Art in Entertainment:
Social Media Inspires a New and Global Trending Art Form: Content Art
As technological advancements continue to occur again and again, the world is going digital. In fact, the world is becoming so digital that the concept of social media has began to inspire an new, up and coming medium of art. This art form is referred to as content art and to some degree we have all embodied it at some point or another. Now, you may have questions by now such as “Just what exactly does this all mean?” or “How does this apply to me I am not tech Savvy?
The answers are simple. It’s the adds you see when scanning this magazine. It’s the posters outside the movie theater or the millions of like your favorite Instagram personality for posing a picture of their half eaten avocado toast at 9pm
last night. All of these were crafted by literate content artist for the rest of us content consumers to be baited to hook line and sinker. This art form doesn’t limit the general population from becoming content artist though. We are all capable. Keep posting, find what YOUR audience finds interesting and come up with the necessary click bait to keep those follower coming back for more it’s that simple!
Oscars 2019 Review: The Academy Giveth and It Taketh Away, But That Was One Helluva Show Ben Travers February 25, 2019
No host, no problem. Though the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences shouldn’t get too much credit for pulling a solid show out of the trash heap of remedied decisions leading up to it (and a few uncorrected voter errors), the 91st Academy Awards proved to work just fine sans host. None of the Oscar staples were cut, and nearly all of them proved to be a huge benefit to the telecast — from the performed songs (including an instant classic “Shallow” staging) to the would-have-been cut categories (the “Skin” creators were the most excited winners of the night) to the length and pacing (this year clocked in as the shortest in at least six years), the 2019 Oscars ran smoother and were far more absorbing than many expected.
And there was a promising indicator as to why. So much focus was put on the bad choices The Academy had been making leading up to this year’s ceremony, the one very, very good choice was largely forgotten: bringing in a more diverse voting body. Despite some problematic forward-facing winners, this year’s Oscars offered many positive steps forward. The new voting body led to a historic, long overdue win for Spike Lee; it led to four black women winning the first five trophies; it led to a record number of black winners overall; it led to women directors sweeping the shorts categories (even though no women directors were nominated for feature directing); it led to a streaming company edging closer to full-blown acceptance in Hollywood’s inner circle; and, yes, it led to a few surprises, including “Green Book” winning Best Picture. READ MORE: 2019 Oscars Winners List: ‘Green Book’ Best Picture, ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ Dominates With Four Prizes That last pick doesn’t exactly fit the progressive narrative, but progress takes time. This is what happens in transitional years: a mixed bag of statement wins and tone-deaf choices. Plus, less across-the-board cohesion is bound to happen with a larger voting body anyway. But “Green Book’s” win helps the telecast. Some viewers may be upset, but they can’t deny the show itself was entertaining, which leads us to the critical takeaway: The Oscars thrived in 2019 because they were the Oscars. The Academy didn’t so much get out of its own way, as it was forced out of its own way by public opinion. The pared down version of the show brought all the attention back to the movies and the people who made them, and what do you know? It came alive! It was raw, surprising, and heartfelt! It felt like it was coming from the deep recesses of Oscar’s being, its past self crying out, and what escaped was “haaa ah ah ah ah, aaah aaah, ah ah ah ah haaa!!”
