Showing posts with label USA Today. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USA Today. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

The End (And Beginning) Of Yao (And Me)


That, above, is by a large margin my most cherished photo from any story I ever did. Not because I am much of a pro basketball fan or even paid much mind of Yao Ming's career while he played in the NBA, but just because of the bizarre dimensions of the thing and how he grumpy he looks. No, I did not step on his toe.

With Yao announcing in Shanghai the end of his NBA career this week, it seems worthwhile and fun for me to go reminisce on my involvement in its start. That picture was shot on an early April 2001 afternoon in a hotel room in the Chinese carmaking capital of Changchun, where USA Today sent me to chase down Yao at the Chinese Basketball Association's All-Star Game. It was on this assignment that I realized I could be really good at both freelancing about even topics I'm not naturally knowledgeable about and parachuting into foreign lands and finding the news.

In January, I had attended a CBA basketball game in Beijing for two reasons. First, I was curious what it would be like and, secondly, the very first morning after I arrived in Beijing I looked out my 13th-floor apartment window to see the words "NBA" and "I Love Basketball" written in English in the snow on a basketball court. I had gone to China to kick back, take stock and NOT work -- sounds familiar now, doesn't that? -- but great stories slapped me in the face everywhere I turned, the Chinese hankering for hoops being the very first. I soon learned that the Chinese were mad for American basketball and that Chinese TV aired one live NBA game every day overlaid by their own color commentary in Mandarin.

Here's how I described the game in a weekly e-mail missive I'd send to my friends and family from China in the era before blogs:

We found a thumping, pulsating arena -- site of 2008 Olympic badminton, perhaps? -- where we were lucky to get seats together and many fans happily stood in the aisles and along the railings to cheer as the team played beneath a massive Chinese flag. Scalpers lurked outside, a guy in a duck suit roamed the room as Beijing's mascot and the loudspeakers blared Ricky Martin and the Backstreet Boys as a dozen cheerleaders in black tights and shimmering butterfly vests danced about the court during time-outs. I noted there seemed to be few families in the audience, but then realized that under China's One Child policy, there aren't as many children so you're not going to bump into a the irksome broods that make outings at professional sports in America so much fun.

It didn't take long for me to learn about the Chinese stars who wanted to come to the U.S. and the NBA's desperate desire to expand and exploit this mammoth new market. In fact, that basketball game was the first time I saw any non-tourist black people in China; they were NBA rejects. Each Chinese team was allowed to hire two foreign players.

It seems obvious now that the U.S. was about to have a Chinese NBA invasion, but Americans had not heard much of a peep about this when I landed. Sports Illustrated had written something about Yao and another Chinese player named Wang Zhizhi, but they hadn't interviewed them and their story was at least two years old.

Timing and drama conspired in my favor. The Chinese didn't want Yao to come to the U.S. yet because his team, the Shanghai Sharks, hoped he'd help them win their first national title first. Also, Chinese culture demanded that the older, 23-year-old Wang go first, and Yao couldn't enter the NBA draft on his own anyway at that point because he was under 21. In the end, Wang came that year, and this was how I wrote about his entry into the draft on the front of USA Today's sports section in March 2001:

BEIJING -- He's a basketball player, so he's supposed to be tall.

But when 7-foot Wang Zhizhi strides through a Beijing restaurant en route to a private karaoke lounge to conduct an interview, it's hard not to be stunned by how close his head comes to the ceiling.

The Chinese gape because Wang, 23, is one of the most famous basketball players in China. American tourists stare, too, wondering who the giant might be.

They'll likely find out soon enough. Wang is in the final stages of securing a release from the top military basketball team in China to sign with the Dallas Mavericks, which could occur as early as Thursday. He's likely to be followed this year or next by 7-6 center Yao Ming, 20, as the first two Asian players in the NBA.

After that, though, I kept hearing how openly displeased Yao was with his forced deferral, and I convinced my editors at USA Today to let me track him down in Changchun. I don't even remember how I did it; I worked a circuit of translators and NBA sources but I swear there was also a little hotel camping-out involved.

What I got was this:

CHANGCHUN, China — Yao Ming doesn't want to be here anymore.

The potential No. 1 pick in this year's NBA draft isn't interested in putting on slam-dunk performances for the Chinese masses at their All-Star Game here. He absolutely loathes having to sit for questions from the Western media about his future. And he cringes at the growing likelihood that he may be forced to skip this year's draft to stay in China another year or two and continue to play for the Shanghai Sharks.

The mind of this anxious 20-year-old with almost no say in his own destiny is an ocean way, in a land where scouts are buzzing about his vast potential and where his compatriot, Wang Zhizhi, suited up Thursday night as a Dallas Maverick. Yao says he wants to enter the draft this year if he is permitted to make himself eligible, which he called "almost a sure thing."

