#louis' pretty face was like 90% of my motivation for this

[mrsdulac]

the thing lay still...

#louis' pretty face was like 90% of my motivation for this #and the loustat kiss was the other 10% #the rest are just some of my favorite shots #interview with the vampire #louis de pointe du lac #lestat de lioncourt #claudia #loustat #amc iwtv

[jastersmohnson]

Lizzy Caplan’s full thoughts on the “Monkey Business” episode

This is from an article that was published in December.  I just discovered it (apologies if it’s already been shared), but I thought it was pretty illuminating.  I had no idea that Lizzy had such distain for the scene, I do feel very sorry for her.  It’s bizarre that Michelle Ashford and the writers insisted on the storyline making it to air when the cast and crew seemed fairly vocal about it being a bad idea, and the critics and audience have almost unanimously agreed that it’s the worst episode of the show by several degrees.

So here’s Lizzy’s full thoughts on the scene/storyline, filmed on her birthday, June 30, 2015:

“This was season three, which was not our strongest season — like, objectively and for some very valid reasons that are not worth getting into now. It was not as refined, let’s say, as the first couple seasons.

“So, it was summer. We were deep into shooting the season and one weekend Annaleigh Ashford, who is amazing and lovely and was on the show, she was doing a cabaret show in Las Vegas. A bunch of us decided to go. My birthday was that upcoming Monday and it was also the very early days of dating my now-husband. We wanted to go have this fun, early birthday Vegas weekend.

“It was a perfectly debauched weekend and then we flew back to LA Sunday night and I was in pretty rough shape. Very hung over. Like, Vegas hung over. And then Monday morning, crack of dawn, I had to be back at work.

“We were shooting in Griffith Park all day. It was easily 100 degrees outside. So hot and there was not a lot of shade and I was still feeling pretty bad from the night before. Exhausted, nauseous, overheating in all those wool clothes that people wore back in the 50s, with 30 undergarments underneath.

“And I’m also dreading the scene we had to shoot that day. I had been trying to convince myself that it wasn’t going to be as bad as I feared because this is a respectable show! The setup of the episode — I have never watched this nor will I ever watch it — was that esteemed sex researchers Masters and Johnson are called to the St. Louis Zoo because their gorilla just won’t mate and (the zoo staff) are tearing their hair out and they need help. And who are you going to call? Sex researchers.

“Somehow Masters and Johnson come to this realization that this frigid — I don’t even know if you can use the word ‘frigid’ for a male gorilla? — but this frigid gorilla needed motivation to get there. So my character, Virginia Johnson, does the most obvious and logical thing, which is to expose her breasts to the gorilla to inspire him to mate.

“When I tell you the amount of times we tried to push back on this storyline (laughs) to no avail. So here we are on set, it’s happening.

“And I remember this very, very vividly: I was feeling physically terrible, but also a deep, deep, deep embarrassment. I think it was hour 13 of what ended up being a 16-hour scorching hot day. And I’m unbuttoning my blouse to show my boobs to a man in a gorilla suit. And also, please don’t forget: It was my birthday.

“The camera was focused on my back, so you didn’t see nudity. You see me from behind, opening my blouse — I’m 90% sure it was only from the back. Again, I haven’t seen it. From my understanding, I wasn’t showing nudity, but it was very implied. And nudity was not uncommon on that show.

“So I remember looking over at the camera guy and I just saw the pity on his face as he’s mouthing: ‘I’m so sorry, I’m so sorry.’ And he was actually a camera guy on ‘Fleishman is in Trouble,’ so we were just reminiscing about this.

“So I do the thing and I’m filled with a deep guttural shame — I didn’t want to do it but I had to do it. Then (laughs), the man in the gorilla suit — who is the only person on set having a worse day than me because it’s a billion degrees outside and he had to spend the whole day in this gorilla suit — he, in character, reacts to this display and then the gorilla is in fact inspired (laughs) by a human woman flashing him her breasts.

“And then the guy proceeds to go and start mating with the female gorilla.

“But the really crazy thing is that the guy in the female gorilla suit? That was the male gorilla’s actual son.

“So he had to look at me, and then make his way over to his son and pretend to mate with him.

“And I just wanted to walk into the ocean and die. That was the worst moment I’ve ever had at work.

“Working on that show was one of the most collaborative experiences, which was probably why this felt extra strange. There were things that pushed my level of comfort, but certainly, it was all my own choice and I was aiming to push it. I was never pushed by any producers to do anything I didn’t want to do — up until this point. There were a lot of times on that show where I had to steel myself in my trailer beforehand for scenes that I really believed in, but I was never pushed into doing anything. Which is why this felt like such an anomaly.

“When I signed up for this show, I had a pretty good idea of what might be involved. But it’s safe to assume that I did not anticipate I would be asked to show my breasts to a man in a gorilla suit in order to inspire the gorilla to mate.

“But also that’s what made everybody so sad. This was a show that was so respected and deservedly so. This is one of the jobs I’m most proud of ever, I’m so happy I was in this show. But there was something stinky about this third season. And to all of a sudden go from this lofty level of prestige to flashing your breasts to a gorilla — that feels like a pretty steep drop.

“The scene was made up, I say that with 99% certainty. I think they really were asked to go to the zoo, but I highly doubt — because it doesn’t even make sense! I don’t think this is how animal psychology works. I have no degree in animal husbandry, but I think it’s safe to assume this was a flight of fancy from some writer.

“Michael Sheen was as horrified as I was, if not more so somehow. Nobody wanted to look anybody else in the eye the whole time (laughs), it was horrifying.

“And it was so clear that everybody — the crew, who feel like the true team you’re playing on — we all felt the same. I couldn’t wait to get to a point where this was funny. But in that moment, it didn’t feel funny to me at all.

“I was probably a little more afraid to speak about this thing, even in a joking way, at first. But we had to do some press pretty soon after and Michael Sheen just went right into how stupid this gorilla thing was (laughs).

“I can’t imagine what this was like for the two guys in the gorilla suits. And they were clearly the best in the business. They were great at being gorillas! But you need therapy after that.

“I just imagine them driving home in complete silence (laughs) not knowing how to process the day.

“Perhaps we should employ the use of female breasts to solve all the world’s problems. Female breasts will heal the world — or at least, the world of the frigid gorillas in 1950s St. Louis.

“When I heard about this column, I knew there was no other story that would hold a candle to the level of deep shame I felt. I was feeling anger when I got home at the end of that day, but my boyfriend and I had this dinner reservation, and by the time we went to dinner, I was a shell of a human. It was definitely a memorable birthday.”

#Masters of Sex #Lizzy Caplan #Virginia Johnson #Michael Sheen #Bill Masters #Monkey Business

[notbemoved-blog]

#OscarsSoDiverse: “O.J.,” “13th,” and “Negro,” Focusing on the Color Line

#OscarsSoWhite is suddenly SO last year, as The New Yorker’s cover this week announces. Now it’s #OscarsNotSoWhite, as diversely pigmented actors and actresses populate some of the year’s most memorable feature films. From Fences to Hidden Figures to Moonlight, an array of stories about race and its impact on lives both real and imagined filled the screen and have the opportunity to compete for some of 2016’s most sought-after movie prizes—best actor and actress, best film, and even best director.

  For my money, though, the most interesting category from a race-in-America perspective goes to Best Documentary film. Three of the five nominated films in the DOC category try to get at the question of the role of race in American life, and each one succeeds in various ways of pointing out the perennial problem of America’s original sin. I am Not Your Negro, 13th, and O. J.: Made in America—all three made by black film makers—push the boundaries of our understanding of the issues African-Americans face in our society and demonstrate the enduring legacy of chattel slavery, Jim Crow segregation, and the devaluation and twisted logic fraught in the social system based on judgment of human beings based on the color of their skin. 