The first hour was all about efficiency. The Queen opening numbers with frontman Adam Lambert mercifully kept it to two songs, perhaps cutting a potential third after seeing Javier Bardem get a little too excited during “We Will Rock You.” (Or they just knew how many Queen songs would be slipped into the ceremony throughout the night.) A confusing montage filled with nominees and snubbed movies alike swept in right after; presumably, it was only there to give the team time to clear the stage for presenters, as there thankfully wasn’t another random montage after that, but there’s no reason to highlight movies like “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” and “The Old Man and the Gun” with clips and voiceover when these movies could’ve been but weren’t, in the end, nominated. : Oscars 2019 Has Already Broken Record Number of Black Winners in One Ceremony Still, things moved along nicely from there. Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, and Maya Rudolph (future stars of Netflix’s “Wine Country”) were even more energizing than a legendary rock group (as if there was ever a doubt); “We are not your hosts, but we are going to stand here a little too long so the people who get a USA Today tomorrow think we hosted,” Fey said, before the trio made smart quips to defuse the Oscars controversy that preceded the ceremony: “We won’t be presenting awards during the commercials, but we will be presenting commercials during the awards,” Poehler said, before a general plug for mayonnaise. “If we had hosted, it probably would’ve gone like this,” Rudolph said, before they made purposefully cheap cracks like “Bust-er Scruggs? I hardly know her!” and “Roma’s on Netflix, what’s next, my microwave makes a movie?” Cries for them to just keep hosting picked up steam on Twitter, but it soon became clear that the show was moving along just fine without a single leader. Jason Momoa bro’d out for “Free Solo’s” win with a fitting fist pump; Melissa McCarthy and Brian Tyree Henry made the most of an obvious costume gag (“This is the correct amount of stupid,” as my sister texted me at the time); Keegan Michael-Key flew down from the ceiling a la Mary Poppins to introduce its nominated song, performed by Bette Midler. All of these presenters and more kept any lingering feelings of absence at bay. Regina King got the night off on the right foot, taking a breath to honor the moment before paying tribute to her visibly moved mother, sitting and watching with tears in her eyes. Ruth Carter and Hannah Beachler were earnest and excited on stage, as the first ever black women to be nominated and win Best Costume Design and Production Design, respectively. Alfonso Cuaron staggered his speeches, starting with a quick and poignant nod to his longtime friend and cinematographer, Emmanuel “Chivo” Lubezki, before spending a little more time behind the mic for “Roma’s” Best Foreign Language Film win, and finally letting his excitement break through the nerves when he won his second Best Director trophy. But long before Cuaron’s third solo win, the show took on a life of its own. First, the much-
anticipated, heavily hyped “Shallow” performance from Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga somehow shattered those sky-high expectations. With a brilliant choice to show it in one uncut take, masterful blocking, and a raw yet honed turn from the two stars, the Oscar telecast burst to life and never looked back. Sure, “Green Book’s” following win for Best Original Screenplay was a little awkward, but any memories of Nick Vallelonga urges for unity were erased when Spike Lee jumped into Samuel L. Jackson’s arms. More than that, he earned a second Oscar for his speech (presumably), which ended with a loving, well-earned, and pointed nod to his best film, “Do the Right Thing.” In the end, the unpredictable nature of the Oscars worked in its favor. When the winners feel inevitable, it gets boring. When the speeches are bad, the energy suffers. When there are awkward montages or bits that bomb, the crowd turns. None of that happened this year (at least, not enough to tip favor against the show, though all those Queen songs sure came close). It’s very easy to imagine things going the other way, and this version of the telecast being an utter snoozefest. In future years, The Academy would be ill-advised to rely so heavily on great speeches, a bevy of surprises, and a hostless show garnering this much buzz. But in 2019, the Oscars got to be the Oscars, and everyone won. Even “Green Book.”
.
Coachella: Everything you need to know about the festival Friday, April 13th, 2018 By ABC7.com staff Thousands are preparing to descend upon the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival, simply known as Coachella, this month. The music festival is known for attracting the biggest names in music from across different genres for two jam-packed weekends. Coachella has gone from a modest festival to one of the most popular. This year, headliners include The Weeknd, Beyoncé and Eminem. Here is a guide on everything you need to know. When is Coachella? Coachella is a two-weekend musical festival taking place April 13-15 and April 20-22. The festival moved from being one weekend to two in 2012 due to increasing popularity. Although the event takes place over two weekends, the lineup remains the same with artists performing for each weekend. Where is Coachella? The Coachella Valley is located in Southern California's Inland Empire. The festival itself is in the city of Indio, where temperatures can exceed 90 degrees. Besides music, the festival also has art installations and various tents. Coachella traffic Heads up, if you use the I-10 between Beaumont and Indio or State Route 60 from Moreno Valley to Beaumont, you'll be seeing a lot of traffic. Caltrans warns motorists that thousands of people will drive to and from the festivals over the next three weeks, with the heaviest travel on eastbound I-10 beginning Friday and Saturday and on westbound I-10 Sunday through Monday. "Please plan ahead and avoid the delays by traveling early in the morning or late evenings," Caltrans said in a press release.