This was an important piece for a few reasons. First, it was a thorough introduction of this monumental figure to the United States audience on page 1A of the largest-circulation newspaper in the nation. And second, it actually showed Westerners that Chinese people can, under very specific circumstances, get away with criticizing the government and official decisions. This circumstance was that this was an extraordinarily gifted athlete and potential cash cow, not a grunt. Later, the Chinese authorities would confiscate a fairly sizeable chunk of his NBA earnings.

Here was the money line from Yao, who spoke through an interpreter because he was years away from speaking English:

"I appreciate the CBA and I am happy playing here. But now I am ready. I want to be with the best."

The next year, after Wang broke us in over here, he got his wish. He was drafted No. 1, and I covered the machinations of that, too. After that, the story was the province of sports writers, not folks like me more interested in the geopolitical and fiscal implications than on-court action.

Years later, a university student in America contacted me. He was doing a piece on people faking photos on the Internet. He was sure the shot above was bogus. I assure him -- and you -- it was not. It was an awesome moment in time.

Saturday, February 6, 2010

The Strip + Petcast LIVE Saturday 4-6 pm PT

Join us live from 4-5 p.m. PT at LVRocks.Com on Saturday as we record two new episodes of The Petcast including one with Andrew Schechter, the referee for Animal Planet's PUPPY BOWL! He'll be on the line with Emily and me around 4:15 pm PT.

Then, 5-6 p.m., Miles and I record a new episode of "The Strip" featuring my conversation in Montreal with Cirque du Soleil CEO and president Daniel Lamarre. Even if you read my Las Vegas Weekly cover story, you haven't heard the half of what Lamarre had to say about all things Cirque, Vegas and beyond. Not to mention, Miles and I have two weeks of Vegas news to catch up on.

So come on out and chat with fellow listeners, see us on the webcam and drink every time Miles curses. Or wait for the podcast versions. Fine by us either way.

Monday, November 30, 2009

This show is UP: Doyle Brunson Loses A Bet

Here's this week's show in which I won a $100 bet off the great Doyle Brunson. FULL DISCLOSURE, we gave the money to the cocktail waitress who served us in Bobby's Room during the interview. Also, Norm Clarke joined us live to answer the trivia question and explain the Anna Quindlen-Wayne Newton incident. Click on the date below to make it play or right-click to save it and listen at your leisure. You can subscribe, too, (it's free!) in iTunes or in Zune.

Dec. 1: Doyle Brunson Loses A Bet...

...and Norm Clarke answers The Question!

Even if you know or care nothing about professional poker, it is hard to imagine you’ve never come across the name Doyle Brunson. Poker’s elder statesmen was there when Texas Hold ‘Em came into being, was there when the concept of the poker tournament was invented and was there when they added hole-card cameras to poker tables to make it interesting for TV viewers to follow the action. Now, at 76, he’s published a surprisingly frank autobiography appropriately titled “The Godfather of Poker” in which he reveals the violent early days of his gambling life, his strained relationship with his father and much more. When Steve spoke to two-time World Series of Poker Main Event champ this week, he opened up some more about the Binion family, mob enforcer Tony Spilotro, Annie Duke, Joan Rivers and Phil Hellmuth, among others. Plus, Steve did the seemingly impossible – he won a bet off Doyle.

In Banter: USA Today’s CityCenter piece, New Year’s Eve is back on top, Harrah’s is buying P-Ho but with what?, Hash House A Go Go is opening a Strip location and more.

Links:

Buy Doyle Brunson’s biography "Godfather of Poker" or the classic "Super/System" on Amazon.Com
Doyle Brunson’s online poker home, DoylesRoom.Com
The LeRoy Neiman painting in Bobby’s Room at Bellagio up close

The travel blog of Kitty Bean Yancey of USA Today
The USAT piece on CityCenter
Rich Velotta’s Las Vegas Sun natural-light-in-Aria casino piece
The piece on the Four Seasons from the NYT that may explain the Mandarin Oriental’s pricing approach, too
The Las Vegas Sun on Harrah’s trying to buy Planet Hollywood
The Review-Journal on the announcement that they’re setting NYE fireworks off on the roof this year
PlanetMoney
from NPR, which Miles listens to
The site for Hash House A Go Go, which is looking for a Strip locale
Norm Clarke gives FiveHundy.Com credit for breaking news that HHAGG is opening at the IP
Norm ferrets out the Vegas connection to Tiger Woods
Anna Quindlen’s
classic, brilliant Wayne Newton plagiarism column

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Economic Survivor Guilt

A number of months ago, my Little Brother's mom mentioned to me that she was looking to buy her first house but felt badly that she was going to get a killer deal on the back of someone else's misfortune. It was a fascinating notion, something I termed economic survivor guilt. It's not logical and it's not justified -- it's not her fault someone else lost their home -- but it's a unique experience to move into the living space of other people, a place where drama must have occurred.

