Tuesday, September 29, 2009

After Derrion Albert's Video Taped Beating Death, a Few Questions and more...

Tue Sep 29 2009
derrion albert video
After Derrion Albert's Video Taped Beating Death, a Few Questions

Derrion Albert, Chicago-based 16-year old who attended Bible Class every week, was beaten to death on September 24. A bystander's video captured the truly horrific ordeal. Four alleged attackers are now being charged as adults. And we have some questions. First, here's what happened: Albert was leaving his high school last Thursday when two rival gangs — one called "The Ville" for their neighborhood — approached the area, all macho and shit. Two guys from the nameless gang attacked Albert with a wooden railroad plank, called a tie, and then, for some reason, five guys from the rival gang got in on the action. One man, 19-year-old Silvanus Shannon, admitted that he stomped — fucking stomped — on this poor kid's head. It's all very disturbing. (I watched it, for this post, and really wish I hadn't. There's an audible crack of Albert's skull. Here's a link, although I don't recommend it.) This being the 21st century, a bystander video taped the whole thing and then gave it to Albert's family, the police and a local Fox channel. Because that's what you do with sensational video, you give it to the media, which will have a field day with the brutal details. It all sounds so familiar, but perhaps this case will be a bit different. Yes, videotaped beatings have become common place. Just earlier this month there was that video of a white teen getting beaten on the school bus by teens some described as a bunch of black racists. (And Obama wants kids to spend more time in school? As if.) Albert's case differs, though, because this is a death, not some talking point. This is a video of someone losing their life. Poof. It's gone. And there are dozens of people cheering on the action. If you don't believe in Kitty Genovese — girl stabbed on the street, disputed newspaper stories say no one helped, social scientists had a field day — maybe you should now. People are watching the attack and then we're watching them watch. But could it be that people should watch this? Should this become standard viewing so that everyday folk understand man's appallingly violent underbelly? Or maybe we've all become too aware and can no longer be bothered to feel the weight of that unsettling realization. Would it be naive to hope that's not the case? As for the camerawoman herself: we're torn between finding her a bit culpable (at one point she says "get closer") and being thankful her morbid, but very human, fascination with violence and technological prowess got the (alleged) attackers on tape. That's some 21st century justice right there. MORE >>

POSTED: Mon Sep 28 2009 21:13



Creative ways to get laid
Enter the Rape Tunnel, For Art

Richard Whitehurst is an artist in Columbus, Ohio. He's building a big wooden tunnel, and if you crawl through it, he will rape you [Update: Or will he??]. Hey, you made the choice to go into the Rape Tunnel. Read the disclaimers! This "controversial" new work will reportedly go up in a gallery there, in Ohio, and then I guess people will come to see it or whatever, and guess what happens then? I've constructed a 22 ft tunnel out of plywood that leads into the project room. There is no way in or out of the project room except for this tunnel. As you travel through the tunnel, it gets smaller and smaller, making it so that you have to crawl and put yourself in a submissive position in order to reach the tunnel's destination. At the end of the tunnel the subject will find me waiting in the project room and I'll try to the best of my ability to overpower and rape the person who crawls through. See this is actually the sequel to Whitehurst's famed "PUNCH-YOU-IN-THE-FACE TUNNEL," where he says he punched some aspiring model in the face and broke her nose and they're still in court like years later but hey, what sort of tunnel did she think she was getting into?!! Anyhow we very much encourage you to read this entire Artlurker.com interview with Whitehurst, cause we're not technically accredited art experts, so far be it from us to say where, exactly, the Rape Tunnel fits in "the canon" of Modern Rape Art. But before you book your tickets to Columbus, ladies (or gents! Young or old! He's taking all comers!), remember: I want to make it clear that I plan to make the experience as unpleasant as I possibly can to anyone who dares to crawl through the tunnel. I will try to the best of my ability to make them regret their decision. We are totally taking a field trip. [Pic: Artlurker] UPDATE: A tipster notes that Googling "Richard Whitehurst artist" turns up virtually no background on the guy. Likewise, the interviewer "Sheila Zareno" seems to be absent from Google. So this could all be hoax! Be warned, before you get all enthusiastic for the Rape Tunnel. Know more? Email us. MORE >>