The Billboard Music Awards had something to say — and actually said it
By MIKAEL WOOD
| POP MUSIC CRITIC |
How to judge Kelly Clarkson’s first time hosting an awards show? Consider that the singer brought a touch of suspense — and a deep well of feeling — to an annual production whose predictable data-based prizes include one for the year’s top-selling album. Welcoming viewers to Sunday’s Billboard Music Awards, broadcast live on NBC from the MGM Grand Garden Arena in Las Vegas, Clarkson stood before the cameras in a stark cold open and admitted, “This is gonna be so hard.” The former “American Idol” champ had been asked to lead a moment of silence, she said, for the victims of last week’s high school shooting near Houston. Yet as a native Texan and a mother of four, she explained that such an idea didn’t sit right with her — that moments of silence are no longer sufficient when “once again … we’re grieving for more kids” who died for “no reason at all.” Fighting back tears, Clarkson instead proposed “a moment of change,” and whether or not she’d run her comments by the show’s organizers ahead of time, the display felt startlingly unrehearsed. It was an expression of raw humanity in an environment that historically has suppressed them. And it wasn’t the only one Sunday. Accepting the award for top Hot 100 song, Luis Fonsi (of “Despacito” fame) thanked listeners for embracing a tune sung mostly in Spanish, then dedicated
the trophy to immigrants and dreamers and “all those who get made fun of when you speak with an accent.” The usually dopey Chainsmokers used their time onstage (after being named top dance/electronic artist) to speak movingly about the inspiration they’d taken from the Swedish producer Avicii, who died last month. Then there was Janet Jackson, this year’s winner of Billboard’s lifetimeachievement Icon Award. After performing a medley of several of her hits, Jackson began her acceptance speech by saying she believes that, despite all our challenges, “we live at a glorious moment in history.” “It’s a moment when, at long last, women have made it clear that we will no longer be controlled, manipulated or abused,” she said. “I stand with those women and with those men equally outraged by discrimination — who support us in heart and mind.” As Clarkson had suggested, silence wasn’t the thing here.
Similarly vivid emotions came through in Sunday’s performances, which in another surprise were generally stronger than Billboard’s typically lifeless awards-show norm — one perverse effect of a culture in which we’re constantly weighing the consequences of mass murder. Kicking off the three-hour program after Clarkson’s call to action, Ariana Grande was tender but resolute in “No More Tears Left to Cry,” her comeback single following the 2017 terrorist bombing that killed 22 people as fans were leaving her concert in Manchester, England. Shawn Mendes and Khalid invited members of a choir from Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School — where 17 people died in a shooting in February — to join them for their duet “Youth,” in which they sing, “You can’t take my youth away.” The result was as stirring as it was simple. And you had to admire the blend of grit and sensuality in Jackson’s “Nasty,” which seemed to be pushing back against years of narrow thinking about what a middle-aged woman should be doing with her body. (Other winners beyond Jackson included Ed Sheeran, named top artist; Khalid, who took top new artist; and Taylor Swift, whose triple-platinum “Reputation” was recognized — duh — as top-selling album.) Not everything worked as well as those highlights. Christina Aguilera and Demi Lovato were two leather-lunged singers in search of a song in their tuneless “Fall in Line,” while John Legend’s corny “A Good Night” made him look like he’d gotten lost on his way to a gig at somebody’s wedding. There were painful showings as well by two talented women unfortunately paired with useless dudes: first Jennifer Lopez, whose rendition of “Dinero” started with DJ Khaled watching Shia LaBeouf in “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps,” then Kesha, who joined Macklemore for a “Good Old Days” that just made you long for a time before they met. The show ended with another concession to nostalgia in the form of Salt-NPepa, the trailblazing hip-hop trio that performed a medley of its hits from the late ’80s and early ’90s, including “Push It,” “Shoop” and “Let’s Talk About Sex.”
But if the finale seemed to strike a throwback note out of step with the Billboard Awards’ otherwise timely vibe, the picture changed once En Vogue joined Salt-N-Pepa for a sharp and knowing take on their classic “Whatta Man.” The lyrics may have been celebrating “a mighty, mighty good man.” But the performance was enacting the proud female energy that Jackson so strikingly described as the spirit of right now.
