The Movable Buffet

Dispatches from Las Vegas
by Richard Abowitz

Category: Peepshow

Aubrey O’Day and Perez Hilton

October 16, 2009 | 11:18 am

AubreyO'Day2-CreditDeniseTruscello

This concludes my too long excursion into the life and mind of Aubrey O’Day.

This is the part of interviewing Aubrey O’Day that surprised me: her obsession with blogger Perez Hilton.  The one time I “met” Hilton was at a Vegas red carpet where he and a publicist tried to push past me like I did not exist. The publicist was groveling at his feet with sycophantic words while Hilton was striding forward like a conquering warlord off to rape and pillage. At the time, I had never heard the name Perez Hilton, and so I used all of my skills acquired at general-admission, all-ages, hard-core punk shows in the '80s to prevent easy passage, sliding my body into inconvenient places. It slowed them for less than a moment, and it got me a dirty look from the publicist. Hilton did not even glance down at me.

When they passed, Buffet photographer Sarah Gerke ran over to tell me with total excitement that the man was Hilton. My blank stare brought an explanation. Since then, Hilton’s fame has expanded so tremendously that he is well known enough in Vegas to host at nightclubs. This year, in one Vegas weekend, he managed to easily unhinge Criss Angel with a tweet at Luxor and then make national news by upending the Miss USA contest over at Planet Hollywood.

I also get that some people hate Perez Hilton. My Vegas colleague (USA Today and New York Times reporter) Steve Friess, I think, falls close to this category, though hate may be too strong a word. Friess at one point believed Hilton had plagiarized him. Friess sent me the evidence, and Hilton replied to me with a copy of his source e-mail for the story. I was totally convinced that Hilton did not plagiarize that story and never wrote an item. But Friess was convinced he had been wronged by Hilton and has referred to Hilton as “vermin” ever since in writing, as if “vermin” was Hilton’s epic simile.

Continue reading »

Aubrey O’Day and Adolf Hitler

October 15, 2009 |  1:54 pm

AubreyO'Day2creditEthanMiller

This is Part 2 of the Aubrey O’Day interview dealing with her controversial Hitler comments.

 
“Oh, I read what you wrote and I would summarize that as a strong distaste [for me].”
 
“I had distaste for your comments on Hitler,” I replied.
 
This exchange was just seven minutes into my 40-minute interview with O’Day. It was the key to why the interview had been so hard to get. And she knew from her public relations team that I intended to ask her about her Hitler comments and her previous explanation of them. In fact, I had entered the room with a gift I had bought for her, "Explaining Hitler" by Ron Rosenbaum.
 
So if I had asked a question, she would have been expecting it and been ready with her response. As it was, I did not get a question in at the start before she offered her answer for 23 continuous minutes of her talking interrupted occasionally by me attempting to get her to focus or clarify something to which she responded repeatedly. “Can I finish?” or “Just let me finish.” And so I was silent until she finished.
 
On her end, O’Day says her PR team told her that I would take parts of what she said and use them out of context to make her look bad or stupid. In my head my plan was to run her unabridged answers on the topic here to allow her to explain things anyway she chose. But given the speech-like length and the tangled syntax that occasionally placed her words (a couple of times I had to ask if “him” referred to Hitler or, say as in one case, Perez Hilton, who had been weaving in and out of her monologue), that is not practical. So I will do my best accurately background the behind the scenes and place her answer in that context as well as offer substantial quotes to summarize it fairly.
 
Just before moving to Las Vegas for her role in "Peepshow," Aubrey O’Day appeared on Fox News, where she called Hitler “brilliant.”  I called that comment praise, which was part of her objection: “I did not praise Hitler as an intelligent person. 'Praise' is a strong word. I would never praise Hitler. Now, unfortunately the word was used in a clip as regards to Castro. I don’t watch [Fox News host Sean] Hannity, and so I was unaware that he enjoys abusing certain guests in the sense that he will wrap you up real quick and spit you out. I wasn’t scared of that, just like I wasn’t scared of doing this interview with you. I got your threats. And I am not scared of my mind. I’ve worked hard at being a smart person regardless of how I am portrayed in the media.”
 
Her view of the Hannity situation is that the subtlety of her answer was lost in the sound-bite world of television.
 
After the Hannity interview she released this statement to TMZ:
 
“Murderers and dictators generally are some of the smartest people out there -- they just use their brain power for evil purposes. I don't condone any of their evil behavior, but I was asked about their intellectual firepower ... and in my opinion you can't have a low IQ and wreck [sic] that much havoc on the world.”
 
It was this considered response offered as an after-the-fact explanation that I found appalling. The reason why is that I considered her statement factually wrong (hence the Rosenbaum book), and then wondered why she was stretching for a dishonest way to praise Hitler.
 