Perhaps the most fascinating of these three films is Ezra Edelman’s O. J.: Made in America. This seven-and-a-half-hour-epic traces the life and legacy of fallen American hero everyone came to know simply as O.J. From football legend in the 1970s to TV ad man (running through airports for Hertz) and B-grade actor in the 1980s to alleged wife killer in the “Crime of the Century” in the 1990s, O. J.’s story is a cautionary tale about race, class, and privilege in glitzy L.A. and how the lens of racial bias colors all of our judgments, no matter which race you are classified as belonging to. 

This well-worn story of the murder of Simpson’s wife, Nicole Brown, and the unfortunate Ron Goldman—a waiter who was simply returning a forgotten item from the restaurant he worked at—would seem an odd choice for making a film documentary for a contemporary film maker. But Edelman, the bi-racial the son of Marian Wright and Peter Edelman, perhaps had it in his DNA to deconstruct the most talked about trial of his youth and disentangle the threads of racism, sexism, heroism, and any other -ism tied up in this tragic tale of woe-all-around. 

I was not inclined to spend the time watching a series of five 1.5 hour-long episodes to get to the bottom of whether or not O.J. was guilty. I had lived through the “Year of Living Dangerously” as the crime was reported on and sensationalized, and as the trial was broadcast daily by breathy journalists and pondered over nightly by millions of Americans. But while attending the Washington Ideas Forum put on by The Atlantic this fall, I heard Ta-Nehisi Coates call the film the best documentary of the year and then interview Edelman about the making of the film. I became intrigued and wanted to see what all the fuss was about. 

It is not a pretty story. It takes us through the allegations that Simpson, a black man, had killed his sexy and glamorous white wife in a jealous rage one night and then jetted off to a motivational speaking engagement. The details are horrifying, and Edelman does not back away from any of the gore or titillating facts of the case. We are re-introduced to the entire cast of characters: the sly defense attorney Johnnie Cochran (“If it [the glove] doesn’t fit, you must acquit.”), the hapless prosecutors Marcia Clark (white) and Christopher Darden (black); O. J.’s friends and detractors, who regularly were paraded into our living rooms back then thanks to the rise of daytime talk shows; the uber-bad-cop Mark Fuhrman whose reputation and career took hit after the media portrayed his as the fall guy; and perhaps most notably the grieving father of Ron Goldman, whose dogged determination to nail the SOB finally brings Simpson to his knees and knocks that cocky smile off of his face. 

But the film is so much more than a seedy whodunit. Edelman takes the opportunity to explore how O. J.’s family got to California (the Great Migration), how he rose from lower-class circumstances as a result of his athletic gifts to become the classy “new black” role model, one that whites could readily embrace, and how he attempted to erase race from the equation—expecting people to judge him based on his abilities, not on his skin tone. It is also a story of how celebrity culture kills the soul, of spousal abuse and how women’s claims about their abusive husbands are consistently devalued, and how the lived experience of race in America could so completely color the way one looked at the O. J. trial. If you were white, O. J. was obviously guilty; if you were black, there were no end of explanations as to why he was innocent and being framed. 

Most of the players are still around and offer “color commentary” on their roles throughout the trial phase of the film. We see footage of them then and now. We also hear from some of the jurors who (spoiler alert!) found O.J. innocent mostly because they were not going to give their sainted hero up to Whitey after all of the bad things they had experienced at the hands of “the Man” throughout their lives. It is shocking, mesmerizing, absorbing TV (the series aired on ESPN), and I can’t say I’ve ever seen anything like it. Most of all, as Time Magazine called the O. J. story, it is “An American Tragedy,” played out in five parts. 

  Ava DuVernay’s 13th takes as its subject the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—the one that outlawed slavery—and demonstrates how what might seem as a throw-away phrase in this two-sentence amendment has become a catalyst for mass incarceration and the ruination of the lives of multiple generations of black American males. The film boasts an impressive array of talented scholars and social commentators, including Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates, CNN talking head Van Jones (who predicted the Trump victory), New Jersey junior Senator Cory Booker, and 1970s radical activist Angela Davis, to name but a few.

“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime . . .  shall exist within the United States. . . .”

 13th could be called a more “standard-style” documentary, providing insight and information on a topical subject in about 90 minutes. Documentaries of this sort are the fondue of modern American intellectual life. You can become conversant on any subject by dipping into a melting pot of ideas—stirred regularly by experts on the matter—and emerge feeling satisfied (knowledgeable) but craving more. 

The inspiration for 13th in part comes from Michelle Alexander’s breakthrough book The New Jim Crow, which provided the first mass-marketed insight into mass incarceration when it was published in 2010. The book became a New York Times bestseller and inspired a fresh look at America’s prison industrial complex through a racial lens, leading to a call for criminal justice reform that continues to this day. 

DuVernay features Alexander prominently throughout the film, citing statistics and historical developments that led to our current situation whereby every third black male in America can expect to spend time in jail as compared to every seventeenth white male and where 40 percent of our entire prison population is black. The film is full of harsh facts like this, often presented in stark black and white graphics, almost like a teacher writing notes on a chalk board. It shows how our prison population grew from 370,000 in 1970 to more than 2.3 million in 2014—a vast increase during a time when crime was actually going down. The causes for this development—Bill Clinton’s 3-strikes policy, mandatory minimum sentencing requirements, the militarization and over-funding of the police force—all conspire to take judgement out of the justice system and lock up more of our (mostly black) citizen and for longer periods of time, often for minor offenses.

13th is a whirlwind tour of our “crimigration” system—as young black men are moved from urban blight to prison in a few easy steps. We hear about the school-to-prison pipeline and the prison industrial complex run often by private corporations for profit. We get history lessons, from Nixon’s call for “law and order” to Reagan’s criminalization of drug abuse to Obama’s plea in 2015 for massive changes in how we deal with the growing crisis (and costs) of nearly five percent of our population being locked up—the highest percentage of any nation on earth. All of this is presented to the soundtrack of hip hop, with Public Enemy coming out looking like prophets for calling out these social outrages at the dawn of the rap era. DuVernay’s film is shouting at all of us. “We are tolerating this,” one of her many guests says. We are all, therefore, complicit. 13th is a damning documentary of the American justice system, and no one is spared its fury. 

I am Not Your Negro, on the other hand, serves its bile cold, which makes it all the more difficult to swallow. It chokes in your mouth and you want to vomit. This spoken word documentary, directed by Haitian-born filmmaker Raoul Peck, apparently recounts word-for-word the 30-paged treatment that author James Baldwin created to sell his publisher on his idea for another blockbuster book in the late 1970s when his star seemed to be waning.(Excerpts from Baldwins other works are also included.) The pitch hangs on the fact that Baldwin was friends with the three most lionized American black martyrs of the 1960s—Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King, Jr., and works its way through Baldwin’s grieving over their deaths and what each man meant to him and to the American black civil rights movement.  

Though the book was never completed (and McGraw-Hill sued Baldwin’s estate for the $200,000 advance Baldwin received), the treatment itself is its own mini-masterpiece of analysis of the black man’s plight in modern American life. Baldwin was such a character, such a force on our country’s incessantly race-obsessed scene in the 1950s and 1960s. His articles and books were devoured by the literati and bohemian crowd alike for their sharp, acerbic insights into white American consciousness. And the film shows wonderful clips of Baldwin during his heyday, most tellingly when he debated William Buckley at England’s Cambridge University in 1965 and when he appeared on the Dick Cavett show in 1968. Baldwin’s fire proves too much for his white counterparts—the lost look on the face of the typically unflappable Cavett when the incendiary Baldwin lets off a riff about how blacks are treated is alone worth the price of the ticket.  

