adamfoxie*blog International: September 2010

October 24, 2010

Television in 1912?! Eagle-eyed viewers spot historical errors in period drama Downton Abbey

Millions of viewers are hooked on its period detail that transports them to a gentler age.

But it would appear that while the makers of Downton Abbey have captured the spirit of the early part of last century they may have taken their eye of the finer details.

Despite enthusiastic praise for the storylines and acting on the series, which has pulled in more than eight million viewers and revived ITV's drama output, a series of apparent glaring historical errors has sparked criticism from some fans.

Good reception: In an oversight by producers, a television aerial appeared in one episode of period drama Downton Abbey, which is set in 1912, a number of years before television was invented

The mistakes, which have mainly been spotted in exterior shots, mostly in the Oxfordshire village of Bampton, include a TV aerial fixed to a house, a modern-style conservatory and double yellow lines on a road, which have all appeared on screen.

Some viewers say they have also seen a modern street sign in the background and claim that a piece of music featured in one of the episodes had not yet been composed when the drama is set in 1912.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk

Now it’s all-out war, as Strictly Come Dancing and The X Factor fight for ratings

First it was a battle for primetime schedules. Now it’s all-out war, as Strictly Come Dancing and The X Factor fight for ratings and news coverage. So which show would you defend to the last?

Give us glitz and high-kicks: Viv Groskop argues the case for Strictly

Strictly is special. We are not talking about some two-bit talent contest here. Those shows are not even in Strictly’s league. Strictly is life. Strictly is dance. It is everything Saturday-night television should be: high-kicks, sequins, glitz and glamour. Good old-fashioned entertainment of the kind most people can’t be bothered to make any more, but that has already grabbed more than 40 per cent of the TV audience.

It is also camp and downright weird. Where else would you find Paul Daniels and Gavin Henson sharing airtime, struck dumb with nerves as they adjust their satin cummerbunds? Or this year’s trump card Ann Widdecombe muttering darkly about her rise and fall? Or grown women on primetime television in barely there leopardskin leotards?

As the battle for primetime ratings steps up, the pressure has never been so intense. The producers are working this year’s dancers so hard – ten hours a day, six days a week – that half of them succumbed to flu after the first show. Yet this is a fairy-tale world where the D-list soap actress becomes a glittering princess and the timid sportsman discovers his inner Casanova. It’s end-of-the-pier fun with bad jokes, spray-tanned politicians and pantomime judges. It’s slightly eccentric and sometimes homespun. It’s not afraid to be silly (welly boot opening number, anyone?) and it’s not afraid to make you cry. Felicity Kendal’s first dance had me blubbing from the off. Isn’t she lovely? I sound like my grandma. Strictly turns us all into our grandmas. And that is a good thing.

The X Factor is, by comparison, overblown, huge, American. It’s mean, nasty and addictive. Worst of all, it will manipulate your emotions and play you for a fool. Because when there is emotion, X Factor tears are crocodile tears. And someone is always crying all the way to the bank. There’s only one real winner on that show and we all know
who it is long before anyone has sung a note: Simon ‘Personal Fortune of £145 Million’ Cowell.

There’s none of that cynicism on Strictly. And as a result, it’s an easy show to ridicule. It has never been cool. Bruce’s gags often fall flat, Tess Daly’s megawatt smile is occasionally strained and Dave Arch’s long-suffering orchestra hits the odd bum note. But that’s half the charm.

Strictly doesn’t try to be something it’s not. It’s not slick or ambitious. Microphones get caught in people’s chest hair. Ask Karen Hardy and Mark Ramprakash, series four. Heels catch in dresses. See Jill Halfpenny in the final of series two. Even the professionals slip up sometimes. This happened to poor Ian Waite when he danced with Zoë Ball for the last time in series three. Fell flat on his face.

But this is why it’s so lovable. Anything can happen (well, almost anything; Ola will never wear a poloneck). Nothing is ever orchestrated or fake (except the tan, of course). Most of all, Strictly is reliable, trustworthy and familiar. It is your oldest friend dressed up for a night out on the town, wearing her best M&S control pants, having done her hair herself with some heated tongs. The X Factor, on the other hand, is the raucous hussy with the brassy highlights and too-tight dress who is flirting with your husband at a party.

