April 12, 2023 • 38 mins
Larry and Thomas are back in Times Square once again this time discussing whether or not Kevin Costner might be trying to renegotiate a new contract or is perhaps leaving the TV Drama "Yellowstone". Then they talk about the ramifications of the new Brooke Shields documentary "Pretty Baby" where she describes the details of how she was sexually exploited as a child star in Hollywood. Next they wonder what will happen legally with latin singer Karol G after she called out GQ Magazine Mexico for photoshopping her cover imaging way too much. And finally the brothers chat about King Charles upcoming coronation and the new bold title of his wife "Queen Camilla".
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Good morning, brother Thomas, Goodmorning, brother Hacke. Do you ever
wonder when you see a prize fightand the boxers come into the ring and
they're already sweating and glistening. Ido. I kind of feel we're like
that now. Yeah, for thoseof you out there, we have had
an animated conversation about a topic thatwe will get to not right now,
but that we will get to home. I can't wait. I can't wait
(00:21):
either, And not to belabor thepugilistic metaphors, but the gloves might come
off. Yeah, yeah, forthe first time ever exactly, and we'll
see who gets the team and thelast time, because neither one of us
will have the endurance to go beyondthat. That's true, exactly, Ladies
and gentlemen, alive from Time Square. Once again we are the Entertainment Brothers,
(00:53):
and now the Entertainment Brothers. Here'sLarry Hackett and Thomas Valentino. Tell
everybody and welcome back. We havelots of stuff ranging from Royal News and
Royal News the way we do Royalnews, which is the illegal personal pr
way that we do it, yeah, and other stuff as well. Let's
(01:14):
start out with there was a bigepisode on a show this week called Succession.
We will not be discussing that.We're not going to give us.
We're not going to ruin anything foranybody. No spoiler orders here, because
we're not going to talk about it. And the reason I bring that up
is that the other big show ontelevision beyond Succession is what's called the kind
of red State succession, and thatis Yellowstone. And there has been a
(01:36):
long bubbling controversy about that show thathas become almost distracting, and it involves
the future or lack thereof, ofthe show's patriarch, Kevin Costner. It
has been going on for a while. There's basically in a nutshell. There
is talk that Costner wants to leavethe show a because he has his own
Western projects that he wants to getoff the ground, not surprising knowing his
(01:57):
history with Dances with Wolf to otherthings. Absolutely, he's obviously experiencing an
incredible career renaissance after many many yearsin the wilderness. I'm oh, nice,
right, do not agree? Oh? I agree? Absolutely? Yeah,
So he wants to do that,It is said he also doesn't want
to work this way on the sameschedule as the show's producer. The show's
creative brain is a guy named TylerSheridan. And as you might know,
(02:21):
there are spinoffs. There's eighteen eighty, there's nineteen twenty three. There apparently
is another spinoff in the works withthe name tentatively attached of Matthew McConaughey,
and whether he's going to be inthat spinoff or whether or not he's actually
going to assume the role of thepatriarch and Yellowstone, none of this is
known. It is a soap operawithin a soap opera. Absolutely, what
do you make of all of this? I ask you this because this may
(02:44):
sound like a crazy non sequitur.But we live in New York where several
weeks ago it was announced that AaronRodgers might be joining the Jets. We
discussed it here. Yes, weeksand weeks and weeks have passed and this
situation has not been resolved. Indiaat Yellowstone, where interestingly enough, problems
are usually dispatched at the end ofa barrel of a gun very quickly.
(03:05):
There's not a lot of yakking andkind of East Coast liberal stuff. And
yellow Stone they get to the heartof the matter and they deal with it.
They sure do. Yeah, thishas gone on all kidding aside,
This has gone on, this conversationabout what's going on for a very long
time. There was a very awkwardkind of fan convention a couple of weeks
ago where neither Sheridan nor Costner showedup, which of course, you know,
caused all kinds of questions about this. What from a legal standpoint,
(03:29):
if any can you make of this? And the inability to get this thing
resolved sounds to me this is thisis straight up out of the Hollywood playbook.
I think he's just holding out.He being Kevin Costner. I think
he's holding out to get more money, give me less days and right,
(03:50):
And at a certain point, everyonehas their price, okay, And I
think if he can get his price, which eventually he probably will, then
he'll be back. But if youdon't go to the extreme, much like
Aaron Rodgers, right, because Imean how many times did he have to
go there with Green Bay, thenyou tend to not get what you want.
(04:11):
And every agent in Hollywood, certainlyCostners, would be telling them,
you know, put it out therethat you don't want to go back,
that you're tired, you want towork on other projects. But let me
tell you something. When you're gettingwhatever the amount per episode that he's getting,
okay, and you're doing what you'redoing, you tend to come to
your sense is real fast when someonemakes the right offer. Are you saying
(04:34):
then that these these comments about himnot wanting to work that long or that
hard, you know, it's difficultto get to the network and that hard.
What's he doing? And also thathe wants to do his own projects.
You don't You don't think this isall I don't think that's worth Yes,
yes, I do think it's posing. It's posturing to get the best
(04:55):
possible deal. Okay, so let'sstop for a second. Yeah, I'm
trying to jump both of those notions. He's posturing to get the best possible
deal. You're a lawyer. Let'ssay you were a lawyer in this case.
Let's say you were the other sides. Are you with the producers lawyers
and you want Costner to come back? You recognize that he is essential to
the show. He's the reason theshow got off, you know, became
(05:15):
popular because he's a well known actor. He's been known for decades. Yeah,
he's good. How do you callhis bluff. Nothing happens until twenty
four hours before the deadline. SoI do the same thing that he's doing.
Okay, he's out in the wilderness, right, and I'm out in
the wilderness too. I'm posturing thesame way. Look, he wants ten
(05:38):
million an episode, I want togive him five. Right, we're five
million apart, which actually I don'tknow that he actually wants ten million an
episode, but I could see wherethat wouldn't be too far off, right,
But the bottom line is if they'refive million apart on whatever the numbers
are, that's not really a lot, right, believe it or not.
Right. Okay, So both partiesare acting the zact same way that they
(06:00):
should. And we see this insports every day. Okay, all of
a sudden someone sits out. Youknow, they don't play a couple of
games or you know that this alwaysgoes down to the last twenty four hours
statistic. Yeah, it is interestingthat when Conster started to balk or and
again all of this, the costerhas said nothing, right, these are
(06:21):
all people on his behalf. We'refeeding stories to various Hollywood reporters. Deadline,
of course, broke this first,so clearly an agent or a manager
or someone leaked this. Yes,it's interesting. That's suddenly after that,
the producers of yellow Stone said,we're in talks with Matthew McConaughey. Right,
do you think that's a little pressurebeing Yeah, yeah, yeah,
And that's and that's exactly if yousaid to me, what would you expect
(06:44):
them to say? I would expectthem to say that, right. Right.
If you remember something similar happened withCharlie Sheen and his show, that's
right, that's right. So itwas the same type of thing, and
then they were talking to Ashton andthen so on and so forth, right,
right, So it's like, okay, and Ashton did in fact get
it, Yes, yes, afterCharlie went crazy. Yeah. Right,
(07:06):
so you have here a situation whereare you going to bring in Matthew to
take Kevin's place? Right? Okay. I don't know. Maybe the show
succeeds that way, maybe it doesn't. But and as Matthew really looking to
do television and be in the grindof television every day when he's a huge
(07:29):
movie star who's still very bankable asa huge movie star, I don't know.
I kind of remember something the moviesthat Matthew McConaughey made, whether they
were the goofy rom coms like Failureto Launch or How to Get a Guy
in Ten Days whatever that thing wascalled with Kate Hudson, or things like
North Dallas, Dallas Biers Club excuseme, yeah, Dallas Bis. They
(07:51):
don't make those movies anymore. Theymake Marvel movies or they make cool,
hot TV shows. So I thinkthe idea of being on television. Harrison
Ford is on two shows on television. Okay, So I hear what you're
saying. But I think with everyseason there's some huge pillar of moviedom.
(08:13):
I believe de Niro is going tobe in a television show, in a
Netflix series that's coming up rights aNetflix series, Well this is a paramount
series. Yeah, but I don'tthink de Niro is going to be doing
a series for five years, potentiallyMcConaughey every night. But okay, but
I hear what you're saying. Okay, But what I'm saying is the Taylor
Sheridan Western Empire includes Kevin Costner,Harrison Ford, Sam Elliott, it may
(08:37):
now include Matthew McConaughey. Right,here's my take on this not the legal
take. Kevin Costner, for thosewho are old enough to remember, was
a complicated figure. He was inmovies like Field of Dreams and Bull Durham,
and he was kind of people reallyloved him. He also was an
autour to some degree. He wonOscars for Dances with Wolves. He then
had a huge come uppance with waterWorld, which was an epic disaster.