Actor Samuel Jackson gives voice to Baldwin’s prose as a jazzy aural backdrop infuses the proceedings with a “Birth of the Cool” vibe. But the author’s prophetic vision is what dominates the film as Baldwin tells how his conscience urges him back to America from his Paris expat hangouts as the country begins its long-overdue civil rights saga. And he recounts in detail where he was and what he felt when each towering figure was gunned down and how he felt compelled to visit their wives and families after each assassination. He doesn’t speak of the toll these visits took on his own consciousness. He doesn’t need to. The pain and outrage inform every sentence of this sharp, acid script. It is a wonder that the man didn’t just self-immolate on screen, so full of passionate observation and Cassandra-like foreboding was he, desperate to make white America understand what it was doing to its own citizens and its own self. 

Of course, I was particularly taken by the photographs of Jimmy Baldwin with Medgar Evers and his children. Having now met the grieving widow and daughter, having stood on the very driveway where Evers was executed, having touched the places where the bullet entered his home and rested on the kitchen counter, I was choked with emotion to see those scenes replayed. “Why is our history so sad?” I wondered. “Why must we relive this nightmare again and again?”  

James Baldwin and Medgar Evers in the carport of the Evers home in Jackson, Mississippi, where Evers would be gunned down several months later.

 These are the questions Baldwin seems to wrestle with, as well, and his answers point not only to government policies, but to the culture itself. Baldwin, it turns out, was a film buff from an early age. And this is where the film offers some relief but also some context. We see film clips of such varied fare as Birth of a Nation (the film also makes a brief appearance in 13th), Imitation of Life, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner, as well as Doris Day’s and Gary Cooper’s works (films Baldwin hated for their sickening portrayal of pathetic white innocence). 

Baldwin’s mother and his auntie would frequently take him to the picture shows when he was young to escape their daily drudgery. There, at the age of 5, Baldwin was enthralled by a tap-dancing Joan Crawford and fell in love with Bette Davis, who possessed similar “bug eyes” just like his. He later came under the spell of his white school teacher who mentored him, brought him books to read and took him to various cultural events all over New York City. Because of her, “I could never hate white people,” he reveals, which make his dire predictions of where America is headed all the more heart-rending. “To look around America today,” he tells us from the grave, “is to make the prophets and the angels weep.”  

James Baldwin’s words writ large at the new National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington, DC.

It's hard to tell which of these films (if any) will be showered by Oscar’s gold tonight. All three are deserving. Perhaps, as often winners are wont to say, “It’s an honor just to be nominated in such good company.” Baldwin’s takedown of Hollywood kitsch may cost Peck the Oscar; DuVernay’s rage at the institutional racism that pervades our current justice system may come on too strong for most Oscar voters (most of whom, as we well know, are not black); so perhaps it’s the languorous, complex, perfectly-attuned-to-our-times O. J. film that Edelman serves up that will win the honors. There’s also the distinct possibility that these three “race films” will cancel themselves out and one of the other two nominated films (one on autism, the other on refugees) will take home the prize.

 No matter. The Academy of Motion Pictures has finally broken through the color barrier and nominated three exceptional studies of black American life. This in itself is worthy of celebration. Perhaps now that we see the problems more clearly we can begin to make some progress? I can hear Jimmy Baldwin’s wry, hoarse, infectious, catty laugh all the way from heaven. “Don’t bet on it,” he’d say.

#James Baldwin #I Am Not Your Negro #Ava DuVernay #13th #Ezra Edelman #O.J.: Made in America #Malcolm X #Medgar Evers #MLK #Martin Luther King #Oscars2017 #OscarsSoWhite #OscarsSoDiverse #OscarsNotSoWhite

[placetobenation]

Welcome back to the fifth installment of the greatest series of articles to look at the PTBN GWWE Tag Team Project in the history of our sport. I’m about halfway through the teams I want to cover (I’ve hit 34 teams with this edition), so it’s both a milestone and a motivation to keep plugging away. You can check out the archives of past articles here. As always, please let me know if you have thoughts on these teams or the articles, or if you just want to join the discussion, you can do so in the Facebook group.

This week I added a couple bonus teams, one that I believe I’ve watched all their existing WWE footage and was an easy call for me, and the other is a team that hasn’t been talked about much, but I think is earning more consideration and discussion. Also, one formatting change, starting with this article the team I want to appear in the preview photo will appear last in the “main event” spot, rather than going in chronological order.

Let’s get started.

Rick Martel-Tony Garea

Years Teamed in WWE: 1980-1982

Total Matches: 261

Combined Days of Tag Title Reigns: 213

Match Suggestions: vs. Mr. Fuji-Mr. Saito (10/31/81), vs. Moondogs (Rex & King 3/17/81 appeared on 4/4/81 ASW), vs. Moondogs (12/29/80- MSG), w/ Pat Patterson vs. Moondogs-Capt. Lou Albano (2/16/81), vs. Wild Samoans (11/8/80, appeared JIP on ASW 11/15/80), vs. Moondogs (7/21/81 appeared on 7/25/81 ASW)

Thoughts: The earliest great babyface team I’ve found so far, Martel and Garea are masters at working a tag team match. Their matches against Fuji-Saito and the Moondogs are all excellent. Both guys are good sellers and Martel is one of the greatest fiery babyfaces of all time. Martel and Garea do an excellent job at gaining the crowd’s sympathy and support leading to hot matches against any opponent other than Baron Mikel Scicluna (they’re only human.) This will surely be my highest ranked Garea team (though I am interested in his team with Larry Z). I originally expected Strike Force to rank higher for me among Martel’s teams, but am starting to reconsider. The Strike Force-Islanders series may have the better matches, but Martel-Garea have more longevity, longer tag reigns and the crowd never turned on them, like they did on Strike Force when they faced Demolition. Regardless, this Martel-Garea team has been impressive. I knew they were good, but discovering how good has been one of the most enjoyable parts of this project. They are also the most follicly gifted team in the history of our sport with manes so luscious they make Sam Malone jealous.

Placement Range: They’ve really shot up my list after watching more of their matches, and the fact that they’re the first great babyface team means something to me. I feel like they carried heel teams of the day to matches they wouldn’t have with anyone else and should get a lot of credit for that. They’ve got good longevity and two decent title reigns and were over as hell. All that puts them in the 15-25 range on my list.

  Blackjacks

Years Teamed in WWE: 1974–1975

Total Matches: 44

Combined Days of Tag Title Reigns: 86

Match Suggestions: vs. Tony Parisi-Louis Cerdan (11/17/75), vs. Dominic DeNucci-Victor Rivera (1/13/74), vs. Dominic DeNucci-Irish Pat Barrett (1975)

Thoughts: The Blackjacks are a well-regarded team by fans of the era, but that has to be for their work outside the WWWF more than their work in the company. Wrestlingdata has them at 44 matches with WWWF in 1975, which is roughly the same amount as Chris Benoit and Kurt Angle (as a team), but the Blackjacks don’t have the classic matches to their credit. Footage of the Blackjacks is hard to come by, but I found three matches on YouTube, and they all stink. Three matches is a small sample size, but it’s about 7 percent of the matches they had in WWWF. And I find it hard to believe the Blackjacks had really good matches, but the rare ones that survived are the bad matches. I will note that Wrestlingdata had the team only appearing in WWWF in 1975 and one of the matches linked in the Facebook thread is from 1974, so maybe they have a few more matches than Wrestlingdata gives them credit for, but I’d have to hear of several hundred more matches to sway me into consideration.

Placement Range: If there’s a case to be made, I’m not the one to make it. I can’t see any criteria that the Blackjacks would do well in for a WWE list. They don’t have longevity, 44 matches is a very small sample without a top-tier match to supplement. They held the tag titles for just under three months, but that was a pretty short run for the time period compared to the other teams I’ve looked at. And based on the footage we have, their matches weren’t good. Hard pass on the Blackjacks for me.

