“No Kardashian Parking” Signs Pop Up Around Hollywood

Kardashian-parking

(PCM) Can we give a giant hug to whoever came up with this brilliant idea? It seems that someone feels that that Kardashian family have worn out their welcome, especially when it comes to parking around Hollywood, CA.

Mysterious “No Kardashian Parking Anytime” signs have been popping up all over the areas of Hollywood that are most frequented by the family. Hilariously, there was even one placed directly in front of the clothing store Dash which is owned by Kim Kardashian West and her two sisters.

Taking credit for the parking sign stunt is a local Los Angeles based artist who goes by the name Plastic Jesus. He claims that the signs are part of an art project titled “Stop Making Stupid People Famous”, however that may have backfired because they have the media yet again talking about all things Kardashian.

Plastic Jesus says the art piece is a statement about America’s obsession with all things celebrity.  He explains that the art project is not meant to condemn celebrities, but is a statement about society as a whole.  He feels that the media sacrifices genuine news stories to feed our celebrity obsessions.

Funny enough, the LAPD says that no one has complained about the signs as of yet, but they are still considered vandalism regardless of Plastic Jesus’s artistic intent.

The post “No Kardashian Parking” Signs Pop Up Around Hollywood appeared first on The World Of Pop Culture.

Kevin Hart: A Look At How Hollywood Comedy Would Have Been Saved If Chappelle Never Left

Chappelle1

As another Kevin Hart movie is released (Get Hard), I comparatively wonder what the career of Dave Chappelle could have been. I say COULD because Hart’s career is certainly nothing like what Chappelle had in mind. Hart has fully embraced Hollywood and his newfound stardom, where Chappelle rebelled against almost everything that came with reaching that certain level of success. Chappelle feels that when you reach a certain level of “success” you become dehumanized. He never went crazy as was reported. The Africa trip wasn’t about drugs, but rather getting away from the Hollywood “game”, which scared the shit out of him. Hart on the other hand, seemingly becomes more and more comfortable as he climbs the ladder of fame.

As he continues to climb to the top, and stars in a few dozen movies every year, for some reason I’m drawn back to the career of Dave Chappelle. Sure these guys have slightly different styles, but they are both stand-up comedians who put in their time playing the Hollywood game to eventually becoming leading men. They were both in multiple films before hitting that level of notoriety that tends to lead to the staring role of a Hollywood feature.

While they are different ages, (Chappelle 41- Hart 35), and differing levels of films to their credit (13 for Chappelle and 35 for Hart), whenever I see Hart in a new film I long for Chappelle. My desire to see Chappelle in more movies is completely selfish. It was never Chappelle’s goal to reach Kevin Hart’s level of fame, however he’s forever immortalized and will no doubt leave more of a lasting impact on popular culture than Kevin Hart could ever reach. It’s a shame (for everyone other than Chappelle and his family) that we may never see Chappelle in another film or television show, but are force-fed stereotypically bland performances and dozens of terrible Kevin Hart films.

Before I truly begin I want to make a five quick points:

1. I find Kevin Hart extremely funny; otherwise I wouldn’t make this comparison to begin with.

2.What I don’t like about Kevin Hart are his movies. His standup is without a doubt fantastic.

3. Chappelle doesn’t want and never desired a career like Kevin Hart’s. At all.

4. While I typically find Hart’s films awful, he is not the reason why. It’s usually a combination of terrible writing/directing/stereotypes/clichés.

5. Again, this is coming from the selfish place of wondering “what could have been” if Hollywood didn’t drive Mr. Chappelle away. What did we (his fans) miss out on? What would he be starring in now? Was he genius enough to elevate the entire landscape of Hollywood and comedies in general? Or was the system that chewed him up and spit him out turning their back on one of the most naturally gifted comedians of all-time. Was he blacklisted and not given the opportunities after proving he wouldn’t simply be a pawn in the game?

My theory is that if Dave Chappelle had chosen to stay within the system, Hollywood would be completely different. Chappelle is a genius, and certainly would have changed the current comedic landscape that has become stale, repetitive, clichéd, lazy, and almost entirely forgettable.

Chappelle2

I compare the current state of Hollywood comedies to the terrible state of mainstream American horror films. We’ve become so accustomed to mediocrity that when a decent effort is released, it garners more praise than otherwise deserved. Take James Wan’s 2013 horror film The Conjuring. I’m not saying the film isn’t good; it’s just not great. This “good” movie was however better than 99% of the other feature length horror films (and better than some Oscar nominated films) released that year, so it has the appearance of being great. It’s not. Sure there are cool camera tricks, but the film relies on clichés and jump scares to entertain the audience.

