Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Silver Fox

While I have eluded to the fact that I really love this show, I've never actually written about it seriously. I started watching this VH1 creation expecting the usual from VH1--exploitation of B-list stars for the reason of laughing at them and their stupidity (see: The Surreal Life (1-2098781), Rock of Love with Bret Michaels, Flavor of Love, Celebrity Fit Club, etc... and my own personal favorite...My Fair Brady). While it's not nice, these shows are dirtily fulfilling because we all know these people are stupid...VH1 is finally giving our opinion some empirical evidence and, thus, validation.

BUT...Celebrity Rehab is not the typical show on this channel and I have to believe it's because of Dr. Drew. We all know and love him from Loveline and we're fascinated by him for his frank discussion of often embarrassing topics with seemingly no personal judgment injected. He's, in fact, the exact opposite of Dr. Phil (who's not really doctor making him just Phil). For that, we love you Drew.

There is so much potential for this show to be a trainwreck exploitation and yet I'm eerily drawn to the television for the full hour, compelled to watch not the horror of withdrawl or the general sadness of seriously drug-addicted people*, but to watch the personal transformation that occurs as they wean themselves off chemicals and how much work rehab actually is. There's nothing "horrific" in this show in terms of tastelessness or ugliness towards the people; in fact, it's so life-affirming, I'm curious to see whether VH1 will actually keep it.

Most surprising to me is that I'm fascinated most by the staff: Dr. Drew's competence as a doctor, an addictionologist (I've never heard of that before so see, this is a learning experience), and a human is really something to behold. Of course, these episodes have been edited to within an inch of their lives, but after watching this show I can understand why he's been so very effective in treating people. I wanna give him a call and go to lunch. He's personable and professional and relatable--how does he do it? But the "resident techs" are the most interesting. All of the people working in his facility (on the show at least) are recovering addicts themselves and they crack me up, both in their ability to handle seriously addicted individuals who are out of control while also being counselors and mentors with great senses of humor and insight into their own lives. Shelley, the most familiar one on the show, looks like 92-pounds of kick-ass woman with a 400 pound heart of gold (and I love her hair...what?).

I'm disappointed to know that the entirety of the show is only 8 episodes--for the journey that some of these people are on, there's just no way we'll see any kind of resolution. For many, the rehab process seems profound and long. But now that I've started this journey with them, I feel like I want to see it through--I'm weirdly personally invested. I think it's a fascinating process to watch as celebrity is stripped away. We see so many stars "being born" in the media everyday that to see a celebrity returned to their original humanity is humbling but refreshingly real. In my estimation, there's nothing exploitative here...just the ability to watch people reclaim their lives and to undo the price of fame.

It leaves me wondering if I can somehow construe my television watching as an addiction requiring Dr. Drew's attention. If it's possible, I'd really like to get into his rehab. Please.

*The rehabbers are:
1) Jeff Conaway: You might know him as "Kinicky" in the movie Grease. He was also on the tv series Taxi. Addicted to alcohol, coke, and opiates. Going through the most comprehensive rehab of anyone on the show.
2) Daniel Baldwin: Yes. Of The Baldwins. Alec and Billy's younger brother, Stephen's older brother. Likely, the most talented of all of them. Never heard of him? Because he's been busy injecting, snorting, and smoking anything not nailed down. Comes into this rehab already sober but obviously still recovering.
3) Chyna (Joanie Laurer): She was a wrestler on WWF. She bills herself as actress...I'm not sure why. Doesn't know why she's in rehab. OK.
4) Brigitte Nielsen: Was married to Sly Stallone during which time she made several crappy movies with him. Always played this amazonian Communist character...even though she's from Denmark. OK. Now married to an Italian normal person (relatively) and lives in Italy. An alcoholic.
5) Jaimee Foxworth: She was on Family Matters...y'know...the show with Urkel. A seriously addicted pot smoker. Dr. Drew says her rehab will likely be the most difficult.
6) Mary Carey: Porn star and gubernatorial candidate in the California recall election...also ran: Gary Coleman. An alcoholic and pill popper.
7) Seth "Shifty" Binzer: Lead singer of Crazytown. Candidate for my favorite rehabber on the show. Rehabbing from crack, heroin, and pills...and alcohol. According to Dr. Drew, his withdrawl would likely be the most physically painful.
8) Ricco Rodriguez: A UFC heavyweight champ; the first to be suspended for cocaine use (and to be suspended from UFC...I imagine that takes a lot). Addicted to cocaine and alcohol.
9) Jessica Sierra: Not an American Idol. That's seriously why she's a celebrity...well except for all of the drug-related arrests. An alcoholic and cocaine addict.