POSTED: Mon Sep 28 2009 16:53



huffington post
Jets Don't Count for Greed Hater Arianna Huffington

Arianna Huffington is accustomed to a life of wealth. She rides her friends' yachts and jets. She even wanted to buy a plane for the Huffington Post, says an insider. So why's she talking about CEO "excess" on The View? Today's appearance, which involved a discussion of corporate executive "narcissism" and excess spending (see attached clip), should have been jarring for anyone familiar with Huffington's lifestyle and spending habits. The Brentwood, California-based internet mogul might drive a Prius and engage in environmental posturing, but that doesn't keep her from hitching rides of David Geffen's jet; hopping on a private plane with Ari Emanuel and Larry David for the New Hampshire primaries; or cruising around the ocean on Larry Ellison's enormous yacht (partly owned by Geffen). Such gallivanting must feel utterly natural to Huffington, a former socialite who started HuffPo from her mansion following an eight-year marriage to wealthy oil scion Michael Huffington. Her spending apparently strikes Huffington as something utterly different from what those evil Wall Street types did. But Huffington's no penny pincher in the corporate suite, either. Her profligate ways became an issue with HuffPo's board, an insider told us. Huffington denied that charge. But there's no question she throws lavish parties, including HuffPo's A-list inaugural ball at the Newseum in January. And with HuffPo's editorial headquarters in New York, she's constantly racking up travel expenses, including that time, notorious internally, when she sent an assistant across the country and back to fetch her passport. Also, rather than just rent a Gotham apartment, Huffington became a frequent guest at the Mercer Hotel luxury boutique. And her travel preferences are said to be exactingly cushy: First class, aisle, bulkhead seat on a three-class plane only, fully refundable and non-stop. Preferably American or United. (Huffington, to be fair, sometimes relaxes these requirements for a convenient Southwest Airlines hop to San Francisco or Vegas. Southwest has only one class of seating.) But that's apparently small time, as far as Huffington is concerned, not to mention a royal pain in the neck to her and the editors she has used as personal secretaries. After one infusion of fresh capital, Huffington was heard internally telling staff that everyone's lives would be greatly improved "once we get the jet." It would seem that was one spending spree that was never approved, and for good reason: It's an absurd idea. Even assuming Huffington Post is on track to more than double last year's purported revenues of $9 million, as one anonymous insider claims, that's not jet money. (Huffington and her spokesman did not answer repeated inquiries on revenue.) At the absolute low end, the cost would start at $3 million, before you get to operating costs which for jet aircraft are typically in the thousands of dollars per hour. Fractional ownership jets also cost in the multiple thousands of... MORE >>

POSTED: Mon Sep 28 2009 14:37



roman polanski
Roman Polanski FAQ's

As the world has learned, 77-year-old director Roman Polanski was arrested and faces extradition to the US over a 31-year-old rape case. Seemed a good moment to sort out what the h- this is all about. Q: Who is this old dude anyway? A: Roman Polanski's is one of most colorful lives of the 20th Century. A young Jewish boy when the Nazis invaded Poland, he managed to survive the war, hiding out while his parents were deported to concentration camps. Becoming an internationally celebrated filmmaker in his 20's, Polanski defected from his native Poland to seek artistic freedom in the west. In France and later in the US, he became a noted international playboy and directed a run of still classics that included Repulsion, Rosemary's Baby and Chinatown. After settling down and marrying actress Sharon Tate however, his long-denied domestic bliss was interrupted when Charles Manson's apostles murdered his very pregnant young wife. Polanski's post-Tate period witnessed a return to his international playboy ways, an epoch ended by his arrest for rape in 1977. Q: What was he accused of? A: The LA District Attorney charged Polanski with luring a thirteen year old aspiring actress/model to Jack Nicholson's home, drugging and anally raping her. Q: Was the girl Justine Bateman? A: No! But this was an urban legend for many years. The victim's name is in fact Samantha Geimer who has since spoken to the press about her experience, including today expressing her wishes that Polanski be punished no further. Q: What happened with his trial? A: As detailed in a recent documentary, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, the trial was a circus that makes the OJ case look like a model of jurisprudence. A judge in love with the spotlight ran the case in circles while seemingly allowing every day's headlines to dictate his rulings. Ultimately, Polanski allowed himself to be jailed for 90 days to undergo psychiatric evaluation on the understanding that this time served would constitute the bulk of his punishment. When it appeared, however, that the judge was on the brink of reneging on this promise and Polanski was facing a much longer imprisonment, he fled the country. Q: What has he done since fleeing the U.S.? A: Since fleeing in 1978, Polanski has lived in France where he has continued to work as a director, making big budget films—such as Frantic, staring Harrison Ford—in cooperation with American film companies. His career went through a rough patch in the '80s and '90s after a series of tepid misfires (eg. Pirates). He recently, however, has had a bit of a comeback winning from afar the Academy Award for The Pianist, a film inspired by his own adventures hiding out from the Nazis. Q: Why haven't we brought him back before? A: Since defecting from Poland, Polanski has held French citizenship and France's extradition treaty with the US forbids sending us their own citizens. Since fleeing, he has been careful not to venture to countries which might send him... MORE >>