To make my point on the Buffet, I interviewed a leading scholar of Hitler’s Germany, Berel Lang, about the evidence for the brilliant intelligence of Adolf Hiter. And as I suspected, that evidence does not exist.
 
But rather than grasp that her explanation was exactly what I wanted to question, O’Day’s PR people noted that she had already explained the Hannity comment.  In an e-mail, I was told by her PR people that they considered the matter closed. Well, good for them. I did not agree. She was unavailable for interviews, until she suddenly started doing them with other press. And so as O’Day made her rounds interviewing to support “Peepshow,” I noted, she was not making time to speak to me. So I did ask why this woman who likes to boast of her intelligence would not face my questions.
 
Finally, her main PR representative in Los Angeles agreed to an interview by phone so that the PR rep could be on the line. But I live 15 minutes from Planet Hollywood, where O’Day stays, and that seemed absurd. Otherwise, her publicist decided, I would have to wait until the rep's next trip to Vegas to sit in on the interview. Again, I questioned why O’Day would need the interview monitored that closely if anyone around her had any confidence in her ability to answer questions. Finally, the interview was arranged even without her PR rep being present; instead a PR rep for the company that handles “Peepshow” sat in and kept out of the interview. So kudos to O’Day again for facing the Hitler question despite the desire of the people around her to declare it old news.
 
It turns out, as with most things I learned talking to her, O’Day and I simply have totally different ways of seeing the world. First, as to her going on Hannity, it seemed to me that she was woefully unprepared, whereas to her this was a challenge showing her courage and openness to any question: “All I knew going on that show was Fox News: hate. Republican: ehh. And you are going to be the only one of your kind: good. This is a challenge, love it. In my career I take all the challenges, and I am not scared.”
 
Of course, it never occurred to me a TV personality would be scared to go on television. The issue to me was judgment: Going on news television to discuss real issues means you should be totally well versed in those issues first. O’Day does not share that perspective on what happened:
 
“The Hitler comment was a hard thing for me to go through. I represented a very liberal side of the sphere [on Fox News]. I stood on my own up until that Hitler comment. Hannity tossed Hitler in. Now what I understand is that I am 25.  I have had the life experience that I have had, and I have opinions about everything until now. Could my opinions change after reading a book [she points at "Explaining Hitler"]? Absolutely. I don’t claim to be the world’s top understander of Hitler out there. I just know some, a little bit.
 
“The only statement I was trying to make is knowing what I know at this point in life is that I don’t think you can do as many atrocious things as any dictator has done without having a high intellect.  I don’t believe you can take control of that many people without being smart.  I don’t make it my job to offend people.  I don’t condone anything horrible he or any other mass murderer or dictator did. I don’t use smart in the same parallel as having a moral compass. I did not just have to answer for that interview to the entire world but to my own family, who matter more to me. Half my family was telling me he wasn’t smart at all, and half were saying kudos for having the courage to say what I thought. I was sick over all of it. It really hurt me a lot. I just wanted to make a correlation between being able to make that much havoc and being smart.”
 
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Charles Manson or insert name of favorite butcher. In other words, O’Day did not mean Hitler was individually brilliant, but in fact has an epistemological view where for some reason she thinks it requires intelligence to control people through murder, fear and intimidation.
 
The problem of course is that connection can not be made, not only at the top level of evil but in everyday life. If someone points a gun at you and gives you orders, do you consider them smart while obeying? Have you ever seen an idiot rise to the top of an office environment where you work? Idiots can do most anything if they are willing to lie, cheat, steal and -- not that this happens so much at the office -- murder.
 
The ability to destroy does not necessarily require intelligence. I hope “Explaining Hitler” will help O’Day see that, because the “evil genius” myth is just that -- a myth, and one that ultimately glamorizes serial killers, Hitler and, I guess, the Dear Leader using his intelligence to starve and torture the people of North Korea, a job inherited from his dad.
 
Huge and horrible destruction can be caused by the brilliant and the idiotic. O’Day would say she is 25 and will one day learn that as true, if she decides it is true. Of course, at that age Einstein was working on his Theory of Special Relativity, one of many works that Hitler, who was threatened by anyone smarter than him, would later have burned. 
 
But on a deeper level, there is a big difference between informed opinion and what O’Day admits were comments derived from little familiarity with the facts and details of what she was speaking about. This is a terrible deficit for someone who repeated over and over how people underestimate her intelligence.
 