Live Streaming: The Way It Affects Today’s World. Throughout history, the way that people have been entertained has constantly evolved. From live gladiator fights in giant arenas, to plays in a theater to watching television shows at a specific time and day, people have always looked for things to keep them amused. There is another change occurring in the way that people get the content they want and need - more people are learning about and taking advantage of live streaming than ever before. What is live streaming? Before it can be understood how live streaming is changing people’s lives, it is first necessary to understand what live streaming is. Live streaming is able to combine the best of television watching and the content of the internet. In order to take advantage of live streaming, an internet connection and some type of computer device is needed. Live streaming will require a faster internet connection than what some people may have access to. Without the faster connection, whatever is being streamed may be interrupted for buffering or may not be able to be viewed. The second piece that is needed is a computer device. There are tablets, laptops, desktops, smart TVs, smartphones and other devices that are capable of streaming content from the internet. In general, if a person can stream any content from the internet on their device, they can usually steam content live. Live content is exactly what it sounds like. The content is being viewed as it is happening. It could be a live play, an event in a theater, a television show being aired live or one of the most common types of live content, a sporting event. Watching something live is not new, people have been doing that with their television since it first came into the home, but now it is being done with the help of the internet. What is live streaming changing? Since watching live entertainment is not a new phenomenon, many may wonder what has made live streaming so different that it is changing the world and the people in it. There are a few specific areas that live streaming as had a major impact on the way the world is working. News Live streaming is changing the way that news is viewed in a few different ways. The ability to access live news reports at any time means that people are staying more informed. What is more important when it comes to live streaming of news is the way the news is reported. It may seem like all news reporting is the same. The news reported sees the event and tells people about it. The reality is that the different
news stations tell the news in different ways and have different biases which can affect the reporting of the news. Thanks to live streaming people can access various news reports that look at all of the angles of a story and can create a more informed opinion about events around the world. Globalization The ability to live stream entertainment from around the world is allowing people to learn more about other parts of the world. It is taking people who may have been isolated in the past and opening their eyes to different cultures, foods, sports and much more. It is another piece in the puzzle that is bringing all the people in the world together. More Entertainment The first and most obvious change is the amount of ways that people can find something to enjoy when they utilize live streaming. Not only can they watch their favorite television show, they can also access live plays, speeches, news and sports. There was a time when people were limited in the amount of sporting events that they could see. Many sports did not make sense economically to televise, but thanks to live streaming such as beIN sports integrated with YipTV and other live streaming resources, it is possible to see a wide variety of sports at any time of the day or night. Live streaming is open up larger audiences for sports that people may not have been familiar with before. Live streaming channels do not have to have as large an audience as traditional television needs and that is providing an unlimited amount of options for entertainment. Safety The ability to live stream many things is helping keep people safer. Some people are taking advantage of live streaming apps that allow them to send videos of their walk home late at night, and that can help catch a crime on film as it happens so maybe, someone can send the help that is needed. The uses of live streaming to improve safety are only just being discovered. Social Planning Many clubs and venues, live stream their locations. It is possible to see who is in a bar and how many people are there before going out. There are also live streaming cameras set up in public places around the world for anyone to see. Educating Whether it is a professor in a college streaming their lectures live or if it is live demonstrations of a cooking technique, the amount of things that can be learned from the live streaming content is difficult to calculate. More people are taking advantage of the educational opportunities that live streaming gives them. Business purposes From conventions for a business to holding meetings, live streaming is a great way for a business to operate effectively. It can save money and produce better and faster results. Many businesses are able to open up new markets thanks to live streaming capabilities. It is difficult to deny that live streaming has changed and is continuing to change the way that people are entertained. There was a time when people saved their pennies so they could see the Saturday double feature at the picture show. That turned into
people sitting at home on certain nights to see some must watch television show. While these things may still exist, they are not the wave of the future. Live streaming offers too much for anyone that takes some time to learn about it. Most importantly, it has shifted the control from the people that provide the entertainment to the people that want the entertainment. Control is a good thing to have, and people are going to enjoy it. Have you taken advantage of live streaming? Do you notice how it is changing what you do? If you have any thoughts, ideas or suggestions, take the time to share them with us.
