Superbowl halftime show - Page 2

dar512 · 02-02-2004, 04:03 PM

Would Janet be wearing such fancy nipple rings if they weren't going to be shown?

Also there's a picture of the two still singing after the breast was exposed on Yahoo. They are not in the process of covering up.

ladysycamore · 02-02-2004, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dar512
Would Janet be wearing such fancy nipple rings if they weren't going to be shown?

Again, she's had the piercings for years now, so it wasn't like it was decorated recently just for this purpose.

Quote:

Also there's a picture of the two still singing after the breast was exposed on Yahoo. They are not in the process of covering up.

Do you think you can post a link to the photo, because all the photos that I've seen says otherwise.

elSicomoro · 02-02-2004, 07:00 PM

Based on Janet's history, her noted thoughts on nudity and the looks on their faces (hers and Justin Timberlake's) when it occurred, I'd say it was accidental.

Having said that, we need to ask two questions here:

1. What's the big deal with showing bare breasts? After all, they're not sexual organs.

2. Why won't Janet Jackson get completely naked? I've been waiting for it for years.

Elspode · 02-02-2004, 10:29 PM

If the target audience for the Super Bowl is rich old farts (on the basis of the bulk of the advertising), then baring Janet's boob fits right in with the game plan.

I, for one, have no problem with sexuality. I do believe, though, that consumers should be able to make an informed decision about what they are viewing, and the Super Bowl is apparently an unrated presentation. If the breast baring was in fact intentional, then it was a serious miscalculation on the part of its presenters. They (IMHO) were shooting for an 'edge' for CBS, and (as Lady Sycamore has pointed out in another thread) have very likely alienated their core audience in the process.

It is, however, very possible that this was a selfish and calculated act on the part of the performers and MTV, and not CBS. My wife has even gone so far as to suggest the act was intended to transfer attention from Michael to Janet for awhile.

At least we now have a conspiracy theory *about* a boob instead of *conceived* by a boob.

novice · 02-03-2004, 02:59 AM

I'm inclined to think it was an intentional act but only known to the performers and possibly MTV (unlikely).
For one thing this is the first time in years i've seen or heard from Janet Jackson and if Timberlake had a concert in my backyard i'd shut the curtains. As they say in showbiz, there's no such thing as bad publicity.
A little extreme, to be sure, but very, very, effective.
As for the costume, it just fell apart. From memory there was a black leather/vinyl cup arrancement over some kind of red fabric.
It defies logic for the red fabric to be attached to the cup as an independent unit rather than as part of a blousy thing.
I have seen the footage a couple of times now and can find no sign of torn fabric which would surely rip rather than detatching whole.
Finally, if i was setting something up like this, i'd probably run the 'startled cover up' routine just in case it backfired and I needed an out

dar512 · 02-03-2004, 08:56 AM

This one:

dar512 · 02-03-2004, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ladysycamore

Again, she's had the piercings for years now, so it wasn't like it was decorated recently just for this purpose.

Yes. I understand she's had the piercing for year. But why such fancy adornments if they're not going to be shown?

Why wear your fanciest earrings if you're going to cover them up with a hat?

BTW Elspode has a post on another thread where he's thinking the same thing.

tikat · 02-03-2004, 12:11 PM

If anything was obscene, it was the rest of the jiggly, wiggly half-time show.

If I had kids, I'd be much more concerned about them being exposed to the rest of that than to Jackson's right breast. (Is it just me, or does that huge ornament almost qualify as clothing?)

And to think CBS refused to air a fairly tame ad because it was "too controversial".

elSicomoro · 02-03-2004, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dar512
But why such fancy adornments if they're not going to be shown?

Because she was saving it for someone special?

dar512 · 02-04-2004, 09:31 AM

I suppose it's possible. If so, then she must love him a lot. That outfit has to be uncomfortable without the doodads. Add those in and you've got to have some major nipple abrasion going on from rubbing against the cup.

Oh, and that also assumes that she wouldn't be changing before she saw him after her performance.

I can hear it now. "Oh baby. Wear that leather outfit home, all right? I can't wait to lacerate my hands when I play with your nipples."

ladysycamore · 02-05-2004, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dar512
This one:

Ok, well, I don't see where they are still singing. Plus, I heard the performance when it happened, and it was clear that they had stopped immediately after the costume rip.

Oh well...it doesn't matter anymore anyway. People are going to believe what they want regardless. *shrugs*

Elspode · 02-05-2004, 09:51 PM

I have to agree with you, here, LS...I saw it happen, and Justin sang the 'gonna get you naked by the end of this song' line, did the yank, and it was cut away immediately thereafter. Song was over.

wolf · 03-10-2004, 01:05 PM

The moment, commemorated in plastic, available on ebay.

The story was carried on Yahoo News and has likely increased the bidding.

Elspode · 03-10-2004, 04:57 PM

Brilliant!

hot_pastrami · 03-10-2004, 05:02 PM

Wow, they're milking this for all it's worth. *Cough*

I know. That was terrible. It had to be said. It was outside of my control. Don't kill the messenger. I am not an animal! Vote Quimby.

