Broad City and Slapstick Feminism /  by Roxanne Teti

Broad City, Season 3 (Comedy Central)

From The Marx Brothers and Buster Keaton to flicks by the Farrelly Brothers and Judd Apatow, slapstick and physical comedy has traditionally been dubbed a man’s game. Even though we are familiar with the success of hits like I Love Lucy and the Laverne and Shirley show, both TV networks and film studios have never truly taken a step outside their comfort zones and fully committed to endorsing a “left of center” female driven physical comedy series. Sociologically, women are not expected to joke around about sex or potty humor—as this behavior is contradictory to the gender norms of what defines a “lady”.  We definitely saw this antiquated way of thinking defied by the widespread popularity of Bridesmaids and it’s memorable food poisoning scene at the bridal shop. However, more recently Broad City, the American sitcom, created by and starring Abbi Jacobson and Ilana Glazer, has begun to penetrate the mainstream as their TV show is not only broadcasting on network television, but is also becoming popular culture’s “go to” references as the show’s humor transcends a particular common ground amongst members of the millennial generation.  

From 2009 to 2011, the sitcom initially began as an independently produced webseries but was taken over by Comedy Central in 2014. Numerous critics are recognizing Abbi and Ilana’s comedic style as “slapstick feminism”. Even though Broad City’s humor is generally predicated on millennial tropes, their visual gags are reminiscent of everything from Charlie Chaplan tricks, all the way to the gestures found in a Carol Burnette sketch. I believe this term; “slapstick feminism” marks the emergence of a genre of comedy that can play a large role contributing to the progress of women in relation to the outdated stereotypes that have dominated popular culture as well as mainstream media for decades. 

Contrary to HBO’s Girls, Broad City possesses a diverse cast with characters of different races and spectrums of sexual orientation. In particular, the show utilizes visual gags, bathroom humor, and sex talk to deconstruct and redefine what we consider to be the “norm”. I believe women and men alike organically subscribe to this outlandish humor because it humanizes the modern day conception of how women should act or who they should be. At large, Broad City is reestablishing the “absurd” within the context of “normal”—thus allowing audiences to identify with yet laugh at the daily struggles and triumphs of Abbi and Ilana’s characters. Broad City has already been renewed for a fourth and fifth season on Comedy Central.

Nevertheless, I don’t believe we would have a space for Broad City in our society today if the Internet did not exist and threaten to disrupt the narrow confines of broadcast media. And for that reason, I encourage all female artists to use the “web” as a chief medium to get their voices heard as well as a device to breakdown traditional stereotypes and redefine genres of film. Audiences are clearly craving content that appeals more directly to the taste buds of today's society.

Entering the Era of VR? /  by Roxanne Teti

Samsung Gear VR

For those who don't know, VR stands for “Virtual Reality”. This weekend's Men’s NCAA Final Four and National Championship basketball games will be streaming live in VR. Using the Samsung Gear VR headset you can download the NCAA March Madness Live app from the Oculus Store and watch the event “court side” from the couch of your living room. The 360-degree panoramic footage will seek to emulate the jaw dropping adrenaline rush as you watch professional and or/college athletes compete from the vantage point of a sideline seat.

The interactive medium was initially introduced in the side spaces of arcades and movie theaters during the early 90’s and never became popular. The VR pods were clunky, the 3D imagery was choppy, and the “adventure” was ultimately boring—thus becoming a phased out option for experiential media. Now almost 22 years later, VR is back in the public’s eye but this "go around" the current technology possesses a product lifespan with a potential longevity. Consumers can check out high resolution, mind-blowing 360 views using sleeker glasses through VR devices like Oculus Rift, PlayStation VR, Gear VR, and HTC Vive. In the space of tech-media, it's common knowledge that VR has been revolutionizing the gaming world for the past year or so, however the medium is now beginning to penetrate the mainstream through the entertainment industry. 

In addition, to the NCAA Final Four and Championship games, this year’s Coachella is already setting the bar for VR innovation as it’s working with Vantage.tv on filming a virtual reality version of the various musical acts—thus making the VR material available to those who cannot attend the annual music festival in person. This conversation can't help but raise the question of whether VR will enhance the "audience experience" by increasing accessibility to popular live events (via VR) or eventually threaten to disrupt the marketplace all together in the future years to come. 