Column: Will Michael Jackson’s legacy survive the 'Leaving Neverland' documentary? http://www.trbimg.com/img-5c7eec15/turbine/ct-
1551821842-b821txndrm-snap-image/1024/1024x576
Wade Robson, right, dresses like his idol, Michael Jackson, in the HBO documentary "Leaving Neverland." Robson went on to accuse Jackson of sexual abuse. (HBO)
Clarence PageContact Reporter
When we first saw Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch on television in the late 1980s, a sarcastic friend of mine wisecracked, “Wow, that looks like a pedophile’s paradise.” I tried not to laugh. Like multitudes of others, I had been following Jackson’s hit songs and dazzling dance moves since his early days with his brothers in the Jackson Five from Gary. I excused his odd excesses — his cosmetic surgeries, his pet chimp, his ranch in Santa Barbara County with its own amusement park and petting zoo — as an understandable consequence of his breathtaking wealth and perhaps his urgent need to construct his own fantasyland to make up for the normal childhood he never had. My excuse-making ended with the airing on Sunday and Monday of Dan Reed’s unsettling HBO documentary, “Leaving Neverland,” a two-part, fourhour re-examination of sexual abuse charges by Wade Robson and James
Safechuck, two men who say Jackson sexually abused them at the Neverland Ranch when they were children. We can now add Jackson’s name to those of R. Kelly, Bill Cosby, Woody Allen, Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey and others whose commercial success has been disrupted by allegations of sexual misconduct that, in Cosby’s case, resulted in a guilty verdict and prison on three counts of aggravated indecent assault. Sure, it is important to remember, as the Jackson family points out in a response to the documentary, that Robson and Safechuck gave statements on the pop star’s behalf in a 1993 sexual abuse case brought by a different boy and settled out of court. Robson also testified on Jackson’s behalf in the 2005 case in which a jury found Jackson not guilty of child molestation and administering an intoxicating substance. In its statement, the Jackson family denounced the documentary as a “public lynching.” Yet, the documentary and the hourlong town hall-style discussion led by Oprah Winfrey that followed make a gut-wrenching case study of what she calls a widely misunderstood and underappreciated aspect of child abuse: the grooming process in which the predator befriends the family, draws the child away from his or her parents and tightens emotional bonds with the child. After noting that she has hosted 217 episodes on child sexual abuse on her TV talk shows, Winfrey concluded, “Sexual abuse … is also sexual seduction.” That’s a bracingly important point. Our stereotypes of pedophiles as violent rapists defy the more common reality of children being persuaded to sympathize with and aid the predator as a sign of love and devotion. Typically, these are children too young to understand what love or sexual relations are all about.
Still, one of the great mysteries that emerged in the early days of the Neverland scandal still haunts us: How could parents leave their children alone with Jackson for what became days at a time? The answer appears to be a complicated combination of trust and denial by parents who were starstruck themselves by Jackson and his generosity in booking fancy suites and transportation for the families while he went off alone to sleep with their children. “I always get what I want,” one mother in the documentary quotes Jackson as saying to her. Indeed, many fans worldwide indulge and even worship superstars like Jackson in a way that can easily encourage a star’s worst instincts — and a deep sense of denial among the rest of us. Or, as Oprah declared, “Celebrity supersedes criminality.” My biggest surprise in watching the Neverland documentary is how much it disturbingly echoed Lifetime’s “Surviving R. Kelly” documentary, which preceded recent sexual abuse charges against him in late February. In 2008, Kelly was found not guilty of child pornography charges connected to an alleged videotaped encounter with a 13-year-old girl. But the singer, whose real name is Robert Kelly, was indicted Feb. 21 in Chicago on 10 charges of aggravated criminal sexual abuse of four victims, three of whom were underage. Kelly has been released from jail on $100,000 bond. In both cases, we again see celebrities facing renewed allegations of sexual misconduct after years of gossip and rumors. But this time we are in the #MeToo era, and the headwind that alleged victims used to face in trying to be heard largely has been replaced by a tailwind that helps them to be heard. This does not mean, as the Jussie Smollett alleged hate crime hoax in Chicago should teach us, that all complaints are valid. Everyone is still entitled under
our system of justice to be considered innocent until proved guilty. But alleged victims also have the right to have their complaint taken seriously. Should we now boycott the artistic creations of controversial artists? I, for one, cannot hear the music of Jackson and Kelly and the comedy of Cosby without also feeling that a sense of revulsion has replaced my former sense of delight. Clarence Page, a member of the Tribune Editorial Board, blogs at www.chicagotribune.com/pagespage. cpage@chicagotribune.com Twitter @cptime Copyright Š 2019, Chicago Tribune