As is often the case, it launched a story idea. It wasn't easy to pull this one off, though, because real estate agents don't want to help journalists locate people who have any misgivings or hesitations, however founded or unfounded. I did it, though, and this piece in today's USA Today is the result.

Take a read. It's obviously focused on Vegas since this is a foreclosure capital -- usually I do broaden these stories to other regions, but this one sat comfortably in one town for the most part -- but I am sure people feel this way in Florida, Detroit and elsewhere.

What is a little shocking to me is how angry so many of the USA Today commenters are. Nobody is suggesting that this sense of guilt is appropriate. But it's the human condition, usually, to feel badly for unfortunate others, isn't it?

Monday, July 27, 2009

Happy Monday


I thought that was fun. Tee hee.

Also, if you've never heard of Uncle Jay Explains before, it's a perfect Monday morning lift. He does these 3-minute comic news summaries that are always, always, always clever. Here's this week's:



You can get "Uncle Jay Explains" via iTunes, but Jay's site doesn't provide a direct iTunes link to do so. So go here and follow his instructions for how to subscribe.

Meanwhile, my day includes a just-concluded interview with one of the Human Nature guys for this week's show, preparing for a Smokey Robinson interview tomorrow for this week's show, some MJ benefit-related calls and meetings and an attempt to finish a long-delayed piece for USA Today.

Oh, and I also have to call the IRS. Looks like I'm audited. Eeek. Somehow I'm not freaking out. Yet.

Sunday, July 19, 2009

This week's LVW Col: #Poker + #Twitter

Within the past year, I've declared both poker and Twitter dead or dying. But now I'm not so sure and I think they have quite a lot to offer one another. Here's this week's "Strip Sense" column on the nexus between two significant pop culture forces working hard not to become pet rocks. -sf

Raise, Fold or ... Tweet
Twitter is giving new life to the World Series of Poker
By STEVE FRIESS (a.k.a. @TheStripPodcast)

On Saturday, when I had planned to hang out at the Rio taking in some World Series of Poker action, I found myself stuck in the squalid Meineke waiting area, learning that my long-term neglect of my brakes and muffler was going to cost me dearly.

There was, however, a bright spot. As it happened, Saturday was the day at the World Series’ $10,000 Buy-In No-Limit Texas Hold ’Em Main Event when the “money bubble” burst—when the field was reduced to the point where everyone still in the tournament is guaranteed to receive at least $21,365. In this case, it was when the field of 6,494 players had been whittled to just 648. It’s a pretty fun moment of celebration when the 649th-place player busts out and everyone left cheers their common successes.

I wasn’t there, but I had the next best thing: World Series of Poker Commissioner Jeffrey Pollack’s Twitter feed. In real time, @JeffreyPollack was blasting out 140-character-or-less updates on what was happening. It got interesting, too, as the field narrowed and then hung at 649 through 12 tense hands during which nobody was eliminated. None of the details about the game mattered so much as the suspense, that feeling that something important—to someone, anyhow—was about to happen, and that if we couldn’t be there, this was the next best thing.

In the modern poker era, there have been several developments responsible for the game’s enormous growth and maturity. The film Rounders made it cool among college kids. The hole-card camera made it interesting for TV viewers. The Internet made it easy for millions to play. And everyman Chris Moneymaker’s 2003 WSOP championship made it an accessible glory for all of the above.

Now, I submit, the rise of tweeting poker players will someday be viewed as another turning point. Twitter solves some important problems for the WSOP. First, it gives people who cannot attend an easy, brief and mobile way to keep up as the action is happening, important because you can usually watch every other sport on TV live during the competition, but not poker, because gambling laws prohibit that. Suddenly, the WSOP isn’t something for just the heartiest fans to follow on poker sites but an event revealing itself as we go about our days.

Read the rest at LasVegasWeekly.com.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Transgender Regret

Here's my latest from USA Today, a look in today's paper at the struggles of transgender people who, for various reasons, change their minds about their transitions. I'm astonished -- but not surprised -- by the cruel comments (not aimed at me) in the reaction section. It's a very tricky and complicated subject, and I've never quite understood why so many people must have such simplistic, compassionless views of complex matters.

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Tony Curtis Exclusive in USA Today

Tony Curtis has a new memoir that hits shelves today, "American Prince." It's full of sex from start to finish and in my conversations with him I got him to admit he was probably a sex addict. I got to read the whole thing first and do the first print interview with him. (A steamy excerpt appears in November's Vanity Fair.) Part of the results of that is out today in USA Today. I'll be airing the rest of the provocative and in-depth interview with the film legend later this month on "The Strip." Here he is below in his backyard along Anthem Country Club overlooking the golf course and the Vegas skyline.