  Shawn Michaels-Diesel

Years Teamed in WWE: 1993-1996, 2003

Total Matches: 75

Combined Days of Tag Title Reigns: 88

Match Suggestions: vs. Razor Ramon-1-2-3 Kid (Action Zone 10/30/94), vs. Yokozuna-British Bulldog (IYH: Triple Header), vs. Marty Jannetty-Razor Ramon (7/27/93), vs. Bret Hart-Undertaker (March 1996)

Thoughts:  Two Dudes with Attitude! That name sounds pretty ridiculous outside the realm of mid-1990s WWF, and Shawn Michaels and Diesel are a tag team that seems very much of that time and place. On the surface, their case is pretty solid, 75 matches is considerably more than I would have guessed, two tag team title reigns and the great Action Zone match with Kid and Razor are great points in their favor. But the case for them just seems a little empty to me. The tag title reigns never amounted to much, with few defenses making tape from the first one and the one from IYH Triple Header was reversed the next night on a Dusty finish. The famous Action Zone tag is great, and there is a pretty good match against Jannetty and Razor, but nothing else I’ve found comes anywhere close to that match. It really seems like 75 matches should have something more interesting. I’d love to see their matches against the Headshrinkers, but I haven’t found any yet. HBK and Big Daddy Cool have a strong enough case to make it, but the harder I looked the more I found the team lacking a bit.

Placement Range: I can’t see a WWE list not including them, and they meet all the criteria I’m looking for. I did hope I might find a few more good matches along the lines of the Action Zone Kliq tag, but no such luck. They’ll be in the lower quarter, probably in the 75-90 range.

  Chris Jericho-Christian

Years Teamed in WWE: 2001-2005, 2012

Total Matches: 65

Combined Days of Tag Title Reigns: 62

Match Suggestions: vs. Booker T-Goldust vs. Dudley Boyz vs. Storm-Regal (Armageddon ’02), vs. Kane vs. Bubba & Spike vs. Jeff Hardy & Rob Van Dam (TLC- 10/7/02- RAW), vs. Trish-Lita (Armageddon ’03), vs. Booker T- Goldust (No Mercy ’02)

Thoughts: I love both Jericho and Christian, but I think it’s fair to say that ’02-’03 was a time both guys were a bit aimless, with looks and characters that badly needed freshening up. Both were great at playing cheesy comedy heels, but the act was wearing a bit thin. Too bad, because they were a helluva team. I feared their matches with Booker T and Goldust wouldn’t hold up, but I was pleasantly surprised at how well each team player their role. They were also a crucial part of the four-way TLC match on Raw that was named Best Match Ever on Raw for Some Random WWE List of Self-Promotion that I Don’t Remember. That match is clearly not the best match in Raw history, but is clearly a helluva match. I think Jericho and Christian worked quite well together and had good chemistry, even if something always seemed to go wrong (the ropes broke right before the finish in an otherwise good match with BookDust, for example.) The angle where they broke up with the $1 Canadian bet over Trish and Lita is one of my favorite mid-card angles and it helped set Christian on the path to Peep Show stardom and Jericho to become the Best in the World at What He Does. And the match they had against Trish and Lita at Armageddon ’03 is brilliant storytelling to me. From Jericho not fighting Trish but being a dick heel to Lita to both guys working to the women’s strengths to sell the offense that was believable and still show the strength and power difference, everything really worked in that match. I was quite surprised how much I enjoyed it upon rewatch. Longevity is a bit of a weak spot with this team, and while they were good in the ring and quite entertaining in backstage segments, there’s not a lot of meat on the bone of their tag team work.

Placement Range: Where this team ranks is going to vary greatly depending on what you value. If you place a heavy emphasis on longevity, they’re probably going to suffer. I’d like to have one classic match and Jericho and Christian fell just short of that. But they were a very good team that always worked well together in the ring and were really entertaining outside of the ring. I have them right around the middle of my list and that feels right. Pencil them in somewhere between 45-65.

  The World’s Greatest Tag Team

Years Teamed in WWE: 2002-2004, 2006-2007, 2009

Total Matches: 223

Combined Days of Tag Title Reigns: 180

Match Suggestions: vs. Kidman-Rey Mysterio (Vengeance ’03), vs. Kidman-Rey Mysterio (8/14/03 SD episode #208), vs. Los Guerreros (2/6/03 – SD), vs. Hardy Boyz- (One Night Stand ’07- Ladder Match), vs. Eddie Guerrero-Tajiri (Judgment Day ’03), vs. Los Guerreros (Backlash ’03), w/Kurt Angle vs. Lesnar-Benoit (No Way Out ’03)

Thoughts: Maybe the biggest challenge with this team was not recommending nearly every match I watched. They really were consistently great during their heyday, continuing the momentum of the blue brand tag division after Benoit-Angle and Edge-Mysterio went onto other things. Los Guerreros were still around, however, and their feud with TWGTT resulted in lots of great matches on SD and PPV. Once Chavo got hurt, things got even better (because Chavo sucks) and TWGTT had a banger of a ladder match against Eddie and Tajiri at Judgment Day ’03. Their matches with Kidman and Mysterio at Vengeance ’03 and on SD were also highlights. The reunion after Shelton’s singles run had diminishing returns, but saw some good matches against the Hardys in 2007. I would’ve told you they had more matches together and longer title reigns if you asked me before this project, so longevity hurts them a bit relative to other top-tier teams. They could’ve been a bit more charismatic and shown more personality, but they also could’ve gotten years out of the no-nonsense wrestling machine team they were as Team Angle and later with Heyman.

Placement Range: The longevity hurts them a bit, but they were just so consistently good. I’ve got a bundle of teams slotted in from about 7-15, and I keep going back and forth on the order of those teams. TWGTT is one of those teams, though I expect they’ll wind up toward the end of that range.

  American Alpha

Years Teamed in WWE: 2014-2017

Total Matches: 278

Combined Days of Tag Title Reigns: 152 (NXT and SD)

Match Suggestions: vs. Revival (NXT Takeover Dallas 4/1/16), vs. Revival (NXT Takeover The End), vs. Slater-Rhyno vs. Usos vs. Orton-Harper- (SD 12/27/16), vs. Usos (SD 3/21/17), vs. Revival (7/6/16- NXT- 2/3 falls),

Thoughts: American Alpha had tremendous matches with the Revival, and we’d talk a lot more about those matches if DIY and the Revival didn’t surpass them later in the year. But that shouldn’t diminish the American Alpha-Revival match-ups, which are still better than all but a handful of tag matches in company history. AA also had the most success transitioning from NXT to the main roster. I understand that is like saying they are the tallest midget or the best looking waitress at Denny’s (shout-out to Steve Williams for that quote.) Still, as of this writing they are only the second team to hold tag-team gold in both NXT and on the main roster. In addition to their NXT work, which was tremendous, they had very good matches with the Usos on SmackDown. American Alpha’s in-ring style works quite well, as they’re able to sell and generate sympathy with the crowd, and still have convincing offense. For those that want to be close to the energy and economic opportunity of Suplex City, but want to avoid the crowds and get good value for your home investments and top-notch schools, come to Belly to Belly Park, where Gable and Jordan set up residence. Of course, the team had tons of potential, so naturally the WWE “creative” writer monkeys had to split the team so Jordan could be Kurt Angle’s son. I’m sure this is some kind of rib that makes Vince piss himself with laughter to this day, while making anyone with a brain ask, “Why the fuck did the break up American Alpha for this stupid shit?” Still, the top-notch matches with the Revival and the Usos, success at both NXT and SD and nearly 300 matches with the company make American Alpha a strong candidate for the middle of the list.

Placement Range: American Alpha was one team I didn’t think was getting enough love on their Facebook thread. I get that their main roster run was uninspired, but they did win the SD tag titles and had classic matches in NXT. I saw many voters talking about a place near the bottom of their list, which is better than leaving them off, but I hope they haven’t made a list yet. Because putting a list together, AA is way higher on my list. I can’t find enough teams I think have better resumes, so they’ll be in my top half, somewhere from 30-50, I imagine. Maybe I’m ranking them higher than most, but I just don’t see enough teams that have their number of matches, success and quality of matches to knock them down any lower.