02-02-2004, 10:29 PM	#19
Elspode When Do I Get Virtual Unreality? Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Raytown, Missouri Posts: 12,719	If the target audience for the Super Bowl is rich old farts (on the basis of the bulk of the advertising), then baring Janet's boob fits right in with the game plan. I, for one, have no problem with sexuality. I do believe, though, that consumers should be able to make an informed decision about what they are viewing, and the Super Bowl is apparently an unrated presentation. If the breast baring was in fact intentional, then it was a serious miscalculation on the part of its presenters. They (IMHO) were shooting for an 'edge' for CBS, and (as Lady Sycamore has pointed out in another thread) have very likely alienated their core audience in the process. It is, however, very possible that this was a selfish and calculated act on the part of the performers and MTV, and not CBS. My wife has even gone so far as to suggest the act was intended to transfer attention from Michael to Janet for awhile. At least we now have a conspiracy theory about a boob instead of conceived by a boob. __________________ "To those of you who are wearing ties, I think my dad would appreciate it if you took them off." - Robert Moog

02-03-2004, 08:56 AM	#21
dar512 dar512 is now Pete Zicato Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago suburb Posts: 4,968	This one: Attached Images

02-05-2004, 09:51 PM	#27
Elspode When Do I Get Virtual Unreality? Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Raytown, Missouri Posts: 12,719	I have to agree with you, here, LS...I saw it happen, and Justin sang the 'gonna get you naked by the end of this song' line, did the yank, and it was cut away immediately thereafter. Song was over. __________________ "To those of you who are wearing ties, I think my dad would appreciate it if you took them off." - Robert Moog

03-10-2004, 01:05 PM	#28
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	The moment, commemorated in plastic, available on ebay. The story was carried on Yahoo News and has likely increased the bidding. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

03-10-2004, 04:57 PM	#29
Elspode When Do I Get Virtual Unreality? Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Raytown, Missouri Posts: 12,719	Brilliant! __________________ "To those of you who are wearing ties, I think my dad would appreciate it if you took them off." - Robert Moog

02-02-2004, 04:03 PM	#16
dar512 dar512 is now Pete Zicato Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago suburb Posts: 4,968	Would Janet be wearing such fancy nipple rings if they weren't going to be shown? Also there's a picture of the two still singing after the breast was exposed on Yahoo. They are not in the process of covering up.

02-02-2004, 07:00 PM	#18
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	Based on Janet's history, her noted thoughts on nudity and the looks on their faces (hers and Justin Timberlake's) when it occurred, I'd say it was accidental. Having said that, we need to ask two questions here: 1. What's the big deal with showing bare breasts? After all, they're not sexual organs. 2. Why won't Janet Jackson get completely naked? I've been waiting for it for years.

02-03-2004, 02:59 AM	#20
novice Ignorance is bliss and I'm orgasmic Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: perth, australia Posts: 296	I'm inclined to think it was an intentional act but only known to the performers and possibly MTV (unlikely). For one thing this is the first time in years i've seen or heard from Janet Jackson and if Timberlake had a concert in my backyard i'd shut the curtains. As they say in showbiz, there's no such thing as bad publicity. A little extreme, to be sure, but very, very, effective. As for the costume, it just fell apart. From memory there was a black leather/vinyl cup arrancement over some kind of red fabric. It defies logic for the red fabric to be attached to the cup as an independent unit rather than as part of a blousy thing. I have seen the footage a couple of times now and can find no sign of torn fabric which would surely rip rather than detatching whole. Finally, if i was setting something up like this, i'd probably run the 'startled cover up' routine just in case it backfired and I needed an out

02-03-2004, 12:11 PM	#23
tikat Paramour of Paradigm Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Conway, Arkansas Posts: 42	If anything was obscene, it was the rest of the jiggly, wiggly half-time show. If I had kids, I'd be much more concerned about them being exposed to the rest of that than to Jackson's right breast. (Is it just me, or does that huge ornament almost qualify as clothing?) And to think CBS refused to air a fairly tame ad because it was "too controversial".

02-04-2004, 09:31 AM	#25
dar512 dar512 is now Pete Zicato Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago suburb Posts: 4,968	I suppose it's possible. If so, then she must love him a lot. That outfit has to be uncomfortable without the doodads. Add those in and you've got to have some major nipple abrasion going on from rubbing against the cup. Oh, and that also assumes that she wouldn't be changing before she saw him after her performance. I can hear it now. "Oh baby. Wear that leather outfit home, all right? I can't wait to lacerate my hands when I play with your nipples."

03-10-2004, 05:02 PM	#30
hot_pastrami I am meaty Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Posts: 1,119	Wow, they're milking this for all it's worth. Cough I know. That was terrible. It had to be said. It was outside of my control. Don't kill the messenger. I am not an animal! Vote Quimby. __________________ Hot Pastrami!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode