Posts Tagged ‘Ridiculous’

Woody Allen vs. American Apparel

April 17, 2009

American Apparel’s (“AA”) tactics in their defense against Woody Allen’s $10mm lawsuit reeks of desperation.  A synopsis: AA, sometime last year, unveiled a billboard on Allen Street in Manhattan that had an image of Woody Allen dressed as a rabbi from the movie “Annie Hall” with the AA logo emblazoned across the image.  Picture from NYT:

Obviously erected without the permission of the reticent Allen, the billboard advertisement was in stark contrast to AA’s usual ads which featured young female models in suggestive soft-pornish poses.  Allen went ahead and filed a $10mm lawsuit for damages.  AA’s lawyer’s response:

‘Woody Allen expects $10 million for use of his image on billboards that were up and down in less than one week,’ Slotnick said. ‘I think Woody Allen overestimates the value of his image.'”

Slotnick also revealed that AA is going to make Woody Allen’s personal history with regards to his wife/ex-adopted daughter the focal point of their defense.

Doesn’t that sound like the most salt-on-the-wound, below-the-belt, playground defense ever?  An analogy: Boy A kicks Boy B in the nuts.  When reprimanded, Boy A goes: everyone knows that B’s  got small balls anyway, so why would it hurt?  B, please show the world your small balls to prove that I’m right!

In response, Woody Allen’s lawyers accused AA of a “scorched earth” approach in its defense.  Let’s hope some common sense prevails here.  Go Woody!

UPDATE (5/18/09) – They’ve reached a $5mm settlement!  La-di-da.

By making an allusion to the film Annie Hall, from which the image of Allen was taken, he intended to comment about tabloid scandal-mongering. The specific scene of the film shows Allen in the role of Alvy Singer at a dinner hosted by Annie Hall’s non-Jewish family. The character feels so out of place at the table that he imagines himself as an Hasidic Jew.

Charney said his idea was to use that personification of discomfort as a metaphor for what he and his company were going through at the time during the sexual harassment lawsuits.

“The billboards were designed to inspire dialogue. They were certainly never intended to sell clothes,” he said.

Advertisements

Film on LKY seized by MDA during SDP screening (woah, acronym overload there)

May 21, 2008

SDP organized a “private screening” of a film about LKY.  Films in Singapore are subject to the Films Act, which states that the making or screening of any film about Singapore politics is illegal, and will have very dire consequences for anyone involved.  Obviously SDP, given their political kamikaze mentality, didn’t give a rat’s ass about this and went ahead with the screening.  Someone at MDA then gets a tip off about this, and they converge on the event in the middle of the screening.  Obviously a conflict ensues, and thanks to technology, it is all on YouTube for us to see.

In the video, Ms. Chee (Soon Juan’s sister) is seen in a confrontation with MDA officials, and ultimately, a plainclothes policeman in a video. Ms. Chee already has a whole series of YouTube videos on her run-ins with Big Brother, but this one might be the most entertaining by far (second only to the “I’m going to the hotel for coffee” one), because the MDA officials’ faces all turn super chao-bin when they get the “this is my right” and “what is reasonable” diatribe from Chee.

From some WP Remix site (you can watch the videos of the confrontation at the site):

Film on Lee Kuan Yew seized by MDA
Posted by Buzz on May 19th, 2008

It was a private screening but that didn’t stop officers from the Media Development Authority (MDA) from seizing a copy of the film, “One Nation Under Lee”, at the Tulip Room in the Peninsular Excelsior Hotel.

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) screened the film to an audience of about 70 people, who paid $20 each to attend the lunch-cum-film event on Saturday, May 17.

The film, produced by activist and artist Seelan Pillay, was a narrative of how Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew subjugated various institutions in Singapore, such as the press, under the government’s control during his time as Prime Minister. It also depicted how the social divide in Singapore is a result of the People’s Action Party’s policies. The film included interviews with former Solicitor General Francis Seow, political detainee Said Zahari, opposition politician JB Jeyaretnam and scenes of various public protests which had taken place in Singapore.

Twenty minutes into the screening, three officers from the MDA, one of whom identified himself as “senior assistant director” Mr Tan Chiu Kee, arrived and demanded that the organizers stopped the screening and handed over the film. They were met outside the door of the room by Ms Chee Siok Chin and other SDP members and supporters.

The officers explained to Ms Chee that they were contravening the Films Act, which stipulates that any film intended for public exhibition must be submitted to the MDA for a licence. Failure to do so would incur a fine of $100 for each copy of the film in possession. Whether the SDP had committed any other offence is unclear as the MDA officers did not say.

The SDP explained that since the screening was already taking place, the officers should allow it to go on and the SDP would hand over the film then. The officers refused and at one point warned the SDP that they were “obstructing justice”.

The MDA officers then called in the police who arrived for a brief period. They left after the SDP agreed to hand over the film. By this time, the screening of the film had ended.

The copy of the film was then handed over to the officers who also asked for the dvd player used to screen the film.