I know who I would rather sit with on my sofa on a Saturday night. And it’s not that old tart.

The X ratings say it all: Judith Woods casts her vote for Simon and co

For me, the choice is simple. Ballroom dancing is for luvvies who’ve spent the summer secretly perfecting their paso doble. The X Factor is about raw talent, authentic transformation and moments of genuine, jaw-dropping astonishment. It’s also stealing the limelight in the battle of the headlines, with increasingly gripping stories charting the trials and triumphs of both contestants and judges. Gamu’s immigration plight has reduced us to tears. We’re gripped by the idea of 50-year-old Tesco checkout operator Mary beating flaky teenager Cher. And viewing figures are holding at 50 per cent plus.

So, Felicity Kendal can high-kick like a lipizzaner. Who would have guessed? All of us, actually. Meanwhile, The X Factor audiences are left breathless by Matt, a 27-year-old painter and decorator from Essex with the soulful falsetto of a superstar.

Yes, over the years, The X Factor has had its fair share of emotionally fragile contenders, fisticuffs – and Jedward. But that’s because it is a programme about ordinary people, where the dramas go deeper than a few dropped sequins. The X Factor is the culmination of the nation’s hopes and dreams; it is an opportunity that quite literally changes lives.

Strictly’s celebrities are hand-picked, professionally groomed and paid to perform. From the outset they are household names, a breed apart from the rest of us, and I for one feel entirely detached from them and their obligatory ‘this is the hardest thing I’ve ever done’ mantra that gets (fox)trotted out on every programme.

On The X Factor, contestants from every profession put their pride on the line – queueing for hours and enduring multiple auditions before they even make it in front of the judges. There is no cash reward just for turning up, and the majority will leave with nothing. The stakes couldn’t be any higher.

The choreographed soap opera of Strictly can’t compete with the gritty drama of The X Factor. Whoever wins the former will get a glitterball trophy; whoever wins the latter will get the chance to be a recording artist and to perform to millions.

Some previous entrants have had stratospheric careers: think Leona Lewis, Alexandra Burke, JLS. Others have crashed and burned, including the first winner Steve Brookstein and Scottish singer Leon Jackson. Who knows what fate has in store for last year’s winner little Joe McElderry, who recently came out as gay to general indifference?

This series already looks set to be a vintage year and in my household weekends revolve round The X Factor. My eight-year-old and I like to be in our jimjams by 7.30pm, snuggled on the sofa, knocking back wine (me) and hot chocolate (her) in a snapshot of cosy togetherness. Until five seconds in. Then the shouting starts – mostly at the TV but sometimes at each other. That’s how much we care.

For younger viewers, there are lessons, too: that it takes focus and effort to pursue a dream, that individualism is something to be applauded, that men can cry and, above all, that most contestants return to their lives, while the truly driven return to the auditions, year after year.

This is the show where rough diamonds are polished, while over on the rhinestone-bedecked BBC, all that glisters is fool’s gold. Strictly is a short-lived spectacle. The unique joy of The X Factor is that it represents a beginning, not an end.

'They don't make artists like us any more - Amazing no one thought I was Gay. Born on the road': Rod Stewart

Ronnie Wood, wayward kids, lawless streets and the problem with pop stars today - as Rod Stewart prepares to sail home to spend more time with his £100m bank balance, he's determined to get one or two things off his chest...

'If you get to 65 and you don't try to get your life in order, God help you,' said Rod Stewart

Rod Stewart has a bad dose of flu. As a fully paid-up member of the A-list Hollywood elite, he’d be entitled to cancel everything and check into a five-star clinic.

But this is Rod. Son of a Leith-born master builder, ex-gravedigger, top-selling artist for four decades, world-class ladies’ man. He’s not going anywhere.

He’s sitting in the centre of a suitably luxurious London hotel suite, straight-backed, alert and smiling, dressed in a gold-buttoned navy blazer, a pristine white shirt and Ralph Lauren trousers. In an era where many of his counterparts appear scarily like their own Dorian Gray portraits in the flesh, he looks exactly like the Rod Stewart you see on album covers.

At 65, the hedgehog hair is as thick and bristly as it was 40 years ago. (‘I’ve hung on to the barnet. My secret? Vary the shampoo all the time. Wash every other day. Dry upside down with a hairdryer – that tip came from some girl in Chicago, and she was right.’) He’s also retained the angular jaw and the knowing twinkle in the eyes that miss absolutely nothing. The flu doesn’t stand a chance. The man is on top form.