A Runway Rewind

I'll be very honest--I'm amazed and appalled at my own lack of commentary on one of the few shows actually giving us new episodes every week. So let me begin with a rundown of what I've thought of this season so far:

Insight #1: I'm amazed that these are listed as "the best designers" so far. Personally, I don't see it. When I think back to some of the designers of the past seasons--Kara Saun, Jay, Santino, Chloe, Daniel...even Andre ("Where's Aaaahn-dre?")--they weren't fooling around. They were awesome. And while there are clearly some break out superstars in this season, on a whole, there seems to be a wide array of "hot mess" present as well. They may be more accomplished in terms of their own businesses (Rami and others actually have previously put out their own lines of clothes and some have actually dressed celebrities for minor awards shows), I can't say from my amateur standpoint that they're bringing a higher design acumen to the show.

Insight #2: Project Bore-way. After nearly every show, I find myself longing for the days of Santino Rice, Jay McCarroll...hell, even Wendy Pepper. They had personality, they had spunk. We might have hated them, we might have loved them--at least we felt something about them. As much as I love Jillian's designs, listening to her is like scraping my nails across an emery board. Victorya (now booted) was at best puzzling and annoying. And Christian, who appears to be the poster-child for personality this season, screams "I would really rather be Paris Hilton" to me. I don't want to be on Christian's side. I don't want to be on anyone's side. Problem.

Insight #3: Guest judges are getting better. Oh, I remember the days of PR when a Betsey Johnson or Cynthia Rowley (who interestingly is actually an automaton, apparently) was a "special" day. The guest judge for the Season 1 FINALE was Parker Posey, for chrissakes (if you don't watch Christopher Guest movies, you have no idea who this is. Even if you do watch, you have no idea why she's able to judge fashion--I'm still in the dark myself). So, to see the veritable list of designers trot through that fourth chair has been really impressive. You know exactly what Michael Kors and Nina Garcia are going to give ya. But that 4th chair is like the knowledgeable and respected wildcard...and offsets Heidi's growing weirdness.

And now, My Official PR4 Rant: What is with the blatant, shameless product placement this season? While we've always had to contend with "The Tresemme hair salon and the l'Oreal Make Up Room," and then last season we tacked on the "BlueFly Accessories wall" (which, incidentally, used to be something else which I cannot recall at the moment), I've not remembered this incessant bowing to the gods of capitalism. Past challenges were for the US Postal Service or Banana Republic (okay, that last one's iffy). But the Hershey challenge could not have been more tacky, really. While the designs themselves didn't scream Hershey, watching 45 minutes of designers unwrapping Reese' cups and Twizzlers made me long for some chocolaty goodness and I felt manipulated. Then last night's challenge was nothing but idol worship of jeans juggernaut Levi's. At least Levi's is clothing and, therefore, has a logical connection to fashion. But c'mon. All the judges do is lean on the designers to be less mainstream, more imaginative, and then in the same breath say--But how really does this say Levi's? I don't like it. Let's not box in the designers by trying to give us more commercials for brands during a telecast that is already laden with too much commercial time. Because, if you're Rami, how really do you drape denim and twizzlers wrappers?

All I have to say about last night: What the eff. Ricky winning? I'm sorry...did somebody slip Michael Kors a crazy pill while we were blinded by Levi's branding? On the other had, seeya Victorya. Good riddance.

Definitely more to come in the future. Next week: picks for top 3.