The event continued with Seelan Pillay and film maker Martyn See taking the floor and answering questions from the audience, which TOC understands included two US embassy officials.

During See’s Q&A session, the MDA officers returned again and asked for the LCD projector. The SDP refused. The audience heckled and scolded the officers who promptly left – without the projector.

Second wind

May 20, 2008

Want to write something to vent after this weekend+1 stretch of working.  It’s terrible working with people who are all kan chiong spiders, clambering over one another to try and get the page numbers to appear properly on a page.  My spine feels flaccid from sitting in a curled position at my desk all weekend, and my mind just refuses to process anymore information.  I remember in the Army TSRs we used to read about the effects of sleep deprivation on soldiers.  I haven’t got the the point where I’m hallucinating about the ghost from The Ring yet, but I’m definitely seeing in tunnel vision already.

Publicity stunt stopped because of lack of permit

May 19, 2008

This is quite ridiculous, really. When are they gonna loosen up?

Protest

Publicity stunt to promote Anlene Orchard Mile goes awry

SINGAPORE: A publicity stunt to promote the Anlene Orchard Mile run may have ended up running afoul of the law.

About 20 men took part in a ‘mock protest’ along Orchard Road on Sunday afternoon to complain about not being able to take part in the women-only run.

The organisers did not have a permit to do so and police are investigating the incident.

The Anlene Orchard Mile, which will be held on June 15, is in its second year.

Organisers had hoped 5,000 women would sign up for the run. – CNA/so/ir

OMFG

May 12, 2008

This is the most ridiculous thing ever. Watch this video of Jesus catching a man watching porn, then read how the company behind GodTube is valued by investors at $150 million.

From Dealbook:

GodTube, Where Networking Is More Spiritual Than Social

GodTube.com, a YouTube knockoff for the evangelical set, seems to be one step closer to building a kingdom on earth.

Last week, news broke that the owner of the site, which shows Christian videos and features a flip-through Bible and prayer blogs, had won a $30 million investment from GLG Partners, a big London hedge fund. The investment valued GodTube, which is owned by Big Jump Media, at nearly $150 million, according to PaidContent.org.

GodTube offers sermons, theological debates, Christian rap videos and low-budget skits like “See man watching porn get caught by Jesus!” (which plays out exactly as the title suggests). The investment will help sustain the on-screen Bible and a prayer wall on which Web surfers can petition God to bless the afflicted or revive a drifting relationship.

When it was formally introduced last August, GodTube was the fastest-growing Web site, as rated by comScore, attracting 1.7 million unique visitors for the month. The traffic remains about the same today. “People thirst for more than just a once-a-week relationship with the Lord and Savior,” Jason Illian, Big Jump Media’s chief strategy officer, told The New York Times. “They desire something that they can live out 24/7.”

Unlike its secular cousin, YouTube, GodTube is proudly filtered: all content must gain approval from the site’s headquarters in Plano, Tex. Vulgar and overtly sexual material isn’t allowed. Neither are videos promoting other religions — for that, there are JewTube.com and IslamicTube.net. (Appropriately enough, the domain name SatanTube.com is for sale.)

Mocking Christianity is definitely not allowed. James O’Malley, a 20-year-old from Leicestershire, in Britain, posted a series of videos last year that jeered at evangelical theology. During a videotaped walking tour of the Natural History Museum in London, he referred to a plesiosaur fossil as a “liar-saur” and noted that volcanoes tended to erupt in non-Christian countries.

“The first couple of videos, where I spoke about Biblical infallibility and homosexuality, remained on GodTube and were treated like any other video,” Mr. O’Malley told The Times. “It was only when I posted a third video suggesting that the earth was flat and that astronauts were part of the ‘round earth’ conspiracy that they finally cottoned on to the fact it was a hoax, and I was banned.”

More in line with GodTube’s spirit is “Baby Got Book,” a satire of the rapper Sir Mix-A-Lot’s ode to the full-size derrière, “Baby Got Back.” In it, Dan Smith, a 34-year-old minister at a church near Cleveland, simultaneously praises godly women and pokes fun at aspects of Christian culture. He dances around with a gold neck medallion reading KJV (for King James Version) and tweaks Sir Mix-A-Lot’s lyrics so that “butt” becomes “Bible” and “she looks like a total prostitute” turns into “looks like Mother Teresa.”

The video has logged more views on GodTube than it has on YouTube. Mr. Smith says he appreciates the exposure, though he prefers promoting his music in places where he can reach nonbelievers, like call-in radio shows. “I just know there aren’t a lot of unchurched or de-churched people going to GodTube,” he told The times.

That self-selecting audience is part of the site’s marketing appeal. GodTube’s advertisers sell Bible software and degrees from online seminaries. The site plans to provide Facebook-like pages soon for ministries and churches.

“What that does is sort of replicate the Mel Gibson ‘Passion of the Christ’ marketing plan,” Mara Einstein, an associate professor at Queens College and the author of a recent book about the marketing of religion, told The Times. “If the pastors become the salespeople of it, I think this is going to explode, absolutely.”