There’s a bottle of vintage wine chilling in a silver ice bucket and a red-and-black football on a desk. That’s always been Stewart’s thing, the juxtaposition of camp rock-star excesses with working-class tartan testosterone. It’s the way he is. It’s how the same man could write Hot Legs and The Killing of Georgie and Maggie May. How the man many will forever remember for leopard skin, peroxide and über-glamorous SWAGs (Stewart wives and girlfriends) can now sell millions of albums of stunningly produced and exquisitely performed popular standards.

‘I’ve done it all,’ he laughs with that sandpaper rasp. ‘I cringe a bit about what I used to wear. Ladies’ knickers, ballerina tights, the leotard things with one nipple hanging out and a feather boa round the middle. Amazing no one thought I was gay, but then I was a big womaniser. Everyone knew it. That’s how I got away with it.’

Stewart is excellent company. He effortlessly combines the aura of glitzy superstardom with the manner of the bloke down the pub, shooting the breeze. Stewart likes a chat

Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey Avoid Awkward Dinner Encounter

Former pop sweethearts Jessica Simpson and Nick Lacheynarrowly avoided an awkward dinner encounter on Thursday, October 21 when they both showed up at the same Hollywood restaurant with their new partners. The blonde beauty stepped out with new beau Eric Johnson and her mother for a meal at The Red O, and the paparazzi was sent into a spin when Lachey arrived at the venue moments later with his girlfriend, Vanessa Minnillo.

But the "Newlyweds" stars, who divorced in 2006, managed to steer clear of any drama and were seated far away from one another as they dined. A source tells People, "They didn't interact. They didn't even come face-to-face with each other."

Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey walked down the aisle on October 26, 2002. They first announced their separation in November, three years after while their divorce was finalized on June 30, 2006. When Simpson filed the papers, she cited "irreconcilable differences.

Jamie Lee Curtis on Dad Tony Curtis: He Was Not a Father

The actress admits that she and the late star never shared the traditional father/daughter bond, saying 'He was not interested in being a father - and this is not a slam against him.'

Jamie Lee Curtis lightened the mood as she honored her late father Tony Curtis at his memorial service earlier this month by imitating his famous deep voice. The "Some Like It Hot" star passed away on September 29 after suffering a cardiac arrest and more than 400 mourners turned out to pay their last respects at a private funeral in Las Vegas.

Tears were streaming down Jamie Lee's face at the end of her touching memorial speech, but she insists it didn't start that way. Instead, the "True Lies" actress decided to greet grieving guests by showing off her impersonation of the acting legend and she recreated the moment during her first TV interview since Curtis' death - on U.S. chat show "The Talk" - on Friday, October 22.

She said, "I was asked to speak at the last minute and so I said, 'Hello youbeautiful people, you got dressed, how nice, it's a privilege for me to see you.' He really was an invention, if you will. This was a guy who was in the navy. He was... a guy from the streets of New York and he became this other thing. He changed his name and he changed his whole life, and the invention of Tony Curtis was his life."

Jamie Lee endured a difficult relationship with her late father following his bitter divorce from her actress mother Janet Leigh when she was a child, and she admits they never shared the traditional father/daughter bond. But she learned to love him as the Hollywood icon he had become, and confesses her admiration for Curtis stemmed mainly from her love of his work.

Jamie Lee explained, "Children are complicated and messy, and he was not a father; he was not interested in being a father - and this is not a slam against him - he did what he had to do from a financial standpoint, which was honorable of him to do, but he wasn't an involved father."

"Therefore, I look at him much more from the perspective of being a fan of him. I was more of a fan of his work, of his spirit, of his joie de vivre (joy of living)... My mother was never a diva, my father was bigger than life, who lived in Vegas

!"

"(There was) no (bond), not at all. Except for the fact that I inherited genetically a part of him. As I said at his funeral, I inherited his desperate need for attention... But I'm working through that!"

Alan Cumming has launched a scathing attack on US President Barack Obama

Alan Cumming has launched a scathing attack on US President Barack Obama for doing “diddly squat” following a decision to suspend a judge’s ruling to end the controversial Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.