With that being said, it’s important to also recognize the negative impact VR could have on the communal and social aspect of viewership as well as the repercussions it could cause to physical activity and the rising obesity issue in America. Will society become so consumed in virtual content that our actual, tangible realities become a faded figment of the past? I hope we don’t become the alienated, overweight, immobile humans from Wall-E. 

In addition, VR is already beginning to dominate the porn industry. The gratuitous nature of the porn genre, has always been contingent on the fantastical heights of voyeuristic intrigue, essentially the act of "watching". However, VR introduces deeper psychological elements of simulation and mental interaction as the user assumes the full POV (point of view) of the "actor". With that being said, as the line between fantasy and reality becomes blended and skewed, will we also experience a negative impact concerning sexual relations between real human partners? Will rates of addiction rise?

Putting these cautionary thoughts aside, VR is the 2016 medium to watch and many tech media industry leaders are seeing viable application and market potential for “virtual reality” in various sectors of entertainment, education, gaming, and even military use. 

The Profit Turning and Controversial Nature Of Religious Content /  by Roxanne Teti

The Passion (2016), FOX

Until it's "time" for a holiday season, we rarely discuss the religious genre of film and TV, despite its origins dating back to the beginning of Hollywood's inception. From the classic movie, The Ten Commandments (1956) to the fantastical Christian allegorical trilogy, The Chronicles of Narnia (2005-2010), the genre has repeatedly realized mainstream success while often generating significant controversy with the public. In most recent years, Darren Aronofsky’s Noah (2014) grossed over $362 million worldwide but received backlash from leaders of the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim institutions as many were offended by his interpretation of the biblical story. We also can recall the box office success of Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, which grossed 611.9 million with a modest 30 million dollar production budget. This film, much more so than Noah, provoked an intense controversial response as some believed the film was "anti-semitic". When analyzing a filmic genre that not only appeals to a widespread audience but also instigates the deeply rooted polemic issues of history is a particularly interesting cultural paradox to grapple even for the entertainment industry. 

Today, although society has evidently become more secularized, faith based films or TV shows still hold the potential to become “revenue generating” productions with significant viewership. For example, in 2013, The Bible, a 10-part miniseries that unfolds the story of “Genesis to Revelation”, attracted over 100 million viewers—turning the “The History Channel” into one of the most watched cable networks according to Nielsen ratings. More recently, the movie Heaven Is For Real (2014), based on a “New York Times Best Seller”, grossed 103 million, and even God’s Not Dead (2014), a film with a sloppy storyline and poor acting earned a surprising $57 million.

Netflix is also recognizing the profit turning potential of the religious genre, as it will be “eternally” streaming Tyler Perry’s The Passion, a musical that presents a modern day spin on Jesus Christ's last days on earth. Before the production makes it way to Netflix, it will follow the traction earned by Grease’s recent TV movie in January by airing live on FOX during the evening of Palm Sunday (March 20th). In addition, the musical will be filmed at various locations around the city of New Orleans, Perry’s hometown. Executive Producer, Adam Anders, describes the show as “ a timeless story everyone can relate to” featuring familiar songs by popular artists like Seal and Chris Daughtry. The Passion, in ways, sounds like a reminiscent revival of the 1973 rock opera, Jesus Christ Superstar. However, Perry is no stranger to producing, directing, and starring in films with religious messaging.

Andrew Lloyd Webber's classical opera - Jesus Christ Superstar (1973 Version)

Regardless of whether a filmic interpretation of a pious icon is “accurate” or receives “backlash” from the various parties involved in the "old as time" argument concerning who is “right”, it seems evident, by proof of ratings or box office numbers, that the masses are intrigued. People are still seeking to identify with some origin of faith regardless of how fragmented religious communities have become in the past 50 years. It appears the challenge lies in how to approach the subject with respect, thus not pushing an ulterior agenda that has the potential to further exacerbate the war on or between religions. 