Perhaps, one reason she finds herself in media storms (and she told me Hitler was not the first) is her failure to know the difference between letting your mind play freely with ideas among friends versus appearing on news programs to pontificate.  It does take courage to have an unpopular opinion, no argument, but there is strength in admitting to not knowing enough about a situation to have an answer. That is the trap Hannity set for her. She was unwilling to say that she did not know enough to answer, and so he was able to get her to agree Hitler was “brilliant.” It is my hope that Ron Rosenbaum’s book will help her grasp the details of how Hitler did what he did without being an evil genius but by brutality, appealing to hate, and murdering anyone who stood in his way. Then after seizing power he was a dictator ruling by gun. Again, it takes no intelligence on an individual or a mass level to murder your enemies. This is evil that can be practiced by the smart and dumb alike. And so I hope the book teaches this one example of that to O’Day.
 
O’Day got herself into this situation because she desperately wants to be taken seriously. She complained six times in her more than 20 minute talk that people saw her a certain way because she appeared in Playboy (a fact I did not know until she told me). But by having no filter between her passing thoughts and expression, where she is able to consider the meaning of her words, the level of her knowledge and the context she is speaking, there will continue to be questions about her intelligence.
 

As for myself, after listening to her long lecture, I agree O’Day is not dumb, and she is certainly not a lover of Hitler. The reality is that from the moment she made that comment about Hitler on Fox until I spoke to her, she demonstrated no judgment about how much she should know about a topic before expressing a public opinion. A choice to praise the brain power of murderers and dictators in a news format is a poor one unless she has plenty of evidence to back that opinion up. Yet when I met with her more than a month later, she still admitted to knowing little about the topic of brain research into dictators and killers yet has not altered her opinion one bit. That is poor judgment in the extreme.

Photo: Ethan Miller/Courtesy Peepshow

Aubrey O'Day: Hate her or love her, she'll decide for you

October 14, 2009 | 11:37 am

AubreyO'DaycreditEthanMiller

I am blogging this much anticipated interview with Aubrey O’Day, which took place Friday afternoon, in three items. This first one (below) deals with the interview itself and “Peepshow,” the show O'day is starring in at Planet Hollywood. I will also cover our detailed conversation about her controversial comments on Adolf Hitler, and in a final item offer her strong thoughts on blogger Perez Hilton and their reciprocal and dysfunctional relationship. -- Richard

 
Shortly after I left her hotel room, Aubrey O’Day sent out a tweet to her more than 150,000 followers: “just did an interview w/an avid Aubrey hater, he was nice.. aubrey haters come in all shapes & sizes! Hopefully he understands me better!” I wonder if I was shorter or fatter than she expected. No matter.
 
I guess, in some ways I did understand her better. She is a very heart-on-sleeve person. But in other ways our worlds do not have much overlap for communication. Last night she sent out a tweet about her favorite DK song. A group of my friends and I immediately thought she meant San Francisco punk legends Dead Kennedys. Obviously, she was referring to her former band Danity Kane, a group I never heard documented on a reality show ("Making the Band") I never watched. What baffled me was her actual conviction (and she has no doubt) that I hate her.  To her it was not possible that I was unaware of her existence before her arrival in Vegas to star in "Peepshow" or that she was a catalyst who inevitably provoked strong reactions from all who come in contact with her.
 
Actually, what really helped me understand O’Day better, and her peculiar sense of celebrity as well as her sense of persecution by bloggers and the media, was an article she directed me to read. It's a profile of her from the Los Angels Times earlier this year; O’Day is very happy with the story. In it, she is quoted in an observation about how people viewed her on that reality television show. This thinking, heroes and villains, was in line with how she expressed herself in our interview: “ 'I was loved the first season,’ O'Day said with a sigh. ‘The second season, the haters came.’ ” As in our interview, there does not seem to be a lot of gray area for O’Day, only those who hate her or love her. “I read what you wrote about me. And, I would say you have a strong distaste for me.”
 
O’Day does not seem to allow for the possibility (or perhaps it is hard for her to accept) that someone can find her a middling singer who can stay in key, and that opinion does not come from hate, but from years of listening to great singers and holding all to those standards. And, yet even here our tastes are so different we may be talking about different things. She spoke admiringly of Janet Jackson. That was an interesting choice as I felt no different about Jackson’s singing when I reviewed the Velvet Rope tour for Rolling Stone than I do about O’Day’s voice in "Peepshow." They both stay in key and can dance pretty well. But O’Day will never be able to pump her songs with the emotion Patti Smith gives her vatic pronouncement, blow out a microphone with the pure power of her voice like Etta James, own a lyric like Billie Holiday, handle the subtleties of a harmony vocal with the peerless ease of Emmylou Harris or scream with the conviction of the ladies from Sleater-Kinney. That is the singing that interests me.
 