The X-Men star and Democratic activist was a firm supporter of the 44th US President before he took office, but the delay in overturning the US military’s policy has sparked criticism from the Scottish actor.

In a statement reported by Herald Scotland, Cumming said: “We keep hearing that Obama is an ally, that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will end under his watch, but what do we actually get?

“Diddly squat thus far on a federal level, and in addition to that some very offensive statements that would have made the Republicans look bad.”

The repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy – which requires gay military personnel to keep their sexuality hidden or face being removed from service – was a major election pledge from Obama.

PinkPaper.com reported last week, the White House asked an appeal court to suspend US District Judge Virginia Phillips’ decision to repeal the policy, citing the need for more time to give forces training and guidance.

The criticism comes just days after Obama gave his support to a campaign tackling homophobic bullying after a spate of suicides. But Cumming argued: “How can we counsel our children not to bully their gay classmates or mock their gay friends when they see their President, their beloved President Obama, refusing to do the equivalent in regards to troops and other adults?”

Herald Scotland reports a White House spokesman described it as “a policy that is going to end”, but declined to comment on the timescale.

Spanish gays and lesbians claim Facebook censorship over Pope 'snog-in'

By h.b. - Oct 24, 2010 - 8:22 AM

Photo - Queerkissingflashmob

The group is organising a 'snog-in' during the Pope's visit to Barcelona on November 7

Spanish gays and lesbians have accused Facebook of censorship after an event being planned by the Queer Kissing Flashmob was removed from the social networking page.

The planned event is to get gay and lesbian couples to hold a ‘snog-in’ in front of the Pope during Benedict XVI’s visit to Barcelona Cathedral at 10am on November 7, as ‘a fight for sexual and affectionate rights, not from violence, but from passion, sensuality and love’.

The Facebook group had more than 1,500 people registered and 12,000 had been invited when the page was removed.

The organisers, who are a group of friends who are not linked to any political group or organisation, have set up another Facebook page under the ‘Queer Kissing Flashmob’ name, which at the time of writing, remains in place.

More information and instructions for those who want to attend the event, (scroll down the page for English) at the organisers blog - queerkissingflashmob.wordpress.com

Keira Knightley Ready For Gay Role; Rosie O'Donnell Might Play Her Lover

PUBLISHED: OCTOBER 24, 2010

Keira Knightley is set to play the role of a suspected lesbian in a

reworking of Lillian Hellman's The Children's Hour, the New York Post

reported.

The play, written in 1934, tells the story of two female teachers

at a girl's boarding school whose lives are ruined when one of

their students accuses the pair of engaging in a lesbian relationship.

The Children's Hour will debut in London's West End next year and

possibly move on to Broadway next winter.

Rosie O'Donnell, who is openly gay, might play the part of Knightley's

suspected lesbian lover, the Post is reporting.

The 25-year-old, English-born Knightley is best known for starring

opposite Johnny Depp in the blockbuster movie franchise the Pirates

of the Caribbean.

Ian Rickson, whose Broadway revival of The Seagull earned him great

critical praise, will direct the play.

After being banned in Boston, The Children's Hour debuted on Broadway

in 1936. A film adaptation of the play starring Shirley MacLaine

and Audrey Hepburn was released in 1961.

BY ON TOP MAGAZINE STAFF

Which is Scarier, Halloween or the Elections?

Halloween or the Elections – Which is Scarier?

Sharron Angle, one of the darlings of the tea party movement and who is running as the Republican challenger against Democratic Senator Harry Reid in Nevada, has professed some interesting ideas. And as we approach Halloween and the general election a couple of days afterwards, these are scary ideas.

Angle, according to the AP, deemed “a BP fund of oil spill victims a ’slush fund;’ suggesting tea party followers will resort to ‘Second Amendment remedies’ if Washington is not reformed; concluding that unemployment benefits have ’spoiled our citizenry;’ and blasting Democrats for pushing public benefits to ‘make government our God.’”

She has advocated the end of Social Security although her views have “moderated” to simply “transitioning out” Social Security, because her campaign has been subject to greater scrutiny.

Angle opposes abortion in all circumstances, including rape and incest. She is virulently anti-immigration, and clearly opposes most of the key LGBT issues, such as repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (though she doesn’t understand the process in the Congress) and same-sex marriage.