Academy Awards Spectacle

Ooh...Oscar nominations are in. Usually, I could really care less as I think these nominations are normally more about marketability and less about talent. But since the writers are still striking (and I'm not complaining...they deserve their residuals), and there's nothing else to really comment on...I'll give you my rundown and picks. Remember, all my picks are 1) based strictly on nothing but my opinion...I haven't seen nearly all of these movies 2) assume that these people would win if I ruled the world. These choices are in Blue while I have speculated on who I think will actually win in Red. Just something to keep in mind.

BEST PICTURE
"Atonement" (Focus Features)
"Juno" (Fox Searchlight)
"Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.)
"No Country for Old Men" (Miramax and Paramount Vantage)
"There Will Be Blood" (Paramount Vantage and Miramax)

All I really ask here is that "Atonement" not win. I have a problem with movies adapted from books this excellent (okay, except Harry Potter). I'd love Juno to win...the whole story of how this movie got made is mystical and somewhat anti-establishment. TWBB will win, however, because of its 1) timely political undertones and 2) Daniel Day Lewis who is always playing some butt-ugly character who is given the assumption of deep social resonance. And in the commercials he has a vein clearly popping out of his forehead. Julia Roberts had that same vein when she won for Erin Brockovich. Let's face it...the Academy loves vein-popping performances.

PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE
George Clooney in "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.)
Daniel Day-Lewis in "There Will Be Blood" (Paramount Vantage and Miramax)
Johnny Depp in "Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street" (DreamWorks and Warner Bros., Distributed by DreamWorks/Paramount)
Tommy Lee Jones in "In the Valley of Elah" (Warner Independent)
Viggo Mortensen in "Eastern Promises" (Focus Features)

This is a toughie b/c all choices are hot (yes...even TLJ in that kind of "craggy" way) so that does me no good. I'd love to see Viggo bring this one home. From what I could tell, he nailed the Russian accent of his character that's somekind of hitman in the Russian Mob. He also sports a body full of sweet tattoos, delivers what I believe is the first full-frontal nudity scene by a male in a mass-released movie (and in that scene, he's actually fighting...hmmm...I'm not sure how I feel about that), and has recently strung together some excellent performances that have gotten exactly zero notice. Even though he's not young, he's standing on the brink of "stardom" akin to that of Harrison Ford, Tom Hanks, Denzel. This could tip the scales in his favor. Despite all of this, DDL will win b/c of the vein-popping. Mark my words. (P.S.--I wouldn't mind if Johnny got this nod either...who else could really play the Demon Barber of Fleet Street on the big screen?)

PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Casey Affleck in "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" (Warner Bros.)
Javier Bardem in "No Country for Old Men" (Miramax and Paramount Vantage)
Hal Holbrook in "Into the Wild" (Paramount Vantage and River Road Entertainment)
Philip Seymour Hoffman in "Charlie Wilson’s War" (Universal)
Tom Wilkinson in "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.)

This category: much easier. Casey Affleck--too young. Hal Hobrook--too old...seriously, I thought this dude kicked it ten years ago. Philip Seymour Hoffman--too weird and this movie is too commerical and was a colossal flop at the box office...and I was actually surprised he wasn't nominated instead for his role in The Savages which would have made my estimation much different. I'd love to see TW win: his body of work in supporting roles is huge and he's ALWAYS good. Can I tell you what he's been in? No. And that's the point of this category. He's the greatest supporting actor ever known. Unfortunately, Javier Bardem has more superficially going for him. He's a Spaniard (and we loooove those...look at Antonio Banderas: talented? We don't know. Spanish: yes. Award winner: yes) and he had this wacky, Dorothy Hamill haircut in this movie. In the same vein as Daniel Day-Lewis previously (pun shamelessly intended), the Academy loves these "method" performances. The haircut will win.

PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE
Cate Blanchett in "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" (Universal)
Julie Christie in "Away from Her" (Lionsgate)
Marion Cotillard in "La Vie en Rose" (Picturehouse)
Laura Linney in "The Savages" (Fox Searchlight)
Ellen Page in "Juno" (Fox Searchlight)

This is a seriously difficult category on the "I wish" side of things. Laura Linney should win one of these one day...and she will, but not this year. Too much other compelling competition. Ellen Page...I have to assume this is really an emotional pick and illustrates, in my estimation, the value in releasing a movie almost immediately before noms are in. People got all caught up in Juno without thinking more objectively about the performance. (See more in the screenplay category for this conversation). Marion Cotillard should win this. Albeit a newcomer, from what I read she absolutely nailed her recreation of Edith Piaf on screen. And I just want to listen to her accept the award (if she is going to be a scab and actually cross the WGA picket lines). Unfortunately, Julie Christie is an emotional favorite here. She's an old lady playing someone struggling with Alzheimer's--or some mental disorder. As Michael Caine's pageant-trainer so famously says in Miss Congeniality, "The winner was a deaf-mute...you can't beat a deaf-mute." Same scenario: Not even Edith Piaf can beat and old, decrepit character dying of a debilitating mental disease. And Julie Christie was Lara in Dr. Zhivago and Madame Rosmerta in Harry Potter. She's been waiting a long time. Oh, and if Cate Blanchett wins in this category, I'll kill myself...okay, maybe not kill...but I'll seriously consider maiming...something that's temporary.

PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Cate Blanchett in "I’m Not There" (The Weinstein Company)
Ruby Dee in "American Gangster" (Universal)
Saoirse Ronan in "Atonement" (Focus Features)
Amy Ryan in "Gone Baby Gone" (Miramax)
Tilda Swinton in "Michael Clayton" (Warner Bros.)

Actually, both of these are hopes, but I'm confident Tilda will take it. If Saorise Ronan wins, I'll know people are smoking crack. This Irish Dakota Fanning needs to put in more time before she gets recognized with this award. I'd argue it's the character as it's written, and not as performed, that's striking--a product of the author and not the actor. Go back to 7th grade and maybe we'll see ya next year, hon. Amy Ryan plays a coked out, wrong-side-of-the-tracks but make-good mom has a lot of appeal...we want to root for the underdog, don't we? I have absolutely no knowledge of American Gangster at all, so Ruby Dee could really deserve this and I don't know. Sorry Ruby. I hope for Cate Blanchett here b/c she's nominated for playing Bob Dylan in one of the craziest movies I've ever heard of...how cool would it be for a woman to win an award for playing a iconic male weirdo-slash-genius? Very cool. Tilda, however, will win b/c she plays an "ugly" woman on screen; she's dressed in conservative corporate wear, sporting no make-up and stringy blond hair. She's today's unwaxed woman and the Academy loves those "gritty" performances. It takes courage to look "normal" on screen. She sewed it up with those conservative too-low but still high black pumps and a skirt that hits her mid-shin.

DIRECTOR
Paul Thomas Anderson - "There Will Be Blood"
Ethan Coen & Joel Coen - "No Country For Old Men"
Tony Gilroy - "Michael Clayton"
Jason Reitman - "Juno"
Julian Schnabel - "The Diving Bell And The Butterfly"

Having not seen the movies, this one's tough to comment on. However, Jason Reitman is Ivan Reitman's son. To me, anyone who can count Ghostbusters as part of their ancestral legacy should win ANY award. Who cares about his actual, individual merit? Nepotism is not always bad. The Coens will win because nobody has forgotten their awesomeness that includes and Fargo and O' Brother, Where Art Thou? And, they were the purveyors of "the haircut" (previously discussed) which only gives them another strong check in the "plus" category.

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Brad Bird - "Ratatouille"
Diablo Cody - "Juno"
Tony Gilroy - "Michael Clayton"
Tamara Jenkins - "The Savages"
Nancy Oliver - "Lars and the Real Girl"

I'm going to out on a limb here and say that this will be the category where what is ideal and real will meet. I think Diablo's absolutely running away with this here. Why? 1) Her name means "Devil"= deliciously cool 2) She used to be a stripper = street cred 3) She used to be poor = ultimate rags to riches story 4) She wrote a hamburger phone into the screenplay as a major character = original 5) She created Juno = feminist but without the angry edge 6) Did I say her name means "devil"? Of all of these, I think her work is most witty, cynical, and cutting edge, which seems to be the tone of all of these movies. The only exception is Michael Clayton which might steal it for that only reason. Then I'll be angry. Go, Diablo!

