i know you’re not supposed to hate anybody. and i really don’t actually hate oprah.
let’s just call it an intense dislike of everything she stands for and everything i’ve ever seen her do and every appearance she’s made in my brain.
other than when she was in “the color purple”. she was great in that. but it was before she was “oprah” in all capital letters which i don’t use on this site.
other than, that, can’t stand her. and here’s the latest reason why.
today i learned that oprah is “contributing”…let me interrupt here. i would have said investing, as i’m sure she’s getting a return. but i quibble. oprah is “contributing” more than $1 million of the $10 million production costs for the upcoming musical based on “the color purple”.
which, after her “contribution”, will now be called “oprah winfrey presents: the color purple.”
you can read about it here in the new york times, but you’ll need to give them your firstborn child or email address.
jeez. let’s call this oprah thing what it is.
the bitch bought naming rights. just like enron tagged the houston astros stadium with their corporate name, until they went under in flames and the astros scrambled to have anyone name the stadium so they didn’t have to play at “enron field” and more. or any of the other stadiums and such all over the country. same thing.
but did enron get a cut of every ticket in addition to having their name splashed on the entrance? they did not. they paid for the publicity the naming rights gave them.
not oprah. she evidently convinced the producers that having her name in the title was a valuable incentive for ticket sales. so, unlike any other investor i can think of in the history of broadway producing, she gets her name in the frigging title and the attendant publicity that entails, and gets her cut of every ticket in addition. and i’m sure she’ll get her money back several-fold, because there are tons of oprah-worshippers out there.
i am not one.
it just is tacky. there are lots of people for whom you could say the name in the title would sell tickets. the name rosie o’donnell in the title, for instance, at one time would have sold many tickets. but did we have “rosie o’donnell presents: taboo”?
no we did not.
hell, any of the myriad of shows that bring in hollywood stars for roles would be well served to somehow feature their star’s name in the title.
but, as i said before, it’s just tacky. let’s hope this doesn’t become a trend.
i guess i’m expecting too much from a woman who panders for attention so much that she gave away a car to everyone in her audience.
i guess i’m expecting too much from a woman who expects closed stores to open the doors for her after closing time, and who then publicly flogs the store and its management until they are forced to come on the show and apologize. for no good reason, i might add, except that she is evidently so god-like at this point that no one can dispute what she says, even if it is dead wrong, and so the company has to eat crow to save their stock price. would hermes open the store for me after closing time? or you? hell no.
oh i forgot.
oprah is a woman of the people.
yeah.
a woman of the people who make stores open after hours and who browbeat their names into broadway show titles.
a group of people to whom, i assure you, i do not belong.
and “the color purple” is one show that i might once have but will not now, come hell or high water, buy a ticket for.
even if i’m in the vast minority, which i will be and usually am anyway.