Even possessing what one would ordinarily characterize as an extreme right-wing ideology, Angle is actually ahead in the polls against the Senate Majority leader. She has a good chance of winning.

And so do other like-minded tea party-backed candidates for Congress—all Republicans. In some places they will surely lose. In others they will certainly win. The New York Times argued that regardless of the outcome of the November 2 elections, the tea party movement will enjoy broad influence in the Republican Party that will pull it further to the right as a result of the inevitable battle of ideology wages on.

This is profoundly scarier than any Halloween—especially if you are part of the LGBT community or an ally.

The GOP, for reasons that continue to escape me, is poised to regain control of the House of Representatives and even worse but less likely, the U.S. Senate. They want to make this election about President Obama; after all he stopped a sure depression, saved a million jobs that would have been lost had he not pushed for a bailout of major automobile manufacturing companies, and restructured health care that has been pronounced by independent economists as deficit neutral.

Until his refusal to use his authority to finally crush the nefarious Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy when a California judge opened that door, I had been a big supporter of the President. But his presidency—at least his first term—was doomed from the start when radio blowhard Rush Limbaugh emerged from his addiction problems to pray that the President and his policies should fail. This lends new meaning to the word patriotism from a man who had prides himself as a patriot.

When the Republican opposition had been relatively quiet at the outset of Obama’s term, Rush gave them voice. They lined up behind this jackass and found their footing. The “birthers” re-emerged. You know, they are the ones who still feel Hawaii is a foreign country and the President is not a U.S. citizen. Then he has been accused of being a Muslim, forgetting their own demagoguery during the 2008 campaign against Obama’s association with the Christian preacher, Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

This is what we are facing if the predictions of November 2 come true. A country that will be led in part by the likes of Queen of the Tea Party, Sarah Palin (at least through her own brand of demagoguery), Michelle Bachman, and perhaps Sharron Angle, Rand Paul and others of their ilk.

Say good-bye to the repeal of DADT. Despite Sen. Mitch McConnell’s supposed willingness to allow the vote to once again take place following the elections, don’t bet on a favorable outcome. Not if the sore-loser-in-chief Sen. John McCain has his way. The continued reckless discrimination against gay and lesbian service members will continue unabated despite 70 percent of the country and all of the top military brass favoring repeal.

Say good-bye to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act or ENDA, which had its best chance in the first term of President Obama, but that window shut in a hurry. The 30-year attempt to end discrimination in the workplace will continue to languish.

And for sure, say good-bye to any opportunity for repealing the Federal Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA. It really didn’t have much of a chance to begin with but at least a dialogue and perhaps hearings may have started during Obama’s second term (if there is to be one) and Democrats somehow remain in the majority.

Locally, we have squandered the past four years with a liberal Democratic governor and a huge majority of Democrats in the legislature. No same-sex marriage bill ever saw the light of day outside a committee. No transgender or gender identity protection bill was allowed to head to the floor for a debate and vote.

The upcoming election will unlikely result in any significant shift in the legislature, but the fight for governor is still up in the air with turnout in a two-to-one Democratic advantage in the state to be the key factor. Should Mr. Ehrlich prevail, the next four years will go as the previous eight—no tangible progress, no matter how many legislators sign their name to a pro-LGBT bill.

Yes, Halloween, especially for children could be scary yet fun. Whatever frightening costumes, pranks and tricks that are a part of the tradition will only last a day or night.

But with the upcoming election, the results could prove even scarier, the pranks are on us, and they will last for years to come.

Contributed by Steve Charing and cross-posted on his blog at: www.SteveCharing.blogspot.com.

October 23, 2010

Largest newspaper in US state won't print gay marriage notices

New Hampshire’s largest newspaper is defending its decision to refuse to publish marriage notices for gay couples.

The New Hampshire Union Leader of Manchester says it has a constitutional right to choose what to print. Publisher Joe McQuaid says the paper isn’t "anti-gay," but believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. He said the paper is opposed to a recent state law legalizing gay marriage.

A male couple getting married in Portsmouth on Saturday wanted to publish a marriage notice, but were refused.

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Paul Hodes called on the paper to change its policy and respect the state law. He challenged Republican opponent Kelly Ayotte to denounce its decision. An Ayotte spokesman said government officials have no business telling a free press what to do.
Boston Herald...