RepMan

The six lies of Henry VIII

Catharine 'Goose' Cody and I have been captivated by the plot twists and turns of the second season of the Showtime series, 'The Tudors.' The Goose is quite the fan of all things 'Ennnery' and somehow manages to find a new book on the subject on an almost weekly basis.

That said, the show's historical inaccuracies are enough to make us want to behead our remote control (or at least banish a battery or two).

To begin with, there's Jonathan Rhys Myers, who plays Henry. He's a fine actor and, says Catharine who likes to use Elizabethian prose at every opportunity, 'quite fetching.' Now, that was fine when Rhys Myers was portraying the youthful, 'rock star' Henry who bounced from Catherine of Aragon to Anne Boleyn to Jane Seymour faster than one can say 'The Reformation.' But, we're deep into the saga now and, despite a nagging leg wound, the Rhys Myers' version of Henry Tudor still looks like an up-and-coming bantamweight boxer. As everyone with a wit of historical knowledge knows, though, the historical Henry aged rapidly and, by the time, he'd dumped Anne of Cleeves in favor of the young tart, Catherine Howard, looked more like a pale version of Notorious B.I.G. than Snoop Dog.

The other characters' physical appearance also strains credulity. The actress portraying the notoriously unattractive Anne of Cleeves is a real looker who, in fact, bears a passing resemblance to the young Ingrid Bergman (who stole the hearts of Bogie and about 40 million other red-blooded American men when the film debuted in 1942).

Every actor sports perfect, pearly white teeth, neatly coiffed hair and immaculate wardrobes. This at a time, mind you, when personal hygiene was virtually nonexistent. The average Tudor subject bathed once or twice annually. Oral hygiene was unknown. And pigs, cows, sheep and other animals wandered London's streets mixing their filth with the human refuse. In short, it wasn't pretty.

Talk about sending mixed signals

It was only a matter of time before the sleazeballs responsible for reality TV programming stumbled upon the 'cougars' concept. For the uneducated, cougars are older women who date younger guys. Cougars are considered hip, cool and uber-hot.

At the same time they're celebrating the rise of the cougar, though, the reality TV programming sleazeballs continue to entrap older guys who hit on younger girls. Chris Hanson and Dateline NBC have been ensnaring middle-aged guys in search of younger 'dates' for years ('C'mon in. I'm just getting changed. There's some lemonade and cookies on the counter for you.').

Ok, I know there's a big difference between men who cruise underage chat rooms and arrange meetings with teens and older women who date younger guys. But, why ensnare and entrap one while empowering and enabling the other? Isn't there something disturbing about both?

And, why does society 'wink' when female teachers sleep with grammar or high school boys but show immediate disgust and contempt to male offenders caught doing the same heinous thing?

Middle-aged guys have been taking a beating at Hollywood's hands for years. We're always depicted as stumbling and bumbling, and in desperate need of the distaff side to save the day. That's B.S., and sends serious mixed signals to our kids in general, and little boys in particular.

Yes, Virginia, society says it's cool for older women to hit on younger men. We even give them cute, animal nicknames: cougars. Older guys who do the exact same thing get animal nicknames as well: pigs. And, trust me, that's one word you do not want to hear in the midst of a swine flu epidemic.

What do 'Saw 3,' 'CSI:Miami' and working parents have in common?

I attended a presentation last night that was equal parts fascinating and disturbing. It was held at the Manhattan townhouse of a fellow Northeastern alum and featured Jack Levin, Ph.D., and co-director of NU's Brudnick Center on Violence and Conflict.

Dr. Levin is arguably the world's leading expert on what he calls 'murder, mayhem and the media.' He studies serial killers, mass murderers and the rise of violence in society. Not your everyday line of work, to be sure. 