But even if none of that were true, O’Day knows the night I saw her, she had issues that could have affected her voice. “The beginning was a little rocky. I was battling a cold,” she told me. Nonetheless, she was clear my opinion of her singing was spawned not by her singing but by personal malice. “To me you are very negative. You strong armed my PR people. My PR people told me I should not bother talking to you. But I think it is important to talk to the people who don’t like me.” I will tell the PR story in the second installment of this entry. But let me thank O’Day for interviewing with me against what she says is the advice of her handlers.
 
In fact, I went back on a another night when I found out she was sick the night I saw her and checked out the show again just to hear her voice, and she is a better singer than I saw opening night. She can, for what it is worth, stand proudly in the footsteps of Mel B.
 
We settled for an interview on the sofa in her spacious Planet Hollywood suite; her dog, with some hair dyed pink, sat between us and rolled over to nap. We both absently petted the dog while speaking. O’Day says she has been enjoying Vegas and appearing in the show. She plays the deeply sexually experienced ringleader of the cast, but behind the scenes, she notes, that at 25, she is among the casts’ youngest members, and that the experiences many cast members share with her make her feel very sexually innocent. That said, she gets that for a tourist in Las Vegas, "Peepshow" has adult elements that can be a bit overwhelming. She likes that:
 
“It is kind of a shocking thing if you are from out of town to go to a show where there is open, blatant nudity right out in the first five minutes of the show. I think that some people don’t know how to handle that and some people are uncomfortable and some people are like ‘O yeah, this is where I was meant to be my whole life.’ This show is different because you can holler, hoop and be drunk. The more the merrier.”
 
As for going topless herself, O’Day had no problem making the decision. “I am pretty comfortable with my body. I think they look better without the pasties. It is a rebellious show and people like to rebel. I love to curse on stage.”
 
When I interviewed Holly Madison she was clear that she wanted her three-month contract in "Peepshow" extended. That is a goal she achieved. O’Day’s answer to that same questions was more conflicted, and she surprised me by saying something I have never heard by a celebrity in an interview: “I am not a happy person,” she said. She then added “The only place I want to be is happy. Am I happy right now? No. The only thing I see for my future is I just want to be happy. I want to figure out what that means for me.  I don’t know yet.”
 
This truly surprised me. I pointed out her job, her friends in the room with us and her dog resting comfortably between us, and I asked her why she was not happy?
 
“My job is good. But I have not gotten those answers yet. I am only 25. It will probably be years more therapy before I get there  I am content. There have been periods in my life when I have been happy. This is not one of them. But I am OK with that. Life is filled with struggle. I am still struggling as a human being.  I have found out what doesn’t work, and so that is good.”
 
How can you not like a person offering up such honest answers?
 
Perhaps, this style of personal revelation offered for the masses is what makes O’Day such a hit on the personality driven Web. And, it also makes her a very sympathetic interview. And, so while I don’t really know her, I would have to say, that she is totally wrong, I like Aubrey O’Day.


Photo: Peepshow 


'Peepshow': Holly Madison and the other one (Aubrey O'Day)

September 25, 2009 | 12:24 pm

Holly

My date last night on the way home from "Peepshow" at Planet Hollywood: "I love the show. It was fun. It is all about Holly Madison. She is so wonderful and cute and fun to watch." 
I am quoting my date to "Peepshow" because, more than any of the other adult show in Vegas, this is meant as a couples show. There are a series of male characters, for example, who have significant roles. More importantly, there is a bubbly snuggle quality that seems built into the show: a frothy topless show created with Broadway-quality talent and production values. I think the result is a great date night if you are in an adult mood in Vegas. I have already reviewed "Peepshow." And though there have been significant alterations to accommodate the cast changes, the core remains.

Of course, the two stars are deserving of comment. Holly Madison gets the lion's share of the credit even though she might be the least technically talented person on a stage loaded with top tier dancers and singers. You can almost hear her mind counting to her mark at certain points in the show. I suspect that will change as her ability to technically execute the show increases with practice. But I hope not too much, because I think her slight hint of awkwardness is one of the show's charms. Watching Madison, you know there is a real person on stage who has used will and hard work to become a Las Vegas headliner despite having no background for the job. And for an upbeat show like "Peepshow," the feeling she gives the audience is more important than technique. She projects her thrill to be there on stage fulfilling a dream, loves every minute of it and she is able to communicate her happiness to the audience, and that makes her really work in the show. Charisma cannot be taught, and Holly Madison has that quality on stage.

Let me say, in case you are not a regular reader, how unimpressed I am by Aubrey O'Day as a public celebrity. That said, I went into the show with an open mind yet am forced to write words I never expected to write: Mel B was amazing when compared to this woman. The best that can be said is that she does not particularly hurt the show. Her stage presence as well as her singing are weak and innocuous. In fact, a lot of the singing my memory recalls Mel B handling is now parceled out to the far more talented singers in the cast. For all her sound and fury coming into Vegas, Aubrey O'Day is truly not essential to this show, which worked far better with a talent able to work at, gag, Mel B's level of dancing, singing and acting skill. O'Day isn't even in the same league. Weird.