(09:01):
It was an epic point and anepic disaster, and lost a lot of
money and he spent years as Idon't want to say a pariah, but
as someone who was not welcomed inHollywood, and his star definitely dim because
he's a complicated, complex guy.He's kind of flinty saying he's a head
case the first one. But healso lodgers Kevin cost But I'm saying is
(09:26):
he was a huge star. Yeah, huge, absolutely the late eighties he
was. But then his starred dim. Yes, and not a lot of
people in Hollywood wept about that.Correct. So now he's back and he's
acting like Kevin Costner. Yes,he's getting you know, he's like,
I don't know if I will saythis, I don't think many people really
remember all that kind of stuff andI don't know that there is a downside
(09:48):
to him for this if he getsif they call his bluff and he gets
canned or doesn't come back. Right, Taylor Sheridan goes and makes other Western
shows with other stars, including MatthewMcConaughey. Right, doesn't mean that Kevin
Costner is not going to get pickedup by someone else who wants to do,
whether it's his project or another one. Right. I think his career
has been resurrected, whether or nothe stays in Yellowstone, and I think
(10:09):
it's all going to work out fromthe works for everybody. I will also
say this, and I'm not suremany people are paying attention to this debate.
None of this is bad for theshow. This is a soap opera
about a cellap opera. Right whenit comes back with Kevin Costor, people
will watch it for all kinds ofsigns and things like that. I think
this is all good news and Iwish them all the best, and we'll
(10:31):
see when it comes back. Doyou watch the show, by the way,
I'll be honest. I surf theshow. Yeah, yeah, I
surf it. I don't find itinteresting enough to watch, right, Yeah,
I have spent a lot of timein that very valley that they're in,
So I watch it for that kindof stuff. It is very beautiful.
Oh. I think a lot ofpeople watch it because, especially if
you're in like New York City wherewe are, you just want to look
(10:52):
at something that's not a building,right, So I think that's a lot
of the appeal of the show isopenness. Yeah. Absolute. The question
becomes if he's you know, ifyou're just looking at money in terms of
money, let's say he gets eightmillion, ten million an episode or whatever,
versus he goes out and does someother projects that are not as proven,
(11:15):
and you know, at the endof the day, you're kind of
going out like an athlete. You'reat the top of your game. Right
now, Okay, he really workedhard. I mean he came back from
what I could see with the halffeels in the McCoy's right exactly, and
then like really dug into this Westerngenre. And now you know, you
need to be careful because what happensis people think they're bigger than they are.
(11:39):
Charlie Sheen, that's all I haveto say. All right, well,
let's wait and see what happens.Yeah, I hope he stays.
Yeah, I hope he stays.I mean, I love Matthew as well,
but I think Kevin's better for this. Well. I don't think he
could assume that role. He's tooyoung for some it seems that way,
right, thank you? Yeah,yeah, yeah. Let's talk quickly about
(12:13):
some stories that we did elsewhere Brookshields. Brook Shields is back on television with
a documentary called Pretty Baby The BrookshieldsStory, wherein she recounts her life in
the fast Lane and in the spotlightin the late seventies early eighties when she
started movies like Pretty Baby, EndlessLove, Blue Lagoon, and she was
clearly a symbol of those very veryvery different times. She was essentially an
(12:37):
underage sex symbol, and she wasin a lot of movies, pretty Baby
being perhaps the most explicit about themthat really exploited her sexuality, which was
underage. Through the prism of fortyyears, A lot of those movies seem
impossible. You cannot imagine them gettingmade now for various reasons, whether it's
(12:58):
the empower women, the Me Toomovement, the way we treat children,
the way we see predation and thepatriarchy blah, blah blah, blah blah.
None of that could get done.You and I had a conversation that
I think is interesting. Much ofthe cause for the exploitation has been laid
at the feet for many, manyyears. This is nothing new of her
late mother, Terry Shields, whowas her manager as well as being her
(13:22):
mother, She was a troubled individual. She was known to be an alcoholic
and to kind of fly into rages. Brooke remains incredibly devoted to the memory
of her mother and insists that whateverdamage there was done to her by starring
in those kinds of movies was abouther own development and was caused by the
way she was seen by the public, not by any psychic damage that was
kind of like meted out upon her, and she remains very kind to her
(13:45):
mother. However, the kind ofstuff you and I discuss, could her
mother, assuming she was still alive, be liable for any of the decisions
that she made on behalf of herdaughter that, in the way we look
at things now, might have imperiledher or exploited her in ways that are
unacceptable these days. Brookshields seems tohave made some kind of peace with her
(14:09):
mom based on everything you just said. Right. But let's say you're like
some of these child stars who wereon Nickelodeon and they're all angry at their
parents. There's a bunch of themout there. I believe Janette McCurdy's one
of them, in the most notableright. Could she sue her mother?
Yeah, yeah, she could,just like any kid could sue their parent
(14:33):
for being a bad parent. Okay, in this case, she could sue
and say, well, you putme in all these movies. I didn't
want to do it. You didpermanent damage to me and it affected me,
and you were also my manager.Therefore your standard of care should be
higher, all right, because you'reboth parent, legal guardian, and manager.
(14:56):
And based on that theory, shecould, how would she do?
Hard to tell? Hard to tell? It would be you know, I'm
sure Terry would have some defenses.The issue, the key issue would be
if someone who's brooks age at twelveyears old, if they can consent,
even if they say they want todo it, did they really want to
(15:20):
do it? Sometimes when you're twelve, you have this burning desire to be
famous. I've seen it among many, many many people. In fact,
I've seen it among too many people, Okay, when they're twelve thirteen,
and they'll do anything, right,I mean, oh, they're twelve,
that's why, right, right,So they want something really bad and they
don't know. So the mother couldsay, well, you know, I'm
(15:41):
her mother, and I was withher every day, and in fact,
she was getting me out of bedin the morning to make sure that I
called everybody to get her to whereshe wanted to be, right, So
that's a valid argument too. Andthen you don't really know. You're in
this gray area of did she reallyknow what she was doing and was consent
really given? And so it's tough. One of the people who also benefited
(16:03):
from her being in these movies,the directors, the studios, you know,
the genes companies that she modeled for. Who again we're all implicitly exploiting
her youth and her sexuality. Again, it was different times, but I
mean, let me ask you this, can you reframe the law to different
times? That is to say,we look at these things much differently now
(16:25):
in twenty twenty three than we didin nineteen eighty. You mean, which
part any kind of well, anykind of liability, any kind of you
know, was she imperiled it allby these people she exploited to a degree
that is somehow actuable. I'm justsaying, are the lawyers out there looking
through statutes figuring out a way tosue that would have any kind of logic
or legal standing. Forty years later, you're you're the studio that she worked
(16:48):
for. Yes, okay, andI made money on Blue Lagoon and she
got paid and all that kind ofstuff. So what's the legal issue here?
A minor can invalidate a contract.So if I sign you to a
contract and you're twelve years old,you could turn around and walk away tomorrow.
Right, that's a fact. Sowhat happens What do you mean because
(17:11):
because they're not of age? Okay, they're not of age? So what
happens in that case? If I'mthe studio and I want to sign Brookshields,
I'm doing one of two things,and probably both. First thing is
I have a contract eighty miles longthat says you're a minor. You can
invalidate this agreement. But guess what, your mother, who's your legal guardian,
(17:36):
is signing off on your behalf,and therefore this agreement is binding.
Furthermore, I'm going to take thenext step of going to probate court and
getting it approved by a judge tomake sure all the terms and all the
money and everything else that's in thereis approved, and the judge is impartial
(17:57):
theoretically. So my sense is,you know, in Hollywood, this is
a known standard that these things weredone, and so she waived her rights
and she consented, whether she actuallydid herself or not her mother did.
I am surprised by the attention thatthis show is getting. I would have
(18:18):
thought to some degree, although Iknow she's had a modicum of fame since
the early eighties, she's pretty famous. Well, she is pretty fat,
and she she has maintained her fame, you know, she hasn't. I
think she was in a television showin the eighties or nineties called Suddenly Susan
or something like that. But it'smore sustained than I thought. Yeah,
And there are a lot of peopleof a certain age that are watching this
documentary. She's getting a lot alot of a press about it, and
(18:40):
a lot of the press about whatwe were discussing here about the kind of
incredulity when you look at these moviesthat these things were made. Right.
Although let's be honest as you andI are old enough to remember. They
were controversial then, and it wasin fact the controversy they were selling.
Yeah, the idea of selling somethingthat was sexualized and somehow verboten and off
limits. Yeah, was part ofthe attraction of that program. I think
(19:03):
we live in a time where thatkind of trans that kind of taboo sexuality.
It's just not what's being sold nowthe world. The world is a
different place. Yeah, But it'sinteresting it was sold then and wouldn't be
sold now necessarily, right, becausethen I don't sold. No, No,
you can you imagine a world wherethose movies would be made? Yeah,
yeah, I can't know. Andit's crazy. It's just crazy.
(19:23):
I mean thinking about the movies thatlike Paul Forhoven made, think about like
you know, well basic instinct.Yeah, you watching you watch a movie
like that. Now you're like,I cannot believe this movie was made.
Show Girls, which again we're werecontroversial back in the day, right,
they are just absolutely yeah toxic nowthey were. They were controversial, but
(19:44):
it never became a me too,which is interesting, right. The controversy
was like under the radar. Well, I'm yeah, it didn't rise,
No, but it certainly was alot. A lot of attention was paid
by people like Susan Faluti and Kimilopaalia. These are This was the foundational stone
upon which things like Me Too arefinally built. There's no question about that.
(20:07):
I mean, it wasn't like feminism, you know, hadn't been born
yet. Lots of people called itout, but it was also seen as
being okay, and the studios wentn'tgoing, well, okay, we're still
gonna make it. Hey, it'sHollywood. By the way, do you
know Paul for Hofan, who wejust mentioned, is a Jesus scholar in
his later years. No, yes, he like he's an expert on like
the Gospels and things like that.He's the first scholar of Jesus. I
mean that who made a who madea soft core part of obvious, you
(20:30):
know, pre sorrowings of that.Speaking of image and imagery, you and
I were having a spirited conversation.I think we were about something that every
(20:55):
now and then rises to the levelof controversy in the publicity machine, in
the vanity factory, as I liketo call it. I believe that was
Costello called it that first. Thestory we're talking about Now is about an
artist named Carol g who's a reggaetonartist and a Colombian singer. She has
called out GQ magazine for what sheclaims was the excessive retouching of her cover
(21:15):
photograph and has said, my facedoes not look like this, my body
does not look like that, andI feel very happy and comfortable with how
I look naturally. Despite making mydiscontent clear with the number of editions they
did with the photo, they didn'tdo anything about it, as if to
look good I needed all those changes. Anyway, this is a hardy perennial
(21:37):
in the publishing industry where a starwill complain about photoshopping. As a former
magazine editor, I can tell youthat, at least in the magazine's magazine
that I worked at, there issome retouching for things that are let's say,
blemishes or imperfections, but there isn'texceed no, no, no,
no, absolutely. If there's aneyelash that stuck on it, I think
there would be. I say today, there's a lot more. I mean,
(21:59):
I look at people and I don'teven know who they are because they've
been so airbrushed, airbrushed and cosmeticsurgery a combo of both. Okay,
you know, right, so youhave the whole kind of Kardashian aesthetic,
right where a combination of plastic surgeryand the way there their photos appear in
ads it doesn't look like them andthat is actually part of their stick.
But there are others, right likethis artist Carol g Yes, who are
(22:22):
complaining about this. You and I, like I said, had a spirited
conversation. I believe that if youare posing for a cover of a magazine,
you relinquish, within reason, anyclaim on what that fixture looks like,
because frankly, you can claim thatmy face was altered and my body
was altered. Well, what ifyou don't like the lighting, What if
(22:42):
you don't like the outfit, Whatif you don't like your hair or your
makeup? Now you can change thatwhile you're doing the photo shoot. I
think this claimed that the magazine editorshave can do what they want with these
photos. You and I had thisconversation about Andy Warhol and yeah, and
the manipulation of photographs there. Yeah, this comes up a lot in fashion
(23:03):
magazines, in particular, particularly inthe monthly magazines, where fashion is that
at premium and people complain about thatthey've been altered too much, and that
is the aesthetic that goes on.Now. I can tell you that I
have had photographs, let's say,from a wedding that I bought, where
the number of retouches that are askedfor by the subject, of course,
(23:26):
is almost dizzying. Yes, right, And that's a bit of a different
circumstance because it's a wedding and weare buying the photos. Carol g was
not paid for these photos. I'mcan assure you with that. She posted
figure to be on the cover ofGQ. Why would you pay her?
She's getting publicity, Okay, Idon't know. I never paid for me.
Okay, so zero zero, shegets nothing. She gets publicity,
okay, and she's getting more publicitynow because she's complaining about Latin GQ's coverage
(23:52):
of her. You disagreed. Youthink you would take this case and have
her and perhaps I mean not knowingall the facts, but you think she
has a claim against the magazine fordistorting her likeness. Here's what I think.
Okay. First thing is, ifI'm working for you, man,
you're my boss, okay, youLarry Hackett at People Magazine, and this
(24:12):
happens. I'm knocking on your doortomorrow morning, and I'm gonna say,
I want to see the paperwork thatwe have with these people. Okay,
so maybe you can weigh in onthat. Like, I don't know,
you know. All I know isif I'm your general counsel, I'm saying,
brother Hackett, you know that consentand waiver part where we can sort
(24:33):
of do anything we want with herimage. I want to make that about
eight pages longer and make it moreand more and more specific so that she
can never sue us. Can Itell you a secret? Tell me that's
that's what there's There's no paperwork,there never is. The publicist says we'll
(24:56):
do a photo shoot, and youhave a photo shoot, and there's discussions
about is the LIMA gonna pick meup? You're gonna pay for hair and
makeup? That's basically it's since inthe days, there's no release where where
she says where where you? IfI'm you and I'm representing People magazine,
first of all, I'm saying,listen, you're posing for us for the
cover, and if we can basicallyalter your appearance as much as possible,
(25:23):
and if you don't you're not goingto say for the better what we think
is the better. Right, wehave the final say on what better is.
But but if someone disagrees what I'msaying is what is profound about this
case. What's profound about it issomeone is subjecting that the other party went
(25:45):
too far in photo shopping her.Okay, and the movement of the world
today is that, Yes, there'scertain people like the Kardashians that that's their
stick, but there's other bull whofeel they want to be more natural.
And if I have imperfections, byimperfections are beautiful and I don't want them
(26:07):
touched. I'm telling you that Idon't deny. I don't doubt her sincerity.
No, no, no, Idon't doubt her sincerity. But Okay,
this is a no lose situation forCarol g. She's not gonna sue.
She's getting attention for claiming for hermagazine cover because she's complaining about it,
and there's controversy, and we inthe press love controversy. She's claiming
(26:29):
it's disrespectful to Latinas, so she'sshowing her political credibility and calling out the
magazine on behalf of other women whoshe respects. She doesn't lose. She
does lose. No, she doesn't. She completely loose, how because I
would never hire her again. Sowait, okay, there's thank you,
thank you. So now I'm LarryHackett. If People Magazine and I just
read this right and I saw whatshe did with Esquire, I am staying
(26:52):
so far away from this. I'mlike, I'm not unless I have Valentino,
Unless I have the Valentino waivering cansent and release form, I'm not
gonna put her on the I'm notgoing to take the chance. I would
generally agree with that, But ifI were a magazine where I knew I
wouldn't be doing that kind of touchup and retouching to her, I would
take her in a second. Ifshe gets catapulted into another level of fame
(27:17):
thanks in part to this controversy,there will be another magazine that deals with
her. Not I agree with that, not in the short term, but
I think, because also remember this, other magazines will watch and if she
doesn't sue, like I said,it's a win win, I guarantee,
like I can't guarantee, it's acounterfactual. They will sell more copies of
(27:40):
the GQ that she's on the coverof because she's complaining about it, no
doubt, no doubt. But stillwhen she goes to do another magazine,
if she's getting a waiver and consentand release form to sign, that says,
if I go too far, Ifin your opinion, I go too
(28:03):
far, too bad, you can'tdo anything about it, even though it's
your name, image and likeness,and I acknowledge that, but you can't
do anything about it. Here's here'sthe dirty secret. If you're a huge,
if you're beyoncem okay, I canassure you no picture of Beyonce gets
on the cover of Vogue or anyother big magazine without Beyonce signing off on
(28:27):
it. That's a negotiated deal.It's it could be negotiated, it could
be just deeply implied because if becausebeyond here's why no one out there without
paper. No one's gonna put iton paper, no way, because it's
journalistically not cool to do this.Okay, we'll live your narrow where the
rules don't let me finish star youare not. If you're running a magazine,
(28:51):
you are still trying to pretend tobe a journalistic organ showing story subjects
the cover. Okay, it's notcool, right, because it's a slippery
slow between showing them the photo onthe cover and then showing them the cover
lines and then showing them the story. Right. I know there are magazines
out there that do that, andfor them to pretend to be journalists is
insane. Right. We did notdo that. We did not show Okay,
(29:15):
people to cover. There's a publiciston the set who sees how the
photos are going. They can lookin the camera and see what it looks
like. That's different than showing themthe actual image that you're going to use.