Levin says our hyper-violent society is spiraling ever further out of control. He cites a number of reasons why:

- the motion picture industry's rating system which, he says, goes virtually unenforced. As a result, kids as young as 10 are routinely allowed into theatres to watch such horrific slasher flicks as 'Saw,' 'Vacancy' and 'Basketball Diaries.'

- the lack of parental supervision at home. Moms and dads are both working nowadays (except the unemployed ones, of course). As a result, latchkey kids have unlimited access to the most violent programming on TV (Levin says most violent crimes committed by kids occur during the unsupervised, after school hours of 3-7 pm)

- an increase in not only the quantity, but the 'quality' of carnage on both the small and large screens. Levin says he's visited many crime scenes and attended countless autopsies, but the real thing is now being equaled, if not surpassed, in graphic reality by TV shows like 'Bones,' 'Law and Order' and the 'CSI' series. Levin says they routinely broadcast the most heinous, hideous and graphic images.

Now, add a dash of easy access to paramilitary weapons and a glorification of villains by the media and you have the final ingredients for widespread death and destruction. On the subject of media coverage, Levin showed us how the cover of People Magazine has dramatically changed since the magazine's introduction and now routinely features murderers and serial killers alongside the likes of Brangelina and Tomcat. Last, but definitely not least, we have the insatiable appetites of ordinary Americans weighed down by the drudgery of their lives who simply can't get enough blood and guts.

It's a toxic cocktail and one that Levin says has become more lethal with each passing decade. The only solution: boycotting TV programs and movies that carry such obscenities. It works, he says, citing Don Imus as a textbook example. Imus, says Levin, is 100 percent non-racist in his content since being fired by WFAN for his Rutgers' women basketball team comments a few years back.

The other solution? Disengaged parents need to engage the 'V-chip' on their cable boxes. If they won't supervise their kids' home viewing habits, says Levin, at least they can limit access to the most violent programming.

Levin shared a sad, sobering, scenario last night. For me, the bleakest parts concerned the future: things are very bad, only getting worse and no one really seems to be angry about it. What does it say about the image (if not the morals and ethics) of an entire population that allows this sorry state of affairs to continue unfettered?

Trust me, ad agency types leave the doors open

I really enjoy the TNT series “Trust Me,” which depicts the inner workings of a fictitious Chicago advertising agency.

The cast is outstanding. The plot lines are compelling and credible and the writers deftly co-mingle real-world accounts like Rolling Rock and Dove Soap with ersatz ones like ArcMobile.

Mason and Connor are the show's protagonists. One's a creative director. The other's a writer. Their relationship has been strained because the former was promoted and now this once tight team has to deal with the fact that they're no longer equals. They both work for an amazingly idiosyncratic group creative director named Tony Mink, who is at war with the agency's other group creative director, a totally obnoxious Brit.

Anyway, the show is very cool and nicely complements my other favorite ad show: “Mad Men.” I only have one issue with “Trust Me.” The agency executives all work behind closed doors! What's that all about? It doesn't ring true, especially for an ad agency in the year 2009. Most have amazingly open workspaces, accented by exposed brick, arched ceilings, and Stanley Kubrick-like ductwork (I have no idea what that means, but it sounds right.) What they don't have is what the “Trust Me” office sports: old fashioned, individual offices with doors that are not only closed most of the time, but locked as well.

RepMan readers know I'm not a big fan of the craft of advertising. But, I do admire many of their uber cool office environments I've visited over the years. Firms like Chiat Day pioneered the open office environment that encouraged creativity, communication and a communal esprit d'corps.

So, trust me, you'll like “Trust Me.” But, someone needs to clue in the writers about the office layout. It doesn't ring true and blemishes an otherwise spot-on depiction of the mostly brutal, brutish and sometimes brilliant lives of modern-day mad men.

It Was Only a Matter of Time

It was only a matter of time before the mindless pablum being produced by Hollywood movie moguls went so far over the line that it engendered a mass response.