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Paul Thomas Anderson - "There Will Be Blood"
Ethan & Joel Coen - "No Country for Old Men"
Christopher Hampton - "Atonement"
Ronald Harwood - "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"
Sarah Polley - "Away from Her"

Same phenomenon here, but for different reasons: These two actually wrote this script and directed the movie. Who doesn't love multi-tasking? And furthermore, Christopher Hampton should be ashamed of himself--he surely destroyed what is the ultimate best book I've ever read. Leave it alone Christopher...move to a small, tropical island and seek refuge there. I'll stop hunting you down in a year or so.

ANIMATED FEATURE
"Persepolis" - (Sony Pictures Classics) Marjane Satrapi and Vincent Paronnaud
"Ratatouille" - (Pixar; Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Distribution) Brad Bird
"Surf’s Up" - (Sony Pictures Releasing) Ash Brannon and Chris Buck

I don't care about these animated movies at all this year. But given that Ratatouille 1) Is a French movie 2) about a culinary rat 3) that's the only one of the three I can remember 4) because Disney spent bajillions of dollars promoting it...it'll win. It does mark the selling out of Patton Oswalt who I will never forgive. Ever.

Hope you don't mind but I left out all the other categories because, let's face it, those are the ones we use for bathroom breaks and snack-making ventures anyway, proving that we could really all care less. You can thank me later.

Reality TV Takeover

(Harumph). I'm starting to feel the weight of this writers' strike as my lack of posting is really due solely to the fact that THERE'S NO NEW TELEVISION ON except for reality shows that are even starting to show the stress of lack of creativity. I'm stuck in an endless cycle of re-runs and marathons which were fun for a few weeks but are now making me feel lifeless and lethargic. So, in an attempt to save the pop culture tent from it's dearth of television, I'll give you a quick up date on the shows I have been watching...and re-watching...and re-watching....and re-watching...oh, sorry--I fell into the endless loop again.

Project Runway (BRAVO): I do look forward to this show b/c it's still able to maintain some sense of newness. Finally (half-way through the season), I feel like the people left make sense. I just want to know what kind of good luck potion Ricky's been taking...he should have been gone weeks ago. Everyone else at least creates compelling designs. And Michael Kors just makes me happy. He's just powerful enough to say whatever he wants and people listen, no matter how bitchy. And Tim Gunn, although for awhile seemingly a robotic version of himself, has managed to wittily regain my loyalty. That man does have a big ol' compassionate heart, albeit with a starched collar.

Make Me a Supermodel (BRAVO). No. No I won't. Because this is an awful show. If you want to know how bad, I'll tell you. It makes me regularly think, "Tyra Banks really is talented." Niki Taylor and Tyson Beckford--two of the weirdest, boring-est, plastic animatrons I've ever seen. And who are these dregs of model hopefuls who they found? Bad.

Jon and Kate Plus 8 (TLC). These two (Jon and Kate) wanted three kids and ended up with 8. It's fascinating to watch what family chaos really looks like. And the kids are cute. And Kate's crazy. Not a bad way to spend an hour on Monday evenings.

America's Next Top Model Marathons (MTV, VH1). These have been running non-stop since Christmas and I'm officially running out of desire to watch them. I know every episode now and I do have my favorites, so given the marathon format, I can tune in at certain times to watch my favorites. Serves as a great reminder of just how bad the afore-mentioned modeling show really is.

The Office Rerun's (TBS). I'm just new enough to the series that these reruns are like little gems on Tuesday nights. Like Forrest Gump's box a'chocolates, ya never knaw what yure gonna git.

Scrubs Reruns (Comedy Central). This has been my one savior as I never watched this show when it was actually running on primetime, so it's like a new series to me. JD and the crew--love 'em.

Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew (VH1). Despite it's title and the fact it's on VH1, I haven't found this show necessarily exploitative or disgusting. It's fascinating to watch Dr. Drew Pinsky (of Loveline fame) treat these "celebrity" clients (Joanie Laurer--Chyna Doll--is a stretch on *celebrity* I think) who are withdrawing from a variety of drug addictions. As Dr. Drew says, the point is not to make "trainwreck" tv but to display the reality of rehab and I think this show does that. Is it "iffy" that the star's get paid to do this--yes, but it's VH1--they pay for celebs to lose weight, to live in a house together for no reason, to get married. It's what they do. Of all of these shows, Dr. Drew brings a little credibility and reality (truly) to a painful experience.