  Undisputed Era

Years Teamed in WWE: 2017-2018

Total Matches: 87 (as of 9/18/18)

Combined Days of Tag Title Reigns:

Match Suggestions: vs. Mustache Mountain- (NXT UK Championship 6/26/18), vs. Mustache Mountain (NXT TV 7/11/18), vs. Mustache Mountain (NXT Takeover- Brooklyn IV 8/18/18), vs. Oney Lorcan-Danny Burch (NXT Takeover Chicago II- 6/16/18), vs. Authors of Pain-Roderick Strong vs. Sanity (NXT Takeover WarGames- 11/18/17)

 Thoughts:  When we started this project, I didn’t think Undisputed Era had a prayer of making my list. I enjoyed Fish and O’Reilly with other companies, but they weren’t setting NXT on fire. Then Roderick Strong joined UE and they were off to the races. Strong has been one of my favorite under-the-radar wrestlers for years, so no surprise his pairing with KOR coincided with me really starting to love UE matches. Since that time, not only do I think they make the top 100, I think their case is much stronger than most are giving them credit for, and they may be much higher on my list than I expected. Their trilogy of matches with Mustache Mountain (6/26, 7/11 and Takeover Brooklyn IV) were all-timers. The only set of three matches that good I can think of are the TLC/ ladder matches between the Dudleys, Hardys and Edge-Christian and the New Day and Usos last year. All five of those teams will be in my top 15, so I don’t think it’s a stretch to say the Mustache Mountain-UE matches put UE toward the lower-middle portion of the list. The Lorcan-Burch match at Takeover Chicago was also tremendous, and they have six-man matches and KOR-Fish matches to supplement their case.

Placement Range: This is another team where what you value will dictate their placement on the list. But if you value great matches, then the Undisputed Era should make your list. I would argue their recent run has yielded more great matches than many teams that will make this list produced in years. I think a good comparison to UE are the SD Six teams, which had great matches in a short run. I have UE just below Angle-Benoit and Edge-Mysterio, comfortably in the middle of the list from 40-60.

  Hart Foundation

Years Teamed in WWE: 1985-1991, 1997

Total Matches: 724

Combined Days of Tag Title Reigns: 479

Match Suggestions: vs. Brain Busters (SummerSlam ’89), vs. British Bulldogs (1/18/86-Capitol Center), British Bulldogs (SNME aired 5/2/87- 2/3 falls), vs. Rockers (SNME aired 4/28/90), VS. Demolition (SummerSlam ’90, 2/3 falls), vs. Demolition (SummerSlam ’88), vs. Nasty Boys (WrestleMania VII)

Thoughts: With more than 700 matches the Hart Foundation has almost unparalleled longevity, lengthy title reigns and is one of the first teams that comes to mind when you think of WWE tag teams. As for their in-ring work…deep breath…I think they are a good, not great team that has many good and few great matches. I think their match with the Brain Busters at SS ’89 is their best, which I have right around 4 stars. I consider that match my “gatekeeper” match to elite level WWE tag team matches, meaning anything I like better makes the cut, anything I think is worse doesn’t and the Harts-Brain Busters is the dividing line. So, I do like that match and I do think the team is good, but I am not nearly as high on their work as many. I don’t like the Demolition SummerSlam matches as much as many do, and I just never felt much connection to the Harts or excitement from their matches. The matches are all technically fine or good, but just lack a little sizzle for me. Their longevity, title reigns and solid work earn them a high spot on my list, but I’m not their biggest fan.

Placement Range: I’ve heard them touted as a number one contender, but to me they don’t have the matches to make that claim. Other than their Brain Busters match I mentioned there’s nothing I’d call better than pretty good. Fans tout their many “classics” but whenever I find the matches they’re referring to, I’m almost always disappointed, and don’t feel like their matches with the British Bulldogs, Killer Bees and others are the classics they’re made out to be. Still, longevity, title reigns, reputation and good matches put them in a tier somewhere between 7-14, so the Hart Foundation is either in my top 10 or just outside it. And it does speak volumes that someone who is not a huge fan has to give credit where it’s due, possibly with a top 10 ranking.

That’s it for this week. I’ll be back soon with a theme column looking at more teams. As always thanks for reading and if I missed any matches or other highlights let us know on the Facebook page.

#IFTTT #Place to Be Nation

[fashiontrendin-blog]

Since when did getting cosmetic surgery become the norm?

http://fashion-trendin.com/since-when-did-getting-cosmetic-surgery-become-the-norm/

Since when did getting cosmetic surgery become the norm?

Like it or loathe it, Botox, fillers and other nonsurgical procedures are becoming the new beauty norm. After all, it’s your face, your choice – right? GLAMOUR reports…

It’s August 2017 and Jennifer, 27, is on her best mate’s hen do. “Cheers!” cries the bride-to-be, in the centre of the room. But instead of quaffing a glass of bubbly, she leans back and closes her eyes as a woman poises a needle at the side of her forehead. Wait, what the? “It was a Botox party,” Jennifer explains, adding that, since then, she’s had one additional Botox treatment at a London clinic. “I wear sunscreen, I buy face creams. To me, Botox is the next step and it’s now part of my beauty routine.”

The new normal?

Jennifer isn’t alone. Research shows a huge upsurge in twentysomethings getting injectables in the form of Botox and lip augmentation, as well as nonsurgical enhancements, including dermal fillers and jawline reshaping. Over half (51%) of women aged 16-29 would consider getting cosmetic enhancements either now, or in the future* – and by 2020, it’s believed that almost 1.5 million of us in the UK will have had a nonsurgical treatment such as Botox or fillers.

“I consider getting Botox as just good grooming – it’s like flossing my teeth,” says Eden, 24, from Edinburgh.

Generation X may raise their eyebrows – or would, if their eyebrows could move. Because one of the reasons so many millennials are exploring nonsurgical procedures is because their mums are doing it, or have done it, too. “We see a lot of mother-daughter pairs in our office,” says Dr Norman Rowe, a board-certified plastic surgeon with a practice in New York City. And for some of the daughters, the motivation is getting a step ahead of the ageing process. “People start earlier,” agrees Dr Tijion Esho, who runs the Esho clinics in Newcastle and London.

“In the past, you might not consider these treatments until your mid-forties, now women in their twenties are more aware of the ageing process and are doing things to halt it.” Women like Emilijia, 28, from Norwich. “Instead of forking out hundreds on expensive creams that might not work, I know Botox can stop my frown lines getting any deeper. I don’t fear ageing but I also don’t accept that ageing has to mean resigning yourself to everything nature does to our appearance.” Not only that, but for Gen Z and millennials who have grown up seeing a dermatologist, using skin creams and having spa appointments such as lash tints and facials, fillers and injectables have become the next logical step.

These are the three golden rules to obey if you’re thinking about lip fillers

“Millennials are more open to cosmetic procedures than any other generational group,” says Jack Duckett, senior consumer lifestyles analyst at global market-research agency Mintel. Its most recent report found that 28% of 18- to 24-year-olds and 31% of 25- to 34-year-olds have had some form of cosmetic treatment (compared with an average of just 21% for the whole UK population). “This age group is more knowledgeable about nonsurgical treatments, and what can be achieved with them,” says Dr Rekha Tailor, medical director of health and aesthetics in Surrey. Advances in technology have also led to subtler results, which in turn means less stigma surrounding injectables. “People are starting to realise that Botox and fillers can be done and still give the person a natural appearance,” says Dr Rowe.

Of course, it’s easy to pin the rise of interest in cosmetic tweaks on Instagram. “I feel social media has imbued this very specific, Barbie-esque aesthetic with big lips and a sculpted face,” says Caroline, 27, from Swansea. But your feed might not be telling the whole story. Make no mistake: scrolling through a well-curated account can make us compare our looks, but experts point to a wider shift in cultural norms.