The offending movie in question is "Tropic Thunder," a clearly inane, low-end vehicle from Dreamworks directed by, and starring, Ben Stiller (who else?). In the movie, Stiller's character, called Simple Jack, is repeatedly called a retard.  Americans with intellectual disabilities don't care for Stiller's pranks and are organizing a nationwide protest against "Tropic Thunder."

Dreamworks, the movie's producer, says the Stiller character was created to poke fun at the extraordinary lengths some actors will go to to land a role. Yeah, sure. The reality is obvious: intellectually-challenged people are yet another easy laugh target. And, if there's anything consistent about today's "funny" movies, it's that they go for the easy laughs at the expense of the physically and mentally challenged.

Stiller's brand of comedy (and, by the way, feel free to insert Will Ferrell or scores of other leading "comedic" actors) plays to the lowest common denominator. He's been offending Americans of all types, sizes and shapes for years now. So, it's refreshing to see someone stand up in the name of common sense and decency.

There's a fine line between humor and insult, and Stiller's brand of comedy has been overstepping the boundaries for years. The only way he and his ilk will ever stop is if it impacts their wallets.

So, here's hoping Americans with intellectual disabilities, as well as their families and friends avoid "Tropic Thunder" in droves. Maybe, it will force the writers, producers and directors to roll up their sleeves and do something unique: create something that's funny rather than offensive.

Variations on a theme

What would happen to a public relations firm if they kept providing the same solution over and over? For that matter, what would happen to any company that kept re-cycling the same old, same old?

Answer: they'd lose clients.

So, how do actors such as Will Ferrell, Ben Stiller, Adam Sandler, Steve Carell and Mike Myers keep getting away with it? And, how does Hollywood, in general, keep getting away with it?

Myers did breakthrough work with the first Austin Powers movie. But, since then? Ugh. Now, I'm seeing billboards for yet another 1960s-themed flick from Myers. This one is The Love Guru and is obviously based on the exploits of the late, and not-so-great, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. Can't these guys come up with something better?

Carell, meanwhile, is in a re-make of 'Get Smart.' Gee, that sounds riveting. For his part, Ferrell re-cycles the same basic character in movies covering ice hockey, basketball, weddings and god knows what else. But, new? Original? Nope. Not from Ferrell. And, not from this group. And, yet, Myers, Stiller, et al, are the leading lights of the Hollywood comedy genre.

It's sad that they consistently re-cycle mediocre content. It's sadder still that Americans accept such mediocrity.

So, here's my question: the business world won't accept re-cycled drivel. And, Hollywood's a big business. So, why are they the exception to the rule?

What's next? "To Catch a Cleaning Lady?"

Having exhausted the various permutations of their long-running 'To Catch a Predator' series, NBC is now launching a new one called, 'To Catch a Contractor.'

The promo heralds a show that will uncover all sorts of sleazy, diabolical and even criminal practices being perpetrated by those always perplexing, always behind schedule and always over budget contractors. Fair enough. Who hasn't had a bad experience with a contractor? In fact, it's almost a rite of passage to be a homeowner.

But, I draw the line with NBC's tactics. I never liked 'Predator' because I thought it crossed over into entrapment. And, something tells me the same will be true with contractors.

I can just imagine the various ways in which NBC and some 'social justice' group will ensnare some unsuspecting, but altogether sleazy, contractor. We'll hear an NBC 'plant,' posing as a sultry, seductive housewife call out: 'The door's open, c'mon in. I'm just folding some wash in the nude. I made some brownies and iced tea. Put your tape measure down and have some.'

In my opinion, the whole thing stinks.

And, where will this mindless content end? Will we see future shows aimed at 'catching' cleaning ladies? How about the mailman? The FedEx delivery guy? You know a country's moral fiber is scraping the bottom when we sit around at night watching one strata of society entrap another. Get a life, America.

Before Oprah, Ellen and all the others, there was Edward R. Murrow

I'm in the midst of watching a fascinating DVD compilation of Edward R. Murrow's landmark television series 'Person to person.'

