Showtime的“八卦”菜肴有污垢，但无法连接所有含义：电视评论
Showtime’s ‘Gossip’ Dishes Dirt, but Can’t Connect What It All Means: TV Review
任何阅读她的作品的人都知道，辛迪·亚当斯（Cindy Adams）不能保持。通常，专栏作家（现为91岁，仍然每周出版多次）在纽约邮报为她的专栏报道。该专栏是名人，保守的政治分析，对敌人的真实和感知的狂热，关于曼哈顿生活特殊性的轶事以及格言和双关语的奇怪的奇怪的杂物。 （最近，她在一篇文章中问读者，还引用了马特·达蒙（Matt Damon）并阐述了卡玛拉·哈里斯（Kamala Harris）：“您在冰冻温度下如何称呼骨骼？音调 - 断断续续，被剪裁和完全直接，将读者视为与亚当斯的亲密亲密关系，她可以坦率地说话，在速记中，这是一个合适的“八卦”，《八卦》（Showtime）的新纪录片系列是亚当斯（Adams）是中心人物对其主题的态度相似。 “八卦”立刻是亚当斯的个人和专业传记，看着鲁珀特·默多克（Rupert Murdoch对唐纳德·特朗普总统的崛起的分析。这些都是在不同程度的能力上完成的，即使是亚当斯无法将这部纪录片放在一起的人的个性。她确实尝试了。亚当斯（Adams）从曼哈顿（Manhattan）的公寓里对镜头说话，上面贴着她过去的帖子封面。她无休止地蔑视自己的股份，并对来自伊梅尔达·马科斯（Imelda Marcos）的朋友们无限的怜悯来胜过自己。亚当斯（Adams）是一位充满活力的演讲者，她在漫长的职业生涯中滑冰时引起了人们的注意。这个系列有时回想起“假装这是一个城市”，其中纽约消失的另一位话语思想家弗朗·莱博蒂茨（Fran Lebowitz）举行了法庭。就像那个Netflix的表演一样，“八卦”也容纳了其明星的盲点。在此纪录片中是的，亚当斯对特朗普根本没有看法 - 甚至没有他对国家有益，这至少可能是辩论的起点很有趣。取而代之的是，多年来，我们得到的是对特朗普对亚当斯的个人慷慨的无休止描述，包括帮助她从直升机上散布她已故丈夫的骨灰。这成功地说明了特朗普擅长于媒体工作的情况 - 所以好的，实际上，几年后，一位专业的隆隆人记得他们的清晰度比特朗普的任何时候都更加清晰。在他担任纽约房地产开发商时，他是一位主人，以利用他一生的固有丑闻。但是在整个“八卦”中，如何表达任何更大的见解都存在根本的不确定性。董事詹妮·卡赫曼（Jenny Carchman）此前曾与利兹·加布斯（Liz Garbus）成为“第四庄园”，讲述了《纽约时报》涵盖特朗普早期总统职位； “八卦”的紧迫性较小，也许少了。这部纪录片想在低调中提升并找到意义 - 一个值得的目标，即使近年来变得越来越小的新颖。但是，最清楚的是，当Gawker网站的前编辑讲话时，“八卦”无法或无法实现的目标是什么，“令人惊讶的是，八卦专栏作家的角色已经扎根着该国。真是太神奇了。我想我会停在那里！”为什么要再说一句话？ “八卦”的缺点似乎适合其主题。总的来说，这是交付事件，个性和ver的工具：它将使您了解纽约市小报出版社是特朗普成功的作者之一。它几乎没有意识到它必须告诉我们的意思，或者，实际上，今天的媒体如何存在于亚当斯以外。就像任何值得她盐的八卦专栏作家一样，纪录片倾向于偏爱那些同意有记录记录的人：我们从亚当斯的邮政同事那里得到了很多东西，其中许多人不再参加游戏，关于subjeCTS包括Harvey Weinstein如何玩小报游戏。 （这些记者有效地是那些被温斯坦掩盖了他掠夺的真相的人，这是一个事实，这是一个事实，即在后台不安。现在有许多场所表达他的观察和遗憾。 TMZ - 可能是21世纪八卦的主要塑造者 - 占据了倒退。考虑到最近制作的纪录片“框架布兰妮·斯皮尔斯”讲述了一个完整的故事，讲述了媒体如何制作和打破名人形象的完整故事，在大约四分之一的跑步时间中。 ，在她的舞风独白过程中，看起来有点像“一天遗骸”的中心。她将一生的劳动纳入了一个正在消失的系统中，并且在其峰值力量的时刻朝着末端发挥作用，我们只能S回顾EE。（尽管这部纪录片指称，但小报并未成为特朗普，但它们有所帮助。）最终，她是一个奇怪的选择，作为这个世界的指导，这两者都坚决避免了它的变化，并且因为她根本无法达到客观地看到特朗普的地方。但是还有谁可能做到？现代八卦传播是由TMZ的铁杆运营商或Deuxmoi上的匿名声音完成的；亚当斯的同龄人不见了。这段经文的事实是一个有趣的事实，使“八卦”成为一个值得一看的敬意，对于那些已经被这个主题参与的人。但是，正如亚当斯专栏现在对她的长期读者有意义一样，这个系列不太可能说服普通公众，它讲述的故事应有的保质期比日报更长。晚上8点ET在Showtime上。
Anyone who reads her work knows that Cindy Adams can’t be still.