And while I'm reaching a point of desperation there are some shows I absolutely refuse to watch no matter what. No condition makes it ever okay to watch:

Rock of Love II with Bret Michaels (VH1). We had to suffer through RoL I and now there's another. The women on this show are disgusting. Bret Michaels is disgusting-er. No. No. No.

American Idol. When will this show go away? A parade of sucky singers being sold as what Americans should want to hear.

Almost anything on E! Now that Ryan Seacrest has his manicured, curiously feminine hands all over that channel, it's like American Idol lite.

Are you Smarter than a Fifth Grader? Not if you watch this show.

There's a whole list, but they all look basically the same. Let's just say this: I've never appreciated television writers more than I do at this very moment. Please writers, come back soon!

Miss America: Maybe Not all Change is Good

Oh effing no. I was totally pumped about this show...the prospects, the hope, the change, the fact of de-plasticization. Oh, woe is me. After the 2nd episode, I have very serious doubts about this. Here's a laundry list of the reasons why in reverse order of importance:

1. A lame attempt at reality show format. So they have these contests...that are lame...and with zero apparent consequences. "Why" I ask, "Why?" TLC--you cannot just throw out any old drivel and assume that tv-watchers are idiots. We are now highly evolved and used to watching shows with a complexity rivaling that of disarming a highly dangerous explosive. You can't take us of Lost and 24 ilk and hand us not only a stupid but inconsequential series of "trials" and assume all with be hunky dory. In fact, it is neither hunky nor dory.

2. Michael Urie. Annoying. Un-funny. Overly-perky. Overly quirky. Overly unknown. Did I already say, "Not funny." This dude's part of the bain of the whole existence of this show. Maybe someone who looks like they didn't just come off a stint at band camp would help thing. I don't know.

3. "Expert" consultants. Under what rock did they un-earth these gems? I find it very hard to believe that these B-list, no-name, tranny look-alikes that they've brought in to "make women modern" know anything about making women modern. I find them bitchy without the reputation to support the bitchiness. And without a huge amount of talent or appeal. Not good.

4. And, finally, the judges. Admittedly, I thought this might be the deal breaker and sure enough, it is. Their advice is fleeting, confusing, and a bit off. Their critiques are uneven and, in my estimation, also have nothing to do with a real or a modern women or even the actual situation at hand. And consider the source, I suppose. A "stylist" (which seems to be code for "I flunked out of design school"), the West Coast editor of "US Weekly"(the job for the gossipy Queen Bee of high school clique-dom), and the male photographer. All super-great candidates to decide what the modern American woman should be.

5. The editing. Yikes. TLC is no Amazing Race that's for sure. By the looks of the show, there are 6 women in the competition--3 who know what's up and 3 who should be mocked shamelessly. And what we see from these 6--just bad. It's so clearly edited to make us think one thing while the truth is the opposite that it's not even fun. Trying. Too. Hard. Strangling. Me.

I'm so disappointed because the promise of relevant change was dangled not so far from my pop culture nose, leading me to a mirage in the old-fashioned desert. Miss America is a classic symbol of the American woman (whether or not it's right is another debate). It needs a change because it simply does not represent women at all but instead forces modern competitors into roles that are so out-dated they're laughable. But the driving force behind the change seems no more savvy or modern than women prancing around in bathing suits and singing bad versions of operatic arias; it's just different. At the height of the problem is that we never even know the contestants real names--they're all "Miss [insert state here]." Would anyone really stand for that anymore? Just because we watch them to discuss at dinner one night stale and prosaic "debate topics" (contraception, abortion, etc), we still also witness the judges hold them to unreal fashion standards and berate them in they're not wearing enough eye-liner. The ones who really challenged others on the debate questions were edited to look aggressive and angry. And there are an awful lot of tears being shown. It's a reality check--but who's reality and how real is it? At this point, all of this still has absolutely nothing to do with me, which means I'm tempted to go surfing and give up on Miss America altogether.

Even after the 2nd episode, it's clear no change will actually be happening here. Yes they cut some hair and made some "suggestions", but they're all superficial; it seems that works on both the literal and the metaphorical level. Oh well. I'm really pinning my hopes on the state costumes now.

Miss America: She's a-Changin'

Confession: I love the Miss America pageant. I always have. There's nothing quite like hunkering down on a Saturday night with a bowl of popcorn and a diet Coke and making fun of the parade of states that opens every pageant, requiring that each beautiful albeit plastified state contestant don a costume representative of her state. Please...that's entertainment. From there we go directly to swimwear (boring) to talent (fascinating in a train-wreck kinda way) to evening-gown-slash-interview (usually embarassing). Hey, I never once said I was a fan of this event. No-no...I just like to watch and laugh.

But, this year there's a massive change underway over at this famous "scholarship program." Basically citing a complete lack of cultural relevancy and threat of extinction, the Miss America Pageant has undertaken what can only be considered a revolutionary re-vamping this year. Normally shown on network tv (ABC in the past) in primetime, this year's pageant will air on TLC (of all cable channels...this is the group that brought you Little People, Big World and Trading Spaces) only after all 52 contestants (including Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico) have participated in a reality show called Miss America: Reality Check also on TLC. The whole premise of the show is to update and basically de-pageantize the "girls" (some of whom are upwards of 25 years old) who have sunk a lifetime of money, time, and effort into looking and acting like Barbie. In an effort to retain what we cultural sociologists call "cultural resonance," the pageant now seeks a modern woman. I think this means one who doesn't use AquaNet and lists furniture rearranging as a talent. Alas, I'm still getting to the bottom of this.

I watched the first episode on Friday and it was absolutely delicious. It opened with Stacey and Clinton from What Not To Wear randomly opening contestants suitcases and critiquing the wardrobe they brought along. Three regular judges (a stylist, a fashion editor, and a photographer) spend their time trying to rid the contestants of any remnant of old pageant ways including too much make-up, too-big hair, and any item of clothing that's polyester, rhinestone-studded, or neon in color. Meanwhile, the girls are slowly having meltdowns (the most ingrained in pageant culture going first) as everything they've ever known or done to make it to this point has been thrown in the dumper and called weird, gross, and wrong.

Admittedly, there are parts of this show that are absolutely clunky. It's clearly supposed to operate as other "contestants live together" shows ala America's Next Top Model, Big Brother, The Real World. However, with no one getting "voted out," this could become really heinous and ugly. (I lived with 4 other girls once and I nearly lost my mind...I cannot imagine living with 51!) The judges are totally illegitimate--I don't know them and they sound crazy, especially Dina Sansing who, based on various talking-head specials on VH1 and E!, appears to have a single-digit IQ. You can check out the whole crew here if interested. (And who the hell is Michael Urie?). I also have this gut feeling of sorrow and perhaps pity for those contestants who a clearly not "game" for this change. Some have obviously been competing in the pageant circuit for years, have finally won their state pageant looking like a tranny playing an extra in "Hairspray," and now they have to (gasp) look NORMAL! If it were me (and it wouldn't be, but if it were) I might feel like the rug had been ripped out from under me. Now they're being mocked by a known-by-nobody cast of judges including Michael Urie (again, who the hell is Michael Urie?).

On the flip side, this is going to be really interesting from a sociological standpoint. Now on TLC (of all places), we can watch a classic American symbol change under duress and sometimes force. Even more fun, the results of the television show will somehow impact the actual pageant (though I'm not totally sure how--another TLC-riffic detail). Built in are assumptions about gender and popular culture and even in the first episode the contestants faced off on issues surrounding religion, politics, and sex. This is the treasure trove of which I've always dreamt. I just wonder if they'll keep the state costumes--those seemed harmless enough and always good fun. And I can't wait until the talents come slithering out of their shadowy little corners. That will be a great day. Only time will tell.

Watch it...I'm tellin' ya, it's gonna be awesome. Fridays at 9pm (CST) on TLC. I'll be there.