Women Can Be Funny-The Rise of Female Comedy /  by Roxanne Teti

Kristen Wiig, NBC Universal

In Hollywood, it’s common knowledge that women are grossly underrepresented in influential roles in front and behind the camera. In particular, the genre of comedy has always been dubbed a “man’s game", regardless if a woman possessed the talent to be “funny”. However, in the past five years, with trailblazers, Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, leading the way, a growth of female comedians have hit the mainstream (like Lena Dunham, Mindy Kaling, Kristen Wiig, Amy Schumer, and Melissa McCarthy, to name a few of the A-listers). Even Broad City’s “left of center” dynamic duo, Abbi and Ilana, are receiving critical praise for their original content in which cultivates organic humor by redefining the "absurd" as the norm.

Nevertheless, we are experiencing an exciting surge of female driven comedy, with gags and jokes appealing to the amusing taste buds of both men and women. In particular, Jessica Williams’ performances on the Daily Show and Kate McKinnon’s versatile portfolio of iconic impersonations on SNL have permeated the digital channels of social media and online streaming services. For example, McKinnon’s Calvin Klein Ad/Justin Bieber impression received over 6.7 million views on YouTube and more recently her Close Encounters skit topped that number with almost 14 million views. McKinnon’s description of her alien abduction was so hysterical, Ryan Gosling, a man, could barely keep it together.

Comedy relies not only on the construction of a joke or the nuances of a particular impersonation but also the intelligence of the comedian and his or her ability to assess the boundaries of what's funny or too personal, especially when involving politics. As a comedian, you have to be witty, well read, and up to date on which relevant current events could be a potential incubator for humor to thrive. Long story short, these women are not only pretty faces, they are also super smart. So in honor of Women’s History Month, I want to celebrate Hollywood’s funniest ladies with a few clips from the most ridiculous “rolling on the floor laughing” skits by women in 2015. 

GIFS-A New Langauge? /  by Roxanne Teti

According to the Twitter universe, yesterday was “#GIFparty Day”, in which users were encouraged to share their favorite GIFs. For the past year or so, the use of GIFs and Emoji’s has become a cultural phenomenon to the extent of creating a new language of communication, a language that evokes it’s own rules of connotation between the engaged individuals. When the same GIF becomes popularized amongst mass audiences—the image signifies a visual association similar to iconography. 

GIF stands for Graphics Interchange Format, also known as that crappy low-resolution 8-bits per pixel image from the early 90’s. Today, we readily participate in GIF communication via social media or text message when expressing how we “feel” about a particular topic or mood. For example, it’s a Thursday night and you go out drinking with co-workers at a new local bar. The next morning you wake up to a text from your colleague reading:

“How are you surviving?”

Instead of returning the message with words, you add a little comic relief into the conversation—replying with a GIF of Cameron Diaz in Bad Teacher hung-over and passed out at her classroom desk chair.  

Don’t get me wrong; I love GIFs—they’re fun, and can certainly provide comic relief to an otherwise banal message. However, when we use images from a Rolodex of popular culture references and reapply their context to the personal context of our conversations, in a way, makes us thieves or imposters. We are recycling and stealing not only the copywritten image but also the humor and redefining its meaning within the inside jokes of our own dialogue. For example, when a GIF is funny, the comical origin relies on the image’s connotation and it's relation to the topic at hand. 

And with GIF generators like GIPHY or the GIF keyboard, a deeper thought process is not required when using or creating a GIF because one can simply either enter information into a GIF robot or choose from a wide variety in a catalogue. Does this type of symbolic communication, which relies heavily on throwback to pop culture references, impact our intellectual potential or the way we express ourselves with words? Furthermore, will our children, overtime, effectively develop proper communication skills or a sophisticated vocabulary? I understand when a GIF is appropriately applied, it can be witty and creative in some ways but a part of me feels like we are losing the ability to communicate emotions with words or visual storytelling that is rooted in originality not butchered motifs. 

