ReportWire

Tag: 00s pop culture

  • War of the Denim Brands Trying to Play Up the 2000s (a More Marked Time of White Supremacy BTW) Instead of “Great Jeans”

    Ever since Sydney Sweeney and American Eagle got it so wrong with their jeans ad, it’s been a free-for-all of shade-throwing on the ad campaign front. It started with Beyoncé, who released the final installment in her series of Levi’s commercials about two weeks after the American Eagle campaign was unveiled. Though, thanks to the daily rounds of fresh invective, the AE campaign still felt much more recent (especially by modern standards, when anything more than a day old is “old”) when Beyoncé’s Levi’s commercial dropped. Almost as if she (and Levi’s) were purposefully trying to show them “how it’s done.” And yet, even Beyoncé, often deemed as “ironclad” or “bulletproof” on the instant success front as Taylor Swift, didn’t exactly alight the masses with her campaign. Which, perhaps worse than saying something “incendiary,” said nothing much at all. 

    Thus, when Gap emerged with its own “little response” (whether admitting that it was a response or not) to the whole jeans controversy in mid-August, they decided to say it best by saying it with Katseye (don’t worry if you hadn’t heard of them until now) bopping around amongst many other dancers to the tune of Kelis’ signature 2003 hit, “Milkshake.” Which apparently feels as “fresh” and “relevant” to the youths of today as it did to the millennials of yore (particularly after the song cameo’d in 2004’s Mean Girls). And, on a side note, it would seem Kelis takes less issue with the song being used to sell denim than she does with it being used to sell Beyoncé herself. Or, more specifically, her music. For who could forget Kelis’ none too favorable reaction to “Mrs. Carter” sampling “Milkshake” for track four of Renaissance, “Energy”? So unfavorable was the reaction, in fact, that Beyoncé “quietly” just removed the sample the same way she removed the phrase “Spazzin’ on that ass” from “Heated” (replacing it with a perhaps even more suggestive phrase: “Blastin’ on that ass”).

    But there’s nothing “quiet” about the reanimation of “Milkshake” in 2025, the year when the saturation of 00s pop culture has reached an ostensible new apex, even though few thought that could be possible after Euphoria makeup and the remake of Mean Girls in 2024. But no, 2025 is gunning hard for the 00s to come back (even in terms of Lindsay Lohan making her own umpteenth “return” with Freakier Friday, released the same year, incidentally, as “Milkshake”). 

    Ironically enough, however, the 00s were a prime time for white supremacy. Reigning truly “supreme” in that no one was talking about the surfeit of whiteness in media at the time. Or the fact that someone like Jennifer Lopez or Lucy Liu was about as “exotic” as Hollywood was willing to get in film, music or any other entertainment medium. That lack of representation, it was all just accepted. Taken at face value. And this is part of why Sweeney and American Eagle (itself a brand very much associated with the 00s, along with Abercrombie & Fitch) might be the most “authentically” 00s of all in that they unleashed an ad campaign that assumes the presence of a customer mindset that truly is still “locked in” with that era.

    The era when the blonde girl with the “‘hot’ body” (to borrow a phrase from Janis Ian’s [Lizzy Caplan] chalkboard plan on how to take down Regina George) was never to be questioned, made fun of and certainly not accused of promoting white supremacy with a dubious tag line (“Sydney Sweeney has great jeans”) that was paired with an even more suggestive commercial “monologue” (“Genes are passed down to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality and even eye color… My jeans are blue”).

    Thus, the Katseye x Gap campaign stood out even more by not only calling upon 00s semiotics and sounds, but also adhering to what the tenets of capitalism do best by repackaging what’s old, making it “new” again and selling it back to the masses. And since Gap commercials at their most successful are always known for the “all-white backdrop,” this latest one hit all the right notes of nostalgia. Considering that’s about the only thing everyone can afford to get high on now, it’s being ramped up all the more with each passing year.

    Hence, Addison Rae, a Gen Zer who clearly identifies as a millennial, also getting in on the 00s nostalgia action with her own ad campaign for Lucky Brand Jeans—an ultra 00s-associated brand. Accordingly, Women’s Wear Daily described the jeans she’s promoting as “a reimagined version of a look from Lucky Brand’s early 2000s archive.” What’s more, Addison rolled her sleeves (or is it cuffs in this case?) even further up by actually getting involved in the design process by serving as creative director for this specific line of ultra low-rise flare jeans. That fit, of course, being the pinnacle of 00s-era fashion, with Paris Hilton and Britney Spears exemplifying the trend in the early aughts. 

    As for Addison’s “commercial” (directed by Mitch Ryan), it didn’t go quite as viral as Gap’s (directed by Bethany Vargas, whose most recent credits include the likes of Lady Gaga’s “Abracadabra” video). Though there is still something like “choreo” in the mix after it opens with Addison walking out onto a stage area in her Lucky Brand Jeans as her own song, “High Fashion,” plays (obviously not as instantly recognizable as “Milkshake”). Right from the beginning, the tag line, “Wear Lucky, feel lucky” immediately pops up. And it isn’t lost on any millennial girl that one of Britney’s biggest hits in the early 00s was “Lucky.” Or that she herself was a wearer of Lucky Brand (along with all the other fashion “staples” of the day: Tommy Hilfiger, Abercrombie, Ed Hardy, Juicy Couture, etc.).

    The visual comparison to Britney that “AR” continues to draw was not lost on anyone who has even a cursory knowledge of the 00s. And yet, despite Spears being everyone’s favorite reference, in the denim wars that have taken the U.S. by storm since July, it seems that Katseye is the clear winner of this round. Even if Addison’s campaign has a level of finesse, class and vague freshness beyond the mere regurgitation of a milkshake that boasts, “I know you want it/The thing that makes me/What the guys go crazy for/They lose their minds.”

    And what guys and girls alike are all losing their minds for this year is 00s stylings, whether in the world of fashion or otherwise. Though someone might want to remind them all that this particular decade was nothing if not pro-white supremacy. But try telling that to a generation that’s somehow managed to romanticize George W. Bush a.k.a. make “Bushcore” happen.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • On Carrie Bradshaw Developing the Idea for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

    On Carrie Bradshaw Developing the Idea for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

    Although it’s easy to shit on Sex and the City in the present, there are occasional moments in the show when one realizes how truly visionary it was for its time. You know, going to a tantric sex workshop and vaguely acknowledging white privilege while you’re getting a pedicure—things like that. But one thing Sex and the City rarely gets credit for is providing the kernel of the idea for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. This occurred in season four of the series; specifically, episode six: “Time and Punishment” (the same episode where Charlotte York [Kristin Davis] was shamed for having “free time” instead of working). Which aired three years before Eternal Sunshine… was released in 2004.

    But back in July of 2001, when “Time and Punishment” first aired, Carrie Bradshaw (Sarah Jessica Parker) had the sudden “revelation” that cheating on Aidan Shaw (John Corbett) back in mid-season three was the worst mistake of her life—or at least her romantic life (which, in truth, embodies one hundred percent of Carrie’s existence). Therefore, narcissist that she is, Carrie obviously believes it’s within her power to get him back…just because she decides on a whim that’s what she wants. And apparently, she’s not wrong in her assumption, wearing Aidan down with her seduction methods (however stalker-y) until he concedes that, sure, he wants to get back together.

    But before that glorious (for Carrie) moment, Bradshaw gives us one of her signature voiceover “insights” from the column de la semaine she’s writing, ruminating on a person’s inability to forgive if they can’t really forget. So it is that she tell us: “Later that day, I got to thinking about relationships and partial lobotomies. Two seemingly different ideas that might be perfect together, like chocolate and peanut butter. Think how much easier it would all be if there was some swift surgical procedure to whisk away all the ugly memories and mistakes and leave only the fun trips and special holidays.” Yes, Carrie is perfectly describing what Charlie Kaufman would call “Lacuna Inc.” in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Minus the part where even the fun trips and special holidays are remembered. For, in Carrie’s ideal version of relationship memory erasure, you still at least remember the person existed in your life prior to the “procedure.”

    Kaufman and Michel Gondry did that concept one better by making it key for all traces of the person to be forgotten. Even though it only set up someone like Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet) and Joel Barish (Jim Carrey) for the trap of gravitating right back toward the person they ended up finding toxic in the first place. Which is also something that Zoë Kravitz’s Blink Twice addresses in a more ominous way. But what Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind prefers to do is position the inevitable “re-attraction” between two people who were already unable to make it work before as something with a more hopeful tinge. Not just more hopeful than what Blink Twice does with the concept, but also with what ends up happening to Carrie and Aidan by the end of season four (hint: total emotional catastrophe/an even more painful breakup than the first time around).

    However, before the reasons for their first breakup are proven yet again (and tenfold), to conclude her thoughts on the matter of “forgiving and forgetting,” Carrie adds, “But until that day arrives, what to do? Rely on the same old needlepoint philosophy of ‘forgive and forget’? And even if a couple can manage the forgiveness, has any[one] ever really conquered the forgetness? Can you ever really forgive, if you can’t forget?” In Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, there’s no need to forgive because all has been forgotten.

    As for setting up the premise for “Time and Punishment,” the episode that precedes it, “Baby, Talk Is Cheap,” also refers to the “unforgettability” (therefore, unforgivability) of what Carrie did to Aidan. An egregious sin he feels obliged to remind her of when she has the gall to come to his door late at night and plead her case for getting back together. None of her “logic” trumps the fact that, as Aidan screams, “You broke my heart!” But Carrie sees that only as a “minor detail” when presenting him with the “argument,” “Look, I know that you’re probably scared and I would be too, but it’s different now. Things are different. I-I’m different.” She then tries to prove it by taking a pack of cigarettes out of her purse and declaring, “Cigarettes, gone.” Of course, if they were really “gone,” they wouldn’t have been in her purse in the first place.

    Nonetheless, Carrie continues to insist that this “new” her was clearly not responsible for the actions of the old her and, thus, shouldn’t be punished by being denied another chance. She assures Aidan, “Seriously, all bad habits gone. This is a whole new thing because I miss you. And I’ve missed you.” As though her desire for him alone should be enough for him to want to forget about all the pain she caused him. And when Aidan screams the aforementioned line at her audacity, Carrie displays the kind of immaturity and embarrassing behavior she’s known for by simply running away instead of staying to face the firing squad, as it were.

    Ultimately, though, she gets what she wants: for Aidan to submit to her. Granted, not without an initial bout of passive aggressive behavior in “Time and Punishment” that finally prompts Carrie to say of the co-worker he’s been openly flirting with, “Why don’t you just fuck her, then we can both be bad.” When he comes to her door at the end of the episode, Carrie tells him, “I know that you can’t forget what happened, but I hope that you can forgive me.” But she was onto something before in her column—the idea that no true forgiveness can be attained without forgetting. Ergo, her wish for a Lacuna Inc.-like enterprise that wouldn’t “exist” until three years later…perhaps after Kaufman caught sight of Carrie’s column. And while Carrie might not have been the first to wish for this form of a “relationship lobotomy,” she was the only one to say it out loud in such a crystallized way before Eternal Sunshine… came along to perfect the notion.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • The Boons and Banes of Memory Erasure in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Blink Twice

    The Boons and Banes of Memory Erasure in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Blink Twice

    Romy Schneider once said, “Memories are the best things in life, I think.” But are they, really, if some of them serve only as a brutal, triggering source of trauma? In both Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Blink Twice, that’s the main type of memory being dealt with, therefore suppressed. But while one is a “rom-com” (Charlie Kaufman-style), the other is a horrifying thriller with a #MeToo slant. Both, however, do center on “the necessity” of memory erasure as it pertains to the relationship between men and women.

    Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, of course, is much “lighter” by comparison. Even though, in its time and its place, it was considered just as “bleak” as it was “quirky.” It’s also more hyper-focused on one relationship in particular, in contrast to Blink Twice speaking to the overall power dynamics between men and women as it relates to sex rather than “romance.” More to the point, the power dynamics between rich men and “regular” women. In Michel Gondry and Charlie Kaufman’s narrative, the main “sufferers” (or beneficiaries, depending on one’s own personal views) of select memory loss are Clementine Kruczynski (Kate Winslet) and Joel Barish (Jim Carrey). But it is the former who “brings it on both of them,” as she’s the one to initially enlist the memory-erasing services of Lacuna Inc., run by Dr. Howard Mierzwiak (Tom Wilkinson). Joel merely follows suit after comprehending what she’s done, deciding that she shouldn’t be the only person in the relationship permitted the luxury of forgetting about all that they shared together. Good and bad.

    So it is that he, too, undergoes the procedure, briefed on the ins and out of it by Mary Svevo (Kirsten Dunst), the receptionist at Lacuna, and Dr. Mierzwiak before opting to excise Clementine from his brain as well (in a scene later to be repurposed by Ariana Grande for the “we can’t be friends [wait for your love]” video). Of course, this isn’t to say he’s not extremely hurt by her “whimsical” decision to “remove” him. Alas, by way of explanation, Dr. Mierzwiak can only offer, “She wanted to move on. We provide that possibility.” One can imagine that Slater King (Channing Tatum) tells himself something similar about his own nefarious operation on a private island that might as well be referred to as Little Saint James (a.k.a. the former “Epstein Island”).

    Sex and the City, incidentally, provided something of a precursor to the Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind “idea kernel” (de facto, the Blink Twice one) in the form of the season four episode, “Time and Punishment.” This due to Carrie’s (Sarah Jessica Parker) theme for her column of the week being whether or not you can ever really forgive someone if you can’t forget what they did (to you). The answer, in both Eternal Sunshine… and Blink Twice, seems to be a resounding no. Though, in the former, there appears to be a greater chance for redemption even after the couple remembers everything that happened between them (and still decides to give it another shot). This courtesy of Mary, who not only unveils the truth to all of Lacuna’s clients (or “patients”), but also unearths her own bitter truth vis-à-vis memory erasure: Howard did it to her (per her request) after the two had an affair. And yet, just as it is for Frida (Naomi Ackie) in Blink Twice, it’s as though we are doomed to repeat the same behavior/gravitate toward the same toxic person regardless of whether the slate (a.k.a. the mind) is wiped clean or not.

    In Blink Twice, Zoë Kravitz’s directorial debut (which she co-wrote with E.T. Feigenbaum), that gravitation proves to be much more harmful for Frida, who drags her best friend, Jess (Alia Shawkat), along for the ride after infiltrating Slater’s fancy benefit dinner for his requisite “foundation.” Although the two are initially working the party as cater waiters, Frida has them both switch into gowns (which scream “trying too hard” while still looking embarrassingly cheap). Naturally, Slater invites them to accompany him and his entourage back to the island where he’s been sequestered in order to “work on himself” as part of a grand performance of a public apology for “bad behavior” past (there’s no need to get specific about what that might have entailed, for there’s a whole range of bad behavior [typically, sexual abuse/harassment-related] that female viewers can easily imagine for themselves). Though, usually, if one is truly working on themselves, they do so by not buying a private island to retreat to. By actually trying to exist in and adapt to the world around them, rather than creating an entirely new one that fits their own “needs.” But that’s the thing: Slater and his ilk don’t want to adapt, don’t want to acknowledge that things have changed and so, too, must their old ways. Instead, they’ve set up a “paradise” for themselves that happens to be every woman’s hell.