That's not cool. Is this thefirst person? Here's the key question,
because listen to the names you're talkingabout. Beyonce, right, yeah,
(29:37):
I want to be photoshopped. Iwant to look better. If there's
a little freckle here, get ridof them. I can demand that,
right right? Okay, but isthis the first person who's ever said,
Hey, I agreed to be photoshopped, but not like that. You took
it too fast. This is thefirst No, no, not first person.
Happens to a time. Okay,what that because what happens is the
(29:59):
photos shot hopping too far. Look, they all want to look their best
and whether they know it or not, they know that that involves some technical
machine fixing. It's when it goestoo far in their minds and they look
silly. Okay, because what she'sOkay, she's not only enraged and disrespected,
she's embarrassed. Okay, because shethinks she you know, she thinks
(30:21):
that people are gonna look at thatand said she wanted to look like this.
So she's putting distance between what endedup on the cover and her own
thoughts about this. Okay. WhatI'm saying is these controversies rise up all
the time, and they're good foreverybody. Yeah, that's a cynical take,
but it's the truth. They're goodfor the lawyers too. They're good
because if I come in but they'renot going to sue. But that doesn't
(30:41):
matter. If I come into younow and say, hey, I think
we should put a little consent andwaiver thoughts together, you might think about
that. You might, And youknow the world is different, Let's be
honest. The publishing industry is onit's on its back, and you know,
maybe they do sign these wavers naked'sagreements. What I found the same
thing. She doesn't legend this thatGQ violated any written deal. No,
(31:03):
no, no, there was I'maware of that. I'm I'm completely aware
of that. Right. All I'msaying is that I do believe in the
next three years that someone will comealong and sue someone else for negligent photo
shopping or altering of their image.That's a prediction, Mark my words.
(31:26):
I'm on the record. If Ijust want one last thing, you're What
you're dealing with in all these casesis a balancing act between fame power.
Yeah, right, Because depending onwhat magazine you are and where you are
in the pecking order, there arecertain stars you'll never get, right,
Beyonce's basically going to Vogue and nowhereelse and maybe Vanity Fair right. You
know, People Magazine we were atick below that. We could get a
(31:49):
lot of people, but people likepeople who were too cool for school,
like Gwyneth Paltrow would never post forPeople magazine because it's still too middle class.
And there's a whole range of thosetitles, and there's a whole range
of those stars, right right.What all of these negotiations are is finding
a kind of balance between where youbelong. You know, you you the
star might be stepping up a littlebit by being on a GQ cover.
(32:10):
You, GQ are showing that you'rehipping your cool right, and everybody's looking
for some people that kind of likefind that magic zone correct where it's good
for both of you. This doesnothing to violate that, and this is
good to your point. There willbe deals that people will try to get
from a magazine like GQ, anddepending on who they are, GQ will
tell them to f off because you'renot big enough, or they may say,
(32:30):
you know what, this person's worthit, and they're about to pop
and they're about to be huge,Let's do this because then their burgeoning fame
is good for us as a magazine. It's a balancing act. And like
I said, I don't think thepublishing industry is in the place right now
where they can afford to say noto people just because that's the way business
was done before. I must admitI haven't been doing this for a quite
a while now, so maybe peopledo make these deals, but clearly they
(32:52):
didn't make this deal in this case. There was only a verbal agreement about
what the photoshoots. There's no doubtabout that, because but you're saying going
forward, you think that's going toLet's take it a step further, right,
what if she did have a writtenagreement and the agreement said we're gonna
photoshop you like this, and we'regonna photoshop you like that, you know,
(33:13):
and then maybe it's like, okay, you violated the terms of a
written agreement. Right, So thatwritten agreement could work both ways, which
is why they don't have them becauseit's complicated. How do you codify?
I would still I would still slamyou with you know, eight pages of
language. You would just be lookingto press for attention. Just you're looking
from the attention from the nose.It's exposed. You're biting the hand that's
(33:35):
feeding you. You're looking for attentionfrom the press that you're beating up on.
I don't want to be exposed.I know what you guys are like,
Is there anything else you wanted totalk about? Oh? We want
to talk about that? The RoyalFamily. It's a quick Royal Family take
(33:59):
okay, okay, because it's agood little soap oper. No wonder what
you think about it. So theinvitations for the May sixth car Nation have
gone out and it's going to bea shorter parade route, and there all
these their details were released about thecarriage and the crowns and the scepters and
all that kind of stuff. Right, What was interesting is that the invitation
came from King Charles and the newlydubbed Queen Camilla. Charles has pushed very
(34:22):
hard to have her named Queen,not Queen Consort. Just a couple of
years ago, while Elizabeth's alive,she said she's gonna be named Queen Consort.
This is a long way from beingPrince Charles's mistress, from being the
third person infamously in the marriage betweenCharles and Diana, and then moving through
the dark period of Diana's death andbeing the girlfriend, and then becoming the
(34:43):
Princess Consort, and then the QueenConsort and now finally the Queen. Her
image has been rehabilitated. For thoseof you who are students, there was
a theory that her image is rehabilitatedby throwing other royals under the bus.
This, of course, is theallegation that Prince Harry makes in his bo
Look in the documentary that Camilla,in an attempt to become accepted by the
(35:04):
British public, ie the British tabloidswould deliver stories too, said tabloids,
in exchange for them being good toher. She was a source and they
basically said, you give us stories, will be nice to you, and
we'll pave the way for you ultimatelyto be his wife, Charles's wife and
now the queen. This adds yetanother layer of operatus to the upcoming coronation.
(35:32):
We have talked about this in thepast about whether any member of the
royal family can take legal action,whether it's Harry against Camilla for what he
alleges she did to him, andwhether it's William for against Harry for what
Harry said about him. Anything herethat makes you, I mean, Harry
no evidence against Camilla. What doeshe have he doesn't know, he doesn't.
(35:55):
Well, then that's ridiculous. Imean I think, god, it's
not Wait let's let's do you thinkshe in fact did that? Me too?
Okay, so she's a fairly goodsource that she was a frequent confidante
of the editors of the largest tabletin the UK. Okay, so she's
(36:16):
a player. She outplayed Harry.Yeah, Okay, So that part of
it is sort of over because nowshe is going to be the queen,
right, So I don't see Harrysaying I have a legal case or cause
of action against her, and youknow William with her the same thing.
I mean, you know, accusingthem of being racist and all this stuff.
(36:38):
I mean, I guess they couldsue, you know, I mean
anyone under the theory of anyone cansue anyone. But you know, what's
the point to stop it. They'renot going to stop you get an order
against them? Yeah, yeah.So what is fascinating here is that you
(36:59):
have someone that was the Kumada,as I've said before, the girlfriend,
right, and now has become thequeen. And then you kind of look
at all the people in that wholecircle. You know, you see a
lot of I see ruthlessness in Meghan, and I see ruthlessness in Camilla,
(37:22):
and I see Camilla as being moresavvy and playing that game. Right,
So they got out played. Yeknow who you're taking on, right,
Either you're gonna take her on oryou're not. But I think they tried
to take her on. They lost, right, It's clear as day.
(37:43):
Oh did they lose? It isamazing he's the queen now. It is
interesting how much news and how muchdrama this family throws off. Yeah,
well not unlike the Dutton family ofYellowstone family. Yeah, it's very very
similar exactly. Yeah, yeah,comes right down away. Yeah well this
was fun. Yeah. Absolutely.As a programming note, ladies and gentlemen,
we are going to be doing theEntertainment Brothers podcast once every two weeks.
(38:07):
Now, there are other commitments thatwe're going to be doing. Keep
keep an eye open for those goodthings actually good things actually, but we're
going to be doing this hopefully regularlyevery two weeks, not every week though,
to be quite honest, our weeklyschedule is always a bit kind of
rickety and not that Yeah we werean age, were into it that much,
but this one we're going to tryto adhere to. So tell your
friends and lovers and everyone else outthere, and it's been a pleasure.
