Superbowl halftime show
 

Anybody else think that was pure garbage? Who exactly is the target audience these days?

And I mean I like bare boobs more than the next guy, but that was pretty lame. Wardrobe malfunction?! Tee hee, good one.

Nice security they have there, guy actually gets on the field dressed in a refs outfit, what if he'd had C4 strapped to his chest?

At least Jake Delhomme made it an entertaining FOOTBALL GAME, would have liked to see the first SB overtime ever.

All in all a great game, but please drop the pre-produced, "shocking moment", lip-synced crap show next year and just show a good marching band, or frisbee dog or anything that's at least remotely entertaining. Championship PPK would have been an upgrade.

And that's all I have to say about this.

Re: Superbowl halftime show
 

I know EXACTLY what you mean. I was repulsed and disgusted by the halftime show, and am of a mind to send a very strong letter to CBS condemning what they did.

I mean, they gave prime-time network TV time to _Justin Fucking Timberlake._ Have they no STANDARDS? Was Buster Poindexter booked elsewhere? They couldn't get Wilson Phillips to reunite for one night? Molly Hatchet turned them down? Zamfir couldn't find his pan flute?

Last year's wasn't too bad. Yeah, it had Shania Twain dressed like Geena Davis in "Transylvania 6-5000" and blatantly flubbing her lip-syncing, but No Doubt played live, and Sting had someone whack him on the head hard enough for him to remember "Ah! I was in The Police once" for ten minutes.

I didn't see Janet's unveiling; my wife and I were out at Ruby Tuesday's for dinner, and by the time that they'd trotted out Janet (which got a "wait -- is this 1989?" from me), P.Diddy, Nelly AND Kid Rock, we were putting on our coats and heading for the door with a hearty "this sucks." Adding Captain N'Suck to the Cavalcade of Crap would not have helped my mood.

As for the breast, big deal. It was as much of a premeditated publicity stunt as Madonna's Britney smooch, and for the same reasons: "Hey, I used to be able to attract fans with my MUSIC, but that was a while ago, so HEY! LOOK! SEXUAL IMAGERY!"

Sure, last night's halftime show was bad, but there once was a time someone had a brilliant idea: The Blues Brothers Halftime show.

That was a very sad day for America.

Was it just me ...

But when the two rappers (P. Diddy and Nelly) were on stage, and they had the batch of yoots bouncing around on the field in front of them ...

There was this guy up in the front of the crowd, with a bit of cloth, that the camera never really focused on well enough to see ... but it was red, with a diagonal stripe of white inside black ... was this meant to be a bit of sporting clothing, or was it a piece of the national socialist battle flag?

Who exactly is the target audience these days?

I found myself asking this same question -- could you also hear the sound of gears grinding as they switched between Janet, Kid Rock, and P. Diddy? The transition was painful to both the ears and the eyes.

From "X-rated games: Halftime cup runneth over with skin & sin"

He then brought on Nelly, who, devoting his musical snippet to crotch-grabbing amid strip-teasing cheerleaders, informed us he's "looking for the right time to shoot [his] seed."

Oh, yeah, that was a classy act.

This is one of the times that I am grateful I can't stand professional sports... I get to miss this kind of pure fecal matter.

Justin Timberlake? Ok, make that VERY grateful.

Re: Superbowl halftime show
 

Whomever is part of this generation of MTV.

People are going to believe what they want. I personally think that it WAS a mistake. Ripping the outfit, no. Showing the boob, yes. The actions that were taken AFTER the incident spoke volumes (there WAS an attempt to cover her up by Justin, after his initial shock, and there ARE photos of Janet trying to cover herself after looking down at her bare breast).

There is a lot that the general public doesn't know, but they seem to have come to their own conclusions anyway. *shrugs*

I don't believe it was accidental. Look at the picture in Entertainment / Super Janet. She has a metal doodad on her nipple. I don't think it would have been nearly so decorative if they weren't planning on showing the breast.

Re: Re: Superbowl halftime show
 

Oh come on! If she wanted to cover herself she would have - what's with this 'attempt' crap?

And what reaction should they have had if it were planned? Both of them point at her boob and say ta-dah!?

She's had that for a number of years now. This is not new.

Re: Re: Re: Superbowl halftime show
 

And she did. The pictures taken after the CBS cameras cut away from the shot state it clearly (since she DID have her hand over the exposed breast). Again, I'm going by the information of someone who was there and saw what millions of people watching on TV did not.

Hrm...it would probably be more like the whole L'il Kim breast exposure...with a big old shit eatin' grin and proud of it. I mean she sure as hell didn't apologize for HER exposed tit now did she? She sure didn't...why? Because it was done on purpose.

Whew I hope to God that Janet issues some sort of statement about all this so people can chill out. But, it probably won't matter what she says at this point...it's like she's now some kind of monster over this whole thing.

So you're saying that everybody doesn't clean the kitchen during the halftime "festivities?"

I personally think that it WAS a mistake. Ripping the outfit, no. Showing the boob, yes.

I dunno -- have you ever seen an outfit detach so perfectly? Its like it was modular and perfect for quick boobage.

Even though I was irritated by the show overall, I have to admit that it worked -- everywhere in the office, today, one can hear, "Did you see the boob?"