    The only requirement to keep them there? Scrubbing any memories they have of being sexually assaulted every night on the island. In lieu of Lacuna, Slater needs only a perfume called Desideria, conveniently crafted from a flower that’s only found on that particular island. It’s, in many ways, a slightly more implausible method for making someone forget a traumatic experience than all-out memory erasure through a “scientific procedure” like Lacuna’s. But, for Kravitz’s purposes, it works. Those purposes extend not only to holding up a mirror to the ongoing and new-fangled ways that men, even post-#MeToo, still manage to behave like barbarians, but also to the ways in which women “self-protect” by conveniently “removing” memories that are too painful to deal with, especially when it comes to men and their egregious comportment. This, in part, is why the Desideria is so effective. There’s a sense that the women of the island are only too ready to forget/ignore what horrors befell them the previous night.

    In the abovementioned Sex and the City episode, there’s a scene at the end where Carrie repeats (seven times) to Aidan (John Corbett), “You have to forgive me” in different “Oscar-worthy” manners. Just as Slater repeats, “I’m sorry” in different dramatic ways until he then askes Frida if she forgives him yet. Seeing (and expecting) that she definitely doesn’t, it only serves to prove his point that, no, you cannot forgive without forgetting (though, to be fair/in this case, maybe just don’t act like women owe you unfettered access to their bodies/treat them like disposable objects designed solely for your amusement and there won’t be any need to forgive).

    Thus, he considers himself in the right (or at least that he “had no choice”) for doing what he did in order to get what he wanted out of her and the other women he lures to the island with his charm (and, of course, the allure of his wealth). In Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, there is also a belief, on Clementine’s part, in being “in the right” for willingly expunging her own memories without any man needing to do it for her. In this sense, one might say that Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is all about the importance of agency in having certain aspects of your memories erased for the sake of self-preservation.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Bebe Rexha Serves 00s Paparazzi Vibes and Shady Record Execs for “I’m The Drama” Video

    Bebe Rexha Serves 00s Paparazzi Vibes and Shady Record Execs for “I’m The Drama” Video

    At the beginning of July this year, Bebe Rexha tweeted, “I could bring down a BIG chunk of this industry. I AM frustrated. I Have been UNDERMINED. I’ve been so quiet for the longest time. I haven’t seen the signs even though people constantly are bringing them up and they have been SO OBVIOUS. And when I have spoken up I’ve been silence[d] and PUNISHED by this industry. Things must change or I’m telling ALL of my truths. The good the bad and the ugly.” The release of “I’m The Drama” feels in line with that pronouncement, as Rexha makes a heavy-handed allusion to the ways in which she’s been mistreated throughout her tenure in the music business by singing, “There’s a silence only I/I was born to break.”

    Alas, Rexha has yet to go into full detail about what, exactly, has happened to her. When asked by a fan on Twitter (again, it’s not “X”), “What stops you from speaking? Do it! We are with you,” Rexha ominously replied, “THEY PUNISH YOU.” On the heels of releasing two other singles, “Chase It” and “My Oh My” (with Kylie Minogue and Tove Lo) this year, it seems as though Rexha is primed to release a fourth album, therefore doesn’t totally want to rock the boat when it comes to blowing the lid off the abuse she’s suffered. Particularly since Better Mistakes and Bebe didn’t perform as well on the charts as they should have (though her 2018 debut, Expectations, was certified platinum and managed to climb to number thirteen on the Billboard 200 album chart upon its release).

    But that doesn’t mean that more “subtle” digs can’t be made at the industry, with the Jak Payne-directed video for “I’m The Drama” channeling Britney Spears in the 00s (think: the video for 2007’s “Piece of Me”). Particularly as it opens on Rexha surrounded by a sea of paparazzi, herself serving as the eye of the storm while wearing oversized black sunglasses (a very Brat emblem these days), a fur-trim coat and hair that’s dyed with black stripes to contrast against the overall blonde tresses.

    In another intercut scene, Rexha appears to be at a venue that looks like a wedding reception (or any generic after-party, really) as she stands in the center of it all wearing a black floor-length gown (which is also her steez in the “My Oh My” video). She then dives into the chorus with an intonation that sounds decidedly mantra-y as she chants, “I’m the drama, I’m the face/I make heads turn in this place/And they lining up, and they lining up/And they lining up for a taste/I’m the drum set, I’m the bass/A goddamn filthy disgrace/And they lining up, and they lining up/And they lining up for a taste.” While this might be what constitutes that majority of the song’s lyrics, the infectious backbeat produced by Jimmy James and Punctual is what sustains it as an undeniable earworm rather than coming across as overly repetitive.

    When she deviates from the chorus to announce, “When I walk in, feel your eyes/Oh, and they call my name,” the scene then switches to her sitting at the head of a table in what looks like a quintessential record label office (further emphasized by the framed records hung up on the wall) filled with executives in suits who don’t have an artistic bone in their body. Thus, it comes across as particularly pointed that she repeats the line, “There’s a silence only I/I was born to break” in this room, as though to none too abstrusely indicate who/what she’s talking about: the music industry “powers that be.” For, like Britney Spears, it seems there is so much more going on behind the scenes with Rexha’s oppression than fans and casual enthusiasts alike could ever fathom, with Rexha herself fueling the flames of that “conspiracy theory” fire by saying, as mentioned, “Things must change or I’m telling ALL of my truths. The good the bad and the ugly.” It sounds a lot like Kesha warning Dr. Luke in 2017’s “Praying,” “And we both know all the truth I could tell.” (Uncoincidentally, Rexha promoted her fangirl love for Kesha by posting a story on her Instagram where she’s singing the lyrics to her first independently-released single, “Joy Ride,” and captioning it, “KESHA YOU DIDN’T HAVE TO SLAY SO HARD WITH THIS ONE.”)

    Rexha might just be reaching her breaking point in that truth-telling regard, as “I’m The Drama” pronounces both lyrically and visually. Unlike, say, Taylor Swift, who “self-effacingly” admits, “It’s me, hi/I’m the problem, it’s me” on 2022’s “Anti-Hero,” Rexha isn’t saying she’s the problem when she declares, “I’m the drama, I’m the drama/They lining up for a taste,” so much as riffing on what Britney said when she goaded, “You want a piece of me?/I’m Mrs. ‘Extra! Extra! This just in’/You want a piece of me?/I’m Mrs. ‘She’s too big, now she’s too thin’/You want a piece of me?/Piece of me.” Of course, Britney’s paparazzi-plagued 00s aura isn’t the only element of the aughts Rexha is serving throughout the “I’m The Drama” video—there’s also some major Lindsay Lohan in “Rumors” vibes (including the occasionally-reminiscent-of-the-“Rumors”-video color palette and the assaulting paparazzi visuals Rexha brings back from the 00s).

    To further explain the message behind her song, Rexha stated, “I just wanted to create something people could relate to. The drama in it captures those moments where you feel like all the eyes are on you, whether good or bad. It’s embracing that and making something so empowering about it.” Just as Britney tried to do time and time again before they turned her into America’s fucked-up voodoo doll. Hopefully, the same won’t happen to Rexha, though, the way this year has been going for her (see: the hate crime in Munich incident), it would be understandable if she had a full-on Britney-with-the-shaved-head-and-umbrella moment.

    In the meantime though, Rexha’s fans would probably like to believe she’ll do as she does at the end of “I’m The Drama” and simply spray a bottle of champagne among the crowd to celebrate her many instances of overcoming adversity in a business that still seeks to chew women up and spit them out like more grist for the mill.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Blake Lively Shows Where Her Millennial-Oriented Loyalties Are By Donning A Signature Britney Dress, Britney Swings Her Dick in Response

    Blake Lively Shows Where Her Millennial-Oriented Loyalties Are By Donning A Signature Britney Dress, Britney Swings Her Dick in Response

    Even if Ryan Reynolds insisted upon wielding NSYNC’s “Bye Bye Bye” (and its signature choreo) as the song for the opening scene of Deadpool and Wolverine, Blake Lively (a.k.a. Mrs. Reynolds) has seen fit to remind people that her millennial-oriented loyalties are forever with Britney Spears. Even when she “lightly” shades Lively for pulling an Ambular in Clueless by “going through her laundry.” Indeed, lately, and at their own peril, millennial women have taken a shine to paying major homage to one, Miss Spears.

    It started earlier this summer with Halsey releasing what amounted to a bad cover version of Spears’ 2000 hit, “Lucky.” Although Halsey assured fans that she, of course, got Spears’ permission to use the song and “pay homage” to it with an accompanying video, Spears posted a rather unfavorable take on the single by saying, “For obvious reasons I’m very upset about the Halsey video. I feel harassed, violated and bullied. I didn’t know an artist like her and someone I looked up to and admired would illustrate me in such an ignorant way by tailoring me as a superficial pop star with no heart or concern at all. I have my own health problems which is why I took down my IG account yesterday. I will definitely be putting it back up to show I CARE. I’m speaking with my lawyers today to see what can be done on this matter. It feels illegal and downright cruel.”

    Soon after, the post was deleted and replaced by Spears’ insistence that the condemnation was merely “fake news !!! That was not me on my phone !!! I love Halsey and that’s why I deleted it 🌹 !!!” Whether or not Spears’ phone was possessed by another person or another one of Spears’ personalities is at one’s discretion. However, based on this other recent “emotional flare-up” on Spears’ part, it appears as though she may very well have been the true culprit behind the Halsey shade. This based on the fact that, after Blake Lively showed up to the August 6th premiere of It Ends With Us wearing the Versace butterfly dress that Spears famously sported in 2002, Spears felt obliged to respond “indirectly” by, days later, posting a video of herself wearing a riff on the same dress (albeit shorter and differently cut) with the caption, “UPDATED VERSION OF MY 2002 VERSACE DRESS 👗 !!! I LIKE IT WAY BETTER. SHOWS MY LEGS !!! 💅🏻👗🌷🌷.” She then included the post-script, “I’m no @blakelively but I like it.”

    Of course, while some might try to insist Spears meant “no shade,” her dick-swinging behavior of late was on-brand for her post-conservatorship, no-fucks-given vibe. (Besides that, why choose to make mention of the same dress and assert her dominance over it at the exact moment after Lively chose to wear it?) In point of fact, Spears has come a long way from being self-effacing and unwilling to take credit for all that she’s done for and contributed to music and pop culture, suddenly suffering no fools when it comes to “tributes.” Regardless of how effusive they might be. This even includes Lively’s gushing Instagram story post directed at Spears upon donning the dress: “Today’s mood. The ultimate queen who made us all want to sparkle and write and share our stories. Britney, us millennials all have a story of a moment, or of years that you made us want to shine and inspire awe, with strength, and joy and immensely hard work. Thank you for your example and your contribution to women telling their stories. So excited about your biopic and all you have to come.” Naturally, this sort of “love letter” to another “stronger than yesterday” woman is befitting of somebody who is known, apparently, as a “crown straightener” a.k.a. “a woman going around straightening all the women’s crowns around her.”

    At the premiere itself, Lively continued to rave, “It’s Britney’s actual dress. It should be in the Smithsonian or the Met [instead, it was available via Tab Vintage]. But it’s on me. I feel so lucky.” Ah, that word—which also serves as the song title that Halsey recently “borrowed.” So yes, it would appear that the fellow millennial women showing Spears so much love of late aren’t exactly getting it in return in quite the same maudlin way, with Lively also noting at the premiere, “This dress meant so much to me because of what she meant to me.” Maybe, in this case, Spears was offended by use of the past tense, with Lively continuing, “Like, she was just somebody who represented, like, love and beauty and youth and hard work and determination and strength, and she was in touch with her sexuality and her delicacy and she just sort of represented it all.” To which one must ask: then what does she represent in the present tense?

    During what some would like to call her “heyday” (a generally off-putting word used to signify that one’s prime is over), Spears wore the dress to Versace’s presentation of the 2003 women’s spring/summer collection in October of 2002, shortly after her very public breakup with Justin Timberlake—the one that, as she described it, turned her from a pop princess into a “harlot who’d broken the heart of America’s golden boy.” This stated in her memoir The Woman In Me. A book that also takes pause to mention what the Versace butterfly dress and the trip to Milan that year meant to her, with Spears stating, “That trip invigorated me—it reminded me that there was still fun to be had in the world. That party was really the first thing I did to put myself out there after the breakup with Justin—on my own, innocent.” A far cry from her declaration of being “not that innocent” in 2000. In any case, perhaps Lively choosing to home in on that particular aspect of her sartorial iconography felt, somehow, like an invasion of what the form-fitting gown signified to her: a newfound liberty—emerging from a chrysalis after being imprisoned in bubblegum pop/Timberlake land.

    At the It Ends With Us premiere, Lively also mentioned, “When this dress was available I was like, ‘Yes, I need it!’ I’ve had it for almost a year now and I’ve been saving it for this.” Not just because one of Spears’ songs appears on the soundtrack, but because it does have a certain “floral-themed” quality to it that correlates with Lively’s flower shop-owning character, Lily Bloom. And while a few might question the relevance of the movie using Spears’ 2003 single, “Everytime,” during the ending credits of the film (performed, instead, by Ethel Cain), any millennial girl can tell you that the song was aimed at Timberlake. At the time when their relationship reigned supreme in the hearts and minds of America, the aftermath of that relationship proved just how, that’s right, toxic (to name another Britney single) the dynamic actually was. Much the same as Lily and Ryle’s (Justin Baldoni) in the movie. Or Lively and Justin Baldoni’s behind the scenes of making it.

    In any event, like Halsey, Lively wasn’t deterred from continuing to express her love for Spears even after the “misunderstanding,” “hearting” Spears’ post about the updated version of her dress (the caption, in typical Spears style, was later deleted). A supportive move (in the wake of having cold water dumped on her enthusiasm) that was almost as uncaring and unbothered as Halsey saying, after Spears (or her “handler”) publicly declaring her disdain for “Lucky” 2.0, “I love Britney!!!! I always have and always will[,] you were the first person who ever made me realize what it means to feel inspired. And you continue to inspire me every day.”

    Because, no matter what Spears tries to do to deter her original millennial fanbase, there is, evidently, no behavior she can engage in that would ever turn them away from her often uncouth responses to their expressions of love. Besides, when you’ve got a territorial dick to swing, you’ve got to swing it.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Like Everything That “Pays Homage” to 00s Pop Culture, Halsey’s “Lucky” Is A Pale, Unsatisfying Imitation

    Like Everything That “Pays Homage” to 00s Pop Culture, Halsey’s “Lucky” Is A Pale, Unsatisfying Imitation

    The rollout of Halsey’s “new era” has been almost as rocky as Katy Perry’s. While the latter tried to pass off the Dr. Luke-produced “Woman’s World” as a feminist anthem, Halsey, instead, opted to pass off the second single from her as-of-yet-untitled fifth album, “Lucky,” as an “homage” to Britney Spears, better known as the Queen of the 2000s. And while Halsey was certain to announce of recreating the song/video for Spears’ 2000 hit, “I wouldn’t even dream of doing it without her blessing!,” Spears’ response felt more that slightly “off” if that was truly the case.

