Britney, Tom, Michael Jackson and the Case Against Second Acts for Famous People

On March 20, 1990, a speeding tractor-trailer collided with Gloria Estefan's bus, leaving her spine shattered and her soft-rock career in jeopardy.

But a year later, when she appeared during the American Music Awards and sing "Coming Out of the Dark," she got a standing ovation. Crowds flocked to her comeback tour and Estefan spent the rest of 1991 waging war with Michael Bolton for the nation's maudlin music monarchy.

Good for Gloria. She overcame tragedy and got on with her life. But the rest of Hollywood, the Britney Spearses and Tom Cruises who get sideswiped by a tractor-trailer's worth of bad press, don't deserve a goddamned thing.

Recent "comeback attempts" by Cruise and Spears -- two publicity super shammies -- and Michael Jackson's recently announced "curtain call" concerts in London are separated from Estefan story by a miles-wide crevasse of entitlement. During the coverage that followed Spears' do-over comeback album Circus and Cruise's worst-kept-secret cameo in Tropic Thunder, there was no mea culpa. No acknowledgment of personal responsibility for their misfortune, only an avalanche of pre-screened propaganda that screamed "love me" and "buy my shit."

Hey, it's understandable -- they only want what the rest of the famous world wants: To stay famous and beloved. It's the fuel that drives VH-1's Celebreality. But unlike Estefan, who couldn't foresee her bus crash, many of these stars have created their own train wrecks and want the paying public to clean it up.

That's not a comeback -- it's desperation. And it runs contrary to the comeback that set the template for all comeback attempts to follow: Elvis Presley's '68 Comeback Special. The King had gone off to serve in the Army, made a string of terrible movies and had completely forsaken musical performances by 1968 and felt he could recapture some of his magic by coming back to live shows. How did he do this? By dressing up like a refugee from a leather bar, going on NBC and singing "That's All Right (Mama)" like the world owed him a cookie. It was the stuff commemorative plates are made of, but it was effective enough to keep Elvis famous and pack his adoring fans into Vegas hotel ballrooms for years to come.

Since then, the comeback has focused more on getting that cookie than actually returning to one's craft. See, there's a difference between Stephen Baldwin and Gary Busey (drug addicts who find spirituality and want us to love them for it) and Mickey Rourke and Robert Downey Jr. (drug addicts who figure out they have real talent and should stop wasting it). Not everyone deserves a comeback just because they're famous.

And not everyone gets one, like O.J. Simpson and Michael Jackson. Nobody gave O.J. a second chance after his first murder trial and while many people attempted to help Michael Jackson return to "King of Pop" status, his crimes were too creepy to ignore.

Then there are just the stars with whom the world is fatigued, like Paris Hilton, Amy Winehouse, or anyone from The Hills. Maybe we'd like them more if they vanished and took Mariah Carey's "let's give the world a breather" approach to their comebacks, but they're never out of the headlines long enough for us to miss them.

And what of the people who never got their first chance? Why should these other fuck-ups get a second one? That Britney Spears's comeback has gone on longer than Miley Cyrus' entire career must be somewhat discouraging to someone like Adrienne Bailon. The disgraced member of Disney's Cheetah Girls wanted what Spears had so badly that she stripped down and had her publicist leak the "stolen" photos just to generate buzz. (Nevermind that a "cheetah girl" sounds a bit too close to a pole dancer's job title to begin with.)

Maybe there's a solution to this mess. A celebrity tribunal of folks who got it right the first time, overcame career (not personal or self-inflicted) setbacks, who can sit in judgment of these wannabe second-chancers. Guys like George Clooney, who kept working his way out of career-enders like Facts of Life and Return of the Killer Tomatoes to become a superstar. People like Morgan Freeman, Bruce Springsteen, Judi Dench. People still getting by just fine on their first (and only) impressions.

I say we have Clooney, Freeman and Springsteen judge who does and doesn't deserve a second shot at fame. Would Rourke and Downey earn points for their self-flagellation, contrition, and raw talent? Would Cruise earn scorn for even calling his comeback a comeback when he's got three Oscar nominations and owns United Artists? Would Tim Allen and Martin Short be sent to Gitmo for conspiring to make Santa Clause 3?

Who knows? Perhaps such a move would reserve comebacks for people like Elvis, who go away for a while and come back to remind us how electric their talents truly were.