‘Airbrushing’ apps such as Facetune, as well as the contouring make-up trend, can give people a glimpse into what fillers or Botox could do to their faces. “Contouring made me really aware of my angles, and to be honest, getting fillers was a less labour-intensive solution,” says Isla, 27, from Bristol. But Isla is quick to point out she isn’t turning to treatments to raise her self-esteem: “It’s just a look I prefer, the same as I prefer plucked eyebrows and straightened hair.” That, say experts, is the key change in attitude from earlier generations. “Patients used to bring in images of celebrities as a reference; now more and more patients show us airbrushed and retouched pictures of themselves as a guide to how they want to look,” says Dr Jean-Louis Sebagh, a world-renowned cosmetic doctor with a clinic in London.

This is what having your lip filler dissolved actually involves

Silicone = status symbol

In the ‘90s and early part of the millennium, cosmetic treatments were kept hush-hush for two reasons. First, the effect was often far less subtle. Second, plastic-surgery procedures were sometimes seen as admitting failure; that your body didn’t live up to a ‘perfect’ look. Today, it appears perceptions have changed.

The hashtag #lipfillers has nearly 300,000 posts on Instagram (as a point of comparison, #stretchmarkremoval has only around 4,000) and for some women, injectables have become another way to claim their body as their own.

Celebs play a part, too, in the way even conventionally attractive names, like Kylie Jenner and the Kardashian sisters have been open about their use of cosmetic enhancements. No longer do celebs ‘admit’ to having a procedure; they openly share their routine, which makes cosmetic augmentation seem simultaneously aspirational and part of the everyday beauty conversation. (‘If she’s already pretty and admits to it, then what’s the big deal in me trying it?’) “When super-confident people like Cardi B are open about cosmetic work, it stops being something ‘embarrassing’,” says Jeni, 23, from London. “It makes waves. It means someone like me feels empowered. If I want work done in the future, then I will.” It’s also less about the celebrity’s specific look that some young women aspire to, and more about their lifestyle.

While most of us may not be able to afford to live like a Kardashian, the face has become one thing women are using their money to invest in, if they so wish. At around £150-£350 per session, depending on the amount of product used and where in the country you have it done, Botox and dermal fillers have become “a normal activity for people with expendable income,” says Miami-based plastic surgeon Dr Rian Maercks.

Take Annabelle, 26, from Edinburgh, for example, who gets lip fillers every six months. “I’m not the type to buy an expensive purse that I won’t use in a year or so. For me, fillers and Botox are much more of a sure thing. I think it’s the same as paying for a gym membership; it’s something that gives you value every day.” Like Annabelle, many millennials consider nonsurgical procedures just another necessary expense, the same way women ten years ago may have juggled their budget to pay for a Brazilian bikini wax. “I sometimes have to push all my bills around in that month to pay for it,” says Jay, 30, from Manchester. “But it’s worth it and it’s my decision to make.”

As experts claim 25 is the prime age to have Botox, one woman tells us what she wishes she’d known

Danger zones

While many women feel it’s had a positive effect, there is of course a dark side to the rise of cosmetic enhancements being performed. One thing practitioners stress to their patients, regardless of age? “Nonsurgical does not mean no risk,” warns Dr Mary O’Brien, a consultant plastic and hand surgeon at the Royal Derby Hospital. Experts worry that the lack of regulation in the industry (Botox must be administered by a medical professional, but anyone can potentially get their hands on fillers and there is no minimum age limit or parental consent required in the UK) could lead to negative results.

“There is sadly an increasing number of unscrupulous providers working in the UK aesthetics industry who are offering cheaper prices for counterfeit, unregulated or diluted products, which are then administered by untrained, unqualified people,” says Dr Shirin Lakhani of Elite Aesthetics in Kent. Dr Lakhani frequently sees patients dealing with complications from past procedures. “Often they have been naïve and opted for cheaper price over quality.” Dr Lakhani and other plastic surgeons stress that procedures are generally safe, as long as you see a qualified practitioner – preferably one who is a member of the British Association of Aesthetic Practitioners (BAAPS).

“If you are considering anti-wrinkle injections or dermal fillers, make sure that you use a doctor or qualified practitioner who is fully insured and has the medical expertise to keep you safe,” says Dr Lakhani, who advises steering clear of discounts or vouchers and instead choosing accredited medical professionals. But even with reputable doctors, there are potentially serious side-effects: rare complications of Botox include temporary droopiness in facial features, blurred vision and breathing difficulties. Dermal fillers can cause rashes and infection and, in very rare cases, can move from the treated area over time or even block a blood vessel. Rare, yes, but enough to put many millennials off, including Nadiya, 20, from Stockton, whose friend had to have her lip fillers removed. “Her lips were so swollen and painful for months.” Then there’s the thought of the chemicals involved. “I don’t smoke, I work out and eat well to stay healthy, so why would I put poison in my face?” says Chloe, 26, from Nottingham.

Why doctors and dermatologists are debating this double-chin-beating injectable

The bottom line

While the role of nonsurgical procedures in the everyday lives of Gen Z and millennials may seem dramatic – dangerous, even – the motivation behind an individual paying for these kinds of treatment is age-old. People want to look and feel their best, and are using the tools and technology on offer to do so. But while the effects may be temporary, is their place in our beauty culture here to stay?

Be smart, be informed

If you are considering treatments, these guides are a useful place to start:

The NHS Guide To Cosmetic Procedures

The British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons

You can search the GMC list of registered medical practitioners at gmc-uk.org/doctors/register/LRMP.asp

[queen-empathy]