    Even so, Spears later updated her stance on the song after deleting the original post, commenting, “Fake news !!! That was not me on my phone !!! I love Halsey and that’s why I deleted it 🌹 !!!” This reply, in all honesty, sounded much more in line with her usual manner of speaking, complete with an emoji usage and lots of exclamation points. In contrast, the original statement came across as too composed and clinical to be the true mark of Spears, with whoever “stole” her phone writing, “For obvious reasons I’m very upset about the Halsey video. I feel harassed, violated and bullied. I didn’t know an artist like her and someone I looked up to and admired would illustrate me in such an ignorant way by tailoring me as a superficial pop star with no heart or concern at all. I have my own health problems which is why I took down my IG account yesterday. I will definitely be putting it back up to show I CARE. I’m speaking with my lawyers today to see what can be done on this matter. It feels illegal and downright cruel.” Rather than sounding like “authentic” Spears, it has the mark of an AI-generated response based on some of her previous soundbites (like when she said during the Piece of Me residency in undercutting reference to her conservatorship, “It feels kind of illegal doing this with this mic in my hand right now, it feels so weird”). But whether Spears was in some way behind the originally expressed sentiment or not, the knee-jerk reaction of contempt is not without its merit. For, so often, attempts at homage not only tend to fall flat, but come across as rather insulting (like Kelly Osbourne covering Madonna’s “Papa Don’t Preach” back in 2002 or Tina Fey sanctioning the musical-movie version of Mean Girls in 2024).

    From the moment the video opens on a child version of Halsey outside a home of, let’s say, modest appearance, and the 00s-inspired pink font spelling out “Lucky” with a star around the “L” tops it off, it’s obvious that this is going to be uncomfortable to watch. Worse still, as though to play up the “inferior artist imitating a greater one” angle, Halsey tapped Gia Coppola to direct the video. “Child Halsey” then runs to get into a car as the opening line, “I am so lucky” plays. Of course, it’s tinged with a sardonic bent, for there’s nothing that lucky about being relentlessly scrutinized. Something that Britney actually knows much more about than most pop stars, Halsey included. After all, it was because of her being subjected to so many egregious privacy violations in the 00s that a law was passed in California in 2009 that made it “a crime to take and sell unauthorized photos of celebrities in ‘personal or familial activity.’” Few other celebrities can lay claim to paving such a path for basic human rights for celebrities. Obviously, all it cost Britney was her mental health. Indeed, Spears was diagnosed as being bipolar (just as Halsey was) in 2008 and has stated of the condition, “I have always been kind of shy, since I was a little girl. It’s who I am to be modest, so I really can’t help it. I turn into this different person…seriously, bipolar disorder.” The “different person” she turns into for the stage was always difficult to reconcile with the shy girl from the South. And maybe it was the less shy version of herself that lashed out in response to Halsey’s rendering of “Lucky.” A version that tries to take the specific pain of Spears and make it her own.

    And as this version of Halsey’s childhood unfolds, we see a cold, distant father walk into the house while his daughter watches TV—the two scarcely acknowledge one another as the lyric, “Did it all to be included, my self-loathing so deep-rooted” plays in the background. After being ignored (the ultimate parental sin, as confirmed by Allison Reynolds [Ally Sheedy] in The Breakfast Club), she retreats into her poster-filled room. The posters, of course, are of Halsey, styled in Spears-circa-the-00s looks. The girl then puts a load of what is now referred to as “Euphoria makeup” on (even though Euphoria takes its makeup aesthetic from the 2000s), mimicking dance moves that are decidedly pulled from a Spears video (either that, or Madonna’s “Vogue”). The camera then focuses in on one of the Halsey posters so that the Halsey “inside” of it (wearing a sheer, crystal-embellished bodysuit designed to remind viewers of the “Toxic” video) can come to life and parrot the original “Lucky” chorus, switching it up to use the first person point of view instead: “But I’m so lucky, I’m a star/And I cry, cry, cry in my lonely heart, thinkin, ‘If there’s nothin’ missin’ in my life/Then why do these tears come at night?’” Well, maybe they come now because of the ostensible rejection Spears displayed toward this song.

    A crushing blow, considering that Halsey recently stated during a promotional interview for Maxxxine that the defining star for her growing up was “Britney Spears, all day. I didn’t think anyone could be, like, more of a star. I actually don’t know that I even knew at that—I was like six—because I was also born in 1994… But I was, like, I didn’t know that I knew she was a person outside of the CD. I thought she lived in there. And every time I played it, she had to sing.” A “childlike” belief (replicated in making Halsey come to life inside the abovementioned poster) that’s eerily telling of how much Spears was viewed as nothing more than a trained monkey “created” solely to amuse the masses. To dance and sing like a puppet. It was no wonder she started to let loose as the mid-00s progressed, shedding the “good girl” image she was saddled with from the outset of her career. This period is alluded to in Halsey’s video as well, during a moment when she can be seen drunkenly laughing in a nightclub setting before appearing on a red carpet (looking more like 00s-era P!nk than Spears) for “TGI” (the fake music news network modeled after the MTV logo).

    In the next few scenes, the homage front starts to get even messier as Halsey tries to jam-pack a hodgepodge of Britney-in-the-00s-related images into the narrative. This includes getting out of a car and being swarmed by paparazzi, wearing a basketball jersey in the recording studio, being miserable in her fancy house—and this is where the nod to “Everytime” comes in. Because, for whatever reason, Simon Rex is there to play her abusive boyfriend. An actor choice on par with Stephen Dorff playing Britney’s abusive boyfriend in the “Everytime” video (which owes its indelible look to direction by David LaChapelle). And, to play up the notion that Halsey, like Britney, got her poor taste in men as a result of the first man she had as an example—her father—Coppola intercuts the scene of Halsey and Rex arguing (as bombastically as Spears and Dorff) with Halsey and her father arguing when she was a child. A moment befitting the lyric, “Inner child that’s unrecruited, truth is/I’m not suited for it.” Indeed, perhaps only pursued “it” a.k.a. fame “just to be liked by strangers that she met online.”

    This idea of not being built for such a machine has also been emphasized by Spears, who stated, “I’m not really made for this industry.” And yes, anyone who is especially sensitive should avoid what Lady Gaga calls “The Fame” at all costs. Not that Spears had too much of a choice once her parents pushed her down the path for their own selfish, money-grubbing motives. A path that led to endless scrutiny, particularly of Spears’ body. To that point, another lyrical moment on Halsey’s “Lucky” reeks of Britney singing, “I’m Mrs. She’s Too Big Now She’s Too Thin” during “Piece of Me,” with Halsey phrasing it as, “And why she losin’ so much weight?/I heard it’s from the drugs she ate.”

    There’s another somewhat awkward allusion to Britney when Halsey also mentions, “I shaved my head four times because I wanted to/And then I did it one more time ’cause I got sick,” with everyone knowing that Britney’s 2007 head shaving is what led her down an abyssal spiral from which she couldn’t return. Especially with regard to that moment being leveraged as a prime example of her “madness,” therefore the need for her to be placed under a conservatorship. As for referencing the original “Lucky” video itself, the only instance of that is in the idea that there are two Halseys—the younger one and the famous one, with the latter watching over the former. The two only meet at the end of the video, when Famous Halsey (dressed, incidentally, like Kate Hudson in Almost Famous, another piece of pop culture from 2000) sits next to Young Halsey on a swing set. Alas, in the very final scene, Coppola returns to the swing set with Famous Halsey sitting all alone, the child version of herself having disappeared. An obvious metaphor for how all innocence is stamped out of you once you’ve been emotionally bulldozed for long enough.

    And it seems that’s the case for Halsey, who recently wrote of her “return” to music, “It’s hard to want to engage in a space that is completely devoid of any kindness, sympathy, patience; or to be honest human decency [oxymoron]. Especially after years of hiding from the interactions for fear that this EXACT thing would happen. I don’t know man. I almost lost my life. I am not gonna do anything that doesn’t make me happy anymore. I can’t spiritually afford it.” Of course, like Doja Cat threatening to quit music back in 2022, it’s unlikely that Halsey will really stop making music. Unlike Spears, who genuinely seems committed to preserving what’s left of her sanity by avoiding the music business like the plague.

    As for Halsey’s attempt at doing “Lucky” justice, let’s just say that, on “Without Me” (a video during which Halsey also has an abusive relationship displayed by intense arguing [with a G-Eazy lookalike, of course]), the singer incorporates a lyric from Justin Timberlake’s “Cry Me A River.” Specifically, “You don’t have to say just what you did/I already know/I had to go and find out from them.” That Halsey chooses to recreate the most affronting moment from the single vis-à-vis Timberlake’s false narrative about how Spears cheated on him makes her, frankly, unworthy of covering any Brit song. No matter how much she’s touted herself as a fan.

    And so, while Halsey wanted to make a “moving” track/“pay homage” to Britney and the 2000s, it’s hard to feel much for it when all it does is take the musical backing of Des’ree’s “You Gotta Be” (though some insist Monica’s “Angel of Mine”) and pairs it with the chorus of “Lucky.” Leaving little of Halsey to be found.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Girls5eva Season 3 Explores the Struggle Between the Group’s Bid For Worldwide Fame and Simply Settling for the “Medium Time” Instead of the Big Time

    Girls5eva Season 3 Explores the Struggle Between the Group’s Bid For Worldwide Fame and Simply Settling for the “Medium Time” Instead of the Big Time

    If Girls5eva is seeking to achieve anything (apart from de-glamorizing late 90s/early 00s pop) in season three, it’s that, sometimes, “settling” is for the best. But this is a revelation that does not arrive until the sixth and final episode, titled “New York” (indeed, all the episodes are named after the cities the band is touring in). In the wake of the series’ transition to Netflix, the third season has only six episodes where the previous two consisted of eight. Whether that bodes well or not remains to be seen, but, either way, Girls5eva has been set up with a cliffhanger that leads one to believe season four is secured. Even though Netflix is known to pull the plug arbitrarily (*cough cough* GLOW). 

    One can only hope that isn’t the case here, with much more material to be mined as Dawn Solano (Sara Bareilles), Wickie Roy (Renée Elise Goldsberry), Summer Dutkowsky (Busy Philipps) and Gloria McManus (Paula Pell) finally become comfortable with the idea of the “medium time.” That “sweet spot” between being total nobodies and being too famous to engage in everyday activities. 

    It’s only after a combination of getting that advice from medium-time “star” Richard Kind and seeing how imprisoned the Taylor Swift-level famous Gray Holland (Thomas Doherty, perhaps best known for playing sexually fluid Max Wolfe on the Gossip Girl reboot) is that the group can come to terms with their so-called mediocrity. In fact, the majority of the season explores a certain grappling with this reality. One that reaches a crescendo when Wickie a.k.a. Lesley Wiggens returns to her hometown of Clarksville, Maryland with the rest of the group in tow (plus their assistant/driver, Percy [John Lutz, of 30 Rock notoriety], the victim of a Punk’d-style prank reality show that Girls5eva was on in the 2000s, and who they feel guilty enough about humiliating to want to give him a “fresh start” in life). For, as far as any of the other band members knew, Wickie lived a “hardscrabble” life before becoming famous. 

    Turns out, what she meant by that is that she would play really hard games of Scrabble with her upper middle class parents. To be sure, the entire “Clarksville” episode is all about the curse of being born into an upper middle class family in terms of how it ruins one’s chances of becoming a famous icon. After all, it’s not enough of a sob story to make for a compelling biopic later on, nor is it in the nepo baby category of privilege that somehow makes a person more “interesting.” 

    Gloria definitely agrees with that sentiment upon realizing that Wickie grew up in a privileged, loving environment as she snaps, “You’re no Shania Twain. Look it up, she’s a hero.” Wickie shrugs, “All I did was create a more intriguing narrative…without technically lying.” And it’s true, Wickie has an answer for every lie her bandmates try to throw back in her face. Later, at the dinner table, Dawn asks Mr. and Mrs. Wiggens (played by Ron Canada and Adriane Lenox, respectively) if they always bail Wickie out when she gets herself in a financial bind. They confirm that, yes, they do—because she’s their daughter. Mr. Wiggens then tells Wickie, “You know we always support you.” She balks, “Maybe that’s the problem.” Confused, he asks, “What is?” Wickie replies, “All of this…wonderful support.” She continues, “You coddled me! Why couldn’t you be one of those sick pageant parents that live your shattered dreams through me?” She then brings up how they even let her quit tap dancing lessons so that now she’s just “pretty good.” Another mark of averageness under her belt. She concludes her speech by screaming, “I wish I’d never been born upper middle class!”

    The reconciliation with being average/par/middle-of-the-road is a running motif throughout the season. And it’s only when the group is allowed to “revert to the past,” so to speak, that they can fully understand why they’re still so hellbent on pursuing global superstardom in the present. This moment for “time travel” to the height of their heyday comes in episode four, “Orlando.” Enlisted by a millennial with money to burn (such a rare breed) named Taffy England (Catherine Cohen) for a private performance at her birthday party, the quartet is flown out on a private jet to attend the event. One in which they quickly find they aren’t the only performers. Turns out, Taffy’s birthday theme is bringing all the posters from her teen girl bedroom to life. Thus, cameos by Rebecca Lobo, a real Monet painting, “Zeke from California High,” “Pixie Jones” (a Jewel-like folk singer played by Ingrid Michaelson) and “Torque” (Loic Mabanza), a Tyrese-like model/actor who used to “date” Wickie as a PR maneuver. 

    As Dawn starts to realize how much Girls5eva had an impact on Taffy’s “teen girl mind,” she starts to feel even less enthusiastic about this performance, even bringing up one of her more toxic 00s memories when Taffy mentions first seeing them live at the Disney Summer Spectacular “hosted by Jar Jar Binks and Bill Cosby.” Dawn cringes at the thought, then tells Taffy, “Fun memory. ‘Cause backstage Fred Durst and Kid Rock realized you could fill Super Soakers with liquid shit.” Taffy is appropriately appalled before Gloria leads her away to tell her that her “vibe sucks” and that she has to keep her mouth shut in order to do this. 

    Dawn grudgingly agrees, but when Taffy then requests that they play “Sweet’n Low Daddy” from the Heartbreakers Soundtrack (a very specific film reference), it’s more than Dawn can bear. Especially in her fragile pregnant state—the one that asks her if she would want her own daughter growing up listening to the music that she used to churn out. 

    “Our old music was pretty toxic,” Dawn says from the outset of their private plane ride. And yet, she tells herself she’s willing to do it for the sake of their “real art.” And that, if Bob Dylan can sell out for Victoria’s Secret, she can do it for this private, one-off thirty-thousand-dollar gig. Because, unlike most people (millennials and Gen Z alike), Dawn declares, “I’m sorry I’m not nostalgic for the 2000s… I’m just not interested in looking back.” Yet, though she claims the reason she doesn’t want to look back is because of how toxic and (even more) misogynistic the culture was at that time, part of the truth is that it’s also painful to remember how famous and “in their prime” they once were. Two qualities that helped to make the Dawn of that era what she calls “fearless.” 