(38:30):
Yes, I'll see you in twoweeks, yes, all right, all
right from Times s Grid where theEntertainment Brothers See you soon.
Good morning, brother Thomas, Goodmorning, brother Hacke. Do you ever
wonder when you see a prize fightand the boxers come into the ring and
they're already sweating and glistening. Ido. I kind of feel we're like
that now. Yeah, for thoseof you out there, we have had
an animated conversation about a topic thatwe will get to not right now,
but that we will get to home. I can't wait. I can't wait
(00:21):
either, And not to belabor thepugilistic metaphors, but the gloves might come
off. Yeah, yeah, forthe first time ever exactly, and we'll
see who gets the team and thelast time, because neither one of us
will have the endurance to go beyondthat. That's true, exactly, Ladies
and gentlemen, alive from Time Square. Once again we are the Entertainment Brothers,
(00:53):
and now the Entertainment Brothers. Here'sLarry Hackett and Thomas Valentino. Tell
everybody and welcome back. We havelots of stuff ranging from Royal News and
Royal News the way we do Royalnews, which is the illegal personal pr
way that we do it, yeah, and other stuff as well. Let's
(01:14):
start out with there was a bigepisode on a show this week called Succession.
We will not be discussing that.We're not going to give us.
We're not going to ruin anything foranybody. No spoiler orders here, because
we're not going to talk about it. And the reason I bring that up
is that the other big show ontelevision beyond Succession is what's called the kind
of red State succession, and thatis Yellowstone. And there has been a
(01:36):
long bubbling controversy about that show thathas become almost distracting, and it involves
the future or lack thereof, ofthe show's patriarch, Kevin Costner. It
has been going on for a while. There's basically in a nutshell. There
is talk that Costner wants to leavethe show a because he has his own
Western projects that he wants to getoff the ground, not surprising knowing his
(01:57):
history with Dances with Wolf to otherthings. Absolutely, he's obviously experiencing an
incredible career renaissance after many many yearsin the wilderness. I'm oh, nice,
right, do not agree? Oh? I agree? Absolutely? Yeah,
So he wants to do that,It is said he also doesn't want
to work this way on the sameschedule as the show's producer. The show's
creative brain is a guy named TylerSheridan. And as you might know,
(02:21):
there are spinoffs. There's eighteen eighty, there's nineteen twenty three. There apparently
is another spinoff in the works withthe name tentatively attached of Matthew McConaughey,
and whether he's going to be inthat spinoff or whether or not he's actually
going to assume the role of thepatriarch and Yellowstone, none of this is
known. It is a soap operawithin a soap opera. Absolutely, what
do you make of all of this? I ask you this because this may
(02:44):
sound like a crazy non sequitur.But we live in New York where several
weeks ago it was announced that AaronRodgers might be joining the Jets. We
discussed it here. Yes, weeksand weeks and weeks have passed and this
situation has not been resolved. Indiaat Yellowstone, where interestingly enough, problems
are usually dispatched at the end ofa barrel of a gun very quickly.
(03:05):
There's not a lot of yakking andkind of East Coast liberal stuff. And
yellow Stone they get to the heartof the matter and they deal with it.
They sure do. Yeah, thishas gone on all kidding aside,
This has gone on, this conversationabout what's going on for a very long
time. There was a very awkwardkind of fan convention a couple of weeks
ago where neither Sheridan nor Costner showedup, which of course, you know,
caused all kinds of questions about this. What from a legal standpoint,
(03:29):
if any can you make of this? And the inability to get this thing
resolved sounds to me this is thisis straight up out of the Hollywood playbook.
I think he's just holding out.He being Kevin Costner. I think
he's holding out to get more money, give me less days and right,
(03:50):
And at a certain point, everyonehas their price, okay, And I
think if he can get his price, which eventually he probably will, then
he'll be back. But if youdon't go to the extreme, much like
Aaron Rodgers, right, because Imean how many times did he have to
go there with Green Bay, thenyou tend to not get what you want.
(04:11):
And every agent in Hollywood, certainlyCostners, would be telling them,
you know, put it out therethat you don't want to go back,
that you're tired, you want towork on other projects. But let me
tell you something. When you're gettingwhatever the amount per episode that he's getting,
okay, and you're doing what you'redoing, you tend to come to
your sense is real fast when someonemakes the right offer. Are you saying
(04:34):
then that these these comments about himnot wanting to work that long or that
hard, you know, it's difficultto get to the network and that hard.
What's he doing? And also thathe wants to do his own projects.
You don't You don't think this isall I don't think that's worth Yes,
yes, I do think it's posing. It's posturing to get the best
(04:55):
possible deal. Okay, so let'sstop for a second. Yeah, I'm
trying to jump both of those notions. He's posturing to get the best possible
deal. You're a lawyer. Let'ssay you were a lawyer in this case.
Let's say you were the other sides. Are you with the producers lawyers
and you want Costner to come back? You recognize that he is essential to
the show. He's the reason theshow got off, you know, became
(05:15):
popular because he's a well known actor. He's been known for decades. Yeah,
he's good. How do you callhis bluff. Nothing happens until twenty
four hours before the deadline. SoI do the same thing that he's doing.
Okay, he's out in the wilderness, right, and I'm out in
the wilderness too. I'm posturing thesame way. Look, he wants ten
(05:38):
million an episode, I want togive him five. Right, we're five
million apart, which actually I don'tknow that he actually wants ten million an
episode, but I could see wherethat wouldn't be too far off, right,
But the bottom line is if they'refive million apart on whatever the numbers
are, that's not really a lot, right, believe it or not.
Right. Okay, So both partiesare acting the zact same way that they
(06:00):
should. And we see this insports every day. Okay, all of
a sudden someone sits out. Youknow, they don't play a couple of
games or you know that this alwaysgoes down to the last twenty four hours
statistic. Yeah, it is interestingthat when Conster started to balk or and
again all of this, the costerhas said nothing, right, these are
(06:21):
all people on his behalf. We'refeeding stories to various Hollywood reporters. Deadline,
of course, broke this first,so clearly an agent or a manager
or someone leaked this. Yes,it's interesting. That's suddenly after that,
the producers of yellow Stone said,we're in talks with Matthew McConaughey. Right,
do you think that's a little pressurebeing Yeah, yeah, yeah,
And that's and that's exactly if yousaid to me, what would you expect
(06:44):
them to say? I would expectthem to say that, right. Right.
If you remember something similar happened withCharlie Sheen and his show, that's
right, that's right. So itwas the same type of thing, and
then they were talking to Ashton andthen so on and so forth, right,
right, So it's like, okay, and Ashton did in fact get
it, Yes, yes, afterCharlie went crazy. Yeah. Right,
(07:06):
so you have here a situation whereare you going to bring in Matthew to
take Kevin's place? Right? Okay. I don't know. Maybe the show
succeeds that way, maybe it doesn't. But and as Matthew really looking to
do television and be in the grindof television every day when he's a huge
(07:29):
movie star who's still very bankable asa huge movie star, I don't know.
I kind of remember something the moviesthat Matthew McConaughey made, whether they
were the goofy rom coms like Failureto Launch or How to Get a Guy
in Ten Days whatever that thing wascalled with Kate Hudson, or things like
North Dallas, Dallas Biers Club excuseme, yeah, Dallas Bis. They
(07:51):
don't make those movies anymore. Theymake Marvel movies or they make cool,
hot TV shows. So I thinkthe idea of being on television. Harrison
Ford is on two shows on television. Okay, So I hear what you're
saying. But I think with everyseason there's some huge pillar of moviedom.
(08:13):
I believe de Niro is going tobe in a television show, in a
Netflix series that's coming up rights aNetflix series, Well this is a paramount
series. Yeah, but I don'tthink de Niro is going to be doing
a series for five years, potentiallyMcConaughey every night. But okay, but
I hear what you're saying. Okay, But what I'm saying is the Taylor
Sheridan Western Empire includes Kevin Costner,Harrison Ford, Sam Elliott, it may
(08:37):
now include Matthew McConaughey. Right,here's my take on this not the legal
take. Kevin Costner, for thosewho are old enough to remember, was
a complicated figure. He was inmovies like Field of Dreams and Bull Durham,
and he was kind of people reallyloved him. He also was an
autour to some degree. He wonOscars for Dances with Wolves. He then
had a huge come uppance with waterWorld, which was an epic disaster.