Hmm. The target audience for the game, according to the advertisers, is pretty much "rich old farts". I mean, 3 different kinds of impotence drugs and Cadillac? Muhammad Ali? Willie Nelson? Even the Pepsi commercial was using an old (if appropriate) song.

I didnt watch, but this has been making me giggle all day. I keep thinking of Lewis Black's bit about the musical half time pagent..."if I'm going to be in that much pain, I want to do it myself!"

Would Janet be wearing such fancy nipple rings if they weren't going to be shown?

Also there's a picture of the two still singing after the breast was exposed on Yahoo. They are not in the process of covering up.

Again, she's had the piercings for years now, so it wasn't like it was decorated recently just for this purpose.

Do you think you can post a link to the photo, because all the photos that I've seen says otherwise.

Based on Janet's history, her noted thoughts on nudity and the looks on their faces (hers and Justin Timberlake's) when it occurred, I'd say it was accidental.

Having said that, we need to ask two questions here:

1. What's the big deal with showing bare breasts? After all, they're not sexual organs.

2. Why won't Janet Jackson get completely naked? I've been waiting for it for years.

If the target audience for the Super Bowl is rich old farts (on the basis of the bulk of the advertising), then baring Janet's boob fits right in with the game plan.

I, for one, have no problem with sexuality. I do believe, though, that consumers should be able to make an informed decision about what they are viewing, and the Super Bowl is apparently an unrated presentation. If the breast baring was in fact intentional, then it was a serious miscalculation on the part of its presenters. They (IMHO) were shooting for an 'edge' for CBS, and (as Lady Sycamore has pointed out in another thread) have very likely alienated their core audience in the process.

It is, however, very possible that this was a selfish and calculated act on the part of the performers and MTV, and not CBS. My wife has even gone so far as to suggest the act was intended to transfer attention from Michael to Janet for awhile.

At least we now have a conspiracy theory *about* a boob instead of *conceived* by a boob.

I'm inclined to think it was an intentional act but only known to the performers and possibly MTV (unlikely).
For one thing this is the first time in years i've seen or heard from Janet Jackson and if Timberlake had a concert in my backyard i'd shut the curtains. As they say in showbiz, there's no such thing as bad publicity.
A little extreme, to be sure, but very, very, effective.
As for the costume, it just fell apart. From memory there was a black leather/vinyl cup arrancement over some kind of red fabric.
It defies logic for the red fabric to be attached to the cup as an independent unit rather than as part of a blousy thing.
I have seen the footage a couple of times now and can find no sign of torn fabric which would surely rip rather than detatching whole.
Finally, if i was setting something up like this, i'd probably run the 'startled cover up' routine just in case it backfired and I needed an out

This one:

Yes. I understand she's had the piercing for year. But why such fancy adornments if they're not going to be shown?

Why wear your fanciest earrings if you're going to cover them up with a hat?

BTW Elspode has a post on another thread where he's thinking the same thing.

If anything was obscene, it was the rest of the jiggly, wiggly half-time show.

If I had kids, I'd be much more concerned about them being exposed to the rest of that than to Jackson's right breast. (Is it just me, or does that huge ornament almost qualify as clothing?)

And to think CBS refused to air a fairly tame ad because it was "too controversial".

Because she was saving it for someone special?

I suppose it's possible. If so, then she must love him a lot. That outfit has to be uncomfortable without the doodads. Add those in and you've got to have some major nipple abrasion going on from rubbing against the cup.

Oh, and that also assumes that she wouldn't be changing before she saw him after her performance.

I can hear it now. "Oh baby. Wear that leather outfit home, all right? I can't wait to lacerate my hands when I play with your nipples."

Ok, well, I don't see where they are still singing. Plus, I heard the performance when it happened, and it was clear that they had stopped immediately after the costume rip.

Oh well...it doesn't matter anymore anyway. People are going to believe what they want regardless. *shrugs*

I have to agree with you, here, LS...I saw it happen, and Justin sang the 'gonna get you naked by the end of this song' line, did the yank, and it was cut away immediately thereafter. Song was over.

The moment, commemorated in plastic, available on ebay.

The story was carried on Yahoo News and has likely increased the bidding.

Brilliant!

Wow, they're milking this for all it's worth. *Cough*

I know. That was terrible. It had to be said. It was outside of my control. Don't kill the messenger. I am not an animal! Vote Quimby.

I've been so fascinated with this (yawn!) story that I just now saw the photo for the first time, right here on this site.

Wow, that's quite a decoration! Looks like the Knight Commander's Cross to the Order of the British Empire, or some damn thing.

You just KNOW that most of the Western World is currently laughing their but-tocks off over all the outrage being displayed, don'tcha?

In my humble opinion, anybody who actually chose to sit and watch a half-time show featuring no-talents like Janet and Justin, writhing around in leather and grabbing their crotches, rather than doing something useful in the kitchen, got exactly what they deserved.

Speaking of no-talents, I finally succumbed to years of seeing gorgeous photos of Mariah Carey on her album covers and bought one of her cd's. And now I have a new coaster.

Absolutely... I mean if we had this kind of thing (NSFW, at least not in the USA) in the US, nobody would have cared about the stupid business at the Super Bowl.

How about anyone that actually got offended got what THEY deserved?

IMO, the backlash from all this drama is more offensive than anything. :rolleyes: