - so what is it when a judge orders the same (or a harsher) sentence down to a young woman who isn't a celebrity?  Would you care and advocate for them then?  Don't even bother answering that one - let's move on...

She does not have cell phone privileges because no jail in America allows cell phones to be used by inmates (need I even say why?) and, remember this because I realize you're having trouble grasping the concept, Lindsay is an inmate right now.  In a jail.  Because of her own actions and even inaction.

I would think, as a mother worried about the path her meal ticket daughter is going down, you'd be happy about this; maybe this will be a wake-up call for Lindsay to grow up and take control of her life.  Anyone ignorant and childish enough to paint "fuck you" on her fingernails before going to court - and not expecting the judge to notice and deem you, well, ignorant and childish - bespeaks of someone either not all right in the head or desperately crying out for help; perhaps and likely both.

This time could be good for Lindsay, if she were treated like everyone else and had to actually experience the consequences of her actions (something far too few of these Hollywood starlets ever have to do).

Get used to talking to her through glass, because that is how you visit an inmate in jail, Dina.  Which - let's remind you once more - your daughter is.  And it isn't the judge who put her there, nor the lawyer that Lindsay immediately fired (and then hired someone right out of law school with no experience).  It's not even Michael Lohan's fault, though I know you and Lindsay like to blame him.  I feel he is just as much to blame for Lindsay's current state of fucked-uppedness as you are; you two were obviously terrible parents as you seemed to confuse the task of parenting with the job of managing.

Yet that blame can only carry so far and, I personally feel, once you are in your 20's, what you do starts to be on you and not anyone else.  Ya'll may not have given her a solid foundation on which to build adulthood, but her choices are what have put her where she is now.  It's no one's fault but Lindsay's that she is in jail.

That you think she should get "special privileges" while there speaks volumes; especially considering the fact that she is getting special treatment in that jail - she is not in population, her family doesn't have to wait in lines just to see her as everyone else does, and the guards give her candy when she asks for it.  I'm sure there's much more in the way of special privileges that Lindsay alone is favored with, but those are a few choice tidbits we've been privy to thanks to the media.

The problem here is that Lindsay isn't being treated like a "common criminal" and she should be.  Firstly, because she is a criminal, she did break the law, and she should be subject to the same laws and punishments the rest of us are.  Secondly, how is she going to learn to accept responsibility for her own fuckups if everyone keeps giving her a free pass?

I hope, for the sake of your daughter's sanity and, quite possibly, life that you take heed to what I know some people close to you must be saying.  Ignore the sycophants and stop being one yourself wherein your child is concerned.  Do what is best for her, not what will bring in more money for all of you.  The extent to which Lindsay has been used by you and Michael is deplorable.  I have no doubt you love your child, but I believe deep down you know it is a selfish love rather than a selfless one, as it should be.  Perhaps if those around her tried to truly help and listen to her rather than pander to her childish whims, I think she would respond.  She is screaming out for guidance and discipline in her life; help her to establish that - even if it means a few years away from the media circus, the limelight, and the entire Hollywood scene.  For once, do what is best for Lindsay and not those that rely on her for a paycheck.

Sincerely,

Shanna Riley
aka skatoolaki

I honestly started out to write this with some snark and bite and a few laughs, but - in the end - found myself actually imploring Dina Lohan to wake up and realize that her daughter is on a fast-moving, one-way trip straight to an early grave.  I found I couldn't poke fun at Lindsay because, as much as I dislike her, she's obviously very ill - mentally and emotionally she is damaged and the self-medicating with drugs and alcohol is only making it worse.  Her parents are constantly in the media, calling it on themselves, and pulling Lindsay between them like a rag doll; she's a meal ticket to them and not a daughter and that's just...sad.  I see Lindsay as this broken, desperate little girl just crying out for someone to love her and take care of her.

No, in the end, I could not poke too much fun because, all around, this is just a sad situation and if something doesn't change - if there is no wake-up call for Lindsay soon - the news we write about her will only continue to be more tragic.

If You Ever Needed Proof That Lindsay Lohan Is Delusional…

Wednesday, March 10th, 2010

It was some years ago that I hung up my celeb-bashing hat and closed down my popular celeb gossip/bash blog, Star Suck.  Though I enjoyed writing the material, it was sort of like shooting fish in a barrel; the subjects of my ire and derision seemed to float around with enormous targets painted on their backs.