There’s almost nothing original in the film, or anything truly memorable, yet it’s regarded as a classic. Again, it’s not. I only bring this up because the same thing is happening to our comedies. Every year the Oscars (not that it’s necessarily a true representation of the “best films”) chose drama after drama for award contention. Horror, and especially comedies never try anything risky or original and are content with mediocrity.

Looking at Kevin Hart’s film career only backs up this sentiment. He’s an extremely talented standup and comedic actor who is in one terrible movie after another. Not to say he’s terrible in them, he’s just not given much to work with. For example, last year’s film Ride Along was a commercial success raking in $154 million at the box office against a budget of $25 million. That kind of profit puts blinders on the studios eyes, as all they see is cash money. This doesn’t give the studios any incentive to try to make a better movie; they simply green-light a sequel, and do more of the same. Everyone cashes in, including Hart, but hey, Chappelle would never play that game. Look for Ride Along 2 in theaters next year. I’m sure you can already guess the plot and a majority of the jokes.

Chappelle3

So what exactly happened to Mr. Chappelle to cause him to turn away from inevitable cinematic success? Chappelle’s story is a familiar one… up until a certain point. Chappelle was almost instantly successful at comedy. His standup was making waves and then he landed a role in Mel Brooks’ Robin Hood: Men in Tights. He continued his standup routines, which led to specials (although I’m certainly not arguing that Chappelle is a better standup comedian, Hart’s had unreal box office returns for his standup specials). Chappelle continued to land roles in movies like The Nutty Professor and Con Air, until he was given a chance to star in a movie he also wrote. That movie is the classic stoner comedy Half Baked.

While not perfect, almost everyone within a certain age demographic has seen the film once, if not multiple times. This was 1998 and he’d continue starring in roles until 2002. In 2003, his life changed forever. He created and starred in The Chappelle Show, which led to his eventual downfall. In a now classic interview with James Lipton on Inside the Actors Studio, Chappelle stated: “Did I get too big? Cause I like people. I like entertaining and the higher up I go, for some reason the less happy I am”. At this point in 2006, Chappelle left his show and went on a spiritual journey to Africa, to escape the madness. The media calling him crazy and a drug addict only reassured him that he made the right decision to escape the sickness that is Hollywood.

What if he never left? I think we would have gotten one or two more seasons of The Chappelle Show, until he eventually moved to movies. His move to movies would have differed from Hart’s because Chappelle would be given more creative control of the roles he decided to take. Scripts would be written by him or tailored for his strengths. Hart’s at a disadvantage here, never writing his own scripts and choosing roles that could be interchangeable for any comedian. Chappelle is the type of guy who doesn’t care about fame or money, so his roles would be selected based on quality and not finances.

The comedy world is missing something. That’s not to say there aren’t funny people working; the gatekeepers may be keeping everyone at bay and at a distance, never allowing one person to transcend the landscape. In Hollywood, this may be exactly what they want. Where Kevin Hart is merely a pawn in this game, Chappelle is the guy that could have changed things.

I mean the guy walked away from a $50 million contract, because he knew the price of admission to this level of fame wasn’t worth it. If Hollywood had this guy mentoring and working with guys like the Kevin Harts, the quality of productions could have only risen. Hart’s an extremely smart guy, but Chappelle is much more realistic in his way of looking at things. I really wish this guy could work with all the new talent coming out, because their philosophy and perception of reality would inevitably be shifted. While I know that no one player is bigger than the entire game, Chappelle is that voice that’s so desperately needed as we cross into a new age in Hollywood. Gone are the classic comedies like Caddyshack, Trading Places, Young Frankenstein, Beverly Hills Cop, Blazing Saddles, and even more recent films like Office Space, Friday (one of my personal favorites), and Moonrise Kingdom. Things are changing, and if not Chappelle, we need more guys that echo similar sentiments.

Dave Chappelle stood up to the Hollywood system, and in return, may have gotten himself blacklisted, meaning nobody would work with or hire him. This forced him to turn his back on any of this stuff and focus on what truly makes him happy. He lives the lifestyle he wants. He does his standup, spends time with his family, and isn’t living this weird isolated lifestyle that comes with reaching the top of the ladder of “success”. He’s doing what he wants, and I’m happy for him. I just know that we missed out on something truly special and for that I’m sad. Maybe things wouldn’t have drastically changed and they would have squashed his creativity to the point where he accepted terrible roles and just went through the motions. But I don’t believe this. The Hollywood comedies missed out, and most of all, the world missed out on groundbreaking comedy that would have questioned everything from race to gender equality, instead we have subsequently been force fed mediocre meals that are beginning to taste more and more bland as the years tick away.