    Indeed, there was certainly no fear about offending anyone with the majority of the rhetoric. Case in point, a flashback to another song of Girls5eva’s from the period, “Your Wife Sux.” A single that Dawn also believes infected Taffy’s mind when she describes how she secured her sugar daddy. At one point, Dawn laments to Gloria, “Our old shitty songs wormed their way into her squishy teen brain and made her want this.” Gloria scoffs, “We didn’t invent the idea of a sugar daddy. Women have always traded puss for boots.” And it’s true, Taffy made her romantic decision all on her own, finally schooling Dawn on why she wanted Girls5eva to perform after asking her why she’s “happy to sit this one out” and let Taffy go onstage in her place. 

    Dawn explains, “I’m not really a big fan of our early stuff. I don’t love the messages. And I’d feel bad if they became like a life road map for some impressionable young girls.” Taffy demands, “Are you talking about me?” Dawn breaks down, “Taffy, I’m so sorry. I feel terrible that I made you.” Looking at Dawn like she’s off her meds, Taffy responds, “You think you made me? You wanna know why Girls5eva is here?” Feebly, Dawn suggests, “Because we’re your heroes?” “No. Because you made me feel like I felt back when I had your poster on my wall. Back before I found out my dad had a second family and I lit all those fires and my mom got blamed and we lost the apartment and I had to drop out of school and dig graves behind the vet’s office.” Feeling humbled, Dawn just awkwardly replies, “Okay.” But Taffy isn’t done yet. “That’s what people love about nostalgia, dumb-dumb. Makes them feel like they did when life was easy, you know?… So get over yourself, and let me enjoy my party.” Dawn concedes, wishing her a happy birthday. Except Taffy has just one more point to make: “You’re doing the same thing, by the way.” “Excuse me?” Dawn inquires with offense in her tone. “Come on. Back with your girl group from twenty years ago. You think you’re too good for ‘Sweet’n Low Daddy’ or ‘I’m A Guy’s Girl (Girls Are Crazy)’? But, there’s something you miss about it too.” 

    With this assessment slapped down, Dawn can’t deny that there’s truth in what Taffy says. That she misses the glory of such a brightly-burning spotlight, even if the material that secured it was dubious then and certainly doesn’t stand the test of time now. Musing about that period to Rebecca Lobo, she bemoans, “I didn’t know it’d all be gone in a matter of months. But life happens. You know, you grow up, nobody thinks you’re special anymore.” Then, looking at the image of herself from the 00s (that’s actually her current image with a different hairstyle) on Taffy’s poster, Dawn admits, “I miss her. And when I’m onstage, I feel like her again.” So it is that she joins Taffy and the others for an enthusiastic rendition of “Sweet’n Low Daddy.” Principles be damned!

    Those principles are no longer put into question, though, when Girls5eva settles for the medium time because they truly love what they do. And yes, settling for the medium time is playing to an empty Radio City Music Hall on Thanksgiving, but not needing to worry about the fact that no one real bought tickets thanks to Summer gaming the system with a bot army that prevents them from being sued by the venue for failure to draw in enough ticket buyers. As Dawn looks out to pretty much no one, she sings a new song inspired by her recent revelation, featuring the lyrics, “The middle is the riddle of it all” and “The middle time is just fine.” The caveat being, “…for now.”

    Those two words are what come into play when one of Wickie’s old songs from Yesternights gets played on The Crown (or rather, the version of The Crown that exists in the Girls5eva universe). Assuring her that coveted Kate Bush-being-played-on-Stranger Things resuscitation. And when Nance Trace (Vanessa Williams) actually calls Wickie to offer her a deal to do a song for a “female Garfield movie,” Wickie insists she’s still a package deal. When Dawn urgently reminds her that they were supposed to be happy with the medium time, the episode ends just as Wickie is about to give her answer. 

    Obviously, this cliffhanger reiterates the central dilemma of the season: does one settle for what they can get and cease risking constant humiliation or does one keep chasing the dream? Knowing Girls5eva, it will continue to be the latter in season four.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • The Most Glaring Issue About Madame Web Is Actually Its Timeline Faux Pas With Britney Spears’ “Toxic” and Mis-Teeq’s “Scandalous”

    The Most Glaring Issue About Madame Web Is Actually Its Timeline Faux Pas With Britney Spears’ “Toxic” and Mis-Teeq’s “Scandalous”

    Like any superhero movie pushing women as its leads, Madame Web suffered a backlash that was almost strangely proportionate to Morbius—which was actually far worse. The Marvels, too, was panned, along with She-Hulk, in a pattern that suggests when women do “badly,” male fanboys are ready to pounce in such a way so as to ensure that studios are amply aware of it. And oh, how Sony became aware of it, scrapping any future plans to build a franchise out of Madame Web once the box office receipts were in. But what’s most unforgivable about Madame Web isn’t its plotline or even its more than occasionally cheesy dialogue (often rampant with use of ADR). No, instead, it’s certain musical details in particular that will gnaw at anyone versed in both their 00s and Britney history.

    First in line on the offending front is the fact that “Toxic,” a single released in January of 2004 is being played when we’re still supposed to be in 2003. And it’s not even like it’s the winter of 2003, well after Spears’ fourth album, In the Zone, was released in mid-November. This can be gleaned by the fact that Cassandra (a rather too on-the-nose name choice for someone who can see into the future) Webb, played by Dakota Johnson, attends a barbeque in some fairly late summer-y clothing (being a Jessica Jones type thanks to S. J. Clarkson’s work in that universe, she’s bound to wear a jacket during any season). In truth, the entire cast dresses in a late summer/early fall manner, so it’s safe to say this is well before “Toxic” or even In the Zone could have conceivably been released.

    Another giveaway that we’re still in summer of ’03 territory is the set design of a particular scene that chooses to very deliberately spotlight a looming poster of Beyoncé’s debut album, Dangerously in Love, which only would have been that loud and proud in June of ‘03 (what with New York constantly turning over its ad space), many months before In the Zone came out, not to mention “Toxic” itself, which wouldn’t be released to radio as a single until January of ‘04. Maybe December, if someone wants to truly believe in how “ahead of the curve” New York is. But since we’re clearly somewhere in the summer of ‘03, this little detail just doesn’t quite jive (to use a word that Britney’s erstwhile record label named itself after). This seems to be happening with, dare one say, slight regularity as the 00s slip evermore into the “period piece” category. Saltburn, too, was guilty of such inattention to detail about 2007 in particular, yet it was perhaps more easily forgiven because it ended up being so beloved (in no small part thanks to Sophie Ellis-Bextor’s “Murder on the Dance Floor”). 

    As for Madame Web being oddly specific about wanting to set its stage in 2003 (and in case one isn’t immediately sure it’s 2003 based on the quickly-flashed title card, Cassie is shown driving past a Blockbuster in her ambulance), director and co-writer S. J. Clarkson’s reasoning could be twofold: 1) she wanted to start the movie during a flashback to 1973 and then only flashforward thirty years to reveal present-day Cassandra and 2) 2003 is sort of that “sweet spot,” technology-wise. A time when things were advanced enough with phones and computers (hell, Britney was already singing love songs centered on e-mails in 1998, when “E-Mail My Heart” was recorded), but not so advanced that your every move could be tracked, and your face instantly recognized on any CCTV camera.

    This, obviously, is why the extremely lame villain of the narrative, Ezekiel Sims (Tahar Rahim), is obsessed with some “cutting-edge” technology that only the NSA (on especially high alert at that time in the wake of 9/11) has access to. Enough to seduce one of its agents and steal her top-secret access to this “special tech” that would become garden-variety in most people’s phones after 2007. Alas, since we’re still in the “early days” of facial recognition, Ezekiel is sure to include (quite expositorily) in his pillow talk, “But as the years pass, there have been technological advances. New ways to find people if you know their faces [which he does because he has nightly visions of the three Spider-Women who will kill him]. The kind of technology I’ve heard the National Security Agency has been pursuing.”

    Once he gets the woman’s security access after poisoning her, he passes the technology off to his “employee,” Amaria (Zosia Mamet, seeming to enjoy roles where she works for dubious people if The Flight Attendant is another indication), who hacks into “the system” to wait for a hit on one or all of these faces: Mattie (Celeste O’Connor), Anya (Isabela Merced) and Julia (Sydney Sweeney). With regard to Sweeney once again going the Euphoria route by playing a teen girl, it bears noting that, at twenty-six, she isn’t all that much younger than “thirty-year-old” Cassandra (Johnson’s actual age is thirty-four). Meanwhile, O’Connor is twenty-five and Merced is twenty-two. Yet it’s Sweeney who the costume designers seem to go out of their way to dress in some interpretation of an 00s teen girl. This tends to mean a lot of Britney looks, including overalls at one point and then, for the majority of the movie, Sweeney’s own riff on a “…Baby One More Time” schoolgirl outfit.

    Relying on Cassie and her premonitions after they’re attacked on the train by Ezekiel, the man they’ll keep referring to as “ceiling guy,” the “teens” trust her enough to let her lead them into some secluded woods where no one can track them, technologically anyway. Afterward, Cassie is foolish enough to tell a trio of teen girls to “stay put” (as if), leaving them to go do some more “research” on who this “ceiling guy” is by returning to her apartment and going through her mother’s old journals from 1973. As she conveniently unearths the valuable information that will tell her who Ezekiel is, the trio grows bored and hungry enough to abandon the woods in favor of a diner off the highway. It’s during this scene that Mis-Teeq’s “Scandalous” starts playing. Which would be passable (since it did exist in 2003), one supposes, were it not for the fact that the director then makes it very clear that the song is playing diegetically. Heard by everyone at the diner as they walk in to the tune of “Scandalous” then sounding over the speakers. The same goes for Spears’ “Toxic,” with Mattie even announcing, “I love this song.”

    Back in the woods, Cassie returns to find an empty clearing followed by a vision wherein a key part of it is “Toxic” providing the soundtrack as the girls are attacked by “ceiling guy” at the diner they’ve absconded to. Cassie gets an immediate sense of foreboding when time “resets” again and the song’s signature opening notes start to play from her stolen taxi as the DJ declares, “This track is going to be huge! Are you in the zone?” Oddly, though—and despite all the radio pushing when it was actually unleashed on the airwaves—Mis-teeq’s “Scandalous” fared about as well on the charts with less radio rotation. This being another track “technically” in existence in 2003 (when it was released on Mis-Teeq’s second [and last] album, Eye Candy), it didn’t start popping off on U.S. radio until April of 2004. Its “revival,” so to speak, after already being played heavily in the UK and Japan during ‘03, made it ripe, apparently, to feature as the theme song for the Catwoman trailer. Now, call one “batty,” but it seems like a bit of an ill-omened idea not only to include a song from a rival comic book studio’s movie, but also a song from a rival comic book studio’s movie that was received so poorly. Indeed, Catwoman has a lower approval rating than Madame Web (eight percent to the latter’s twelve). 

    For an even weirder Britney/Mis-Teeq connection within these universes, Spears’ “Outrageous” was actually slated to be the movie’s theme before the pop star injured her leg while filming the video for it (which had nothing to do with Catwoman, but heavily featured Snoop Dogg). This, for one reason or another, led to Catwoman wielding “Scandalous” instead (which is just another word for “outrageous” anyway). But the only thing “scandalous” about Madame Web is its flagrant disregard for the correct radio airplay timeline. Something that the musical supervisors on the movie perhaps assumed would be the least of the audience’s grievances. And though “Toxic” is a great fit for a story about poison-delivering spider-people, due to this petit faux pas, it’s probably more at home as a string arrangement in Promising Young Woman (you know, the movie Emerald Fennell brought us before her own 00s-era inconsistencies in Saltburn).

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Joining An 00s-Related Trend in Declaring What Amounts to “That Wasn’t Me, That Was Patricia,” Jennifer Lopez Says “J. Lo” Was Just A Larger-Than-Life Character

    Joining An 00s-Related Trend in Declaring What Amounts to “That Wasn’t Me, That Was Patricia,” Jennifer Lopez Says “J. Lo” Was Just A Larger-Than-Life Character

    Like Paris Hilton saying she was “playing a character” (specifically, that of a dumb blonde) during her early to mid-00s heyday, Jennifer Lopez is the latest aughts figure to join that bandwagon. This “revelation” arrives in her documentary, The Greatest Love Story Never Told, a companion piece to This Is Me…Now: A Love Story—itself a companion piece to This Is Me…Now the record. Her announcement of this comes about thirty minutes into the film, as she’s getting her hair styled (complete with clip-on bangs). The man “doing her up” declares, “There’s J. Lo.” Lopez confirms, “There she is.” This assertion that the alter ego of Jennifer Lopez is someone entirely different serves as a launchpad for Lopez to then narrate that the persona of “J. Lo” was a “larger-than-life character” she created to fulfill the ultimate fantasy of who she always wanted to become: rich, famous and powerful. A girl from the Bronx who done good. 

    As director Jason B. Bergh (who also brought us another J. Lo documentary, Halftime, in 2022) then cuts to images and footage of Lopez from that prime era of “J. Lo,” Lopez explains, “J. Lo was created back then, with those first three albums. This Is Me…Then, ‘Jenny From the Block’ and all that. In a way, she’s kind of a larger-than-life character. It was really me becoming who I always dreamt of being.” Alas, once the impossible dream/expectation becomes a reality, there’s a certain existential crisis that tends to occur. One that is unique to the world of celebrity and something that Taylor Swift spoke on in her own “intimate documentary,” Miss Americana. For Swift, the pivotal moment of her existential dread showed up at the 2016 Grammys, with the singer recalling, “I had won Album of the Year at the Grammys for a second time, which I never thought was a possibility. And I remembered thinking afterward, ‘Oh my god, that was all you wanted. Oh god, that was all you wanted, that was all you focused on.’ You get to the mountaintop and you look around and you’re like, ‘Oh god, what now?’” 

    For Lopez, that moment likely came with the success of her sophomore album, titled, what else, J.Lo. Released on January 23, 2001, just three days before her then-latest movie, The Wedding Planner, the chart success of the album was further complemented by the fact that The Wedding Planner would top the box office at the same time. An unprecedented coup for a woman who was very much proving her status as a triple threat: actress, singer, dancer. (Way more impressive than Lauryn Hill boasting, “Rapper-slash-actress/More powerful than two Cleopatras.) Remaining her highest-selling record to date, J.Lo did establish that larger-than-life persona Lopez refers to in Greatest Love Story Never Told. It also provided a jumping-off point for her to create entire lifestyle brands around it (similarly to Paris Hilton, who has presently branched out into cookware), from J.Lo by Jennifer Lopez to Glow by JLo—not to mention the recent establishment of her skincare line, JLo Beauty (because everyone who’s anyone has a skincare and/or makeup line now). What’s more, even before Paris Hilton tapped into her highly profitable The Simple Life “character” (which the world wasn’t officially introduced to until December of 2003), Lopez was setting the trend on what it meant to, let’s say, “become the character you always thought you could be.” The avatar of yourself that would sub in for the less glamorous version. This being part of why it’s rather ironic that one of J.Lo’s most well-known singles was titled “I’m Real.” 