So Curtis is a respected artist. He has a studio where he paints. His works are in the permanent collection at NYC's MOMA, in fact. Among his projects, he spends a bit of his time retouching a blown-up publicity photo from his youth, see?


So, since I was the first to read and ask him about his book, he signed it in a special way...


Ain't that a blast?

See the USA Today piece here and stay tuned for the blockbuster interviews on "The Strip."

Monday, August 4, 2008

Las Vegas, Environmentalist Mecca?

OK, I'm sure to come under a bit of mockery for my piece today in USA Today. Already, the USAT message boards are overflowing with commentary about how Vegas can never been seen as environmentally sensitive because its very existence defies the laws of the environment.

It wasn't my intention to claim that this is the center of sustainability. But it is instructional that these massive resorts are doing all of these things to become LEED-certified, albeit my discussion of their financial benefits thanks to huge state tax breaks was curtailed.

Bottom line is that all of this green building is going on where you'd absolutely least expect it. And the LEED people themselves see a greater good in being able to say, "If a Vegas resort can do it, so can you" to the rest of corporate America.

Monday, June 23, 2008

12,000 Words About Sheldon Adelson

The New Yorker's Connie Bruck did a breathtaking and fearless job taking readers inside the world of Sheldon Adelson in the current issue. Grab yourself a cup of coffee and take it all in here. It's a major piece of work, chiming in at more than 12,000 words. I will do the same and blog more later, but what I've read and heard so far makes it worth your and my full attention.

I just wonder if Adelson will leave it alone or sic his attorneys on Bruck and company. God knows, some of the edgier parts of my USA Today piece in January were removed in part out of fear of a lawsuit.

Sunday, June 15, 2008

EXCLUSIVE: What FB's iMac Screens Will Look Like

(UPDATE, 6/16, 10:42 a.m.: I had posted links to an older version of this demo. I just updated the links to direct you to the new ones. They're largely the same file but this one does seem to work faster and better.)

My USA Today piece on the Fontainebleau's $15 million deal to put Apple iMacs in every room appeared on Friday on the cover of the Destinations section. You can read that here.

But here's a fun bonus: There's a Flash demonstration of what "iFB," as they're calling it, does that I'm able to share exclusively with you folks. Mac users can click here to download it and PC users can click here. They're ZIP files that open up as applications, but I promise you there is no spam in there.

And if you don't want to download anything, here are a few screen shots. Click on any of these images to make them bigger and more readable.

This is a close-up of the personalized greeting...


Here's the main screen:


And another screen with your local weather, etc.:


And, finally, here's a little sneak peek of the restaurant line-up for the Miami property, which reopens after a $500 million renovation this fall. Some of the same restaurateurs are coming to the $3 billion Vegas property as well as more.


One of the coolest parts of the FB-Apple thing that is new from my USAT piece is the idea of a touch-screen wayfinder board in the lobby of a resort that gives you personalized directions. Methinks the days of a deliberately confusing resort layout that forces guests to wander in circles in the casino -- Binion's Horseshoe comes to mind -- are over.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Another Busy Day

In addition to the USA Today pieces I referenced from the ACMAs, I also had a front-page piece in today's newspaper and a longer story inside both looking at the notion that some schools are trying to institute policies that would make a 50 the lowest grade a student can receive. I got the idea from a terrific piece by my Petcast co-host and Las Vegas Sun scribe Emily Richmond, who did a story in February on the controversy surrounding new grading policies. Her version is here.

In addition, I've also got a piece in Newsweek this week, online today, about why many podcasters hate the word "podcast."

Star-gazing at the ACMAs

[Click on any photos to enlarge them]

I had to go for USA Today on Sunday to the Academy of Country Music Awards at the MGM Grand Garden and stand in triple-digit heat along that journalist trough known as a red carpet. In this case, it was an orange carpet, but nobody could/would say why and one colleague's suggestion that it's because Home Depot is a major sponsor was incorrect.

Anyhow, all of us journos were pretty set on doing sleepy little tales of Vegas-gone-country, lifetime-achiever Garth Brooks worship and pretty new young things winning big when Entertainer of the Year Kenny Chesney forced a total rewrite by complaining backstage at the end of the program about a change in how the award he won is decided. For the first time, it was purely determined by online public voting, making it harder for him to compare his fourth-in-a-row triumph to the four-straights of Garth Brooks of the five-straights of Alabama. He started by pausing to say he had to "choose his words carefully," but then he unloaded pretty spectacularly.

Since he won, it wasn't just sour grapes. And that explains why my piece ended up being written as it was. Read the main piece here. I also grabbed Dr. Phil McGraw and put him on the spot about those racy Vanity Fair photos. Read that item here.

I didn't bother to interview LeAnn Rimes on the carpet since I profiled her here for last week's L.A. Times. The conversation for that piece will air on this week's episode of "The Strip," too. Oh, and she also didn't give a fig about talking to print reporters, which may explain why this shot came out so unflattering as she virtually sprinted past us after charming the TV cameras.