(09:01):
It was an epic point and anepic disaster, and lost a lot of
money and he spent years as Idon't want to say a pariah, but
as someone who was not welcomed inHollywood, and his star definitely dim because
he's a complicated, complex guy.He's kind of flinty saying he's a head
case the first one. But healso lodgers Kevin cost But I'm saying is
(09:26):
he was a huge star. Yeah, huge, absolutely the late eighties he
was. But then his starred dim. Yes, and not a lot of
people in Hollywood wept about that.Correct. So now he's back and he's
acting like Kevin Costner. Yes,he's getting you know, he's like,
I don't know if I will saythis, I don't think many people really
remember all that kind of stuff andI don't know that there is a downside
(09:48):
to him for this if he getsif they call his bluff and he gets
canned or doesn't come back. Right, Taylor Sheridan goes and makes other Western
shows with other stars, including MatthewMcConaughey. Right, doesn't mean that Kevin
Costner is not going to get pickedup by someone else who wants to do,
whether it's his project or another one. Right. I think his career
has been resurrected, whether or nothe stays in Yellowstone, and I think
(10:09):
it's all going to work out fromthe works for everybody. I will also
say this, and I'm not suremany people are paying attention to this debate.
None of this is bad for theshow. This is a soap opera
about a cellap opera. Right whenit comes back with Kevin Costor, people
will watch it for all kinds ofsigns and things like that. I think
this is all good news and Iwish them all the best, and we'll
(10:31):
see when it comes back. Doyou watch the show, by the way,
I'll be honest. I surf theshow. Yeah, yeah, I
surf it. I don't find itinteresting enough to watch, right, Yeah,
I have spent a lot of timein that very valley that they're in,
So I watch it for that kindof stuff. It is very beautiful.
Oh. I think a lot ofpeople watch it because, especially if
you're in like New York City wherewe are, you just want to look
(10:52):
at something that's not a building,right, So I think that's a lot
of the appeal of the show isopenness. Yeah. Absolute. The question
becomes if he's you know, ifyou're just looking at money in terms of
money, let's say he gets eightmillion, ten million an episode or whatever,
versus he goes out and does someother projects that are not as proven,
(11:15):
and you know, at the endof the day, you're kind of
going out like an athlete. You'reat the top of your game. Right
now, Okay, he really workedhard. I mean he came back from
what I could see with the halffeels in the McCoy's right exactly, and
then like really dug into this Westerngenre. And now you know, you
need to be careful because what happensis people think they're bigger than they are.
(11:39):
Charlie Sheen, that's all I haveto say. All right, well,
let's wait and see what happens.Yeah, I hope he stays.
Yeah, I hope he stays.I mean, I love Matthew as well,
but I think Kevin's better for this. Well. I don't think he
could assume that role. He's tooyoung for some it seems that way,
right, thank you? Yeah,yeah, yeah. Let's talk quickly about
(12:13):
some stories that we did elsewhere Brookshields. Brook Shields is back on television with
a documentary called Pretty Baby The BrookshieldsStory, wherein she recounts her life in
the fast Lane and in the spotlightin the late seventies early eighties when she
started movies like Pretty Baby, EndlessLove, Blue Lagoon, and she was
clearly a symbol of those very veryvery different times. She was essentially an
(12:37):
underage sex symbol, and she wasin a lot of movies, pretty Baby
being perhaps the most explicit about themthat really exploited her sexuality, which was
underage. Through the prism of fortyyears, A lot of those movies seem
impossible. You cannot imagine them gettingmade now for various reasons, whether it's
(12:58):
the empower women, the Me Toomovement, the way we treat children,
the way we see predation and thepatriarchy blah, blah blah, blah blah.
None of that could get done.You and I had a conversation that
I think is interesting. Much ofthe cause for the exploitation has been laid
at the feet for many, manyyears. This is nothing new of her
late mother, Terry Shields, whowas her manager as well as being her
(13:22):
mother, She was a troubled individual. She was known to be an alcoholic
and to kind of fly into rages. Brooke remains incredibly devoted to the memory
of her mother and insists that whateverdamage there was done to her by starring
in those kinds of movies was abouther own development and was caused by the
way she was seen by the public, not by any psychic damage that was
kind of like meted out upon her, and she remains very kind to her
(13:45):
mother. However, the kind ofstuff you and I discuss, could her
mother, assuming she was still alive, be liable for any of the decisions
that she made on behalf of herdaughter that, in the way we look
at things now, might have imperiledher or exploited her in ways that are
unacceptable these days. Brookshields seems tohave made some kind of peace with her
(14:09):
mom based on everything you just said. Right. But let's say you're like
some of these child stars who wereon Nickelodeon and they're all angry at their
parents. There's a bunch of themout there. I believe Janette McCurdy's one
of them, in the most notableright. Could she sue her mother?
Yeah, yeah, she could,just like any kid could sue their parent
(14:33):
for being a bad parent. Okay, in this case, she could sue
and say, well, you putme in all these movies. I didn't
want to do it. You didpermanent damage to me and it affected me,
and you were also my manager.Therefore your standard of care should be
higher, all right, because you'reboth parent, legal guardian, and manager.
(14:56):
And based on that theory, shecould, how would she do?
Hard to tell? Hard to tell? It would be you know, I'm
sure Terry would have some defenses.The issue, the key issue would be
if someone who's brooks age at twelveyears old, if they can consent,
even if they say they want todo it, did they really want to
(15:20):
do it? Sometimes when you're twelve, you have this burning desire to be
famous. I've seen it among many, many many people. In fact,
I've seen it among too many people, Okay, when they're twelve thirteen,
and they'll do anything, right,I mean, oh, they're twelve,
that's why, right, right,So they want something really bad and they
don't know. So the mother couldsay, well, you know, I'm
(15:41):
her mother, and I was withher every day, and in fact,
she was getting me out of bedin the morning to make sure that I
called everybody to get her to whereshe wanted to be, right, So
that's a valid argument too. Andthen you don't really know. You're in
this gray area of did she reallyknow what she was doing and was consent
really given? And so it's tough. One of the people who also benefited
(16:03):
from her being in these movies,the directors, the studios, you know,
the genes companies that she modeled for. Who again we're all implicitly exploiting
her youth and her sexuality. Again, it was different times, but I
mean, let me ask you this, can you reframe the law to different
times? That is to say,we look at these things much differently now
(16:25):
in twenty twenty three than we didin nineteen eighty. You mean, which
part any kind of well, anykind of liability, any kind of you
know, was she imperiled it allby these people she exploited to a degree
that is somehow actuable. I'm justsaying, are the lawyers out there looking
through statutes figuring out a way tosue that would have any kind of logic
or legal standing. Forty years later, you're you're the studio that she worked
(16:48):
for. Yes, okay, andI made money on Blue Lagoon and she
got paid and all that kind ofstuff. So what's the legal issue here?
A minor can invalidate a contract.So if I sign you to a
contract and you're twelve years old,you could turn around and walk away tomorrow.
Right, that's a fact. Sowhat happens What do you mean because
(17:11):
because they're not of age? Okay, they're not of age? So what
happens in that case? If I'mthe studio and I want to sign Brookshields,
I'm doing one of two things,and probably both. First thing is
I have a contract eighty miles longthat says you're a minor. You can
invalidate this agreement. But guess what, your mother, who's your legal guardian,
(17:36):
is signing off on your behalf,and therefore this agreement is binding.
Furthermore, I'm going to take thenext step of going to probate court and
getting it approved by a judge tomake sure all the terms and all the
money and everything else that's in thereis approved, and the judge is impartial
(17:57):
theoretically. So my sense is,you know, in Hollywood, this is
a known standard that these things weredone, and so she waived her rights
and she consented, whether she actuallydid herself or not her mother did.
I am surprised by the attention thatthis show is getting. I would have
(18:18):
thought to some degree, although Iknow she's had a modicum of fame since
the early eighties, she's pretty famous. Well, she is pretty fat,
and she she has maintained her fame, you know, she hasn't. I
think she was in a television showin the eighties or nineties called Suddenly Susan
or something like that. But it'smore sustained than I thought. Yeah,
And there are a lot of peopleof a certain age that are watching this
documentary. She's getting a lot alot of a press about it, and
(18:40):
a lot of the press about whatwe were discussing here about the kind of
incredulity when you look at these moviesthat these things were made. Right.
Although let's be honest as you andI are old enough to remember. They
were controversial then, and it wasin fact the controversy they were selling.