    But, in the end, Lopez appears to want to clarify, there was nothing truly real about “J. Lo” all along. Though, like the portmanteau “Bennifer,” her personal nickname did establish another trend in shortening fellow celebrity names in an equivalent fashion (e.g., J. Law for Jennifer Lawrence). Not to mention Bennifer serving as the genesis for subsequent celebrity couple monikers, including TomKat, Brangelina, Kimye and, more recently, Traylor. Lopez herself even had another couple name with Alexander Rodriguez: J-Rod. (So much for Ben Affleck being a “special” exception for her with Bennifer.) But the artifice of Persona (that’s right, with a capital p) fortified by such names that ultimately function as distancing-from-mere-mortality alter egos seemed, by and by, too much for Lopez to live up to the pressure of. Or so she would have her audience believe in Greatest Love Story Never Told, further expounding, “This Is Me…Now is about truth. And facing the truth of who you really are and embracing that. And the truth is, I’m not the same as I was twenty years ago.” Granted, this isn’t exactly “revelatory,” as few, if any, people stay the same after the passage of two decades, but it is meant to tie into the idea that the construct of “J. Lo” never really existed.

    Just as “Britney, bitch” or Paris “That’s Hot” Hilton never did. These latter two 00s personalities also appeared to suffer the same plight as Lopez when she describes, “I was always very much about show business. Put your best foot forward, don’t let them see when you’re suffering, don’t let them see when you’re hurt… Like, that’s what my life was. But then I realized that I wasn’t being kind of authentic to myself” (emphasis on the Freudian slip choice of words “kind of”—because, in the present climate, “kind of authentic” is better than full-stop inauthentic). The same epiphany eventually descended upon Hilton and Spears (finally “allowed” to be authentically herself after being freed from her oppressive and never-should-have-happened conservatorship). 

    And while some are still calling bullshit on J. Lo’s so-called authenticity with This Is Me…Now (see: The New York Times headline, “Jennifer Lopez and This Is Me…Now: Is She For Real?”), but it can at least be said that perhaps she’s angling closer to (some iteration of) the truth about who she really is. Or, rather, as close to “the truth” that a celebrity who’s been, for so long, larger-than-life can get. Or, as occasional J. Lo nemesis, Madonna, once put it, “I am going through the layers and revealing myself. I am on a journey, an adventure that’s constantly changing shape.” In the erstwhile J. Lo’s case, however, that shape remains consistently curvaceous.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • The “Toxic” Video for a New, Less Glamorous Era: Charli XCX’s “Von Dutch”

    The “Toxic” Video for a New, Less Glamorous Era: Charli XCX’s “Von Dutch”

    Although Charli XCX’s first album, True Romance, wasn’t released until 2013, she has always exuded the sonic and visual aura of being a daughter of the 00s. And there was no more significant “mother” in that decade than Britney Spears, who kicked off the aughts with her iconic “Oops!…I Did It Again” video and album. By 2004, however, Spears seemed determined to one-up herself with the video for “Toxic,” arguably among her most well-known visuals after “…Baby One More Time,”  “Oops!…I Did It Again”  and “I’m A Slave 4 U.” In it, Spears channels Pan Am-era chic in a flight attendant uniform that one would have never seen in the “friendly” skies of the 00s, let alone now. 

    But even more than her 60s-inspired flight attendant ensemble, it was her literal nude look that stood out in the eyes of viewers. As Spears confirmed in an interview (something she seems to have thrown a peace sign up on altogether since the conservatorship ended) from 2016 with Jonathan Ross, it was simply crystals/mini diamonds (or “hand diamonds,” as she called them) glued onto her body and paired with a white G-string. And voilà, immortal look achieved. 

    With the video released at the beginning of 2004, it would eventually serve as a reminder of 00s “polish” and decadence in the years before the 2008 financial crisis. In the months just leading up to it, Spears would release the less polished (visual-wise) video for “Gimme More,” the lead single from 2007’s Blackout. After that, she would unleash the moody, clapback-at-the-critics song, “Piece of Me”—which would become such a signature that she named her Vegas residency in its honor. It is the theme of that particular song which Charli XCX seeks to repurpose on “Von Dutch” (a title in keeping with her 00s reverence). Accordingly, the Torso-directed video commences with XCX being stalked by paparazzi at the airport (Charles de Gaulle, to be exact—because Charli is just so Euro).

    As she walks past the proverbial vultures with her aloofness and sunglasses as a shield, she then whips her shades off, along with her skirt (so she can sport just her underwear and tights underneath), and gets right into the first verse: “It’s okay to just admit that you’re jealous of me/Yeah I heard you talk about me, that’s the word on the street/You’re obsessin’ [that accusation lending the song un certain Mariah flair], just confess it/Put your hands up/It’s obvious I’m your number one.” (This also channeling, incidentally, a lyric Goldfrapp sings on 2005’s, what else, “Number 1”.) 

    From the start, it’s apparent that XCX is much less apologetic than Spears was on “Piece of Me” as she sang with more than a slightly sardonic tinge, “I’m Miss Bad Media Karma/Another day, another drama/Guess I can’t see no harm in workin’ and bein’ a mama.” Charli, rather than inserting semi-apologetic caveats in her lyrics, declares full-stop, “​​I’m just living that life Von Dutch, cult classic, but I still pop/I get money, you get mad because the bank’s shut/Yeah, I know your little secret, put your hands up/It’s so obvious I’m your number one.” In the spirit of another 00s piece of pop culture that has inspired of late, Mean Girls, there are many aspects of “Von Dutch” that mirror the content of Renée Rapp and Megan Thee Stallion’s “Not My Fault.” Wherein the former boasts, “It’s not my fault/You gotta pay what I get for free/It’s not my fault/You’re like, you’re like, you’re like in love with me.” According to Charli, nor is it her fault either. She’s “just livin’ that life, Von dutch, cult classic, but I still pop.” 

    Even when forced to mingle among the hoi polloi at the airport. Because, again, these are not the glamorous days of Britney’s “Toxic” video, during which she plays an international spy who also happens to be on a mission to poison her ex-boyfriend. For Charli, it’s less about the destination and more about the journey as she treats the entire airport and, subsequently, the airplane like her runway. Or, more to the point, as any “TikToker” would if CDG had agreed to shut down the terminal for them so they could dance and mug for the camera to their heart’s content without judgment (not that such a worry has ever stopped an “influencer” from annoying people in the public space before). Not to mention providing an empty plane to “bop around” on before making one’s way out onto the wing to do a jig there as well. And, as though to highlight the differences between 2004 Britney on an airplane and 2024 Charli on one, the latter takes the drink cart she’s pushing and violently shoves it down on the floor without a second thought. A stark contrast to Spears sexily pushing her own champagne-filled cart down the aisle on her airplane to “serve with a smile” that hides her ulterior motives.

    But back to the TikTok video flavor, funnily enough, XCX seems to shade that ilk with the line, “Do that littlе dance, without it, you’d be namelеss.” Something in the tone of the lyrics also giving Amy Winehouse on “Fuck Me Pumps” when she jibes, “Don’t be mad at me, ‘cause you’re pushing thirty/And your old tricks no longer work” (how ahead of her time she was on Gen Z-level ageism…along with Lily Allen on “22”). This all further speaking to how XCX is ready to drench herself in the 00s…much as the rest of the pop culture-obsessed set has done of late. But XCX is additionally bringing more than a dash of her “Tumblr sleaze” into the equation, hence breaking the fourth wall by slamming her head against the camera to mimic the effect of beating the shit out of someone—whoever her collective nemesis is, in this case. 

    She then grabs onto an automatic floor-cleaning machine and holds on for a bit before jumping the turnstile at a boarding gate like it’s merely a subway stop. On the empty plane (an Airbus A380), XCX continues her visceral, “anti-‘Toxic’” performance, pursued by the invisible antagonist she keeps fighting back with bratty (her next album is titled Brat, after all) panache. Or perhaps “anti” isn’t the word so much as “antithesis of.” Because there is nothing rehearsed-feeling or, as mentioned, polished about this the way there was in “Toxic.” This, to reemphasize, echoing the fact that all sense of glamor and being able to put up a veneer of elegance and sophistication has dissipated in our post-Empire world. Indeed, XCX is effectively putting a spotlight on the motif of how fucking shitty it is to travel now compared to 2004 (easier and less dehumanizing that year than now, despite the world coming fresh off 9/11). 

    Elsewhere in the lyrics of the song, XCX takes a page from Olivia Rodrigo branding her ex as a “fame fucker” on “vampire” (since fame, after all, is supposedly accessible to everyone now). Thus, Charli jabs at her haters, “Why you lying? You won’t fuck unless he’s famous.” It’s a long way from Britney touting, “I’m Mrs. Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous (you want a piece of me)/I’m Mrs. Oh My God That Britney’s Shameless (you want a piece of me).” Where Spears was forced to give up those pieces of herself to the public mostly against her will, Charli is of an era wherein everyone is willing and ready to whore it all out for the sake of fame (and hopefully, the added and often correlative bonus of money). Doing it for the hallowed “benefit” of being able to say you’re “famous”—or rather, “viral.” That word so evocative of a disease…which is precisely what fame has become. A bug that everyone wants to catch like corona at a party in 2020 Tuscaloosa. Because if you’re not trying to get famous while the world burns around you, you might not have a chance to enjoy the perks before it’s burned entirely. Thanks, in part, to jumbo jets like the one so prominently featured in XCX’s video (and yes, Charli is no stranger to promoting fossil fuels in her songs [including “Vroom Vroom” and “Speed Drive”] and visuals [e.g., “2999”]).

    It’s hard to put much “Toxic”-level varnish on this bleak human condition of the next generation. Maybe that’s why, by the end, XCX is as triumphant as she is run ragged, coasting along the conveyor belt of the baggage claim with the rest of the damaged, overly jostled goods.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Gen Z Is to Cady Heron as Millennials Are to Regina George, Or: Does Mean Girls 2024 Make Gen Z the New Queen Bee? Hardly.

    Gen Z Is to Cady Heron as Millennials Are to Regina George, Or: Does Mean Girls 2024 Make Gen Z the New Queen Bee? Hardly.

    For those who applaud it, any contempt expressed for the latest iteration of Mean Girls is likely to be met with the ageist rebuke of how it’s probably because you’re a millennial (granted, some millennials might be enough of a traitor to their own birth cohort to lap up this schlock). As in: “Sorry you don’t like it, bitch, but it’s Gen Z’s turn now. You’re just jealous.” The thing is, there’s not anything to be jealous of here, for nothing about this film does much to truly challenge or reinvent the status quo of the original. Which, theoretically, should be the entire point of redoing a film. Especially a film that has been so significant to pop culture. And not just millennial pop culture, but pop culture as a whole. Mean Girls, indeed, has contributed an entire vocabulary and manner of speaking to the collective lexicon. Of course, reinventing the wheel might be the expectation if this was a truly new version. Instead, it is merely a translation of the Broadway musical that kicked off in the fall of 2017, right as another cultural phenomenon was taking shape: the #MeToo movement. 

    This alignment with the repackaging of Mean Girls as something that a new generation could latch onto and relate with seemed timely for the heralding of a new era that not only abhorred flagrant sexual abuse against women, but also anything unpleasant whatsoever. It quickly became clear that a lot of things could be branded as “unpleasant.” Even some of the most formerly minute “linguistic nuances.” This would soon end up extending to any form of “slut-shaming” or “body-shaming.” Granted, Fey was already onto slut-shaming being “over” when she tells the junior class in the original movie,  “You all have got to stop calling each other sluts and whores. It just makes it okay for guys to call you sluts and whores.” (They still seem to think it’s okay, by the way.)

    Having had such “foresight,” Fey was also game to update and tweak a lot of other “problematic” things. From something as innocuous as having Karen say that Gretchen gets diarrhea on a Ferris wheel instead of at a Barnes & Noble (clearly, not relevant enough anymore to a generation that gets any reading advice from “BookTok”) to removing dialogue like, “I don’t hate you because you’re fat. You’re fat because I hate you” to doing away entirely with that plotline about Coach Carr (now played by Jon “Don Draper” Hamm) having sexual relationships with underage girls.

    What Fey has always been super comfortable with (as most people have been), however, is ageist humor (she has plenty of anti-Madonna lines to that effect throughout 30 Rock). For example, rather than Gretchen (Bebe Wood) telling her friends that “fetch” is British slang like she does in 2004, she muses that she thinks she saw it in an “old movie,” “maybe Juno.” Because yes, everything and everyone is currently “old” in Gen Z land, though 2007 (the year of Juno’s release) was seventeen years ago, not seventy. This little dig at “old movies” is tantamount to that moment in 2005’s Monster-in-Law when Viola Fields (Jane Fonda) has to interview a pop star (very clearly modeled after Britney Spears) named Tanya Murphy (Stephanie Turner) for her talk show, Public Intimacy. Finding it difficult to relate to Tanya, Viola briefly brightens when the Britney clone says, “I love watching really old movies. They’re my favorite.” Viola nudges, “Really? Which ones?” Tanya then pulls a “Mean Girls 2024 Gretchen” by replying, “Well, um, Grease and Grease II. Um, Benji, I love Benji. Free Willy, um, Legally Blonde…uh The Little Mermaid.” By the time Tanya says Legally Blonde (four years “old” at the time of Monster-in-Law’s release), that’s about as much as Viola can take before she’s set off (though Tanya blatantly showcasing her lack of knowledge about Roe v. Wade is what, at last, prompts Viola’s physical violence). Angourie Rice, who plays a millennial in Senior Year, ought to have said something in defense of Juno, but here she’s playing the inherently ageist Gen Zer she is. Albeit a “geriatric” one who isn’t quite passing for high school student age. Not the way Rachel McAdams did at twenty-five while filming Mean Girls

    To that point, Lindsay Lohan was seventeen years old during the production and theater release of Mean Girls, while Angourie Rice was twenty-two (now twenty-three upon the movie’s theater release). Those five years make all the difference in lending a bit more, shall we say, authenticity to being a teenager. Mainly because, duh, Lohan was an actual teenager. And yes, 2004 was inarguably the height of her career success. Which is why she clings on to Mean Girls at every opportunity (complete with the Mean Girls x Wal-Mart commercial). Thus, it was no surprise to see her “cameo” by the end of the film, where she takes on the oh so significant role of Mathlete State Championship moderator, given a few notable lines (e.g., “Honey, I don’t know your life”—something that would have landed better coming from Samantha Jones) but largely serving as a reminder of how much better the original Mean Girls was and that the viewer is currently watching a dual-layered helping of, “Oh how the mighty have fallen.”

    While the musical angle is meant to at least faintly set the 2024 film edition apart from the original, it’s clear that Tina Fey, from her schizophrenic viewpoint as a Gen Xer, has trouble toeing the line between post-2017 “sensitivity” and maintaining the stinging tone of what was allowed by 2004 standards. Although Gen Z is known for being “bitchy” and speaking in a manner that echoes the internet-speak amalgam of gay men meets AAVE, any attempt at “biting cuntery” is in no way present at the same level it was in 2004’s Mean Girls. And a large part of that isn’t just because “you can’t say shit anymore,” but also because the meanness of the original Regina George is completely washed out and muted. This compounded by the fact that Reneé Rapp is emblematic of a more “body positive” Regina. In other words, she’s more zaftig than the expected Barbie shape of millennial Regina. Perhaps this is why any acerbic comments on Regina’s part about other people’s looks are noticeably lacking. For example, in the original, Regina tells Cady over the phone, in reference to Gretchen (Lacey Chabert), “Cady, she’s not pretty. I mean, that sounds bad, but whatever.” Regina might say the same of the downgraded looks of the Mean Girls cast as a whole… Let’s just say, gone are the days of the polish and glamor once present in teen movies. And yet, there is still nothing “real” about what’s presented here in Mean Girls 2024. Because, again, it struggles too much with the balancing act of trying to be au courant with the fact that it was created during a time when people (read: millennials) could withstand such patent “meanness.”

    In the climate of now, where bullying is all but a criminal offense resulting in severe punishment, Mean Girls no longer fits in the high school narrative of the present. This is something that the aforementioned Senior Year gets right when Stephanie (Rebel Wilson) returns to high school as thirty-seven-year-old and finds that Gen Z seems to care little about the rules of social hierarchy she knew so well as a teenage millennial. And the rules Regina George’s mom likely knew as well. Alas, Mrs. George becomes a pale imitation of Amy Poehler’s rendering, with Busy Philipps trying her best to make the role “frothy,” even when she warns Regina and co. to enjoy their youth because it will never get any better than it is right now for them (something Gen Z clearly believes based on an obsession with people being “old” that has never been seen to this extent before). The absence of her formerly blatant boob job also seems to be an arbitrary “fix” to the previous standards of beauty that were applauded and upheld in the Mean Girls of 2004 (hell, even the “fat girl” who sees Regina has gained some extra padding on her backside is the first to mock her by shouting in front of everyone, “Watch where you’re going, fat ass!”). 

    To boot, the curse of having to “update” things automatically entails the presence of previously unavailable technology. This, of course, takes away from the bombastic effect of Regina scattering photocopies of the Burn Book pages throughout the entire school, instead placing the book in the entry hallway to be “discovered.” And yes, the fact that the Gen Z Plastics would be using a tactile object such as this is given a one-line explanation by Regina when she asks if they made the book during the week their phones were taken away. Again proving how this “translation” doesn’t hold the same weight (no fat-shaming pun intended) or impact as before. 

    More vexingly still, without the indelible voiceovers from Cady, the movie becomes a hollow shell of itself, and not just because it’s now a musical lacking the punch of, at the very least, some particularly memorable lyrics (and no, “Not My Fault” playing in the credits isn’t much of a prime example of that either). And so, those who remember the gold standard of the original movie will have to settle for conjuring up the voiceovers themselves while watching (e.g., “I know it may look like I’d become a bitch, but that was only because I was acting like a bitch” and “I could hear people getting bored with me. But I couldn’t stop. It just kept coming up like word vomit”). But perhaps Fey felt that the “storytelling device” of  Janis ʻImi’ike (Auliʻi Cravalho)—formerly Janis Ian—and Damian Hubbard (Jaquel Spivey)—formerly just Damian—telling it through what is presumed to be a TikTok video (this, like Senior Year, mirroring a trope established by Easy A) would be enough to both “modernize” the movie (along with Cady being raised by a single mom instead of two married parents) and compensate for its current lack of signature voiceovers.

    Some might point out that there’s simply no room for voiceovers in a musical without making the whole thing too clunky. Which brings one to the question of why a musical version instead of a more legitimate reboot had to be made. Well, obviously, the answer is: money. Knowing that the same financial success of the musical would be secured by an effortless transition to film. One that ageistly promises in the trailer: “Not your mother’s Mean Girls.” Apart from the fact that it doesn’t deliver at all on any form of “raunch” that might be entailed by that tagline, as Zing Tsjeng of The Guardian pointed out, “Your mother’s? Tina Fey’s teen comedy was released nineteen years ago. Unless my mother was a child bride, I’m not sure the marketing department thought this one through.” 

    But of course they did. And what they thought was, “Let’s throw millennials under the bus like Regina and focus our money-making endeavors on a fresher audience.” That fresh audience being totally unschooled in the ways in which Mean Girls is a product of its time. And so, is it really supposed to be “woke” to change the indelible “fugly slut” line to “fugly cow”? As though fat-shaming is more acceptable than slut-shaming (which also occurs when Karen [Avantika] is derided by both Regina and Gretchen for having sex with eleven different “partners”—the implication perhaps being that maybe some of them weren’t boys). And obviously, Regina saying, “I know what homeschool is, I’m not retarded” had to go. The phrase “social suicide” is also apparently out (even though Olivia Rodrigo is happy to reference it in “diary of a homeschooled girl”). In general, all “strong” language has been eradicated. Something that becomes particularly notable in the “standoff” scene between Janis and Cady after the former catches her having a party despite saying she would be out of town. In this manifestation of the fight, gone are the harshly-delivered lines, “You’re a mean girl, Cady. You’re a bitch!”

    Despite its thud-landing delivery, the messaging of Mean Girls remains the same. Or, to quote the original Cady (evidently an honorary Gen Zer with this zen anti-bullying stance), “Making fun of Caroline Krafft wouldn’t stop her from beating me in this contest. Calling somebody else fat won’t make you any skinnier, calling someone stupid doesn’t make you any smarter. And ruining Regina George’s life definitely didn’t make me any happier. All you can do in life is try to solve the problem in front of you.” Alas, Fey doesn’t solve the problem of bridging millennial pop culture into what little there is of Gen Z’s. At the end of Mean Girls 2024, the gist of Cady’s third-act message becomes (as said by Janis): “Even if you don’t like someone, chances are they still want to just coexist. So get off their dick.”

    The thing is, Mean Girls 2024 can’t coexist (at least not on the same level) with Mean Girls. It’s almost like Cady Heron trying to be the new Regina George. That is to say, it just doesn’t work, and ends up backfiring spectacularly (though not from a financial standpoint, which is all that ultimately matters to most). Unfortunately, when Cady tells Damian at the end of 2004’s Mean Girls, “Hey, check it out. Junior Plastics” and then gives the voiceover, “And if any freshmen tried to disturb that peace…well, let’s just say we knew how to take care of it [cue the fantasy of the school bus running them over],” she added, “Just kidding.” And she was. Otherwise the so-called junior Plastics of Mean Girls 2024 wouldn’t be here, disturbing the millennial peace.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • The Grim Fan Fiction Presented by the Mean Girls x Wal-Mart Commercial

    The Grim Fan Fiction Presented by the Mean Girls x Wal-Mart Commercial

    In 2023, Wal-Mart has so “generously” allowed us to catch a glimpse into the lives of where the mean girls from 2004 are now. Not only that, but this version of 2023 ostensibly exists in an alternate realm where the name Karen (and Karen Smith, no less) isn’t something worthy of calling attention to. Not at any point during the extremely lengthy commercial (almost a full two minutes [an “epic” in the realm of advertising], which means Wal-Mart really shelled out for it). Though there were plenty of other “plot points” that attention was called to in terms of assessing where some of the Mean Girls characters have ended up. And, let’s just say it, the assumptions to be made are rather grim. 

    For a start, Cady Heron (Lindsay Lohan) is still hanging out with Gretchen (Lacey Chabert) and Karen (Amanda Seyfried). Are we really to believe that Cady would have remained friends with anyone from The Plastics (particularly since she informs viewers at the end of the movie, “In case you’re wondering, The Plastics broke up”)? And if one person was worth remaining friends with, wouldn’t it have been Regina? If for no other reason than she had a mind of her own. Or, as Damian (Daniel Franzese) said, “She’s the queen bee, the star. Those other two are just her little workers.” Later on in Mean Girls, Cady marvels, “Was I the new queen bee?” It seems that, for the purposes of this Wal-Mart commercial, yes, she is. Even if she’s now a guidance counselor. Arguably one of the bleakest aspects about this flash forward to the mean girls’ future. That, and it seems that Janis Ian (Lizzy Caplan) isn’t friends with her or Damian anymore, having likely moved on to bigger and better things outside of the Chicago area. 

    Perhaps this is why Cady has resorted to a continued friendship with Gretchen and Karen. The latter of whom appears to be doing a “weather report” for no one’s benefit but her own—and yeah, it’s a bit sad that she’s still skulking around the high school to do it. They should have at least shown her doing “weather” for a local channel, and maybe even alluding to the climate change factors that have become unignorable in the years since 2004. Though, somehow, the next scene transition occurs by showing Karen on the big screen of Kevin Gnapoor’s (Rajiv Surendra) living room, even though it would make no sense for Karen to broadcast from North Shore High School if she was a legitimate “weather girl.”

    But that’s not supposed to be the viewer’s focus as the camera whip-pans to Kevin’s son holding a twenty-five-dollar (because of course the price flashes on the screen) Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles RC in his hands (with a Hot Wheels and Barbie box in the background, to boot). After all, it’s so important that Generation Alpha understands the importance of material goods, too. That job has already been done on Gen Z, who, although positioned as “climate-conscious” and “embracing of all sexual and ethnic identifications,” ain’t really none of that based on what one actually sees outside of think pieces concerning said birth cohort. Kevin then half-heartedly tells his son, “Don’t let the haters stop you from doing your thang, Kevin Jr.,” as though he has little will left to believe that himself. And clearly, if Janis isn’t in this scene, it means she dumped his ass along with Cady and Damian’s, too. 

    As for Gretchen, she’s apparently been a young mom since roughly 2007 (if we’re to believe her daughter is sixteen, and Mean Girls came out in 2004, when Gretchen would have been sixteen herself). Not only does she have a high school-age daughter named Amber who seems more Regina than Gretchen, she also has two younger kids as well. All of whom are Asian, though there’s no sign of the Asian husband she presumably married as a result of immersing herself in an Asian clique at the end of Mean Girls (this being a hyper-specific detail for the Wal-Mart commercial to include). 

    Cady’s life also appears rather empty based on her purchases of “Apple AirPods and Legos,” though that doesn’t seem to stop one stalker-y student from wanting to imitate that purchase the way Bethany Byrd (Stefanie Drummond) did with Regina George’s Army pants and flip flops. It’s never really made clear if Cady does have kids of her own (hence, the reason for buying Legos?), but it is clear that she has no compunction about displaying a pathetic mug on her desk that reads, “Best Guidance Counselor Ever.” Perhaps this level of patheticness is her karma for calling Ms. Norbury (Tina Fey) a “sad old drug pusher” back when she was a student instead of a “teacher.” And maybe her additional karma for all that high school fuckery was not ending up with Aaron Samuels (Jonathan Bennett), who is nowhere to be found…perhaps because the real-life Aaron Samuels turned out to be gay (which is why he was more willing to appear as that character in Ariana Grande’s “thank u, next” video). 

    Nonetheless, Cady does her best to maintain “plucky” narrations as she remarks, “Even as the guidance counselor, I was still getting schooled.” Yes, by the Gen Z tits who are even more asshole-ish than millennials were (this despite the former’s reputation for “tolerance”). So while Gretchen appears to have an absentee Asian husband as she lives out her tragic lawnmower mom life, Cady is working for a middling wage at the same high school she attended twenty years ago. Maybe the only person with a more depressing fate is Damian, who, for whatever reason, is working the projector for the Winter Talent Show. 

    Possibly the one thing that could be more heinous is if Karen ended up marrying her “first cousin,” Seth Mosakowski, and having inbred, even dumber children with him. In any case, there’s obviously a reason why Regina George is no longer consorting with any of these “losers.” Because, evidently, she didn’t peak in high school as expected…the way all the others appear to have done just that. One would instead like to believe that she and Janis have finally consummated their long overdue lesbian relationship and are proud owners of a kinky sex shop that also sells lacrosse gear (which itself can double as sex toys) somewhere in L.A.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Gen Zers Think Millennials Are Cringe, But Still Want to Emulate Them in the Mean Girls Commercial

    Gen Zers Think Millennials Are Cringe, But Still Want to Emulate Them in the Mean Girls Commercial

    Apart from being one of the most overt pieces of capitalist propaganda to wield pop culture in recent memory, the Mean Girls x Wal-Mart commercial is a stark reminder not just of Gen Z contempt for millennials, but for their simultaneous desire to emulate them. After all, there’s a fine line between hate and love, as it is said. And, to quote Cady Heron (Lindsay Lohan), it’s not millennials’ fault that Gen Z “is like in love with them or something.” At least, if one is to go by the obsession with their era (even when trying to deride it through an over-the-top condemnation of skinny jeans and side parts). 

    Within the absurd universe of 2023-era Mean Girls, Gen Z is somehow the spawn of Gretchen Wieners (Lacey Chabert), while Cady (Lindsay Lohan) and Karen (Amanda Seyfried) don’t seem to have any clear claim on children of their own (unless it’s the other two members of Amber Wieners’ Gen Z clique). And maybe Cady is too busy “nurturing” youths in her role as a guidance counselor anyway to bother with children of her own. Which brings us to a scene designed to make her look out of touch in an “old” way rather than a “cute” one (as she did in 2004 whilst talking to Aaron Samuels [Jonathan Bennett]). Since everything is “cute” when you’re young enough…as society has drummed into our collective minds by now. This occurs when, sitting behind her desk dispensing “guidance” to a duo of mean girls, she once again says, “Grool.”

    The duo looks at her like she’s a “Martian” (as Regina called her) after she utters, apropos of nothing, “Grool.” At least when she said it in the actual movie, it was a conflated response to Aaron declaring of his Halloween party invite, “That flier admits one person only, so…don’t bring some other guy with you.” She started to say “great,” then “cool”—ergo, “Grool.” But how would these Gen Z putas living their far more “glamorous” life be expected to know anything about that “lore.” So naturally, they look up from their phones long enough to respond with disgust, “Huh?” and “What’s ‘grool’?” Cady assures, “It’s nothing.” 

    Almost as “nothing” as Gen Z claims millennials are to them despite constantly turning to Mean Girls as a behavioral bible and/or source of 00s yearning/“aesthetic” inspiration. And in the Wal-Mart commercial, that emulation comes both behaviorally and sartorially as Gretchen’s daughter and her friends wear the same pastels and plaids as the original Plastics did. Even though Cady was sure to tell us at the end of Mean Girls (after Damian [Daniel Franzese] delightedly warns of a freshman trio of girls, “Check it out, Junior Plastics”), “And if any freshmen tried to disturb that peace…well, let’s just say we knew how to take care of it.” Cue Cady imagining a school bus running the trio over and then assuring, “Just kidding.” But, of course, there are surely many millennials by now who have had such violent and hostile fantasies about cartoonishly ageist Gen Z. Particularly since, as we see exhibited by the Gen Z Plastics of the Wal-Mart commercial, they’re essentially grafting what millennials did while simultaneously critiquing them. Mainly for being “old” and for having never experienced the horrors of modern-day smartphone/social media life in their teens the way Gen Z is now. 