Now, you can tell that I'm not modern country fan -- I was probably 15 years too late to catch my fave, Collin Raye, here -- since in our haste I screwed up the name of one of the Brooks & Dunn guys in my piece. But in my prep I fell in total love with Sugarland, which won Song of the Year and Single of the Year for the wrenching ballad "Stay." I challenge you to go watch this Sinead O'Connoresque video and come back unimpressed. Here they are, with Jennifer Nettles also showing off her backless dress.



Aside from Dr. Phil, there were others with tenuous ties to country music showing up including American Gladiator's Wolf and some Victoria's Secret model with the longest, barest legs I've ever seen.



The model is being asked by some dippy woman from some Web video thing called HollyScoop to answer the same inane question Dippy asked every single person who came by: "What's country to you?" Yes, folks, Dippy got a better spot on the carpet than USA Today, People, the Associated Press and several other major print/online outlets. In fact, everyone with a video camera did, leaving us with only the stars so early, so patient or so desperate for attention to be bothered to speak to print scribes by the time they got past the 100 or so TV softball tossers.

Speaking of which, I didn't have any questions for Jewel and, besides, I couldn't stop thinking of lemon meringue pie for some reason as she stopped by...


We could've gotten out of the heat sooner if we hadn't had to stand around waiting for Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban to race by us minutes before the awards show started. You can't see it, but the reason why Kidman is holding down her YSL maternity frock as though it might blow away -- there was no wind -- was because there was evidently some sort of ironing disaster that left a huge region of wrinkles to our left of her bump. There's a story there, but nobody had the guts to ask her. Or the time.


Backstage, we heard from award-winners including the awful cute Brad Paisley...

...the awful cute (and young!) Taylor Swift...


...and the awful thinner Garth Brooks.


This was before Chesney came along with his bombshell, so I actually was able to pay attention to Garth. He seemed really nice. I've always been a fan. He should really think about playing Vegas. Maybe even the Colosseum. Now there's an idea...

And that was that. Yee-haw.

Friday, May 16, 2008

"It's A Cher Thing, You Just Don't Understand"

Help! I'm being beaten up by Cher fanatics who are offended by being referred to as fanatics or crazies but who prove their fanaticism and craziness by their certainty that nothing she did in her new Vegas show could possibly be grounds for criticism!

But first. A few others have now chimed in on the new show at the Colosseum that I was sorely disappointed by. I blogged some of it last week after I attended opening night and wrote a longer version for my column in this week's Las Vegas Weekly.

Mike Weatherford of the R-J gave this hot mess a B, but it was a lukewarm B at that: "This show, a continuation of her touring opuses of the 2000s, takes the format to its logical peak (and hopefully its conclusion)." He also points out that it's "front-loaded," giving us the best effect, costume and star banter in the very beginning.

Meanwhile, Joe Brown of the Las Vegas Sun took a similar tack: Cher "
provides everything you could want from a Cher show. She makes Cher sounds. She changes costumes and wigs after nearly every number (take your time, we’ll wait). There’s hair-tossing, hip-cocking, lip-licking, arm-crossing, eye-rolling, finger-snapping, skipping and sauntering Is it good? Does it matter?"

Neither main Vegas critic is particularly enthusiastic. No, that's left to, of all people, longtime Rolling Stone scribe and L.A. Times blogger Richard Abowitz, my friend and someone I've already needled quite a bit for this posting. Abowitz tried to tell me that his take on this thing wasn't as positive as Brown or Weatherford, but he actually wrote this Cher-style over-the-top sentence: "Cher has created a monstrously entertaining experience that (even more than "A New Day," which actually relied on a Cirque alumnae) captures a sort of ultimate state-of-the-art Vegas production show and places that in the midst of a Cher concert of resplendent diva glory." [Note from the grammar police: alumnae is plural. I think he meant alumnus, since that's a singular male form and he's referring to Franco Dragone.]

I don't know if any of them are going to get the sort of angry mail that I'm starting to receive from Cheristas for mocking their, uh, enthusiasm while taking stock of seriously flawed parts of one of the Strip's most expensive shows.

You see, Weatherford, Brown and Abowitz approached their commentaries from the point of view that this is Cher, there are certain expectations in that construct and those who love her will love this. It's a reasonable approach. Except that I'm not contented with the premise that the public's view of this thing is predetermined by their adoration or hatred of the star. There ARE many who are on the fence. I am living proof of that. If I were in Vegas for vacation and I was looking around at what's on, I *might* check out the Cher-Vegas thing even if I'm not the sort of gay who decorates sailor hats or the sort of groupie who knows what kind of tree Sonny Bono died slamming into.