This post first appeared on AgeOfTheNerd.com!

The post Kevin Hart: A Look At How Hollywood Comedy Would Have Been Saved If Chappelle Never Left also appeared on Movie News & Reviews.

Why Wonder Woman Should Be Played By A Man


(PCM) Should existing super heroes be replaced by alternate races, colors or sexualities for the sake of appeasing false outrage? Some refer to this as comicgate. Most people don't read comic books. Ask a friend about comic book superheroes and they will base their knowledge from a superhero film such as Winter Soldier or The Dark Knight Returns, not original source material in print. Few know of Batman: The Long Halloween or Hush. batman-hush-dark-knight-returnsUnless you are Harlequin (Harley Quinn’s first appearance was in animation), the origins and character traits of comic book characters are borne from comic books. The fanbase of superheroes are comic book readers. Comic book fans love their characters as they are. Yet more and more new fans demand for a gay character, or more representation of women –  the list goes on. Legacy readers feel hijacked by the political correctness new fans bring. Legacy readers feel even more angst due to drastic and undue changes to characters that often retcon a character needlessly. Most calls for politically correct changes are made by entities such as media organizations acting as the mouthpiece for a single blogger, not large organized groups which have a true vested interest in evolving characters. The blogger or agenda oriented media writer doesn’t ask for change, they demand it. There are still legitimate requests in changes to the inhabitants of comic books – to a point. And while the case of “to a point” is being made, let’s not bog down in that statement alone. The argument here is that as a rule we shouldn’t change superheroes main characteristics. Long time comic book readers accept politically correct additions and resist politically correct changes. Some could argue it’s a generational issue, but it goes beyond your age. You see, if we are changing comic book characters’ genders, interests, or anything that originally defined their ‘character’ they no longer remain that character. If Marvel can change Thor to a female, then DC’s Wonder Woman could be played by a man. Do you see the meaning here? Comic book characters have a history of behaviors and interests. Superman is a boy scout, Batman is grim, Spider-Man is Peter Parker and Peter Parker is eternally young. Sure the publishers of these comics have the right to alter the course of a character, and in many cases they are justified in doing so. Yet the defining elements of a character should rarely if ever be changed once canon is established. While times change and the characteristics of a character should mirror the times, superheroes should remain true to their roots. Superheroes such as Superman have changed much over their long existence. Superman didn’t always fly, but the canon of Superman is he has always been a moral model. There are exceptions, perhaps a character is totally unknown and disposable or about to be abandoned. Plausible evolutionary arcs work too. Canon to a faithful comic book reader is the undisputed history of a character. Examples:
  • Death of Superman.
  • Uncle Ben’s legacy of power & responsibility.
  • Bane breaks Batman’s back with aftermath of Azrael.
  • The death of Gwen Stacy.
The caretakers (contemporary editors and publishers) of canon have made more bad decisions than good. In fact you could argue that canon has been the reason for success in film. When films are based on or follow canon they succeed. That is why Sony continues to fail with Spider-Man and Marvel Studios is on a winning streak. FantasticFourScreenshot1It’s why Fox’s reboot of the Fantastic Four is guaranteed to fail. Fox’s only success in the superhero genre was Days of Future Past. Why? Days of Future Past integrated canon – specifically the story sharing the same title written by Chris Claremont in 1981 in Uncanny X-Men. While blaming film studios for bad films is easy, we still have the actual publishers DC and Marvel dead in our sights. They hold the most responsibility for taking good characters and destroying them. For this rule there are exceptions.
  • Catwoman is now bi-sexual – plausible arc.
Some feminists may argue against this article any support in keeping Catwoman heterosexual is sexist, however this change to Catwoman is borderline. catwoman-kissSure it’s plausible she can be bisexual but frankly turning her from a chaotic neutral cat burgler to the head of a crime ring is more of a sin.
  • A gay Green Lantern – long forgotten character.
Announcing characters as gay may be contrived but can be an acceptable change to canon. Writing a Green Lantern as gay does not violate his canon but at the time it was announced it appeared contrived in an effort to increase sales. It was almost as if the publishers wanted bigoted opinions for the sake of controversy. Allen-Scott-Kissing-SamThe upside here is the most well known Green Lantern Hal Jordan wasn’t changed, it was a Green Lantern (original Golden Age Alan Scott) not the Green Lantern (New 52 Hal Jordan) of modern canon. It’s worth noting that DC retconned Alan Scott into Earth 2, an alternate DC universe.
  • Spider-Man is black/hispanic – plausible arc.