Comments

[JazzyJim]

Wow, I thought it was me being "overly" sensitive - but after reading the other responses, I see that the tone of the writer was indeed prickish and deserved of condemnation! Bravo readers. Having a keen sense for yellow journalism that is NY Post, FOX, National Enquirer that roles around in it's own waste under the guise of "entertain­ment/news" I'm more likely to question the authors perspective and motive than that of the defenseless accused. I"m fairly knowledgeable about celebrities and their all too human frailties. Our society builds them up, loves to tear them down and a nice comeback story is worth a few million dollars!! Spears is only guilty of being naive and undereducated due to the fact that she's been working since the age of 4! She is a one woman "industry" - earning not only her keep, but an un-employable ex-husband, employees her parents and hundreds of others - including the tabloids whom make millions peddling any misstep she makes as though she WERE a religious icon. Britney gives her fans what they want. There are a billion starving artists who "won't get it" - that's the point. What does Paris Hilton or Perez Hilton offer at all? Yet, we pay the clown for being a clown - and we waste time commenting on the missteps of Ms. Spears for growing up in front of us (willingly and unwillingly). Britney's career by the way - is not a comeback. You have to have had gone somewhere

[Olden]

Well, Jason:
Congratulations - you have earned the "honor" of being yet another scribbler to take a cheap shot at Michael Jackson. Very original - well done....
I'd like to ask where you got the authority to decide who deserves a comeback?! And what, pray tell, are Michael Jackson's "creepy crimes"? Last I heard, he was acquitted in a court of law on all counts. Or, do you now think that in addition to deciding who gets a comeback, you can also be a substitute for our judicial process?
Let me break this to you gently: there are millions of people across the world who are ecstatic at the prospect of Michael Jackson performing live again. Perhaps they ought to get a vote in your proposed tribunal? Michael Jackson is a man of unparalleled accomplishments, someone with profound contributions to his field and someone who has managed to reach across all racial, ethnic, gender, national and generational deliniations to touch people in deep emotional ways. The man is beloved by Europeans, Jews, Arabs, Asians, Indians, Africans. No one mentioned in your article (with the possible exception of Elvis) comes close to the stature of Michael Jackson, so why you are putting him in this group is entirely lost on me.
So, how about a little respect for this man, who has had such a profound impact over an inspiring 40-year career and how about a simple "Welcome back". I assure you, that would've been far more interesting and worth-reading.

[mandykay]

Elvis started dating Priscilla when she was 14. Elvis never wrote a song of his own. Elvis admitted he could only play three chords on the guitar. Elvis died on his royal throne due to so many years of major drug abuse. He wouldn't even be a slam dunk winner on "American Idol" these days..... But, was he worthy of a "comeback" '68? Absolutely. Neither talent nor virtue, nor rhyme and/or reason has anything to do with why we love our celebs. I appreciated it when Bill Maher pointed out that rock stars and religious figures are quite similar. Does it make sense to love "Jesus"? Um, some would argue it makes about as much sense as loving Tom, Britney, Michael, or Elivs. But some people love Jesus and/or celebrities regardless of how much or how little sense it makes to do so...... WELCOME BACK MICHAEL, AND GOOD LUCK!! YOU DESEVER IT AS MUCH AS ANYBODY!!

[WhiteRabbitGrins]

And what is YOUR talent? What have YOU accomplished? Who are you to say who does and who does not deserve "a second chance?" When you have accomplished as much as the people you've criticized, come back here and tell me about it. Meanwhile, live and let live. These are human beings, living their lives and making mistakes -- albeit in the public eye -- whereas you and I get to make our mistakes (and repair them), in private. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

[TAR72]

Thanks. You just said it all.

[marignymitch]

Nice points. And in that vein please stop HuffPost from following TomKatt's every move on their fakery comeback tours. Thanks.

[Artfullyaware]

Elvis fought in Korea??? I thought he served in Germany...

[Jason Notte - Huffpost Blogger]

You're absolutely right. Friedberg is a long way from Korea and 1958 is a long way from 1953. My apologies.

[mistymi]

Who are you? It sounds like you think you are the "decider". It is not up to me or you to decide. It is up to their fans. Other than that, leave judgment up to God.

[ignorantwillyharper]

I don't think he was trying to be a decider, only stating a opinion. As far as letting god decide, that is not his job either. Remember that was W's job, who else would really want it.

[Scott Mendelson - Huffpost Blogger]

Who says Tom Cruise ever went anywhere? His PR-tour of doom was to promote War Of The Worlds in 2005, which ended up being his highest grossing film ever ($234 million). He followed that up with the commercially disappointing but well-reviewed Mission Impossible III ($134 million). His next project was a genuine flop, Lions For Lambs, but it was a low budget Robert Redford political drama, the kind of prestige project that had no value to being seen in theaters in the first place (it's basically a three part college lecture/political debate). His next film, Tropic Thunder, garnered tons of positive PR and crossed the $100 million mark. His 'first big test' of his post coach-jumping box office mojo was a solid hit. Valkyrie garnered decent reviews and opened to over $21 million (remember, Tom Cruise movies usually open to $25 million and close out just over $110 million) and closed out at $83 million. He may not be the biggest star in the world anymore (that would be Will Smith), but he certainly is doing just fine and not in need of a comeback.

[Russn3]

Tropic Thunder was not a "Cruise" film, nor can he really take credit for the success of Speilberg's War of The Worlds any more than Jeff Goldblum could take credit for Jurassic Park.

[dollyblue]

Touche!