So
here is an article from Tim Goodman in the SF Chronicle on 2/7, titled
"Morality police threw wet blanket on broadcast". My only question is why? What was the wet blanket? Was it the fact that we did not get to see Janet Jackson trying to boost sales on an upcoming album by exposing herself? Was it the fact that we did not get to see Justin Timberlake grabbing himself and simulating humping dancers from behind? Why is this a bad thing? I am no prude, and I enjoy my share of porn. But why is that crap what makes an entertaining half time show. Paul McCartney got up there, played some popular music, had some cool staging (with the projections on stage), and was backed up by some fireworks. What more do you want? A few years ago, that's all any half time show was. The only reason for the show at all is for the network to try and get you to stay while most people are going to the bathroom or refilling their chip bowls. Mr. Goodman states the show tried to avoid any sense of controversy.Yes. And? Sounds fine to me. The only controversy I need in my SuperBowl is whether or not some player kept his toes in-bounds on some critical catch.
And no, the commercials were not as shocking either. Again, so what. I honestly could do without seeing a flatulent horse pass flaming gas on some poor woman. I chuckled some here and there.
This escalating need to shock more than the last time finally crossed the line for many viewers last year and triggered a backlash. Oh well, now you are just forced to actually do something entertaining without resorting to cheap shocks.
The SuperBowl took a few steps back in time yesterday. Thank you to all involved.