That notion apparently offends those Cher crazies who attack the very notion of the more casual fan or audience member. One wrote: "
Who really should be catered to most, the dedicated fans who have supported Cher's career throughout the decades or Las Vegas visitors who have nothing better to do than take in a Cher show so they can say they saw it? I ... am very sorry you don't fully appreciate what Cher is all about."

The most significant critique of my nerve in approaching this from an outside-the-cult angle came from a woman who operates a popular Cher list-serv. I was nervous going into covering this thing for USA Today that I might not be able to identify all the songs, so I had gotten her phone number to call later that night in case I needed it. Turned out, I didn't. There were only a few songs I didn't recognize and I just didn't write about those.

I can just imagine what sort of outrage I've sparked on this list-serv from the beleaguered, put-upon Cher fans who, like their role model, are evidently so badly misunderstood.

Here's some of her lengthy note:

"I take your comments as personal attacks towards Cher fans as a whole. It's not uncommon to receive criticism. Over the years, both Cher and her fans have been degraded, but we all keep going strong. I just felt like, I needed to speak on behalf of all fans and let you know how we felt.

You, in my honest opinion, were lost. You had no clue what the name of any of the songs were and even asked to call me after the show to get the set list. I missed your call. I have to admit, after reading this review, I am glad that I did. Lord only knows, what you would have said about me just because I knew the names of the songs.

We use the phrase, "It's a Cher thing, you just don't understand." It's probably the best way to describe how we feel. There are not many who get it. It's a passion, Steve. Just like you may have a passion for sports for example.
[I don't. -sf] Many of us have grown up with Cher. We have been there since the beginning. We have watched her grow and mature. We have watched her succeed and fail. No matter what we watched, we have loved it all. That is probably the only statement in your review that is correct: "The most vocal Cher fans won’t criticize a thing."

Sure we know there were glitches in the show. It just opened. There are going to be glitches in every show. Cher is real Steve, and she sings live unlike many. The glitches show that she is not perfect. No one is. We can relate to her more so because of this."


I had engaged in some hyperbole in my piece about the extremes to which the most devoted go to see their idol. It was taken literally by many who wrote. More from the list-serv manager:

"As far as 'crazy Cher fanatics' mortgaging their homes, did they tell you this? Geez, I don't know one die-hard who is homeless. Sure we will take on many shows during her three year run. Many of us, will take on as many as we can. We save for these shows and go when our budget allows, just like you may save for something you want to do. Once again, it goes back to our passion.

Obvious Caesars believes that Cher has achieved that certain level of greatness required to perform at the Colosseum.If they thought she would be degrading to the Colosseum, do you honestly think they would have let her headline there?

Others that have performed there are great and I am in no way belittling them. The truth, however, is that everyone is different. Cher is Cher. She will always be Cher and she will perform how she wants to perform. This is no secret. Anyone who has had the honor of seeing her perform knows the style of her shows. Caesars obviously knew this when they brought her on board. Therefore, no one should be surprised at her performances."


But here's the real point, and the reason why these people's opinions are so irrelevant to non-Kool-Aid drinkers:

"The Colosseum leaves quite a bit to be desired. It might be grand as you call it, but the crowd that goes there really doesn't care what the performer is about. They are basically high rollers with a comp. They are rude and obnoxious. They are just there to see the show because they have received a free ticket. In my opinion, they are just taking up space. There is a difference between the high rollers and the die-hards. We actually want those seats! We want to be in the presence of Cher."


For the sake of the Colosseum, I do hope that there are enough people like this to fill 4,200 seats 200 times over the next three years. There probably are. But the real chip on the shoulder does not belong to those of us who can look objectively at an artist and a show and see room for improvement. The real chip belongs to those who believe that if you cannot accept The Gospel According to Cher, you should go find another church.

Wednesday, May 7, 2008

EXCLUSIVE: How To Fix The Cher Show

My exclusive first-look overview and impressions piece on Cher's new Vegas show, which opened last night, is on USA Today's website this morning. You can find that here. There was plenty of good here, but this show needs a LOT of work.

As it was only the first run-through of the production, it is hard to know if Cher and her director-choreographer are planning any radical changes. It clocks in at about two hours and I'm told it'll be closer to 90 when they're done with it.

If they're taking suggestions, here are four:

* Fewer costumes, more Cher. Yes, they're very pretty and fun to look at and can only be donned by this particular woman. But they also get redundant and, more importantly, they force her into constant (and probably complex) costume changes. We are baby-sat -- for $250+ a seat -- by videos that are also available on YouTube (like this one which is used wholesale) or, surely, in the DVD box set of the Sonny & Cher Show. Any show driven by style rather talent -- or any show that feels like that -- is problematic. I understand that the wardrobe swaps are time-consuming because they're not as easy as slipping something off and on, but then stay longer than one or two songs in each and give us more of the woman and her terrific, battle-scar-weary personality we came for and relate to. (Aside: If you're going to make us watch whole songs on video screens, please repair that obvious vertical tear in it. Thx.)