Broadcast on CBS between 1953 and '59, the series featured one-on-one interviews between the uber journalist become talk show host and celebrities from all walks of life. There's John F. Kennedy, speaking from his Boston apartment just one month after marrying Jacqueline Bouvier in 1953. Another segment shows Norman Rockwell discussing his painting techniques from his Stockbridge, Massachusetts, art studio. A third follows Eleanor Roosevelt around her Manhattan apartment in 1954.

There's also Liberace, Marilyn Monroe, Sammy Davis, Jr., and so many other legends.

Murrow's 'technique' was to sit in his New York studio and, via newly-developed technology, speak to the celebrities directly from their homes.

Person to person is a fascinating snapshot into a long gone America. It was a simpler time and Murrow served up simpler questions. There's no antagonism, no hints of scandal or intrigue, and no discussion of anything other than blue skies and happy times. That said, the interviews are anything but bland.

Murrow and his guests are direct, to the point and, dare I say it, humble. The watchwords of Person to person are civility, urbanity and compassion; three words that are nearly absent from any contemporary talk show.

It may have been superficial in content, but Person to person reflects Murrow's impeccable image of truth and honesty. Compared to the Jerry Springer's, Howard Stern's and others on our airwaves today, Edward R. Murrow is a breath of fresh air (despite his omnipresent cigarette).

Hollywood's new blood sport: dead pools

The freak show that is entertainment news seems dead set on debating who will die first: Britney or Farah.

Feigning concern, reporters, commentators and talking heads (and it's getting increasingly difficult to tell one from the other) vie with each other for the latest 'unauthorized' videos or inside peaks at the two tortured starlets.

'Brit's a threat to herself and those around,' waxed one pundit. 'Farah's courage in the face of certain death from cancer is laudable,' sighed another. Faux feelings, to be sure. And, yet we stare intently as the news media chop block one another to get the latest, greatest videos of each failing (and fallen) star. The ratings, one would assume, must soar in direct correlation to each celeb's descent into hell.

Who's to blame for this macabre dance? It certainly wasn't always this way. The 24/7 news cycle is one obvious culprit since it needs constant news to feed hungry viewers and listeners. Then there's the perpetual dumbing of America, with each new reality show slightly more idiotic than its predecessor. And, let's not forget America's increasingly manic obsession with Hollywood itself. It's a toxic combination that seems to just spiral more and more out of control each day.

Once upon a time, I thought this to be a uniquely American phenomenon. But, now, when I travel overseas, I routinely see Hollywood gossip leading the local newscasts. In fact, the lead stories on Arusha, Tanzania, TV sets on January 1, 2008, were (in order):

- Britney's latest breakdown
- Benazir Bhutto's assassination
- Civil unrest in nearby Kenya

The dead pool descriptor seems to work equally well for the Hollywood circus and the slow, but steady, death of responsible journalism. And, it seems to me we're all to blame.

Growing up Spears

Life is tough enough without added burdens. That said, and in light of yesterday's custody ruling against Britney Spears, could you imagine being one of her kids?

Those poor, if privileged, souls not only have the misfortune of having two highly dysfunctional parents. They also have to overcome the horrific image tsunamis their mom and dad have created.

Sure, the Spears/K-Fed kids will have every creature comfort money can buy. But, they'll also have to deal with the emotional baggage that comes with an out-of-control pop star diva mom and a hanger-on/gold digger dad.

It takes years and years to build an image and reputation. And, as we all know, only a nanosecond to blow to bits. So, how brutal must it be to start life with at least one, if not both, arm(s) tied behind one's back?

I'd like to think the Spears/Federline youngsters will turn out just fine, but the odds are heavily stacked against it.

They're both years away from having to strike out on their own. But when they do, they'll always have to deflect questions about their dysfunctional parents. And, that's a high price to pay for someone else's fame.