In normal times, the columnist — now 91 and still publishing multiple times a week — goes out to do reporting for her column in the New York Post. The column is a strange mélange of quotes from celebrities, conservative political analysis, invective against foes real and perceived, anecdotes about the peculiarity of life in Manhattan, and aphorisms and puns. (She recently asked readers, in a column that also quoted Matt Damon and excoriated Kamala Harris, “What do you call a skeleton out in freezing temperatures? A numb skull.”) About the only consistent thing about her column day to day is the tone — choppy, clipped, and utterly direct, treating the reader as someone intimate enough with Adams that she can speak frankly, and in shorthand.
It’s fitting that “Gossip,” Showtime’s new documentary series on which Adams is the central figure, takes a similar attitude to its subjects. “Gossip” is, at once, a personal and professional biography of Adams, a look at the rise of Rupert Murdoch as a media mogul stateside, a jaunty set of anecdotes about the rivalry between the Murdoch-owned Post and the New York Daily News and the stories both papers covered, and an analysis of the rise of President Donald Trump. These are done to varying degrees of competency, and even a personality as big as Adams’ can’t hold this documentary together.
She does try. Adams speaks to the camera from her apartment in Manhattan, wallpapered with her past Post covers. She has endless contempt for her nemeses and boundless mercy for friends from Imelda Marcos to Trump himself. Adams is a dynamic speaker who holds one’s attention as she skitters through stories from her long career; this series at times recalls “Pretend It’s a City,” in which Fran Lebowitz, another discursive thinker from a vanished New York, holds court. And like that Netflix show, “Gossip” accommodates its star’s blind spots. In this documentary, Adams has no perspective on Trump at all — not even that he’s been good for the country, which might at least be interesting as a starting point for debate. What we get instead are endless descriptions of Trump’s personal generosity to Adams over the years, including helping her scatter her late husband’s ashes from his helicopter.
This successfully makes the case, as is made elsewhere, that Trump was good at working the press — so good, in fact, that years later, a professional rumormonger remembers them with greater clarity than any time Trump made news. He was in his time as a New York real-estate developer a master at leveraging the inherent scandal of his life. But throughout “Gossip,” there’s a fundamental uncertainty about how to express any larger insight. Director Jenny Carchman previously made, with Liz Garbus, "The Fourth Estate," about the New York Times covering the early Trump presidency; "Gossip" has less urgency, and maybe less on its mind. This documentary wants to elevate and find meaning within the lowbrow — a worthy goal, if one that's become a lot less novel in recent years. But it’s most clear what “Gossip” doesn’t or can’t achieve when a talking head, a former editor of the website Gawker, tells the camera, “It’s amazing that a gossip columnist character has run the country. That’s pretty amazing. I think I’ll stop there!”
Why stop before saying anything at all? “Gossip’s” shortcomings seem to suit its subject. It is, in the main, a vehicle for delivering incident, personality, and verve: it will leave you with the understanding that the New York City tabloid press was among the authors of Trump’s success. It imparts little sense of what anything it has to tell us means — or, indeed, how that press exists today beyond Adams. Like any gossip columnist worth her salt, the documentary tends to favor those who’ve agreed to go on record: We get much from Adams’ Post colleagues, many of whom aren’t in the game anymore, about subjects including how Harvey Weinstein played the tabloid game. (That these journalists are, effectively, the ones who got played as Weinstein obscured the long-rumored truth about his predations is a fact that thrums uneasily in the background.) We also hear from Perez Hilton, the aughts-era blogger who has by now had many venues to express his observations and regrets. TMZ — probably the dominant shaper of gossip in the 21st century — takes a backseat. Consider that the recent New York Times-produced documentary “Framing Britney Spears” told a complete story of how celebrity image is made and broken by the media, and in about a quarter of the running time.
There's an indulgent refusal here to cut short Adams, who comes over the course of her stem-winding monologues to seem a bit like the butler at the center of “The Remains of the Day.” She has put a lifetime of labor into a system that is vanishing, and that in its moment of peak power worked towards ends whose culmination we can only see in retrospect. (Tabloids didn't make Trump, despite what this documentary alleges, but they helped.) She is, in the end, a curious choice as guide to this world, both because she has resolutely avoided its changes and because she simply cannot reach a place of seeing Trump objectively.
But who else might have done it? Modern gossip dissemination is done by hardcore operators at TMZ or anonymous voices on DeuxMoi; Adams’ peers are gone. That fact of that passage is an interesting one, and makes “Gossip” a tribute worth watching for those who are already engaged by the subject. But just as Adams’ column now only makes sense to her longtime readers, this series is unlikely to convince the general public that the stories it tells deserved a shelf life much longer than that of a daily newspaper.
"Gossip" premieres Aug. 22 at 8 p.m. ET on Showtime.
本文资料/文案来自网络，如有侵权，请联系我们删除。
|
发表于 2022-7-5 05:41:03
发表于 2022-10-15 03:42:38