Photo: Holly Madison; Credit: John Ganun

Aubrey O'Day skips Peepshow: Only two people care

September 24, 2009 | 10:42 am

How big of a draw will Aubrey O'Day be for Peepshow?

Tuesday night, the woman who brags of admiring Hitler's intellectual firepower allowed her understudy to perform on what was to be only her second night in the show. Why? On her blog she posted a video in which she blames photos that were illicitly taken of her the previous night for her petulant one-day vacation. She also talks about female empowerment and strips down to her bra in the video while talking rather bizarrely about her weight, body image and being exploited.

So, how upset were people when it was announced that the brand name celebrity in Peepshow, Aubrey O'Day, would not be performing? According to a reliable source, who requested anonymity due to not being authorized to discuss box office numbers, only two people asked for a refund. That is right: two refunds. Apparently, the rest of the audience was content with celebrity Holly Madison, and the understudy for O'Day.
 
O'Day's vacation day, which she took to teach us all a lesson about her special qualities, may instead have taught a very different lesson to the producers of Peepshow about what kind of audience draw their new star brings to the show. Good thing they have Holly Madison for a year.

New 'Peepshow' star praises Hitler's 'intellectual firepower'

September 8, 2009 |  9:55 am

Monday, Aubrey O'Day arrived in Vegas to begin her three-month gig in "Peepshow" at Planet Hollywood. But she will find an interesting welcome in Vegas, based in part on the clip above where you can see her referring to Hitler as "brilliant" on Fox News, (after a guest tossed out the name Mengele, which the starlet did not seem to recognize at all). I can sort of understand  that an ignorant 25-year-old singer bumbling on live television could embarrass herself. But later she defended her comments to TMZ with the following ridiculous statement:


Murderers and dictators generally are some of the smartest people out there -- they just use their brain power for evil purposes. I don't condone any of their evil behavior, but I was asked about their intellectual firepower ... and in my opinion you can't have a low IQ and wreck [sic] that much havoc on the world.

Does she know anything about IQ and what it does and does not test for? Exactly what study claims that murderers and dictators are "some of the smartest people out there"? And, if there is no such study, and the proof to her is anecdotal, why is Hitler an example to pick for his considerable "intellectual firepower"? At least, firepower is a relevant term, though not as a metaphor. Did she consider that it actually takes more intelligence and skill to persuade people you are correct than to point a gun at them to get your way and kill them if you don't?

I don't expect a headliner at a topless show in Vegas to be, to reuse her words, brilliant or to posses much intellectual firepower. And, while clearly O'Day could use a little of both, just some basic intelligence would be nice. O'Day's level of ignorance, and stubborn refusal to admit an offensive, tasteless and factually errant statement does infuriate. But to give her the benefit of the doubt, I took the time to do what O'Day should have done before sounding off to Fox News and TMZ about Hitler, and reached out to Berel Lang, a leading scholar of the period whose "Act and Idea in the Nazi Genocide" is essential reading, and whose equally essential essays are collected in "Post-Holocaust: Interpretation, Misinterpretation and the Claims of History." Lang should be required reading for anyone like O'Day who wants to talk about how intelligent someone has to be to ruin the world. As to the "brilliant" and "intellectual firepower" of Hitler, Lang leaves little ambiguity:

"Brilliant" by itself can connote something like the "intellectual firepower" your "star" associates with it, but in claiming this, she pretty clearly hasn't read anything that Hitler wrote or his speeches, and she certainly hasn't tried to analyze his wartime strategic/tactical decisions which became cumulative blunders (his own general staff were in general, if muted, dissent).  And she certainly doesn't mean that he was a
brilliant painter.

Lang goes on in his e-mail to me to note:

The notion of attributing "intellectual firepower" to Hitler seems to me quite simply wrong, refuted by the facts of his history. He certainly had certain unusual gifts of persuasion and willpower, but one can grant this without using the other terms that you've asked about. Of course, this is one person's [Lang's] opinion, but I believe it would be supported by a virtual consensus among historians.
So now I must ask why Aubrey O'Day goes against the virtual consensus of historians who have studied Hitler and Nazi Germany and World War II to offer unsubstantiated praise of the mind of Hitler (even if offering a perfunctory denunciation of his actions).

Again, O'Day did not simply refer to Hitler as brilliant but followed up not with an apology but a further argument that Hitler had "intellectual firepower." She appears to be totally ignorant of history, and, as a result, on some level giving the benefit of the doubt to Hitler. Shame on her.