That wasn't the only reason I stopped, though.  It was also negative, too negative in the end, and I figured – at least karma-wise – it would be best to refrain from profiting off of bad-mouthing others (regardless that those others were often self-centered, selfish, narcissists who often deserved every bit of it).  But, boy, it was fun while it lasted.

I vowed to never pick on celebrities again – okay, scratch that.  I vowed to not make a habit of picking on celebrities again, unless they did something stupid enough to warrant a worded takedown.

And that brings us to Lindsay Lohan and the E-Trade Saga.

Some of you may remember the cute (if you're into that sort of thing), creepy (if you're not) talking E-trade babies commercial from the Super Bowl.

It's a running theme – this fast-talking, tech-savvy, portolio-trading baby that confers with the screen like an adult awash with the glow of his laptop – that E-trade has done a few commercials with.  On Super Bowl Sunday they decided not to mess with a good thing, and kept the little guy for their big spot – this time adding a couple of females into the mix.

The NY Post describes the commercial succinctly:

In the ad for the financial-services company, a baby girl is upset with her boyfriend for not calling the previous night.

After the boy apologizes, saying he was diversifying his portfolio, the girl asks suspiciously: "And that milkaholic Lindsay wasn't over?"

"Lindsay?" the boy asks sheepishly before another baby girl pokes her head into the frame and asks, "Milk-a-what?"

What's the big deal, you're wondering?  Well, apparently, as the rest of the world went back to their chips and beer – and the game – Lindsay Lohan was on the phone with her mother…crying.

You see, Lindsay is positive the commercial was making fun of her.

Not so, says E-trade.  It's simply "a popular baby's name".

But Lindsay, who apparently – if no one else does – sees herself as an –aholic of something or other, is insistent.  She is suing E-trade for $100 million for her "pain and suffering".

Dina Lohan is proud of Lindsay for taking a stand and is quoted as saying, "I'm just basically glad I took a stand. I'm not going to let them do this to us anymore."  Fruit Loop and her mother are also insisting the "horrible" and "mean" ad be yanked.

I can't decide if she's really this ignorant or she's really just that desperate for some publicity.

Jon Gosselin’s New Girlfriend or Publicity Stunt to Push New Clothes Line?

Wednesday, July 15th, 2009

I, for reasons unknown to me but which I am sure go way, far down into my psyche, am fascinated lately with all things Gosselin.

Before my affliction fascination began, I had never even watched Jon & Kate Plus 8, as I am not much into reality TV and even less into reality TV that involves an inordinate amount of screaming kids.  Those are the kinds of things that make me want to reach in and rip my uterus out.

Yet, around the time the Gosselin's marriage began to crumble, I - like a large number of Americans - suddenly gained interest.  Again, I was not alone in this phenomenon as evidenced by the fact that, as the Gosselin's marriage grew weaker, their ratings grew stronger.

I wanted to believe this was due to a shared understanding of the human condition; that others could simply relate to the Gosselin's pain. Yet, despite my highest hopes, I knew it had more to do with the usual draw of "reality" TV - hoping to see someone fight, cry, puke, or die, than with any sort  of actual compassion.

So it is - always with great shame - that I find myself reading just about any article I come across that has anything about Jon, Kate, or their 8 (see how I just did that?)

I was doing some of that guilty reading earlier this evening when I came across an article that seemed utterly ridiculous; even for the media-whores that are the Gosselins.

The article itself was simply another in the vast deluge of stories that have spewed forth since this past weekend when Jon Gosselin was spotted out with a "girlfriend" on a tropical vacation.

The story grew, with each successive piece, into a more sordid tale:  The "girlfriend" was Kate's tummy-tuck doctor's daughter.  The "vacation" was an exclusive, 3-day trip to St. Tropez that was funded by Christian Audigier, the designer of Jon's favorite clothing line - Ed Hardy.  Jon and his girlfriend were staying on Audigier's private yacht; Jon and Audigier, it is revealed, are in talks to work together on a new clothing line for kids.  That the Gosselin kids are going to model.  Of course.