Yeah, the idea of selling somethingthat was sexualized and somehow verboten and off
limits. Yeah, was part ofthe attraction of that program. I think
(19:03):
we live in a time where thatkind of trans that kind of taboo sexuality.
It's just not what's being sold nowthe world. The world is a
different place. Yeah, But it'sinteresting it was sold then and wouldn't be
sold now necessarily, right, becausethen I don't sold. No, No,
you can you imagine a world wherethose movies would be made? Yeah,
yeah, I can't know. Andit's crazy. It's just crazy.
(19:23):
I mean thinking about the movies thatlike Paul Forhoven made, think about like
you know, well basic instinct.Yeah, you watching you watch a movie
like that. Now you're like,I cannot believe this movie was made.
Show Girls, which again we're werecontroversial back in the day, right,
they are just absolutely yeah toxic nowthey were. They were controversial, but
(19:44):
it never became a me too,which is interesting, right. The controversy
was like under the radar. Well, I'm yeah, it didn't rise,
No, but it certainly was alot. A lot of attention was paid
by people like Susan Faluti and Kimilopaalia. These are This was the foundational stone
upon which things like Me Too arefinally built. There's no question about that.
(20:07):
I mean, it wasn't like feminism, you know, hadn't been born
yet. Lots of people called itout, but it was also seen as
being okay, and the studios wentn'tgoing, well, okay, we're still
gonna make it. Hey, it'sHollywood. By the way, do you
know Paul for Hofan, who wejust mentioned, is a Jesus scholar in
his later years. No, yes, he like he's an expert on like
the Gospels and things like that.He's the first scholar of Jesus. I
mean that who made a who madea soft core part of obvious, you
(20:30):
know, pre sorrowings of that.Speaking of image and imagery, you and
I were having a spirited conversation.I think we were about something that every
(20:55):
now and then rises to the levelof controversy in the publicity machine, in
the vanity factory, as I liketo call it. I believe that was
Costello called it that first. Thestory we're talking about Now is about an
artist named Carol g who's a reggaetonartist and a Colombian singer. She has
called out GQ magazine for what sheclaims was the excessive retouching of her cover
(21:15):
photograph and has said, my facedoes not look like this, my body
does not look like that, andI feel very happy and comfortable with how
I look naturally. Despite making mydiscontent clear with the number of editions they
did with the photo, they didn'tdo anything about it, as if to
look good I needed all those changes. Anyway, this is a hardy perennial
(21:37):
in the publishing industry where a starwill complain about photoshopping. As a former
magazine editor, I can tell youthat, at least in the magazine's magazine
that I worked at, there issome retouching for things that are let's say,
blemishes or imperfections, but there isn'texceed no, no, no,
no, absolutely. If there's aneyelash that stuck on it, I think
there would be. I say today, there's a lot more. I mean,
(21:59):
I look at people and I don'teven know who they are because they've
been so airbrushed, airbrushed and cosmeticsurgery a combo of both. Okay,
you know, right, so youhave the whole kind of Kardashian aesthetic,
right where a combination of plastic surgeryand the way there their photos appear in
ads it doesn't look like them andthat is actually part of their stick.
But there are others, right likethis artist Carol g Yes, who are
(22:22):
complaining about this. You and I, like I said, had a spirited
conversation. I believe that if youare posing for a cover of a magazine,
you relinquish, within reason, anyclaim on what that fixture looks like,
because frankly, you can claim thatmy face was altered and my body
was altered. Well, what ifyou don't like the lighting, What if
(22:42):
you don't like the outfit, Whatif you don't like your hair or your
makeup? Now you can change thatwhile you're doing the photo shoot. I
think this claimed that the magazine editorshave can do what they want with these
photos. You and I had thisconversation about Andy Warhol and yeah, and
the manipulation of photographs there. Yeah, this comes up a lot in fashion
(23:03):
magazines, in particular, particularly inthe monthly magazines, where fashion is that
at premium and people complain about thatthey've been altered too much, and that
is the aesthetic that goes on.Now. I can tell you that I
have had photographs, let's say,from a wedding that I bought, where
the number of retouches that are askedfor by the subject, of course,
(23:26):
is almost dizzying. Yes, right, And that's a bit of a different
circumstance because it's a wedding and weare buying the photos. Carol g was
not paid for these photos. I'mcan assure you with that. She posted
figure to be on the cover ofGQ. Why would you pay her?
She's getting publicity, Okay, Idon't know. I never paid for me.
Okay, so zero zero, shegets nothing. She gets publicity,
okay, and she's getting more publicitynow because she's complaining about Latin GQ's coverage
(23:52):
of her. You disagreed. Youthink you would take this case and have
her and perhaps I mean not knowingall the facts, but you think she
has a claim against the magazine fordistorting her likeness. Here's what I think.
Okay. First thing is, ifI'm working for you, man,
you're my boss, okay, youLarry Hackett at People Magazine, and this
(24:12):
happens. I'm knocking on your doortomorrow morning, and I'm gonna say,
I want to see the paperwork thatwe have with these people. Okay,
so maybe you can weigh in onthat. Like, I don't know,
you know. All I know isif I'm your general counsel, I'm saying,
brother Hackett, you know that consentand waiver part where we can sort
(24:33):
of do anything we want with herimage. I want to make that about
eight pages longer and make it moreand more and more specific so that she
can never sue us. Can Itell you a secret? Tell me that's
that's what there's There's no paperwork,there never is. The publicist says we'll
(24:56):
do a photo shoot, and youhave a photo shoot, and there's discussions
about is the LIMA gonna pick meup? You're gonna pay for hair and
makeup? That's basically it's since inthe days, there's no release where where
she says where where you? IfI'm you and I'm representing People magazine,
first of all, I'm saying,listen, you're posing for us for the
cover, and if we can basicallyalter your appearance as much as possible,
(25:23):
and if you don't you're not goingto say for the better what we think
is the better. Right, wehave the final say on what better is.
But but if someone disagrees what I'msaying is what is profound about this
case. What's profound about it issomeone is subjecting that the other party went
(25:45):
too far in photo shopping her.Okay, and the movement of the world
today is that, Yes, there'scertain people like the Kardashians that that's their
stick, but there's other bull whofeel they want to be more natural.
And if I have imperfections, byimperfections are beautiful and I don't want them
(26:07):
touched. I'm telling you that Idon't deny. I don't doubt her sincerity.
No, no, no, Idon't doubt her sincerity. But Okay,
this is a no lose situation forCarol g. She's not gonna sue.
She's getting attention for claiming for hermagazine cover because she's complaining about it,
and there's controversy, and we inthe press love controversy. She's claiming
(26:29):
it's disrespectful to Latinas, so she'sshowing her political credibility and calling out the
magazine on behalf of other women whoshe respects. She doesn't lose. She
does lose. No, she doesn't. She completely loose, how because I
would never hire her again. Sowait, okay, there's thank you,
thank you. So now I'm LarryHackett. If People Magazine and I just
read this right and I saw whatshe did with Esquire, I am staying
(26:52):
so far away from this. I'mlike, I'm not unless I have Valentino,
Unless I have the Valentino waivering cansent and release form, I'm not
gonna put her on the I'm notgoing to take the chance. I would
generally agree with that, But ifI were a magazine where I knew I
wouldn't be doing that kind of touchup and retouching to her, I would
take her in a second. Ifshe gets catapulted into another level of fame
(27:17):
thanks in part to this controversy,there will be another magazine that deals with
her. Not I agree with that, not in the short term, but
I think, because also remember this, other magazines will watch and if she
doesn't sue, like I said,it's a win win, I guarantee,
like I can't guarantee, it's acounterfactual. They will sell more copies of
(27:40):
the GQ that she's on the coverof because she's complaining about it, no
doubt, no doubt. But stillwhen she goes to do another magazine,
if she's getting a waiver and consentand release form to sign, that says,
if I go too far, Ifin your opinion, I go too
(28:03):
far, too bad, you can'tdo anything about it, even though it's
your name, image and likeness,and I acknowledge that, but you can't
do anything about it. Here's here'sthe dirty secret. If you're a huge,
if you're beyoncem okay, I canassure you no picture of Beyonce gets
on the cover of Vogue or anyother big magazine without Beyonce signing off on
(28:27):
it. That's a negotiated deal.It's it could be negotiated, it could
be just deeply implied because if becausebeyond here's why no one out there without
paper. No one's gonna put iton paper, no way, because it's
journalistically not cool to do this.Okay, we'll live your narrow where the
rules don't let me finish star youare not. If you're running a magazine,
(28:51):
you are still trying to pretend tobe a journalistic organ showing story subjects
the cover. Okay, it's notcool, right, because it's a slippery
slow between showing them the photo onthe cover and then showing them the cover
lines and then showing them the story. Right. I know there are magazines
out there that do that, andfor them to pretend to be journalists is
insane. Right. We did notdo that. We did not show Okay,
(29:15):
people to cover. There's a publiciston the set who sees how the
photos are going. They can lookin the camera and see what it looks
like. That's different than showing themthe actual image that you're going to use.