* Drop the knock-off bits from Cirque du Soleil. Like Hans Klok before her, Cher seems not to have done her due diligence in the neighborhood. That two-hunks-balancing-one-another act? Mystere. The aerial sheet-flying thing? Zumanity. When sequences are already done -- and done better -- at neighboring hotels, you wonder if Cher and her peeps bothered to check out the competition. Bette Midler and Toni Basil, by contrast, went and saw every last other Vegas show. Even the ones with animal tricks. Smart.

* For the love of GOD, drop the YMCA. Yes, they do this. With Village People impersonators. And no Cher. The whole song, dance and all. Tacky, tacky, tacky. And not in a good, how-'70s way.

* You're in the Colosseum, not the MGM Grand Garden Arena. Act like it. This is the most prestigious theater in the Western U.S., not any ol' concert venue. Celine Dion set the standard, being close to but somehow above her audience in a manner that made her seem more elegant, more old-school star-like. Slapping the hands of the audience? Maybe not. Confusing them about whether they can get up and dance? Get with security to work that out. Forcing the crowd to STAND UP AND CHEER FOR FIVE MINUTES FOR AN ENCORE THEY KNOW IS COMING BECAUSE YOU'VE YET TO GET TO YOUR BIGGEST HIT? Insulting.

I'll discuss this and have other observations on this week's episode of "The Strip," which will be recorded at home tonight and posted sometime tomorrow.

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

No Live Show This Week

We'll have a podcast, but we can't do the show tonight at LV Rocks because I'm going to cover Cher's opener for USA Today. So no live show, and the dead one will be up on Thursday as usual. Our interview this week is a joint chat with Four Seasons songmaster Bob Gaudio and the actor who portrays him in "Jersey Boys," Erich Bergen.

Sunday, April 27, 2008

USAT on Tina-Oprah-Cher-Tom-Toilets

Look for my report on the Tina-Cher-Oprah show in tomorrow's USA Today. It's already up, so here's the link to it. Apologies in advance for the cliche headline; not my department.

Plaigarized by Perez Hilton?

So it looks like Perez Hilton found my post about Tina Turner going on tour of interest and repackaged it today. Except that he literally quoted from my prior blog post the part about "lolling about her Swiss home" without providing any credit or a link. He actually puts those words in Sophia Loren's mouth when, in fact, that was my paraphrase of what Tina explained.

Here's the screenshot below:


I'm happy to believe it was an oversight, but I've emailed Perez Hilton hours ago to both of the e-mail addresses I have for him reminding him that I was the one who brought him to Vegas for his first public appearance here and asking him for the courtesy of credit and a link.

So far, no response.

Sunday, April 13, 2008

Sunday Reading

Some Sundays, the newspaper is so empty that I'm done before my first cup of coffee is gone. This weekend, though, there were lots of good stuff:

* Howard Stutz reports (second item) that Harrah's -- or whatever it's called these days -- has stopped "making the Review-Journal available" to its hotel guests. Stutz surmises it's because of the paper's coverage of the safety-code violations at more than one property. The Harrah's spokesman says it's a "cost-cutting measure." That's odd. What's it cost a company to offer the local newspaper for sale? The real shocker, though, was that the paper only sold 600 copies a day in the eight resorts that has tens of thousands of rooms occupied by twenties of thousands of people. What's THAT tell ya?

* Geoff Schumacher's column today looks at the very Kevin Bacon-ness of Henderson recently banning 18-and-under dance clubs. I hadn't noticed this April 2 news story in the paper, but it's a good one and probably deserves some national attention.

* Hubble Smith of the R-J and In Business Las Vegas had a solid round-up of all the foreign countries buying up Vegas.

* Norm gets threatened by Criss Angel. Don't ask. Just read.

* Liz Benston from the Las Vegas Sun did a really nice job examining the process and the personalities behind a Vegas couple who got rejected by the Gaming Control Board for an unrestricted gaming license. They can't get one of these, despite having a squeaky clean background, but Pansy Ho can? Hmm. (OK, this was Saturday's paper. I just got to it today.)

* Sometimes we're too close to the flame to realize how good a story is. How many times on "The Strip" podcast and elsewhere have we engaged in the parlor game of what other musical act could pull off a Celine-like Vegas run? And then USA Today's weekend edition goes and does exactly that story. Some of the answers from experts may surprise. (Fair warning, USAT's site seems to be down at the moment.)

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

Another day, another feud

David McKee seems like a nice fellow. He's certainly a good blogger over at the Las Vegas Advisor's spiffy new site. I even have it bookmarked. And he even quoted me in a piece he wrote a long while back about the Broadway-to-Vegas trend for Las Vegas CityLife. Plus, he contributes nicely to RateVegas.Com's VegasGang podcast. Check it out.