Of course, this might be what she wants. O'Day sent out a tweet  late last night after arriving in Vegas: "I used to dream of being famous! now that I'm grown, I want to be infamous." Searching for ways to praise Hitler is a perfect start to that dubious goal.


Interview with 'Peepshow's' Holly Madison

June 25, 2009 | 10:19 am


HollyMadisoncreditJohnGanun

Tonight is media night for "Peepshow"'s new star Holly Madison. She started in the show this week. While "Peepshow" received solid reviews and strong buzz, stars Mel B and Kelly Monaco were on three-month contracts. To resolve this Mel B's replacement is a professional from Broadway, and Holly Madison was brought into replace Kelly Monaco. Unlike Monaco, Madison does appear topless. This has been the direction of the show anyway as it adjusts to the Vegas market.

By coincidence for another story, I  recently interviewed Scott Zeiger, whose company produces "Peepshow"  (as well as "Jersey Boys," "Phantom: Las Vegas Spectacular" and Wayne Brady's Venetian show) . Zeiger was excited about Madison and her celebrity-driving sales when I asked him about that. He argued that while Madison may lack the profile of Mel B, in many ways the nature of Madison's celebrity is a perfect match for the Las Vegas market in general as well as a match to "Peepshow," a frivolous romp fantastically choreographed and carefully conceived by Jerry Mitchell, in particular. But he also said his vision of the show includes a rotating star every three months to keep the show fresh. Based on my interview with her Wednesday, Madison is hoping to change his mind on that. I think she probably has a reasonable shot at doing so. I've seen a lot of shows in Vegas plan rotating stars to keep up media interest and to bring in new people, but almost without fail they eventually settle into one star. Why? Because the tourists from around the world are the ones in the audience, and so with the audiences already rotating (as new tourists arrive and the old ones leave), eventually shows discover the work required to rotate a star is pointless.

I was told that Madison would not discuss Criss Angel. They share a publicist, and the publicist chose to stay in the room for the interview. This is not unusual in Vegas. The publicist for "Peepshow" made the same choice, and both remained discreetly in the background during the interview.

I am going to post separately my discussion with Madison about working at Playboy. When we met she was dressed casually like she was ready to go to the gym and was relaxed during the interview:

Richard Abowitz: How have the first couple of performances been?

Holly Madison: Really fun. The first night I was nervous. But it was so much fun. The cast and crew are amazing,  I just feel very lucky to be part of this talented cast. They have been so nice and so welcoming.

Abowitz: Do you have a lot of experience in front of a live audience?

Madison: "Dancing with the Stars" has a live audience. But I was never really thinking about that. I was thinking about the 22 million people at home. So it was scarier. So this live audience I have a lot more fun with. We have a scene with audience interaction.  Absolutely, this ["Peepshow"] is a new thing. But  I've seen the show several times, and I have been given a lot of rehearsal time.

Abowitz: You play the shy Bo Peep. Is she anything like you?

Madison:  I think that character is me. Even in the beginning when she draws the heart on the shower, I used to do that all the time. Everything about the character is exactly like me.

Abowitz: Are you doing the identical part that Kelly Monaco performed or has the character been altered for you?

Madison: I am allowed to improvise a little bit and throw my own personality into it. But right now I do the same dance number Kelly did and the same parts. But what I would like to do is work myself into it more. There are other dance numbers I would like to be a part of. So maybe after this week, I'll start bombarding the creative team with my wishes.

Abowitz: What part of the show were you most worried about opening night?

Madison: The dance number at the end, because the costume is so skimpy and I did not want to slip and fall in my high heels. But I have gone through a few in front of an audience and I have done OK and so I am happy.

Abowitz: You said you were like your character in "Peepshow." She is very shy and you on television seem very outgoing?

Madison. This is how I am in my personal life. I am shy,

Abowitz: How different is a reality show from a personal life?

Madison: I think it is very different. It captures a part of who you are. But in my case especially you have to step yourself up a lot more.

Abowitz: What do you mean by "step yourself up"?

Madison: Exaggerate your personality, because you have to be a little more funny and little more crazy than you would be in real life. Because nobody wants to watch a show about someone sitting alone in a corner working on a computer.

Abowitz: Do you think it has given people a mistaken impression of who you are?

Madison: Yes and no. If you watched the show you have a good idea about my work at the magazine and my hobbies and the things I like to do. That can give you a window into what I am like. But people come at it with their own opinions too, and people see other things. Anything I do on "Girls Next Door" is meant to be fun, funny and entertaining.

Abowitz: So you think of it as more entertainment than documentary?