Last is the race card on Spider-Man. Many mixed instant outrage over the rumor the first Spider-Man in a Marvel Cinematic Universe film may be Miles Morales (black/hispanic). parker-moralesMost felt placing Miles Morales ahead of Peter Parker was a violation of canon in terms of chronological order, while the thought police argued anyone that couldn’t accept Miles Morales was a racist for not accepting a black/hispanic. The fan base in general simply wanted the Spider-Man that has existed in the original Civil War story. peter-parker-civil-warAltering Peter Parker’s skin color wasn’t the ultimate concern. The outcry that was drowned out by the loud minority was that Miles Morales came about because of Peter Parker. Changing canon is just not authentic. If were not for so many comic book readers, the rest of the world would not be receiving this gift of great superhero films. Yes there are many racist, bigots and homophobes on the Internet anonymously insulting the voices who call for more female superheroes, writers, and even video game programmers for that matter. They do not represent the voices of reason that have more specific arguments against changing superheros canon. Canon is the argument in a nutshell. Let’s not take any beloved character and rewrite them for the sole purpose of political correctness or appeasement. Would J.R.R. Tolkien have wanted modern screenwriters to make Frodo Baggins a female? Perhaps, he would have, but it would have been that single creators decision to do so.marvel-universeThis brings us to ownership. In the world of publishing comics, if you add a character to the DC or Marvel universe you give up any claim to the character. You may add a wonderful new addition to the DC Universe or the Marvel Universe that can now interact with Superman or Spider-Man but you lose your say so over the future of that character. dc-universeTo this end we should all question the stewards of our beloved childhood friends Batman, Spider-Man and the likes. If the political wind is blowing conservative, characters may be less controversial, maybe even stuffy or bland. In the current climate a very liberal wind is blowing that seemingly has an agenda of answering to the loud minority who do not even buy comic books at the same rate as typical readers. Should we have gay characters? Should we have muslim characters? Should we have more female superheroes? Why not? Few would argue against it, but there certainly isn’t a huge demand for them either. Sales prove it. ms-marvel-muslimSome could demand why must publishers take existing characters and alter them so drastically they don't represent what they once were? The answer may be because they'd rather risk not selling a few extra issues of your favorite title and then go back on that change if their half-hearted attempt goes flat. After all, retconning characters is often relied upon by publishers to serve their needs. And that’s what taking an existing hetrosexual character and turning them gay is, it’s half-hearted. Make a new character that is gay and that’s the way you get everyone on board. The answer is even more simple. Money. Publishers use controversy to increase sales. They can only speculate – once the decision to make a change is made, they will only know if they were right if sales increase. At one time publishers mandated these changes against the will of writers that were old-school. Now publishers are more savvy. They hire writers that have an agenda that matches up with the changes being made to a character. Want to change a character to a successful female character? Hire a female writer. Want a writer to support the gay lifestyle of a character? Hire a writer that has those values.catwoman3This example is not always the case, but it is happening. By no means is this meant to belittle female writers. But to get a true female perspective, don’t you need a female? As a man I’ll never understand fully the experience of giving birth, and while I can write about it, wouldn’t a woman’s understanding be more apt? Agenda writers have a place but this tack has yet to yield any successful results other than short term and it’s no less thoughtful than killing Superman. Killing Superman had short term success, so far the same can't even be said of making Thor a female. What is a good example of restoring popularity to a character to boost sales? The Captain America films from Marvel Studios is an ideal example. That character was as uncool as the Blue Beetle, and now he’s as worthy as Superman. Good story telling saved Captain America, not appeasement to loud minority requests. It is fair to argue that the fan opinions that should matter to the publishers are from the fans that have long term understanding of characters and are invested in those characters. The one constant has been that fans are getting what they ask for. For example, fans demanded for years that Spider-Man return from Sony to Marvel. That finally took place with the Amy Pascal/Kevin Feige deal which allows Spider-Man to be a part of the MCU in 2016 Marvel Studios film Civil War. Now rumors run rampant it won’t be Peter Parker that wears the Spider-Man mask. thor-femaleThe message should be clear to the caretakers of our comics. Don't screw with canon. If you want to give those that want a female superhero what they want, then write better stories around existing female superheros or just create great new female superheros. This isn't a divide between males and females, it’s about great characters, and great stories. Until then, if you want to change genders, sexuality and such like making Thor a female or suddenly changing a male character to gay, then by all means, make Wonder Woman a man. The post Why Wonder Woman Should Be Played By A Man appeared first on The World Of Pop Culture.