So I had fairly warm feelings about the guy. Well, I did until some of readers pointed me to this really offensive, totally out-of-line comment he wrote in the comments section of said blog last night. A poster had questioned how McKee could be such a fan of "Winner Takes All" by Christina Binkley after having read the extensive list of factual mistakes I set forth in last week's Las Vegas Weekly column. And this was his baffling response:

"Eh, if memory serves, Friess found some ticky-tack goofs (like the "Gans/Ganz" discrepancy) and made a federal case of them. Steve Wynn is Friess' bread-and-butter guest on "The Strip Podcast"; Wynn has made his displeasure with "Winner Takes All" known and ... you do the math."

Now, there ought to be a code amongst Vegas bloggers, but there isn't. And since McKee opted to write this on his open forum, I thought I'd respond on mine.

Dear David:

How about not "going on memory" but instead actually reading what I wrote?

In my USA Today review of Binkley's book, I praised it extensively and specifically noted her even-handed portrayal of Wynn in all his contradictions: "
Wynn, developer of the Mirage, Bellagio and Wynn Las Vegas, is seen as filled with contradictory traits. In anecdote after anecdote, Binkley illustrates his magnanimity, egotism, eloquence, weirdness, humor, insecurity, pettiness. The fact she had terrific access to him did not tilt her evenhanded portrayal. At times, she is deliciously dishy in a way that is unlikely to get another interview, as when she implies Wynn had cosmetic surgery."

Even in my Weekly commentary, I also had nice things to say about the book overall and still recommend(ed) it. But the fact is that there were an unforgivable list of very serious -- not "ticky/tack" (what does that mean, anyhow?) factual errors that I find inconceivable from coming from a Wall Street Journal writer. Any two or three of these mistakes would have had her benched at many of the papers you and I have written for. (Well, if you've written for the Las Vegas Sun, perhaps not. They don't seem to mind.)

Binkley invented at least one phone call, pretends that airplanes can land at airports they can't, has people as parties to deals they didn't make. And since the book came out and this list was published, there have been a long list of further mistakes that have been brought to my attention.

She also seems to have crafted a book entirely around not detached news judgment but who gave her access. I have very little problem -- in fact I was delighted -- by her portrayal of Wynn. He's complicated and her rendering is also complicated. But her ignoring of Adelson? Her minimizing of Lanni? Her infusing Loveman with responsibilities and accomplishments that weren't his alone? I was much more indignant about her treatment of other Vegas figures. When she's on the topic of Wynn, her work largely sings -- even with errors so baffling and careless that they must force the in-the-know reader to wonder about the accuracy of other parts of the tome.

Yet what's most offensive is this weird implication that I'm a lackey for anybody, much less Steve Wynn. Do you actually read my work and listen to our show? Do you know how many times I have been on the receiving end of Wynn's ire? Sometimes our interviews are cordial, often he finds me obnoxious. C'est la vie.

Listeners and readers have often thought that perhaps Wynn just likes my spunk, likes being challenged. That could explain how we met in the first place; I wrote a scathing review of the new Wynn resort for the Chicago Tribune and he called not to bawl me out but to invite me to let him show me the hotel himself. OK, he bawled me out, too. But after a two-hour discussion in which I defended myself point by point, he decided to give me the walk-about. Something tells me that wouldn't have happened if I had cowered and quivered before him.

For the record, I obtained a copy of WTA in December, but it was an uncorrected galley proof and I believed it proper to give Binkley the fix to correct many of the glaring errors in the final product. But she didn't. Then I had to wait for my USAT review to run before I could expand on it in my Weekly column. So that explains my timing, not some errand being run on behalf of a pooh-bah. I've taken guff from the GalleyCat blog for that approach, to which I've responded. And so it goes.

But you make it sound as if Wynn called me up and said, "Stevie boy, ya gotta go after this broad." Are you serious? Or are words just that cheap? I do give Wynn -- and Adelson and Lanni -- a chance to respond to the book in tomorrow's Weekly column, but then I give Binkley the last word as well.

I expect non-media people to "do the math" as you say. They're unaware of how journalists actually operate and aren't expected to do their research before they make off-handed remarks.

You, Mr. McKee, are a lot better than that. I do encourage folks to read your blog. It's excellent and clearly takes a lot of work. I just wish you'd taken an extra millisecond to think about what you were saying about a colleague before you insulted my reputation.

Best,
Steve

P.S. And yes, I did enjoy "Double Or Nothing" by Tom Breitling. It was a surprisingly well-written rendering of an interesting and specific Vegas tale. It isn't anything more than it purports to be, a subjective memoir, and is benefits from lower expectations. As opposed to Binkley's effort, which is harmed by the extremely high expectations we rightfully have for a journalist of her stature.