Madison: Absolutely in the case of that show.  I think what people love about "Girls Next Door" is that it is a bit of an escape like a sitcom and kind of like a guilty pleasure. It is just fun.

Abowitz: You have said you want to be known as Miss Las Vegas. Does that mean you have other plans for Vegas after your three months in the "Peepshow"?

Madison: I would love to stay in the show if they will have me. I have moved here. I am looking for a house. The deals are good. I am hoping to buy by the end of the year, and I am just looking for the right house. There is something different about Las Vegas. It is a small town in a big city, and I am in love with it.

Photo: John Ganun


Holly Madison: Clubbing with the young'uns

June 15, 2009 |  1:34 pm

HollyMadisoncreditJoshRyan

And you thought Holly Madison was known only for her attachment to men a decade -- or so -- older than her, like Hugh Hefner and Criss Angel. Apparently, that rule applies only to men. She hangs out with women who are a bit younger than those two. A good deal younger in the case of at least one friend. This press release was just sent out by the firm that represents the Hard Rock:

"On Sunday, June 14, 'Girls Next Door' star Holly Madison [was] spotted with a group of friends attempting to enter Body English at Hard Rock Hotel & Casino but being turned away because a member of their party, a fellow playmate, tried sneaking in and was not 21 years old."

You can criticize the Hard Rock for burning Madison, but I don't blame them. This is a major Vegas no-no for someone starring in a local show, assuming she knew the age of her friend. And if she did not know, perhaps she should have figured it out before going clubbing in Vegas.

Madison will be starring in "Peepshow" at Planet Hollywood beginning June 22. The VIP treatment is extended to headliners in Vegas, but that may end abruptly for those who  jeopardize a property's liquor and/or gaming license.

Photo: Josh Ryan


Newest 'Peepshow' star's first interview

June 10, 2009 | 10:01 am

IMG_8234

I just got off the phone with Broadway actress Shoshana Bean who is coming to Vegas on Friday to begin rehearsals for "Peepshow" at Planet Hollywood, where she will be replacing Mel B. Thanks to Twitter, I was able to reach her before the Vegas publicity machine put itself between us and she says this is her first interview since accepting the job with the "Peepshow" cast.

"Peepshow" opened to strong reviews but has been dependent on its two stars, Kelly Monaco and Mel B, to use celebrity power to bring in the tourists. But both stars were on three-month contracts and neither chose to stick around. So, it will be interesting to see if "Peepshow" can keep the positive buzz up with the substantially less known Holly Madison as the marquee name and, now, a relative unknown, Shoshana Bean, making her Vegas debut replacing Mel B. Based on audio samples, Bean is the stronger singer by far compared with Mel B and so celebrity seems to be traded for her talent, and I can't complain about that. I just hope the tourists see things the same way.

Richard Abowitz: How did you get connected to "Peepshow"?

Shoshana Bean: I was in the original company of "Hairspray" back in 2002 and Jerry Mitchell ["Peepshow" creator] was the choreographer on that. So, when he was conceiving "Peepshow" there was a lot of discussion and it finally worked out.

RA: What should people in Las Vegas know about your background?

SB: I mostly have a background in musical theater and Broadway. After "Hairspray," I did "Wicked" for about two years. And this winter I released my solo album, and I have been hustling that and touring and promoting my own stuff. I sang backup for a lot of pop stars back in the day like Michael Jackson. And, doing an album is what I really wanted to do and finally I was able to get a minute to do it. That is what the past couple years have been about.

RA: Do you spend a lot of time in Vegas?

SB: I do. I started about three years ago. That is when I went for the first time. I love it. I did not think I would enjoy it. But the moment I got there I loved it. It is hot. You can sit in the sun all day and act like a fool everywhere and it is totally acceptable. Even my dog loves Vegas. She actually stayed illegally at Planet Hollywood. You are not allowed to have pets there. She has a bag that does not look like a dog bag. It has breathing holes but otherwise it looks like a normal duffel bag. And, she loved Vegas.

RA: Have you seen "Peepshow" yet?

SB: I have not seen it yet. I will see it Friday night.

RA: Are you worried about taking over Mel B's role lacking her celebrity?

SB: Yes and no. I don't look at it that way. We are so different. As far as lacking celebrity to pull in tickets, they have Holly Madison for that. So, the pressure is off.  My name won't bring people in, and I obviously don't have Mel B's body, but I can sing and that is why I have a place at the table. I am a singer.

RA: Will you be appearing topless in the show?

SB: No, no, no. Actually, I will be wearing more clothes than she [Mel B] was and I will not be taking anything off.

RA: Any thoughts on working with Holly Madison?

SB: I guess I'll meet her Friday. I feel like I know her from seeing "The Girls Next Door."