18/08/2017 17:00, Report by Steve Bartram ALAN TATE: ONCE A RED, ALWAYS A RED... Features editor Steve Bartram relives last week’s trip to the Liberty Stadium for Alan Tate’s testimonial as former Reds – including Tate’s close friend, Darren Fletcher – came from far and wide to salute an ex-Academy starlet who never made a senior Reds appearances, this was an occasion which showcased Manchester United’s family spirit… Dwight Yorke, his eye twitching with tiredness, sinks into his seat at the back of the coach. The previous day, he returned from working in Indonesia; a trip which followed a day at home in Cheshire after three weeks on the Reds’ pre-season tour of the US. As he tells Russell Beardsmore and Ben Thornley, without a hint of the infectious grin which accompanied his stellar career, 90 minutes of football is hardly what the doctor ordered. When Wes Brown boards the coach, however, he has just the tonic. “Yorkie. Poker?” The Trinidad and Tobago legend is exhumed. His hooded head lifts. That smile consumes his face. “Yeah, man. Just come and get me." By the time the coach has reached Sandbach – 40 miles into a 220-mile trip – the group is in full swing. Brown, Yorke, Fletcher, Danny Webber, Chris Eagles and Karl Munroe occupy the six seats at the heart of the coach. While the players are spread about the top level of the double-decker coach – Beardsmore and Thornley at the back, while Denis Irwin, Andy Ritchie and Quinton Fortune bookend the party at the front - the whole group intermingles. Those who aren’t involved in the poker drift past, pausing to share stories or crack wise at whoever loses a particular hand, before meandering downstairs to catch up with staff. Downstairs, the players share hugs and handshakes with security guards and Foundation staff. Di Ryding, the trip’s physio, catches up with players she has known since she joined the club in 2004. Everybody is family here. The reason this assortment of United players is on the bus is to contest the Alan Tate Testimonial. The Easington-born defender rose up through the United Academy system in the early noughties, winning the 2000/01 Jimmy Murphy Young Player of the Year award and captaining the club’s Reserves before eventually making a loan deal with Swansea permanent in 2004. Over 250 games later, after the Swans’ first-ever Premier League fixture, he suffered a broken leg in a golf cart accident. Though his career continued, Swansea took the decision to award him a testimonial and a United XI was scheduled to provide the opposition on 13 August 2013. The only condition was a rearrangement in the event of the two clubs being paired together at first team level later that same week in the opening game of the Premier League season. That’s exactly what happened, and the game was postponed while David Moyes began his brief managerial reign with a thumping 4-1 win at the Liberty Stadium. After a combined seven managerial changes between the two clubs, several unsuccessful rearrangements and almost exactly four years, the Reds are now Swansea-bound. This group – with a combined 1,660 appearances, 157 goals and 49 major honours – is intent on honouring the 34-year-old who never played a single first team game for United. The road to this point has been long and arduous, and the bid to build a team has not been easy. Working in tandem with Fletcher, Manchester United Foundation co-ordinator James Lester has managed to pull off various coups, despite the friendly being arranged in the middle of holiday season and falling the week before the start of the Premier League season proper. Munroe, a late call-up, is a friend of Brown and an ex-Academy player. Meeting the coach in Wales is Clayton Blackmore, Kevin Pilkington, Erik Nevland (hastily flown in from Stavanger), Alex Lang and Damian Gielty. The latter pair are the only members of the group with no affiliation to United. Lang is Swansea’s 17-year-old youth team goalkeeper, providing emergency cover should anything untoward befall Pilkington, while Gielty is Fletcher’s cousin and flies in from Norway the day after completing a 50 kilometre hike. Fletcher has more involvement than most in this fixture, both organisational and emotional. “I was 15 when I moved down to go full-time at United,” recalls the Scot. “Tatey was already there because he was in the year above me. He recognised that I was a young lad finding my way in a new city. Whenever the lads went out for a meal or to the Trafford Centre to play pool, Tatey got me involved. He welcomed me into the group and that is something I’ve never forgotten.” Having assisted Lester in rounding up a squad which is now – bar those meeting the party later – safely en route, Fletcher can settle into the subplot of the trip: the poker. The six players use Brown’s custom-made poker set, featuring various coloured chips which bear the defender’s name on a United shirt. “I got it as a present and it’s my pride and joy,” beams the defender, before ruefully adding: “Eagles has had it in his garage for months.” Eagles is the youngest member of the party, a pup at just 31. Looking around the bus, he is 25 years younger than Ritchie, the group’s elder, and this is his first foray into legends football. “At first I thought it was a bit out of my comfort zone,” he admits, “But I spoke to Webbs about it and he sold it to me. I thought I was maybe too young… what is a legend anyway?” Therein lies a common theme surrounding such games: what constitutes a legendary Manchester United player? Webber mustered three senior appearances during his time on the club’s books, but has long since made peace with a debate which, on social media at least, often surfaces and seldom remains pretty. “Listen, I was on the radio the other night, debating whether or not Wayne Rooney is a Manchester United legend,” he tells the group. “If people don’t think he’s a legend, what chance has anyone got?” Eagles shakes his head. He notched 17 outings and a solitary goal with United – an unforgettable, vital strike at Everton in 2007 – before leaving the club to join Burnley the following summer. After a short stint at Port Vale towards the end of last season, he is currently plotting his next move as a free agent. So too is Brown. A week later, the Longsight libero will join ex-United coach Rene Meulensteen at Kerala Blasters in the Indian Super League, but on the coach he mulls over his alternatives, one of which is to hook up with former team-mate Teddy Sheringham, a recent managerial appointment at Atletico de Kolkata, also in the ISL. Fletcher is the only professional, and has special dispensation to travel to the game. The Scot has been allowed by boss Mark Hughes to miss training and partake in the game as much as he likes, but returning with any kind of injury ahead of the Potters’ Premier League opener at Everton will not go down well. “Tackle like me,” proffers Eagles, suggesting the best way to approach the situation. “Just don’t do it! I’ve never been injured in my life!” As Fletcher mulls his dilemma, he steadily surrounds himself with coffee cups brimming with poker chips. John O’Shea calls Brown and is put on speaker for the party’s benefit. The repartee zips about the group, Yorke taking centre stage when he assumes the role of dealer. Though he turns 46 later this year, his regular golfing – he plays off a handicap of one – and gym work have combined to give him a doorman’s physique. Now, as he loudly predicts each card before he deals it, speculating on the other players’ strategies in order to get into their heads, he fills the bus. Not that the strategy ultimately breeds any great financial reward, but that isn’t the motive on this trip. None of the players are paid for answering the call to return to United duty. The motivation for playing is altogether more wholesome, ranging from longstanding friendship with Tate to craving the dressing room culture which underscored their playing days at Old Trafford. Between them, they have represented United from the reigns of Ron Atkinson to Louis van Gaal, but they are team-mates. “You just feel at home,” says Webber. “There’s that special bond you get at United,” continues Eagles. “You never lose friendships, it’s very strange. At other clubs I’ve been at, that’s not the case. I was at Bolton for three years but I wouldn’t go and meet any of them for a coffee, but at United, it’s like best mates.” After arriving in Swansea, the squad is bolstered by those who have made their own way, before the group heads to the Liberty Stadium. They arrive two hours early for the 7pm kick-off, but this has its benefits. While this is a friendly match, the players’ spread of ages makes the encounter “a high-risk game,” according to physio Di. Some hop on to the massage table, others take to the floor and go through their own stretching routines. Eagles requests music, and is duly handed with an enormous sound system by Swansea’s staff. “Did they pull this off the stadium?” he laughs, before putting on house music which, judging by one or two expressions among the senior seniors, prompts the first glaring reminder of the generational gap bridged hitherto. Eagles and Brown play two-touch keepy-up; Blackmore’s son – sporting a Henrikh Mkhitaryan shirt – weaves through the group and takes pot-shots at Pilkington; new parent Fortune rubs his face and stares into the distance, having hardly slept for two months. The football proves almost incidental. Within 11 minutes Yorke, who nine hours earlier joked about having an easy night, thunders in an unstoppable opener, which is equalised by a superb chip from Andy Robinson for a Swans legends team managed by Brendan Rodgers. Webber then slots home, only for Sam Ricketts to level once again. Those finishes are forgotten, however, shortly before half-time when Fortune misjudges a dropping ball and it hits him in the mouth. The United bench falls about in hysterics. So too, it seems, do the secret MUTV-watchers among United’s former players sat in their respective homes. The opening moments of half-time are spent with Fletcher reading aloud from a players’ WhatsApp group revelling in Quinton’s misfortune. “Did Quinny try to eat the ball?” messages O’Shea. By this point, Irwin has left the fray with a hamstring injury, throwing Munroe on for his legends debut. On the bench, Damian Gielty – whose football career included a stint in Luxembourg and peaked at Berwick Rangers – remains cool, seemingly unfazed by the fact that the next injury will turn his emergency call-up into an outing for Manchester United. His quads, he admits, are a touch stiff after the previous day’s marathon descent down a mountain. When Munroe is withdrawn with a toe injury, Gielty takes to the field midway through the second period, by which point Webber has clinically put United back into the lead. Yorke, who has dropped deeper and deeper, dictating United’s play, rounds off the scoring late on with a typically calm finish to secure a win. For the hosts, even an away win can’t spoil the party, and Tate takes to the public address system to express his gratitude for everybody’s involvement. At least, that’s what United’s players assume. On the field, they can’t hear a word. When Tate goes over to the visiting Reds to shake hands, Eagles quips: “Tatey, whatever you just said, well done!” All parties reconvene in the stadium’s VIP lounge for a post-match meal, where the players can unwind ahead of the following day’s hefty return journey. Fletcher will be up before dawn to take a car back over to Stoke for training, while Yorke has to hastily make his way over to Gatwick Airport before boarding a flight back to Trinidad. The striker is dismayed, however, to learn that he has a three-hour trip to London, having been told by Irwin that it would take him under 90 minutes. “Oh,” grins the Irishman, knowingly. “I thought you were flying to London.” The bulk of the group remains for a post-match party in Swansea, and among those who board the coach to return to Manchester the following morning, the chatter is as animated as it had been pre-match. “I know it’s a friendly game,” says Eagles, “but when Webbs scored to make it 3-2, I was punching the air and screaming! I don’t care who I play, I want to win, especially being back at United. Pulling the shirt on again and playing just brings back loads of memories. I loved every minute of it. "Having that kit on, it was like waking up, like I’ve been asleep for the last eight or nine years. I knew some of these boys from before, some of them I’ve only met on this trip, but I knew everything would just click into place because we’re all United players.”