Zendaya Fires Back At Giuliana Rancic Over Racist Hair Comments

Zendaya1

(PCM) Teen actress and musician, Zendaya took the high road and was able to put E! “Fashion Police” host Giuliana Rancic in her place without ever naming names, after Rancic made racist commentary about Zendaya’s dredlocked hair at the Oscars.

During a post-Oscar episode of “Fashion Police” Rancic commented on Zendaya’s hair saying “‘I feel like she smells like patchouli oil … or maybe weed”. Zendaya, who looked absolutely gorgeous in her white off-should Vivienne Westwood gown and Chopard jewels, was deeply insulted by Rancic’s thoughtless statements and took to social media to school the E! personality about her ignorance and stereotyping  when it comes to individuals who sport dredlocked hair.

Zendaya wrote “There is a fine line between what is funny and disrespectful. Someone said something about my hair at the Oscars that left me in awe. Not because I was relishing in rave outfit reviews, but because I was hit with ignorant slurs and pure disrespect. To say that an 18-year-old woman with locs must smell of patchouli oil or ‘weed’ is not only a large stereotype but outrageously offensive”

You can read Zendaya’s full tweet below:

You can see that no where in the tweet does Zendaya call out Rancic personally, but she obviously knew it was directed at her and took to her own Twitter account to offer up an apology.

The post Zendaya Fires Back At Giuliana Rancic Over Racist Hair Comments also appeared on PCM Lifestyle.

2015 Oscar Winners! Live!

Oscars2(PCM) The 87th Annual Academy Awards are taking place tonight, February 22, in L.A.’s Dolby Theater and all of Hollywood has come out to celebrate the best films of the past year.

Facing outcries and protests at the lack of diversity in this year’s nominees, the Awards show opened with a timely joke by host Neil Patrick Harris: “We’re here tonight to celebrate Hollywood’s whitest, um, brightest stars.”

The opening number was a grand homage to cinema greats throughout history and included NPH dueting with Anna Kendrick and Jack Black crashing the number.

The big question on everyone’s mind is whether Birdman or Boyhood will come out on top tonight, seeing as both are great feats of directing and filmmaking and have been at the top of most Academy Award prediction lists.

Stay tuned to find out as PCM live tweets the Oscars and check back to see our update list of winners!

Tune in now to ABC to watch the 2015 Oscars!

Best Supporting Actor
Robert Duvall – The Judge
Ethan Hawke – Boyhood
Edward Norton – Birdman
Mark Ruffalo – Foxcatcher
*J.K. Simmons – Whiplash*

Costume Design
*Milena Canonero – The Grand Budapest Hotel*
Mark Bridges – Inherent Vice 
Colleen Atwood – Into the Woods 
Anna B. Sheppard – Maleficent
Jacqueline Durran – Mr. Turner

Makeup and Hairstyling
Bill Corso and Dennis Liddiard – Foxcatcher
*Frances Hannon and Mark Coulier – The Grand Budapest Hotel*
Elizabeth Yianni-Georgiou and David White – Guardians of the Galaxy

Foreign Language Film
*Ida – Poland*
Leviathan
Tangerines
Timbuktu
Wild Tales

The post 2015 Oscar Winners! Live! also appeared on Movie News & Reviews.

“Winning Is Everything” At This Year’s MTV Movie Awards

MTV-Movie-Awards

(PCM) The new promo video for the upcoming MTV Movie Awards features Amy Schumer and Bill Hadar and marks the start of the “Winning Is Everything” campaign that pokes fun at Award season in a true Movie Awards/MTV way.

The plan is to bring a little honesty (and a whole lot of competition) back to the Movie Awards and try to break into the Oscar buzz with MTV’s very own take on Award’s season.

The idea behind “Winning is Everything”, is despite what your parents or Little League coaches told you, winning is way better than losing. Everyone wants to be first place, get a shiny trophy and be recognized as the best. And you know who really loves winning? Actors.

The MTV Movie Awards isn’t just a polite industry awards shows. It’s our chance to officially decide who looks best without a shirt, who punches best and who can make out better than every other maker outer.

Amy Schumer and Bill Hader are totally cool with not taking home a trophy…or are they? When it comes down to it, winning is everything. Don’t miss the 2015 MTV Movie Awards on Sunday, April 12 at 8/7c.

The post “Winning Is Everything” At This Year’s MTV Movie Awards also appeared on Movie News & Reviews.

WordPress theme: Kippis 1.15
Loading..