    To that point, Gretchen has happily taken on a Mrs. George-esque (Amy Poehler) persona by becoming not like a regular mom, but a cool mom as she sets up the ring light and camera to film Amber and her bitch friends doing limply-executed dances, presumably for TikTok. Amber then snaps at her mother when she says, “This is gonna be so fetch.” Amber’s response? “Stop trying to make fetch happen, Mom. It’s still not gonna happen.” Gretchen looks deeply wounded by this, for surely it’s gotta sting more coming from her daughter than Regina George. Her daughter, mind you, who knows nothing about millennial culture because not only did she not live through it, but everything about it has been diluted and bastardized by TikTok. Including Mean Girls itself. 

    This usually extends to the oft-referenced Winter Talent Show scene, which is recreated here as well (albeit with “smart” flat-heeled boots in lieu of stiletto-heeled ones). Even though Gretchen (and Cady/Karen, for that matter) would have needed to get pregnant right after high school, circa 2007-2009, to have a high school-age daughter. The probability of this seems rather unlikely (unless you’re Lorelai Gilmore), considering her Type A personality and “good” college/“respectable” career path. Even if having kids and marrying a “similar-minded/pedigreed” man was also at the forefront of her mind, that wouldn’t have been until, realistically, at least her mid-twenties. But, for the sake of capitalist propaganda, we must suspend our disbelief as Gretchen (joined by two more children who also appear to be Asian, which means she definitely didn’t marry Jason [Daniel DeSanto]), Cady and Karen watch a “less hot version” of themselves perform the same song and dance that they did “back in the day.” To far greater ennui…even though Gretchen takes over for Mrs. George on the filming front. 

    By the end of the commercial, the movie has been so perverted from its original self that the Burn Book pages plastered all over the school have been transformed into ads for Wal-Mart Black Friday deals instead of salacious pieces of gossip (many of which wouldn’t fly in the Gen Z climate of the present, where jokes about people being fat, or slutty, or statutory rapists would probably be deemed too insensitive).

    And yet, while millennial messaging has been “massaged” to suit a Gen Z demographic in this commercial (not just with the Burn Book being nothing but a “coupon book,” but also Gretchen having her son play with a Barbie), it is still Gen Z trying to be “analog” in the end by engaging with printouts. This being just one of the many ways, throughout the commercial, in which they’ve surrendered to their worst, most “cringe” fear: “being millennial.”

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Mean Girls x Wal-Mart Commercial: A None Too Subtle Trojan Horse for Capitalism Via Millennial Nostalgia

    Mean Girls x Wal-Mart Commercial: A None Too Subtle Trojan Horse for Capitalism Via Millennial Nostalgia

    As the “reunion” that everyone’s been waiting for, it was practically inevitable that the Mean Girls “assembly” (high school pun intended) would disappoint. Mainly because, yes, the so-called reunion is a fucking Wal-Mart commercial. That said, it actually seems as though, rather than people being disappointed by it, they’re somehow delighted. Dare one say…“tickled.” But the reason behind that appears to be less about content and more about an increasing fiendishness for nostalgia, especially among millennials. And no, it’s not because they’re, as Gen Z would falsely bill them, “old,” but because it’s glaringly apparent that times in 2004 were far more bearable—fun, even (remember fun?)—than times in 2023. 

    Of course, naysayers and “pro-progressive” types would argue that life was so much worse back then (see: the media manipulation and vilification of women like Britney Spears). That we’ve come “such a long way” (or “such a long way,” as Gretchen Wieners [Lacey Chabert] would utter it) in our perception of things (“thing” being the word that still describes how men see women) and our “tolerance for others” (read: white people in print and media making flaccid attempts at “inclusivity”). But the truth is, psychologically, society has gone further back into the Dark Ages with its mentality—particularly toward women and minorities (who are only viewed as minorities by the white people who only make up about eight percent of the world’s population). So yeah, a throwback to 2004 is bound to feel pretty fucking great right now. Like sweet candy compared to the tasteless gruel (a riff on “grool,” obviously) being served up on a daily basis in this part of the century. 

    What’s more, 2004 was still within a prime era for the U.S. in terms of continuing to hold up capitalism as what George W. Bush would later call “the best system ever devised.” To that end, one would like to believe the Mean Girls x Wal-Mart commercial is a wink-wink nod to the Bush years’ unironic exaltation of capitalism, but no, that’s clearly not the case. In fact, this capitalistic propaganda posing as “Mean Girls nostalgia” at its worst treats the viewers as though they themselves still live in 2004, when it was easier to pretend “deal shopping” for Black Friday isn’t the very thing that’s helped to make 2023 even more of a dystopia compared to 2004. Or that the presence of Missy Elliott (whose song, “Pass That Dutch,” plays repeatedly throughout the original Mean Girls, therefore this commercial) spelling out “D-E-A-L-S”  instead of “K-L-A” (that’s how Coach Carr [Dwayne Hill] spells “chlamydia”) somehow makes the human predilection for consumerism more “kosher.” As does, according to the commercial creators, Gretchen Wieners replacing Regina George (Rachel McAdams) in the silver Lexus convertible. Except it’s now a brandless convertible of a nondescript tone.

    That’s right, since Rachel McAdams announced simply that she “didn’t want to” be part of the little puff piece for capitalism, they got Chabert to fill in for one of McAdams’ key moments from the film. So in lieu of Regina pulling up to the soccer field and shouting, “Get in loser, we’re going shopping,” Gretchen does. And no, it’s not to pick up Cady (Lindsay Lohan) and Karen (Amanda Seyfried), but rather, her own high school-age daughter (which doesn’t quite mathematically track), Amber Wieners. Amber stands on the field with her clique comprised of the next generation mean girls, and is absolutely mortified (could it be because Gen Z is supposed to be more environmentally concerned? No, it’s because, no matter what era you’re in, parents are always humiliating) when Gretchen cries out, “Get in sweetie, we’re going deals shopping!” Even though the back of her car is already piled high with plenty of shit from Wal-Mart. Because what it the American message if not, even to this day: excess! 

    So it is that the Mean Girls x Wal-Mart “partnership” wields nostalgia like a seductive and deadly weapon to keep encouraging the very capitalistic behavior that will be humanity’s undoing. Behavior that millennials once got to relish in the 00s without half as much guilt about it as there is now (and mainly only because of Greta Thunberg). Yet that’s the the thing, isn’ it? There’s still clearly not enough guilt or compunction about it if a commercial like this can exist…and continue to be so gleefully embraced. The same goes for the abominable Menulog commercial starring Latto and Christina Aguilera. Both employ the same method of assaulting the audience with “eye candy” and familiar 00s nostalgia (via Christina Aguilera) to distract from the obvious point: we want you to keep engaging in the same buying patterns as the very generation you and Gen Z are constantly railing against—baby boomers. And in this scenario, it makes all the sense in the world that millennials are also known as echo boomers. Just look at the way Cady, Gretchen and Karen are living. That is to say, in the exact same way as their own parents. 

    The warm reception toward this commercial (and its tainting of the original movie) is, accordingly, a sign of how desperately so many people want to deny the reality of now. One in which the idea of Cady, Gretchen and Karen (though, pointedly, not Regina) continuing to carry out the same toxic consumerist cycle of the generation before them is a comfort rather than a horror show. After all, millennials were supposed to be differentthey were supposed to want something more (besides more material goods). And yet, like the yippies of the 1960s who became yuppies in the 1980s (see: Jerry Rubin), millennials, if we’re to go by this commercial, have gladly sold out in the same way to keep the very system that has failed them (perhaps more than anyone) going. 

    It does seem fitting, in this regard that McAdams, the lone Gen Xer of the group (a.k.a. the “eldest” of the quartet at forty-four) opted to opt out. Perhaps old enough to know she doesn’t really want to be part of this schlock under the pretense of it being something “for the fans” when, obviously, it’s for nobody’s benefit other than the capitalist agenda’s, which has been using pop culture for decades upon decades to promote its purpose. This brings us to the fact that a “Mean Girls” commercial has already been recently used to promote a brand: Coach. Yes, back in 2021, Megan Thee Stallion stepped into the role of Regina George (because McAdams so patently doesn’t want to) to help recreate the introduction scene to the leader of The Plastics and, of course, sell some overpriced handbags. 

    Then there was a 2022 Allbirds commercial wherein Lohan, as usual, capitalized on Mean Girls (one of her only viable movies) to sell some shoes by peppering in “subtle” references to the movie. Like how she was a mathlete in high school. She then goes to pick out a pair of pink running shoes and says, “Well, it is Wednesday.” More “hardy-har-har” allusions arrive when she adds, “These don’t just look cute. They’re made with natural materials…always avoid the plastics,” followed by, “Bouncy. Perfect for a queen bee like Lindsay Lohan.” The point being, it’s fairly evident that, for whatever reason, Mean Girls has become a go-to for bolstering consumer faith in capitalism. And again, that’s arguably because 2004 was such a peak time for worshiping it. But what’s past doesn’t have to be present…so long as you’re not seduced by it. Therein lies the catch.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Madison Beer Retreats to the “Sweet Relief” of the 2000s, Corroborating That There’s Little Relief in the Present

    Madison Beer Retreats to the “Sweet Relief” of the 2000s, Corroborating That There’s Little Relief in the Present

    As is the case with most of “Gen Z pop culture,” it’s usually grafted from the 2000s. The latest addition to that truism comes in the form of Madison Beer’s “Sweet Relief” video (marking the sixth single from Silence Between Songs). In many ways, it picks up where “Spinnin” left off, in terms of offering viewers a suburban milieu that Beer inhabits/generally frolics through. This time around, however, things are much brighter (and less desolate) than they are in “Spinnin.” For a start, the sun is actually shining for most of the video, save for during the “requisite” shower scenes of Beer (who seems to want to channel a bit of Miley Cyrus in “Flowers”), which serve no real purpose other than for her to memorex her “hotness” for future generations. 

    However, when she’s not parading her soaped-up body for the camera, she’s actually playing the part of a “nerdy” shy girl. Which, of course, per “2000s law,” simply means donning a pair of glasses. And, if anyone had a doubt that this “little narrative” wasn’t meant to be set in the 00s, one of Beer’s besties proceeds to take photos of the group in Beer’s room with her Canon digital camera. The fact that Beer and her friends are just hanging out in her room together also harkens back to videos of the 00s, when “room culture” was at a peak (see also: Mandy Moore’s “Candy,” Britney Spears’ “From the Bottom of My Broken Heart” and Jennifer Lopez’s “If You Had My Love”—all released on the brink of Y2K). Not to mention that just about the only thing to do in suburbia is hang out in your room…unless you have a car, in which case, you can proceed to do donuts in an empty parking lot. 

    So it is that Beer and her friends, often inexplicably holding stuffed animals (like a teenage Britney for her 1999 Rolling Stone shoot), keep taking “prehistoric selfies” with each other, employing what would later be called a “MySpace angle.” Trying on clothes and putting on makeup—the usual “girlie things” that women in their teens (and beyond) are supposed to do when they congregate—it seems they grow bored enough of that to switch locations to another classic suburban backdrop: the yard. Complete with a trampoline and tire swing. And also—gasp!—boys. Some of them even smoking—double gasp!—cigarettes. And that’s also how you know this is supposed to be the 00s: no one is vaping. In fact, Beer has her “dweebish” eyes on the smoking dude as they all sit in a circle in front of the white picket fence (here, again, the Del Rey influence on Beer is present). And this is where the chorus of “Sweet Relief” applies to the “secret” glances being made as she sings, “It’s just something only we know/Baby, I can’t help myself/I’m seein’ you everywhere I go/I don’t dream of anyone else/All I need, sweet relief [obviously, a sexual euphemism]/It’s just somethin’ only we know/Something only we know.”

    Or so they would like to believe. But at the next cliche suburban location change—the parking lot of a mall—the two are talking in such an obvious “I like you” way that it would be hard not to notice the attraction. Plus, Beer has taken her glasses off so that he can suddenly “really” see her. The moments of fucking around in the parking lot (including Beer being pushed along on a skateboard) channel many a 90s video (see: The Smashing Pumpkins’ repertoire). Not to mention the parking lot driving scenes from Lana Del Rey’s “Bartender” portion of the “Norman Fucking Rockwell” video. And then there’s even a dash of Madonna’s 1983 “Borderline” video as the two talk in front of a sign post together…except that Beer has more luck than Madonna at endearing her love interest to her in this particular scene. 

    The picturesqueness of it all stems from the simplicity of a group of youths actually doing things together, however seemingly banal, that don’t involve the distracting prop of a phone. Because sure, plenty of teens had cell phones “back in the day,” but never used so pervasively as they are now. After all, there weren’t even enough options on a phone to warrant being sucked into it so readily (unless you count playing Snake on a Nokia).  

    And yet, beneath the surface of this being a “quaint” town in the middle of nowhere, the reality is that the group is roaming the streets of North Hollywood. Getting ice cream as night falls, the innocence of that act is mitigated, to the trained eye, by the fact that they walk past a dance studio called Ararat. Conveniently located just across the street from VIP Gentlemen’s Club…which makes for a perfect transition for the little girl taking “dignified” dance lessons to eventually transition into the nearby strip club. Because, as David Lynch has taught us repeatedly, anything “innocent” is always belied by a seedy underbelly. Especially in California. 

    Getting slurpees at a convenience store and “messing around” at a car wash then serve as the precursor to the “grand finale” of the video: jumping into someone’s pool while fully clothed. All of these “millennial” activities (though the latter trio of scenes smacks more decidedly of Gen X) seem to further emphasize that maybe Gen Z kind of hates it here, in this era. Even in spite of constantly mocking those who are even five years older than them for being “boomer.” Sure, every generation tends to romanticize the time period of the one that came before it, but something about this feels different. As though Gen Z inherently knows they got the fuzzy end of the lollipop with regard to experiencing youth. Like, actually experiencing it…instead of just seeing it acted out on their phones. 

    And so, like most Olivia Rodrigo videos, Beer’s “Sweet Relief” offers yet another clear case of hauntology in pop culture. Not just because capitalism creates the conditions in which nothing can ever be new, but because it’s never been more apparent that, as Francis Fukuyama would say, we’ve reached “the end of history.” Or, perhaps more accurately, the end of human history, with nothing new left to say or do, as made increasingly evident by offerings like “Sweet Relief.” Yet even with the AI infusion that’s been infiltrating (and likely to infiltrate all the more) art, the “bots” are only repurposing (e.g., getting AI versions of singer’s voices to sing songs by other musicians) just as much as Madison Beer, or anyone else of her generation. Those who are caught between showing contempt for the narrow-mindedness of the past while still romanticizing it because the present is so utterly dystopian.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Why Does It Take A Video of Madonna Doing Successive Jump Squats From Over Twenty Years Ago To Appreciate Her?

    Why Does It Take A Video of Madonna Doing Successive Jump Squats From Over Twenty Years Ago To Appreciate Her?

    Being that there’s really no rhyme or reason to what might “take hold” with regard to virality on TikTok, one supposes it should be no surprise that a very specific moment from Madonna’s 2001 Drowned World Tour has become a popular “challenge” on the accursed app. That “moment” being more like fifteen seconds of unheard-of physical rigor for someone of any age (let alone someone over forty) as she proceeds to do approximately sixteen jump squats in rapid succession right after screaming, “Ah yeaahhhh!” An utterance few people would exclaim with joy prior to having to do something so physically strenuous. But such is the nature of Madonna: equal parts endlessly driven and masochistic. 