#andy Tate #what football means what manchester united is made of #mufc #ggmu

[bleederziine]

We Like To Listen To You! An Interview w/ The Evening Attraction

    Talking to other people is freaking hard. Unlike when you’re a teenager, and talking to people is awkward because you want to be there best friend or their main squeeze, when you’re an adult, you’re doing it for those two reasons, along with needing a job, or in my case, getting musicians to sit down in one place and ask your questions. Luckily for me, when I sat down at Tony’s Burritoes with The Evening Attraction, they were ready and excited to answer all my questions, despite the crowded conditions and din of chattering toddlers and burrito bowl orders being placed. It was refreshing to meet a band that has been making music for a little while, and are proud of it, and at the same time still get excited about fan art and new experiences while on tour.

         After the interview I got to see TEA at the Beat Kitchen. TEA is a band that makes small rooms, like the Beat Kitchen, feel big with their confident playing and classic “rock” gestures (swinging guitars, fidgety dance moves), and I can’t wait to see them again some time. In the mean time, read this interview!

How did the band start?

Miles: Paul can tell the story better…

Paul: Well me and Miles were playing in a band in high school, and in 2013 that band kinda fizzled out, and we, Miles and I, formed this new band with our old drummer Matt Geiser and Joey who Miles knew from Columbia. Me and Miles go way back, and we started this band in 2014.

Miles: So I met Joe at Columbia, and we’ve been in love ever since… Then we made a record at Treehouse Records, at Matt’s place, who was playing drums with us. After that we started playing shows, and our first show was at Lincoln Hall. We just kept playing shows and getting around the scene, and then Nick joined as the drummer after Matt left.

Vincent: We played a lot of shows with traveling bands, and other local bands who had traction around the city. So its been great to play shows and meet guys like Mystery Lights.

Paul: But the last part of the puzzle was adding Vince, about a year ago! We have to add that otherwise everyone will say ‘we haven’t been introduced to this character, this isn’t a Tarantino film, why haven’t I been introduced to this guy?!’

Sub/V (to Vincent): How did you join the band, then?

Miles: We just kidnapped him one night, and never let him go.

Vincent: Really, thats what happened.

Joey: Yeah, we only take his blindfold off when we get to the venues.

Miles: So yeah, we’ve just been playing around the city for a while… We have a new record coming out soon, with this new outfit, got all the magic going on over at Treehouse Records. It should be out sometime this winter.

Vince: I love being in the band, I love being a hostage more-

Paul: Hey, thats not a laughing matter!

Miles: Get the blindfold!

Sub/V: So what inspired you all to initially make music, like in high school or college?

Joey: When I was four years old, it was the Monkeys. So I just watched a lot of the Monkey’s, and wanted a group of guys to play Monkey’s songs with.

Vincent: Yeah its really the only thing I want to do, it goes beyond self expression or anything, its more a matter of fulfilling my own happiness. I’ve wanted to be a musician since I was a kid.

Paul: For me my dad was in a band in the 90s, called Material Issue, and that was always a big thing for me, just being around music all the time.

Miles: I started making music with Paul, as I began learning how to write music and play guitar.

Sub/V: What did you listen to in high school?

Paul: Ooh, thats a good one! Cause thats like the stuff you kind of bury now…

Miles: A kind of guilty pleasure thing

Paul: I was a big Muse fan in high school

Miles: We liked Kings of Leon, early Kings of Leon before they got big…

Joey: I was obsessed with the White Stripes. I think I’m still obsessed with the White Stripes.

Paul: We’re all big Oasis fans too.

Vincent: I like the Strokes…

Joey: Yeah the Strokes, Franz Ferdinand… Wait, I figured it out. 2010, sophomore year of high school, MGMT’s Congratulations. One of the best albums ever made, first record to change my mind from Led Zeppelin guitar solos to, like, melodic chord structures.

Paul: Since then its just been a downward spiral. For the record, I never got into that record, still haven’t. Thats one of the great divides in the band, why we’re sitting on this side of the table.

Vincent: I will say that Radiohead has a couple of perfect records, some of the band might disagree, thats okay… we all have our own tastes and preferences…

Paul: Well those are all our old influences… what are you into now Miles? Nick you always have some good names to rattle off.

Jumble of multiple voices: Nude Party, Mystery Lights, Tom Petty.

Paul: I’ve been obsessed with Paul McCartney since I saw him recently.

SUB/V: Well those are all definitely less embarrassing than what I listened to in high school; basically just all Kesha and One Direction.

Miles: Are you serious?

SUB/V: Well I didn’t get into quote-unquote “cool” music until like two years ago…

Joey: No no I just watched an interview with like Liam, the hot one. Dude seemed really charming.

Paul: Miles actually has a tattoo of him on his face.

Miles: My girlfriend played me some of the one guy’s solo stuff… it was, eh, okay. I think he’s handsome, but he’s not built for rock’n’roll.

SUB/V: Well when I was like, 14, I think, I asked Louis to take a picture of me and he said no, cause it was his day off?

Miles: What a lying son of a bitch!

SUB/V: So how was it touring with Post Animal?

Paul: It was… very productive and successful. Lots of work, very busy.

Vincent: The feedback was incredible, lots of great reactions.

Nick: People were really nice to us, letting us stay at their houses and stuff.

Joey: Those guys are like our best friends, so it was like being with your friends every day on vacation.

Paul: Its great just listening to their good music, and your own good music, and playing music for people who have a fun time listening to it!

Nick: Miles got some crowd surfing in, with a tambourine, and the crowd just destroyed it.

Miles: I broke it into about three pieces. That day the crowd just ate a tambourine.

Paul: You know what that reminds me of? Like in a cartoon when something eats something and then like burp out the crown or hat or whatever? It was like the crowd ate you and then burped out the tambourine.

SUB/V: What was it like staying with strangers? That would feel pretty creepy for me…

Nick: Surprisingly great. There were probably like 3 sets of people who were just completely spontaneous, like we asked at the show and they just obliged.

Joey: All of them were very clean homes, surprisingly. This one guy in Houston, named Ernie, like drew all of these beautiful drawings of us, he’s an artist. They all look like lava lamps, like really psychedelic. He even drew one of Javi (Post Animal) as a fish.

SUB/V: You guys have a new release coming out soon in the fall; how has the way you write/make music changed throughout your time as a band?

Joey: Honestly like me and this guy have lived together for a while and we just bounce ideas off each other… we just write out some lyrics and put music together to go along with it.

Vincent: Usually Miles and Joey will have an idea, and then Paul will write a super sweet bass line, and Nick’ll start playing and it’ll all just come together.

Paul: Nick’s the best drummer in Chicago.

Miles: For this record we just made demoes, and then worked of those, and took ‘em to the garage and worked on them and created these songs as a band.

SUB/V: What keeps you motivated to make music?

Vincent: Every day is just so inspiring. As artists around today we’re very lucky to be in the information era, where you can hear any kind of artist or music, if you go on Google or Apple Music.

Joey: We’ve all been together for a while now, and I think thats its just cool that we can continue to do this, and finally get to share it with more people.

Paul: Vince’s real answer is he’s being held hostage, so he has no say in it. Anyway I don’t really think we have a choice; what would we do, just not write songs when we think of them? So, in summary, we’ve been around since 2014, we just got back from tour, we had some success, we love meeting people, we made a lot of good friends around the country…

Joey: We like to listen to Columbia Record’s radio broadcasts of Orson Welles’s Suspense…

Paul: And more than anything, we like to listen to you! So please, have conversations with us!

INTERVIEW AND PHOTOS BY CHLOE GRAHAM (@SUBVERSESMUSIC)

#the evening attraction #35mm #shootfilm #chicago music #beat kitchen