That's not cool. Is this thefirst person? Here's the key question,
because listen to the names you're talkingabout. Beyonce, right, yeah,
(29:37):
I want to be photoshopped. Iwant to look better. If there's
a little freckle here, get ridof them. I can demand that,
right right? Okay, but isthis the first person who's ever said,
Hey, I agreed to be photoshopped, but not like that. You took
it too fast. This is thefirst No, no, not first person.
Happens to a time. Okay,what that because what happens is the
(29:59):
photos shot hopping too far. Look, they all want to look their best
and whether they know it or not, they know that that involves some technical
machine fixing. It's when it goestoo far in their minds and they look
silly. Okay, because what she'sOkay, she's not only enraged and disrespected,
she's embarrassed. Okay, because shethinks she you know, she thinks
(30:21):
that people are gonna look at thatand said she wanted to look like this.
So she's putting distance between what endedup on the cover and her own
thoughts about this. Okay. WhatI'm saying is these controversies rise up all
the time, and they're good foreverybody. Yeah, that's a cynical take,
but it's the truth. They're goodfor the lawyers too. They're good
because if I come in but they'renot going to sue. But that doesn't
(30:41):
matter. If I come into younow and say, hey, I think
we should put a little consent andwaiver thoughts together, you might think about
that. You might, And youknow the world is different, Let's be
honest. The publishing industry is onit's on its back, and you know,
maybe they do sign these wavers naked'sagreements. What I found the same
thing. She doesn't legend this thatGQ violated any written deal. No,
(31:03):
no, no, there was I'maware of that. I'm I'm completely aware
of that. Right. All I'msaying is that I do believe in the
next three years that someone will comealong and sue someone else for negligent photo
shopping or altering of their image.That's a prediction, Mark my words.
(31:26):
I'm on the record. If Ijust want one last thing, you're What
you're dealing with in all these casesis a balancing act between fame power.
Yeah, right, Because depending onwhat magazine you are and where you are
in the pecking order, there arecertain stars you'll never get, right,
Beyonce's basically going to Vogue and nowhereelse and maybe Vanity Fair right. You
know, People Magazine we were atick below that. We could get a
(31:49):
lot of people, but people likepeople who were too cool for school,
like Gwyneth Paltrow would never post forPeople magazine because it's still too middle class.
And there's a whole range of thosetitles, and there's a whole range
of those stars, right right.What all of these negotiations are is finding
a kind of balance between where youbelong. You know, you you the
star might be stepping up a littlebit by being on a GQ cover.
(32:10):
You, GQ are showing that you'rehipping your cool right, and everybody's looking
for some people that kind of likefind that magic zone correct where it's good
for both of you. This doesnothing to violate that, and this is
good to your point. There willbe deals that people will try to get
from a magazine like GQ, anddepending on who they are, GQ will
tell them to f off because you'renot big enough, or they may say,
(32:30):
you know what, this person's worthit, and they're about to pop
and they're about to be huge,Let's do this because then their burgeoning fame
is good for us as a magazine. It's a balancing act. And like
I said, I don't think thepublishing industry is in the place right now
where they can afford to say noto people just because that's the way business
was done before. I must admitI haven't been doing this for a quite
a while now, so maybe peopledo make these deals, but clearly they
(32:52):
didn't make this deal in this case. There was only a verbal agreement about
what the photoshoots. There's no doubtabout that, because but you're saying going
forward, you think that's going toLet's take it a step further, right,
what if she did have a writtenagreement and the agreement said we're gonna
photoshop you like this, and we'regonna photoshop you like that, you know,
(33:13):
and then maybe it's like, okay, you violated the terms of a
written agreement. Right, So thatwritten agreement could work both ways, which
is why they don't have them becauseit's complicated. How do you codify?
I would still I would still slamyou with you know, eight pages of
language. You would just be lookingto press for attention. Just you're looking
from the attention from the nose.It's exposed. You're biting the hand that's
(33:35):
feeding you. You're looking for attentionfrom the press that you're beating up on.
I don't want to be exposed.I know what you guys are like,
Is there anything else you wanted totalk about? Oh? We want
to talk about that? The RoyalFamily. It's a quick Royal Family take
(33:59):
okay, okay, because it's agood little soap oper. No wonder what
you think about it. So theinvitations for the May sixth car Nation have
gone out and it's going to bea shorter parade route, and there all
these their details were released about thecarriage and the crowns and the scepters and
all that kind of stuff. Right, What was interesting is that the invitation
came from King Charles and the newlydubbed Queen Camilla. Charles has pushed very
(34:22):
hard to have her named Queen,not Queen Consort. Just a couple of
years ago, while Elizabeth's alive,she said she's gonna be named Queen Consort.
This is a long way from beingPrince Charles's mistress, from being the
third person infamously in the marriage betweenCharles and Diana, and then moving through
the dark period of Diana's death andbeing the girlfriend, and then becoming the
(34:43):
Princess Consort, and then the QueenConsort and now finally the Queen. Her
image has been rehabilitated. For thoseof you who are students, there was
a theory that her image is rehabilitatedby throwing other royals under the bus.
This, of course, is theallegation that Prince Harry makes in his bo
Look in the documentary that Camilla,in an attempt to become accepted by the
(35:04):
British public, ie the British tabloidswould deliver stories too, said tabloids,
in exchange for them being good toher. She was a source and they
basically said, you give us stories, will be nice to you, and
we'll pave the way for you ultimatelyto be his wife, Charles's wife and
now the queen. This adds yetanother layer of operatus to the upcoming coronation.
(35:32):
We have talked about this in thepast about whether any member of the
royal family can take legal action,whether it's Harry against Camilla for what he
alleges she did to him, andwhether it's William for against Harry for what
Harry said about him. Anything herethat makes you, I mean, Harry
no evidence against Camilla. What doeshe have he doesn't know, he doesn't.
(35:55):
Well, then that's ridiculous. Imean I think, god, it's
not Wait let's let's do you thinkshe in fact did that? Me too?
Okay, so she's a fairly goodsource that she was a frequent confidante
of the editors of the largest tabletin the UK. Okay, so she's
(36:16):
a player. She outplayed Harry.Yeah, Okay, So that part of
it is sort of over because nowshe is going to be the queen,
right, So I don't see Harrysaying I have a legal case or cause
of action against her, and youknow William with her the same thing.
I mean, you know, accusingthem of being racist and all this stuff.
(36:38):
I mean, I guess they couldsue, you know, I mean
anyone under the theory of anyone cansue anyone. But you know, what's
the point to stop it. They'renot going to stop you get an order
against them? Yeah, yeah.So what is fascinating here is that you
(36:59):
have someone that was the Kumada,as I've said before, the girlfriend,
right, and now has become thequeen. And then you kind of look
at all the people in that wholecircle. You know, you see a
lot of I see ruthlessness in Meghan, and I see ruthlessness in Camilla,
(37:22):
and I see Camilla as being moresavvy and playing that game. Right,
So they got out played. Yeknow who you're taking on, right,
Either you're gonna take her on oryou're not. But I think they tried
to take her on. They lost, right, It's clear as day.
(37:43):
Oh did they lose? It isamazing he's the queen now. It is
interesting how much news and how muchdrama this family throws off. Yeah,
well not unlike the Dutton family ofYellowstone family. Yeah, it's very very
similar exactly. Yeah, yeah,comes right down away. Yeah well this
was fun. Yeah. Absolutely.As a programming note, ladies and gentlemen,
we are going to be doing theEntertainment Brothers podcast once every two weeks.
(38:07):
Now, there are other commitments thatwe're going to be doing. Keep
keep an eye open for those goodthings actually good things actually, but we're
going to be doing this hopefully regularlyevery two weeks, not every week though,
to be quite honest, our weeklyschedule is always a bit kind of
rickety and not that Yeah we werean age, were into it that much,
but this one we're going to tryto adhere to. So tell your
friends and lovers and everyone else outthere, and it's been a pleasure.
(38:30):
Yes, I'll see you in twoweeks, yes, all right, all
right from Times s Grid where theEntertainment Brothers See you soon.
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.