    It was that sort of vigor that went into conceptualizing the tour, which itself wasn’t very appreciated in its time, derided for not having enough “hits” performed, for a start. To boot, Madonna’s own brother, Christopher Ciccone, would condemn it in his “tell-all” by saying that the “tree concept” he had originally come up with for the backdrops that would appear onstage became something darker and more sinister. As did the entire tour once it transformed into Drowned World. Originally, Madonna had planned to tour in 1998/1999 after Ray of Light was released, but life kept getting in the way and it was 2001 by the time she took her act on the road again. For the new millennium, Madonna had reinvented herself once more. This time as both a “ghetto fabulous” cowgirl for Music and as an English “missus,” married to Guy Ritchie. 

    But if Ritchie thought she was going to stay home and darn his socks, he had another thing coming. Less than a year after her marriage (and giving birth to a second child), she would embark on this world tour in promotion of Music. It was, indeed, the title track and lead single from that record which would serve as her pièce de résistance of a finale for the tour. A finale that, as stated, is suddenly attracting far more attention than it ever did before. Perhaps because, in the early 00s, women were simply “expected” to be that physically fit if they wanted to still be considered part of the game at all. Not that it stopped anyone from continuing to call Madonna “over the hill” at forty-three. Though, as it’s long been plain to see, Madonna could always outpace the pop stars half her age. 

    With her recent bacterial infection, however, the media has been quick to pounce on the narrative that Madonna got it as a result of trying to “keep up” with those pop stars half her age—Taylor Swift being one such name specifically mentioned despite the fact that Madonna has always been a more entertaining (and more political) performer. Anything to discredit not only what she’s still capable of, but what she’s already been doing consistently from the very outset of her live performance days. Which is, to reiterate: dancing her fucking ass off. This is probably why she needed to get ass implants to replace it. In any case, apparently even “TikTokers” (a polite euphemism for nitwits who don’t catch on to things until decades later) can’t turn a blind eye to the impressiveness of what Madonna was doing even then, at an age when she was already being branded as a “geriatric.” 

    Perhaps it took the passing of a couple decades to fully understand the grueling nature of the choreography on that tour. No matter how old one is. Even Britney Spears, who was in the “prime” of her pop stardom in 2001, would have admitted to its difficulty. Thus, maybe the one token of Establishment appreciation it got—being nominated for an Emmy in the category of Outstanding Choreography—was telling of just how elaborate those moves were. But, as Madonna declared long ago, “I got the moves, baby.” In addition to, “Only when I’m dancing can I feel this free.” In that respect, Madonna has said that she’s always associated movement with freedom. Freedom to flit from place to place, freedom to try new things. Thus, her phobia of being fat. Or “zaftig,” as she put it in a 2006 article for Elle

    And it’s a fear you can see in her determined eyes as she does those jump squats. Not just the fear of being “rotund,” but the fear of being told that she “can’t.” That because of her age, she should be limited by her body. Repeatedly, Madonna has defied everyone, including herself, to prove the contrary, going so far as to keep dancing as she would have in 2001 during 2019’s Madame X Tour, which resulted in her needing hip replacement surgery afterward. At present, she’s hell-bent on proving her body (and the masses) wrong again by not giving up on the idea of this new world tour, celebrating (ergo, its name: the Celebration Tour) forty years of hits, just because she may or may not have almost died due to a serious bacterial infection. Itself caused by ignoring any signs her body was trying to give her about slowing down. Maybe, for that brief blip when Madonna was on the other side, neither God nor the Devil wanted to allow entry to someone so persistently stubborn. 

    Stubborn enough to endure the wait it took for her to be vindicated as a “stamina queen” twenty-two years after doing those relentless jump squats at the end of her show. While, on the one hand, it’s nice to see her being appreciated in some way by those who might not have known the extent of her tireless commitment to pop music as theater art, it’s also total bullshit that it takes TikTok to justify the Madonna love. Or at least love for her fitness routine. 

    In that same aforementioned Elle article, Madonna remarked, “I hope by the time it’s my moment to leave the world physically, I’ll have gotten my head around the idea that life is an endless cycle.” If that’s the case, hopefully in the next matrix, the cycle of taking too long to appreciate Madonna’s physical (and mental) prowess won’t occur yet again

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Britney: The Pop Star Barbie America Turned Into Its Fucked-Up Voodoo Doll

    Britney: The Pop Star Barbie America Turned Into Its Fucked-Up Voodoo Doll

    Britney Spears was never given much of a chance in the way of being “taken seriously.” From the beginning, she was written off as another cookie-cutter pop star from the Jive Records factory, including Spears’ boy band contemporaries, Backstreet Boys and *NSYNC. And, despite her massive success from the beginning, there was little interest from those with a “refined ear” for music in opening their arms to her (just their zippers).

    Hence, a 2000 review (that barely made mention of the actual songs’ content) of Britney’s sophomore album on The A.V. Club was sure to lambast her for being “a true cipher, a dress-up doll programmed to satisfy as many different fans and fantasies as possible.” Harsh indeed. And yet, there is something to that idea. The one where Spears, in the early years of her career was this moldable Pop Star Barbie that fulfilled the Aryan ideal (long before Taylor Swift) of “the girl next door” who would also pull her skirt up if you asked. That was for the fulfillment of the Nabokovian male fantasy, of course. For the girls who looked up to Spears, it would be stated by polite marketing tactics that it was because she could be seen as someone you wanted to be “best friends” with. A greater truth was that all the guys wanted to bang her so all the girls wanted to be her.

    Then came her inevitable “fall.” The one that conveniently coincided with her no longer being in her teen years, therefore “virginal.” Which meant it was time to paint her into the outright “slut” everyone always thought she was merely because she dressed provocatively for her stage performances and music videos. Enter the rumors of cheating on Justin Timberlake with Wade Robson. Then Justin’s almost immediate retaliation with the song and video, “Cry Me A River”—which, in case anyone was confused as to whether it was about Britney, included a very on-the-nose lookalike targeted by her jilted ex (played by, who else, Justin). From that moment forward, Britney was damned to be branded a “good girl gone bad.” One of the American media’s favorite tropes.

    The systematic dismantling of Britney as “teen dream” to “cautionary tale” was further solidified in January of 2004, when she married her childhood friend, Jason Alexander, at a Las Vegas wedding chapel. It took no time for her mother and her manager to swoop in and convince her to petition for an annulment. One that provided language with eerie foreshadowing with regard to her conservatorship: “Spears lacked understanding of her actions.” It was obvious with that abrupt maneuver that Britney was in desperate search of someone to love. Particularly after the earth-shattering breakup with Justin. And if someone like Alexander could worm his way in, it was certainly no challenge for Kevin Federline, the catalyst for the eventual downward spiral America would see documented so fully in 2007. Just two years after TMZ was born, and being stalked by the paparazzi took on a decidedly British ferocity. In fact, perhaps only Princess Diana could know how Britney felt in those peak years of being endlessly pursued—thanks to the often million-dollar price tag that a photo of Britney could fetch.

    And so, it all provided even more “reason” (read: motive) to make a spectacle of her, prove she was some “out of control” (that was the phrase actually used to describe her marrying Jason Alexander on an Us Weekly cover) party girl unfit to be a mother. Unfit even compared to Kevin fucking Federline. Who was given carte blanche to do what he wanted throughout his short-lived marriage to Britney, even though Britney assumed she’d have an actual partner around to help raise her children (and yes, almost every photo of Britney from that period is with just her and her kids, with no sign of K-Fed anywhere). This paired with her unaddressed postpartum depression brewed the recipe for Britney’s own addiction to form as a coping mechanism. The headlines making such damning declarations with Spears’ image attached as, “Time Bomb,” “Sick!” and “Hollywood’s Drug Problem.”

    Even as a married woman (for the second time in the same year) to K-Fed, Britney couldn’t be deemed “tame” enough, stoking the outrage of “child advocates” when she was photographed with her son, Sean, in her lap while driving. Undeniably, members of the press were always waiting to catch the perfect shot of her “failing” as a mother—and if anyone had as many photos taken in rapid-fire succession as Britney, that sort of “proof” would be bound to materialize. Just as it did when Britney was caught almost dropping Sean on a New York sidewalk in May of ’06.

    2006 was very stressful indeed for Britney’s motherhood role, as she gave birth to her second son in September. Just two months later, she filed for divorce from Federline in November of ’06. One that wouldn’t be finalized until July 2007, with K-Fed likely trying to hold out for a better settlement. With nothing left to lose (or so she thought), Britney took being single and in her twenties to heart again as she hit the Hollywood nightclub scene (most famously with Paris Hilton). Through it all, America feasted on her reckless decline (sometimes just called: being in your twenties), then pretended to act shocked when she got 5150’d. Anyone would be if they were put in a situation like that.

    Then came the journalists’ endless splooge-fest over assessing what led to the “breakdown” (a.k.a. a woman simply wanting to have more time holding her son and locking herself in the bathroom to get it). Most harshly, Vanessa Griogoriadis in a Rolling Stone cover story called “The Tragedy of Britney Spears.” Among other descriptions of her time spent observing the pop star (no one seems to know how this story was approved), Griogoriadis states, “If there is one thing that has become clear in the past year of Britney’s collapse—the most public downfall of any star in history—it’s that she doesn’t want anything to do with the person the world thought she was. She is not a good girl. She is not America’s sweetheart. She is an inbred swamp thing who chain-smokes, doesn’t do her nails, tells reporters to ‘eat it, snort it, lick it, fuck it’ and screams at people who want pictures for their little sisters.” So there it is: the Pop Star Barbie America turned into its fucked-up voodoo doll.

    Even now. Just take one look at the comments on what she posts. For example, “Can we actually have this page banned? I mean I think it’s in the best interest of the occupant that it gets completely logged out and deleted. Please, this isn’t what anyone was thinking Brittany would be free to do… it’s causing severe 2ndhand embarrassment and making ppl question their childhood lol” or “Literally do anything else please” or “She is filming this herself and it’s gross, have some dignity and think of your poor boys” or “This woman is definitely off her meds. There’s no one to keep her in check. Seem as though she is surrounded by ‘yes’ people, including her husband. ‘Let her be, she’s not harming anyone.’ YES SHE IS!!!! She has CHILDREN!! She is spiraling out of control. This will not end well.”

    Who knows how it will really “end” for Britney, but it’s clear that something within her died quite some time ago when it was stamped out repeatedly by dissection to the nth degree. This includes, above all else, in photo and video format. Some would like to believe she’s gotten a happy “end” in her current husband, who, to be honest, seems like he was planted in her life. And, talking of him, he once had the gall to caption a photo of them together with the back-handed advice, “Women are the most powerful humans on this 🌎 fellas listen up: what they don’t teach you in school is that your ability to listen and agree with your woman 👩 even if you don’t agree is the 🔑 to a happy life 😎 What do they say? Oh… Happy wife, happy life.” It’s the kind of yuk-yuk-yuk misogyny that speaks to a man who isn’t really listening to a word “his” girl is saying, just nods along to get along—all the while thinking what a crazy little ninny she is. But, hey, ain’t she cute? In short, Spears is just recreating the relationship she’s had with America since the beginning.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Britney Saying She’s Turning 12 Instead of 41 Has Everything to Do With Retreating to a “Safety” Age

    Britney Saying She’s Turning 12 Instead of 41 Has Everything to Do With Retreating to a “Safety” Age

    Being that tabloid-type publications still enjoy the parading of a headline that makes a celebrity come across as unhinged, OK! Magazine frequently weighs in on Britney Spears’ various Instagram posts (which, as most should know by now, usually include dancing and twirling—and also plenty of shade) with more than a hint of judgment. One such headline referred to a post she put up on Thanksgiving wherein she referred to her erstwhile conservatorship by mentioning, “I know most didn’t get them in the past but I hope you’re all being served with my handwritten letters now.” She then added, in anticipation of her December 2nd birthday, “I hear the new thing to do is to have slumber parties and dance in the kitchen 😜😜😜 !!! I’m not turning 41 … I’m turning 12.”

    Even though it was a light-hearted way to “brush off” her self-infantilization, OK! chose to bill that as “Britney Spears Bizarrely Jokes She’s ‘Not Turning 41’ But 12 Years Old Ahead Of Birthday.” But many might either empathize or at least be able to clearly understand that her allusion to that particular age is her “safe place.”

    Granted, being on The Mickey Mouse Club wasn’t exactly a time of “innocence”—what with Justin Timberlake kissing her during a game of spin the bottle (Ryan Gosling claimed the same, but Britney insisted she only ever kissed Justin). Timberlake, among many other sources of pervert-oriented pride about Britney, would be sure to later announce that he was her first kiss. In addition to shaming her for lying to the media about being a virgin while dating Timberlake. Something he would keep doing well after their breakup, finding a way to incorporate Britney into a 2009 SNL sketch called “Immigrant Tale.” Playing the part of Cornelius Timberlake, he tells his fellow immigrants on the boat bound for Ellis Island of the exploits his great-great-grandson will have, including dating a “popular female singer… Publicly, they’ll claim to be virgins but privately… he hit it.”

    Britney’s sudden lack of “credibility” in the wake of their breakup was further spurred by Justin, who did everything in his media blitzkrieg power to insinuate or outright declare that 1) Britney cheated on him and 2) they had sex throughout their relationship. One such announcement being made on a radio show when Timberlake was asked point-blank, “Did you fuck Britney Spears?” Without hesitating, he responded, “Okay yeah, I did it!”

    All of this is to say that, while many people turning a so-called “icky” age would prefer to return to their twenties, that decade, for Britney, was her most traumatic, commencing with the Timberlake breakup that sealed the media’s sudden dismantling of her image as America’s sweetheart and culminating in her conservatorship. Placed under it at the beginning of 2008, Spears was just twenty-seven years old and would spend the theoretical prime of her life in this form of captivity.

    And it’s only natural for her to feel as though time was robbed from her. Time from what is seen as the last dalliance with precious youth before full-tilt middle age. Now thrust into her forties, Britney’s bifurcated personality/identity crisis isn’t just about being caught up in the curse of an obsession with youth because she founded her image on a Lolita one, but because the safest place right now probably does feel like twelve.

    Regardless of the fact that her parents were pimping her out already at that time, it was still her own life. And the work she did at twelve would end up providing the launching point to total freedom and agency with a solo career. What’s more to be that age and concerned only with frivolous, frothy things is likely all Britney wants at this juncture. For she’s spent so much of her life worrying about pleasing people, making one wrong step or, worse still, being threatened with loss of access to her children (who, tragically, don’t want to see her anyway) that it’s understandable for her to want slumber parties and dancing in the kitchen. Along with other “trifles” like makeup, dessert, planetary destruction through fashion and talking about hot guys (since the quote unquote hot guy she’s married to appears so often to be missing, when he’s not trying to get her to go Instagram Live against her will).

    So yes, Britney can say she’s turning twelve if she wants to. If that’s the age that makes her feel best, why not? Plus, that old saying is true: you’re as young as you feel. And based on Britney’s posts, she’s feeling like the deranged twelve-year-old within.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link