The Never Ending Gender Gap in Entertainment /  by Roxanne Teti

Joy, 20th Century Fox (2015)

Before addressing Hollywood, I want to begin this post discussing professional sports and the blatant gender pay gap that exists between men and women—so blatant we're talking about the difference of millions of dollars. For example, in 2015, WNBA players received salaries between $39,000 and $110,000. On the contrary, NBA players were paid anywhere between $525,000 and 17 million. I can already hear the opposing argument to this disparity—“no one watches women’s basketball, it’s a supply and demand thing, women don’t compete at the same level as men”. Ok, let’s examine one of the most recently controversial pay gaps in sports history—the 2015 Women’s World Cup. The U.S. Women’s National Team was awarded $2 million in prize money for winning the esteemed world championship meanwhile Germany’s men’s team was paid $35 million for their victory. Even the U.S. men’s team took home a bigger check—racking in 9 million dollars for coming in a whopping 11th place. The Women’s World Cup was one of the most watched sporting events of 2015—gaining over 25.4 million viewers. The event accomplished significantly higher ratings than the Stanley Cup (7.6 million) or the NBA Finals (13.9 million). Wait a second, I thought this was all about money. Sports, especially televised events, are another form of entertainment. Keep in mind these are numbers talking, not the rhetoric of some third wave feminist agenda. 

U.S. Women's National Soccer Team (2015)

An enormous pay gap between men and women also exists in Hollywood. For example, female actresses, directors, writers, and producers are still paid significantly less than their male counterparts. For instance, it was reported that in 2015 the highest paid actor was Robert Downey Jr., making 80 million bucks. On the other hand, Jennifer Lawrence was the highest paid actress but made $52 million. Looking at box office numbers, nearly 50% of the top 15 grossing films had stories with female leads (i.e. Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Inside Out, The Hunger Games: Mockingjay-Part 2, Cinderella, and Pitch Perfect 2) Similar to the Women’s World Cup case study, there’s something else going on here. The audience, the customer, is clearly "buying" female driven stories—remember it’s numbers, it’s economics. 

Finally this discussion brings us to our most recent controversy —the 88th Academy Awards and the heated debate concerning Hollywood’s gender pay gap and lack of diversity for minorities. Specifically looking at female driven plots or female leads, this year’s 8 Best Picture nominations featured only 3 films with a female lead—Room, Brooklyn, and Mad Max: Fury Road. However, the Academy did have the opportunity to nominate some other films of quality cinema, it's not like the content didn't exist. For example, some snubs include: The Diary of a Teenage Girl, Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Joy, Carol, and Suffragette, to name a few. 

Moving on... the Best Director nominations featured no female directors. ZERO nominees are women. This is 2016 not 1950. At least the Documentary Features and Documentary Shorts nominations have one or two female directors. The categories for Original Score, Cinematography, Sound Mixing, Visual Effects also have no female nominations. The individuals that earn awards for these categories in film production and post-production are typically known to require a more “technical” skill set, perhaps a skill set the woman's brain doesn't possess (???). It's sad, a female Director of Photography has never been nominated for an Oscar in the history of time. Then we look at the Costume Design category and 4 out of the 5 nominees are women. That’s interesting isn’t it? Not taking anything away from the artistry of Costume Design by any means but come on those are some interesting numbers... With that being said we should at least celebrate and root for writers, Andrea Berloff (Straight Outta Compton), Phyllis Nagy (Carol), and Emma Donoghue (Room) for their screenwriting accomplishments and nominations. 

For those who are hosting an #AltOscarParty, why don’t we have an alternative vote for Best Picture of 2016? Click this survey and submit your response! 

My Oscar 2016 Predictions /  by Roxanne Teti

The Revenant, 20th Century Fox (2015).

This year's nominations have been difficult to predict. Between the "Oscars So White" controversy and the polarized array of genre driven films, The 88th Academy Awards will either be an interesting or an overwhelmingly boring ride. Below are my predictions for every category. 

Best Picture- THE REVENANT

This revenge film is a safe pick for Best Picture as it possesses both critical acclaim and box office success. 

Potential Upset: The Big Short - Winning several top notch awards including the PGA's Outstanding Producer accolade makes this film a threatening candidate for a dark horse triumph.  

Who I Want to Win: Mad Max: Fury Road - Miller and company did an excellent job of bringing this fantastical cult hit to life.

Painful Snubs: It's still beyond me that Suffragette, Straight Outta Compton and Carol were absent from Best Picture consideration. 

Best Director- Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu

Iñárritu (The Revenant) could most definitely take home his second Oscar after winning Best Director for Birdman last year. 

Potential Upset: George Miller, Mad Max: Fury Road. The Academy secretly loves Miller and his perseverance as an artist. 

Who I Want To Win: George Miller. Miller's unconventional genius and distinct style deserves recognition one day.

Painful Snubs: Ridley Scott (The Martian), Suffragette (Sarah Garvon), Quentin Tarantino (The Hateful Eight), and Todd Haynes (Carol). 

Best Actor- Leonardo DiCAprio

DiCaprio's gristly embodiment of Glass in the The Revenant will most likely earn Leo his very first Oscar! 

Potential Upset: Michael Fassbender (Steve Jobs). Fassbender delivers Steve Job's pulsating energy with a riveting performance that carried the film and it's various holes in story.

Who I Want to Win: Give Leo an Oscar already. 

Painful Snubs: Michael B. Jordan (Creed), Johnny Depp (Black Mass), Will Smith (Concussion). 

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR- SYLVESTER STALLONE

A clear favorite here! 39 years later Stallone plays the heroic film icon Rocky better than ever—showing his softer, vulnerable side as he fights new battles of survival.

Potential Upset: Tom Hardy (The Revenant). Hardy is a walking metaphor for manic savagery.

Who I Want to Win: Christian Bale (The Big Short).  Bale's layered portrayal as Michael Burry captured not only an eccentric persona of a real life man but also personified the foreboding intensity of the market's looming crash. 

Painful Snubs: Idris Elba (Beast of No Nation), Steve Carell (The Big Short).

Best Actress- Brie Larson

Room is an important film regarding the psychological repercussions of abuse at the highest level and Larson's performance brings this important issue into the spotlight. Her depiction of a deeply hurt victim, courageous survivor, and loving mother gave viewers permanent goosebumps. 

Potential Upset: Saoirse Ronan (Brooklyn). Ronan does an excellent job captivating a gamut of emotions including homesickness, romance, and freedom. 

Who I Want to Win: Jennifer Lawrence, Joy. Lawrence is a natural talent and I don’t care if she’s America’s sweetheart. She delivered another incredible performance—capturing the passion and persistence of a real life person that should inspire all women to pursue their dreams. 

Painful Snubs: Helen Mirren (Trumbo). Cate Blanchett (Carol). Yes, Blanchett was’t snubbed a nomination but she will be snubbed an Oscar and not because her performance isn't worthy. Blanchett will be automatically overlooked because she won two years ago for Blue Jasmine and the Academy failed to nominate Carol for Best Picture. 

Best Supporting Actress-KATE WINSLET

Kate Winslet (Steve Jobs) did an excellent job mastering a difficult accent and playing opposite and against Fassbender's erratic and often robotic facade. 

Potential Upset: Alicia Vikander (The Danish Girl). I think we can all agree, Vikander did a beautiful job but she should have been nominated for Ex-Machina. 

Who I Want to Win: Rooney Mara (Carol). This is Mara’s best performance to date and it deserves the Oscar. Her transformation of character was not only well crafted but the way she captured Therese’s subtle intrigue with looks and movements engrossed in subtext is not easy stuff. 

Painful Snubs: Tessa Thompson (Creed), Kristen Stewart (Clouds of Sils Maria) 

BEST ORGINAL  SCREENPLAY - SPOtLIGHT, Josh Singer & Tom McCarthy

Spotlight will win because of it's well constructed dramatic arc and ability to showcase an ensemble cast with organization and poise. 

Potential Upset: Straight Outta Compton, Jonathan Herman and Andrea Berloff. This was an incredibly creative story that carefully wove together elements of drama, history, and romance with balance and bite. 

Who I Want to Win: Straight Outta Compton, Jonathan Herman and Andrea Berloff. #OscarsSoWhite. 

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY- The Big Short, Charles Randolph, Adam McKay

Randolph and McKay diffuse the density of Michael Lewis’ book with cinematic prowess. 

Potential Upset: The Martian (Drew Goddard). Sometimes it can be a  huge challenge to make an already entertaining book into a movie. It’s even harder to translate written prose describing the character’s inner thoughts into dialogue or a visual metaphor. Goddard gracefully accomplished this and more.

Who I Want to Win: Carol (Phyllis Nagy). Nagy’s beautiful adaption of Patricia’s Highsmith’s The Price of Salt propelled a literary gem into a visual word of film without compromising the story’s emotional arc. The dialogue and it’s poignant subtext is every screenwriter’s dream. 

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY - The Revenant, Emmanuel Lubezki

Lubezki’s dynamic camera work and focus on the macro made The Revenant’s diegetic world possible and enhanced the story’s epic nature.

Potential Upset: John Seale (Mad Max: Fury Road). While Mad Max relies heavy on special effects, the careful construction of Seale's cinematography should not go unrecognized. He creates a saturated post-apocalyptic tone in which he unifies with a distinct color palette that feels unique only to the world of Mad Max. 

Who I Want to Win: Ed Lachman (Carol). Each of Lachman’s frames are carefully composed to not only reflect the “look and feel” of New York in the 1950’s but also to personify the emotive arc of a forbidden love story. The role of the camera and the “gaze” is also an integral element of the story and Lachman was able to communicate this metaphor without being too pretentious. 

BEST ORIGINAL MUSIC SCORE- The Hateful EighT, Ennio Morricone

It’s Morricone’s year. He’s 87, written over 400 scores, has been nominated 6 times, and deserves an honorary award for his prolific career. His score for The Hateful Eight achieves cinematic bliss—straying from boring tropes and thematic traps. 

Potential Upset: Star Wars: The Force Awakens, John Williams. With 50 nominations under this belt, Williams has set the bar for action packed film scoring. Everything he touches is often gold. 

Who I Want To Win: The Hateful Eight. Morricone should win this one but if he wasn’t 87 and near retiring, I would want Carter Burwell (Carol) to win. This is Burwell’s first nomination and his emphatic score for Carol is enchanting with lush layers of instrumentation. Burwell is also known for his work with the Coen Brothers. 

BEST FILM EDITING- MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST ORIGINAL SONG- "TIL IT HAPPENS TO YOU"

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM - SON OF SAUL

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE- INSIDE OUT

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE - AMY

BEST COSTUME DESIGN- CINDERELLA

BEST MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING- MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST PRODUCTION DESIGN- MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS- Star wars: The force awakens

BEST SOUND EDITING AND BEST SOUND MIXING-MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST SOUND MIXING- the revenant

Best Live Action Short Subject- Shok

Best Documentary Short Subject- A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness

Best Animated Short- Bear Story

Wake Up Mr. West: When Narcissism Turns Against You /  by Roxanne Teti

As we all know, Kanye West is really “on one” right now. Aside from throwing shade at Taylor Swift on his new track Famous, the rapper's egomania has reached new heights—comparing himself to God, Steve Jobs, and Stanley Kubrick to name a few. Last week, the comical hashtag, “#OutBoastKanye” was popularized on Twitter, after Kanye gloated about buying “furs and houses” for his family. At this point, not only has West’s braggart craze and pompous statements stolen the spotlight from The Life of Pablo's critical success, but his behavior has also negatively swayed the public’s opinion about the artist—making him an easy target for late night comedy and a routine subject for media discretion. Here, just take a look at his turbulent stream of consciousness:  

On one hand, some people believe his controversial behavior is a well-masked gimmick, a publicity rouse or perhaps a deliberate marketing strategy, to gain traction for his newest album's release. However, while Kanye loves attention, I don't know if attracting this degree of negative scrutiny is being intentionally manufactured by any means. When further examining his limitless mode of extreme narcissism, it is important to recognize that arrogance is psychologically rooted in fear and insecurity not power or confidence.

Looking at some of his most outrageous moments like begging tech billionaires Mark Zuckerberg and Larry Page for financial support or witnessing the aggressive rage of his backstage temper tantrum at SNL, West’s mental instability and impulsive nature seems very palpable, at least from an "outside" perspective. Even his long time collaborator Rhymefest tweeted that West "needs help, in the form of counseling. spiritual and mental". After listening to some of the darker tracks on The Life of Pablo (like FML or Father Stretch My Hands Pt. 2) it almost feels like the artist is calling out for help, even if it's not intentional. If West continues down this erratic path without first healing some of his deeper wounds, he may risk undermining his achievements and future potential as one of our generation’s greatest artists. 

“Momma pass in Hollywood. If you ask, lost my soul. Driving fast, lost control.”
— Kanye West on Father Stretch My Hands Pt. 2