Photo credit: Tye Jakobs


Behind the 'Peepshow' pasty flap of 2009

May 18, 2009 | 12:08 pm

Casino1_MG_0518

Despite good reviews and great buzz, Planet Hollywood's topless "Peepshow" finds itself in the midst of a tiny controversy. The reason for the flap: tiny pasties. Some had argued that, due to use of pasties, "Peepshow" wasn't a topless show at all. And so, in material worthy of satirist Alexander Pope, the pasties have been removed, causing, it was reported, at least one cast member to quit.

Caught somewhere in the "Peepshow Pasty flap of 2009" is the issue of the difference between a striptease and a topless show. Regardless, "Peepshow" remains a very good adult show that now runs pasty-free. The men in the show never wore pasties, though I wish they would.


Anyway, I spoke to Scott Zeiger, co-chief executive of "Peepshow" producer Base Entertainment, and here is our conversation, in which he also announces the arrival of Holly Madison to the cast after Kelly Monaco's contract ends:


Richard Abowitz: So why have the pasties come off in "Peepshow"?

Scott Zeiger: Like any show, Broadway, West End or Las Vegas shows go through an artistic arc in the creation process from storyboards to opening to after. But our process on "Peepshow," unlike Broadway, is an evolutionary one that will continue to evolve as we cast different people into the show and exploit their unique talents. If we get a new Bo Peep character who is also an extraordinary singer, that person will be called upon to sing in the show. Whereas Kelly Monaco is a dancer and not a singer and so she didn't sing. Our process from the storyboard was always an evolutionary one. The decision to remove  pasties is part of the overall process. You have seen the show. We are not a topless dance show. We are not a parade of topless women. We are a striptease spectacular. Our vignettes are about the art of the tease.  We tried it with pasties and we thought it was beautiful  and elegant. But our cast became more comfortable and we decided to take the striptease down another level, so to speak. The show continues to be artful, elegant and beautiful. The show  still delivers on the promise of our original artistic mission.

Abowitz: But now offers a more traditional forward reveal?

Zeiger: That is exactly right. If our show were on Broadway in its pasty format, it would be the most sexy show in New York. But we are in Vegas and we are watching the audiences and evaluating the competition and deciding what is appropriate for the market. So, yes, it is a full reveal.


Abowitz: Please, let me ask you about some rumors that have appeared in the press. First off, did a cast member quit over the decision to remove the pasties?

Zeiger: The way the Equity contracts work, every actress and actor has a four-week out. These are union actors and actresses, and we are prepared for that. The way the contracts work is we had to go to the actors and ask permission to remove the pasties.  It is true that one of our dancers gave notice. But I am not sure she was comfortable in the play in its first format from the very first time we had a preview. But it is true an actor gave us notice. But an actor can give us notice for any reason.

Abowitz: The rumor I read that amazed me the most is that the production cost $400,000  a week. Is that accurate?


Zeiger: That is not accurate. It is expensive. But we have a fluid number because there are so many variables. The biggest variable is advertising, and during the branding process you are going to see large advertising spent. We have a billboard on Sunset Boulevard. Also, depending on time of year, advertising costs go up and down. They can range from $35,000 a week to $100,000 a week. Rehearsals aren't free, but once the show is set, those costs wind down. We are putting Holly Madison in the cast replacing Kelly Monaco.

Abowitz: Who is replacing Mel B or is she staying on?

Zeiger: That role is undecided. I think Holly Madison will be great.

Abowitz: Does she sing?

Zeiger: She has other talents.

Abowitz: What are they. Please feel free to say what they are.

Zeiger: You can say what they are.

Abowitz: I can't say. All I know is she dated Hugh Hefner and Criss Angel. What is the talent in that?

Zeiger: She was also on "Dancing With the Stars" and she is quite beautiful. [After this interview a publicist contacted me to let me know what I was missing is that unlike Kelly Monaco, Holly Madison will be going fully topless.]

Abowitz: Finally, in this economy, how is "Peepshow" doing?

Zeiger: That is the most exciting thing. The audience is building every single day.  It is challenging with tourism and occupancy down, and people here spending less when they are here. But given that, we could not be happier because each night our grosses are better than the night before. We are very confident in the show.

Photo: Holly Madison. Courtesy: From Holly Madison.



Advertisement

About the Bloggers

Recent Comments


Categories


Recent Posts
Movable Buffet: Final entry |  November 4, 2009, 1:05 pm »
Photos from Fangoria: Trinity of Terrors |  November 1, 2009, 8:45 am »
Oops, I am a tourist (and it's expensive) |  October 31, 2009, 10:00 am »
Fright Dome: Huge haunted houses at Circus Circus |  October 30, 2009, 11:47 am »

Archives