However, the gig was up before it even started.  The media wasn't so stupid as to be blindsided by the hand-holding "couple" and  Jon's suddenly sponsored "holiday" by a benefactor who was just happy Jon wore his clothes a lot:

One source says it's no coincidence that Jon brought Hailey along on his trip.

Jon coming on his own or Christian meeting him at an office in L.A. is not going to get them that much coverage," an insider says. "Jon walking around St.-Tropez in an Ed Hardy T-shirt with a new girlfriend on his arm is going to get them extra press inches, which is what they want."

Mission accomplished, apparently.

Apparently. It seems Jon and Audigier even went so far as to start an "engagement' rumor by summoning a celeb-favored jeweler for a "private showing" on Audigier's yacht; all under the premise that Jon and Hailey were looking at rings and hinting at a possible engagement.  Later, Hailey was reported sporting the rock on her finger at a nightclub, further churning the rampant rumor mill.

See Jon Gosselin Purchaes Ring, Secretly Engaged,

The whole stunt is so over-the-top and glaringly apparent even the press - painfully aware of the ridiculous plot - is disgusted:

Alright, that is enough, Source. We can't take anymore. This is the longest Ed Hardy commercial ever. Or longest Jon & Kate Plus 8 promo ever. Either way, if we have to mention Christian Audigier one more time, something bad will happen."

Indeed.

The truth of the matter is, though:  They can have Jon prance around a tropical isle in Ed Hardy clothes with a young bimbo strapped to his arm whom he promises his undying love to, all while expressing a desire to get married before the ink has even been affixed to his divorce papers, *all you want* - the fact is, this clothing line will only ever be as popular as any flash-in-the-pan celebrity's ever was (i.e. it will eventually flop and die a slow, painfully righteous death).

British Brit

Friday, January 25th, 2008

Exactly when did Britney become British?

Britney’s Obit – Not News

Tuesday, January 22nd, 2008

Since Britney Spears has uncharacteristically kept herself below the radar for the last week, papers are scrambling to fill their pages with something about their most illustrious train wreck. A week without word on Britney and - to the modern media, at least - the world stops spinning.

And so they come up with this: The Associated Press Already Has an Obituary for Britney Spears. The media is shocking and tantalizing their vapid crowds with the distressing news that The Associated Press, those bloodthirsty hound dogs, have already gone so far as to write the troubled, former pop star right off this Earth. How callous! How cruel! How dare they!

In truth, however, this has nothing to do with Britney or the cold-blooded sharks that swim the waters of American and British media.

After recently reading The Dead Beat: Lost Souls, Lucky Stiffs, and the Perverse Pleasure of Obituaries by Marilyn Johnson and Life on the Death Beat: A Handbook for Obituary Writers by Alana Baranick, Jim Sheeler, and Stephen Miller, I can assure you that this latest bit of "news" is anything but.

In fact, I can't fathom why everyone is so shocked, or why the media is making such a big deal out of this (oh, wait, yes I do - sensationalism, true or no, sells).

The fact is, this is a very common practice for prominent newspapers wherein celebrities - especially ill, elderly, or troubled ones - are concerned. Anyone can do a little research into the world of obit-writing and learn that obits for some of the world's most prominent persons are ready to go at a moment's notice in the advent of their demise. In fact, some celebs even offer to do "obit interviews" to help the obituary writers out with their eventual and someday-will-be-needed last write-up.

This is a common practice for every celebrity or noteworthy person the world over - not just Britney Spears. And this certainly not the work of some forward-thinking news hounds forecasting the inevitable.

As if there aren't enough newsworthy and important things to be reporting on in the world, the media has to make up sensational and pointless stories about Britney Spears just to feel as if they're writing something relevant. What is this world coming to, I ask you?

Paris Hilton as Mother Theresa?!

Thursday, February 23rd, 2006

Calling all who know that SOME things should never be:

Paris Hilton has been asked to star in a movie.

That's nothing.

It's a movie about the life of Mother Theresa, and Paris has been asked to play THE Mother Theresa.

No, I'm not joking. I'm SO not joking, and so upset that this might transpire, I have called my legion of gnomes to help me stop this from happening:

Please go - read - and SIGN. Link and pass it on. We cannot let this happen.

Paris No Mother Theresa which explains the reason for No To Paris Hilton As Mother Theresa.

I, and the Universe, thank you.