POSTED: Mon Sep 28 2009 13:41



recaps
Mad Men: The Night of the Hippie Attack

Of course the moment that everyone will remember is when Don Draper got donkey punched by a bunch of drugged out kids, but it was the series of silent vignettes that really made this episode different. Matt Weiner—assisted by director Daisy von Scherler Mayer, the lady behind classic '90s indie Party Girl—starts off the episode with three out of context moments, one of Peggy, one of Betty, and one of Don each lying in a precarious state. The rest of the episode busies itself filling in the context for how we find our characters in their prone state. As the season starts to fold in on itself, with previous occurrences finally having ramifications, the situations inform us about both the characters identity and their destiny. Peggy is Dead: Well, she's not dead for real, but the lifeless falling of her arm out of the bed was certainly ominous for something to come. It's probably more that Peggy is dead meat now that she has entered into a very unwise affair with Duck. Oh, Peggy, why?! Why must you leap into bed with every man who shows you a hint of attention? I mean, Duck? Really? Duck continued trying to woo both Peggy and Pete to his agency with an Hermes scarf and a box of Cuban cigars. They both return the gifts and plan to stay where they are. However, Peggy, being sought professionally for the first time, is on shaky ground. When Pete comes and talks to her, we see that she's again out of the interoffice loop and doesn't even know about Don's meeting with Conrad Hilton. However, Pete convinces her it's best to stay put. Later, she uses that intel to try to get on the account and Don lashes out at her, telling her to do her job and stop asking for things. If Don only knew that she was on her way to Duck, who was putting all sorts of sweet nothings into her ear, he might have chosen his words more wisely. Once Peggy scampers over to see Duck, she very unconvincingly says that she is happy at Sterling Cooper and rebukes his advances of leaving the firm. He then very easily convinces her to go into bed. Oh, Peggy, why?! This can't be a wise move, but it is sure to be a definitive one for Miss Olsen. Betty is Lusty: When we first see Betty, she is in a state of repose lying on divan. Later, we see her on the same couch, but this time, patting her dress seductively. That's because pretty ice queen Betty is thinking about chilling the arms of another man. At a meeting for the Junior League—in her fabulous redecorated sitting room—the happy housewives of Ossining tell Betty that they are going to fight a 3000 gallon water tank being built on the Hudson River. Betty tentatively takes up the cause and meekly states that she knows someone in the governor's office, her old friend Henry, the pregnant belly toucher from the Kentucky Derby Party (that little shindig sure seems to be the lynchpin for this season). The other ladies seem to be keen to the fact that Henry has an eye for pretty young things and convince her to use her... MORE >>

POSTED: Mon Sep 28 2009 12:45



spam
How Your Porn Addiction Enriches Eastern Europeans

America has a terrible health insurance system and crippling shame about sex. On the bright side, our problems are helping some Eastern Europeans make thousands of dollars per week, one fraudulent internet transaction at a time. The antivirus company Sophos sicced the Russian head of its Canadian antivirus lab on various scammy sites (original report) and discovered that entry-level scammers can do pretty well for themselves. Sophos snuck into the admin panel for the affiliate of one scam site , which offered free porn if you installed a nefarious video codec (really spyware). The affiliate in question made $6,500 for Aug. 2008, probably using templates and software provided by the scam network. Another common scam involves using affiliates to sell fake prescription drugs, ostensibly from Canada. Since actual drugs aren't involved, the seller can afford to give the affiliate a 40 percent kickback; Sophos believes a single spam campaign could net $16,000 per day. It's unclear whether Eastern Europeans can continue to con Americans into spending tons of money on completely ineffective health care "solutions," with internet propaganda, now that so many American scammers have jumped into that same game. MORE >>

POSTED: Mon Sep 28 2009 12:32



poop
So How's That Tucker Max Movie Doing?

As you all know, we've just concluded the opening weekend of Tucker Max's film debut, "Alcohol and Poop Go Together Like Whores and EZ Cheez." How grand a mark has it made on cinema history? Let's go to the scorecards! Box Office Mojo sez: It opened on 120 screens and raked in a total of $369K, for an opening weekend average of $3,075 per screen. That puts Tucker's movie eighth in per-screen revenue out of the nine movies that opened last weekend. Although he came close to matching the $3,100 per screen average of Blind Date (2009). But sometimes critically acclaimed films don't have boffo box offices. It's just the nature of high art. Let's go to the reviews: Reuters: "the film is unfunny from first minute to last, and its half-hearted attempts at emotion merely underscore its general loathsomeness." USA Today: "This unfunny, über-misogynistic adaptation of Tucker Max's audacious best-seller of the same name is unlikely to please anyone." Chicago Tribune: "The result just might be the most hypocritical feature in the history of film as well as the history of hypocrisy, and along with serving beer, I hope they show 'I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell' in hell." San Francisco Chronicle: "That was epic, bro. You should make a movie ...No, you shouldn't! Put down the digital camera, step away from Robert McKee's guide to screenplays, and get back to ramming your head through Sheetrock during spring break." New York Times: "a mediocre gross-out movie that barely pushes the envelope." Boston Globe: "Ridiculously cheap-looking, smug, scurrilous, but fairly evolved for a project so fundamentally unevolved." So...mixed. We'll say "mixed reviews." MORE >>

POSTED: Mon Sep 28 2009 11:48




Click here to safely unsubscribe now from "Gawker: Top Stories" or change your subscription or subscribe

Your requested content delivery powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 9 Thoreau Way, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA. +1.978.776.9498

 

No comments:

Post a Comment

CrunchyTech

Blog Archive