Scattered Shots

Alfred Urrutia rampagingsloth@yahoo.com
Fri, 18 Jul 2003 12:39:59 -0700 (PDT)


--- Donna Tavoso <dtavoso@earthlink.net> wrote:

> My comment was on Carnie Wilson, who you may have noticed that Playboy
> didn't even mention on the cover. It was about the fact that men will
> go to buy an issue because of a celebrity -- Anna is pretty, but if
> she was just a pretty girl you wouldn't jog to the newsstand to get
> it, you go because she is famous and she is pretty -- on a side note,
> save your money, the pictures are picked up from her calendar and are
> about as dull as you can get.
> 

Well, I don't think I explained myself too well.  I should have said
that I'd be interested because she's a pretty enough celebrity, not
because she's a celebrity who's pretty enough.  Shit, that might be
more confusing.  What I'm saying is I already would "jog" to the
newsstand (actually I don't because I subscribe to Playboy) for
pictures of pretty girls.  It wouldn't matter if Anna was a nobody.
The famous aspect adds about 5% for me.  To put it another way, some
of my favorite celebrities aren't that well known or considered that
famous compared to a Pam Anderson or Madonna.  I'd love to see Carly
Pope or Annabeth Gish or Sarah Silverman in Playboy.

> Of couse she's entitled to her opinion, that wasn't my point, my point
> was more that everyone is always griping about how Playmates aren't on
> the cover enough etc, and here Playboy puts one on the cover to help
> support her in her new movie and then does press to support the issue
> and her movie (she's not the star, the studio wasn't going to get her
> on any show) and she slams Playboy by telling people not to buy the
> issue.  If she didn't like the photos she could have spoken up at the
> photo shoot (and yes they do and can) -- My point was that as much as
> everyone hates all the reality stars or B-stars who pose for the
> magazine, when they go out and promote it, they talk about what a
> great experience it was, how they love the pictures, that makes people
> want to buy the magazine.

True.  But that's expected, like reading a movie review in the ad that
says "The funniest comedy of the year!"  I put little stock in the
whole "the were wonderful, it was such a great experience" soundbites
when *everyone* says that.  Not that it affects whether I buy
something or not, just that I don't even hear it.

> And I don't think that Playboy should support the Playmates by being
> in more Playboy Videos (first of all they are already in tons of
> those) or being on Playboy TV, I think they should support them more
> by helping them be on more mainstream shows, like they did for Brande
> Roderick w/Baywatch.  But I also think they should support other
> Playmate efforts like Danelle Folta and the Playboy X-Treme team, it
> shows a whole different side of the Playmates.

I agree.  I was just noticing that they don't *even* support them with
as much air time and publicity in their own stuff as they promote porn
stars and unknown models sometimes.  I would certainly love to see
them help Playmates get regular movie/TV roles like Kelly Monaco or
Roderick have done and also support side projects like X-Treme Team or
Rebekka Armstrong's AIDS awareness stuff.  But how they treat their
Playmates internally is a good indication of how much support they're
going to give them outside.





Alfred.

=====
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"When you're surrounded by midgets with hammers, you know
 you're going to get a pounding."
 - Triple-H, on how horror movies can help you to evaluate
   real life dangers.
Alfred Urrutia                     rampagingsloth@yahoo.com