The GREAT Escape



Is UP and Running! 

If you want to read the new material. Lesberatti is now at: 


There's Gossip, Photos and Movies and better language translation.


Is UP and Running. 

I have moved my Top Level Domain Name: Tech-Gyrl to a new host...You can visit the new site at: 


Lesberatti and Tech-Gyrl are merging, and being hosted by a different server (not Blogspot, or Google) I do not plan to post to Lesberatti on Blogspot or any other Blogger site that I may have (Tech-Gyrl).

As I continue my Scarlett summer…BREAKING NEWS:

Scarlett Johansson wins French novel lookalike case

 PARIS  - Hollywood actress Scarlett Johansson won damages on Wednesday against a French author whose novel features a character resembling the starlet who is treated as a sex object.

A Paris court ordered novelist Gregoire Delacourt to pay Johansson 2,500 euros ($3400) for his "hurtful and demeaning" depiction of a female lookalike in his book "The First Thing We Look At".


The actress had sought 50,000 euros ($70,000) in compensation after accusing Delacourt of using her image to promote the novel, which has sold 100,000 copies since it was published in 2013.

The first part of the book is told through the eyes of a garage mechanic who "resembles a better version of Ryan Gosling" and thinks the book's heroine is Johansson when she turns up on his doorstep.

The woman's looks means men see her as a sex object and the character is involved in a series of amourous relationships that prosecutor Vincent Toledano claimed "never existed".

"For Scarlett Johansson, the fact that she is attributed two relationships that she never mentioned herself is hurtful and demeaning," the court said.

The actress also sought an injunction to stop the novel being translated or adapted for cinema, which was thrown out by the court.

Johansson's lawyer declared himself "extremely pleased" with the verdict, while Delacourt's defence team called the compensation "derisory".

Speaking when the actress launched the case in May, defense lawyer Anne Veil said if Delacourt had known Johansson would have "kicked up such a racket, he would have chosen someone else".

  — Agence France-Presse

Edtor's Note: In my opinion Johansson was awarded a nominal judgement, it must have been the principle she was suing about.

Finally Saw It…

My Review of Under The Skin:

“Under The Skin” (2014): Still Plays On My MIND (Review)

“Under The Skin” (2014): A Slow Understanding (Review)
Please Note: In my film review I identify the alien as Isserly which is the name used in the book and not as Laura which is associated with the film adaptation (In Fact I didn't even notice if Laura was used in the film.)

“Under The Skin. Is Not Your Conventional Sci Fi Movie
That’s what one would think of after watching this movie that stars Scarlett Johansson as an alien that seduces and preys on men.
Under The Skin has deeper meanings and themes that are not easy to understand. Under The Skin uses something netherworldly to explain the misconceptions that men and woman have of each other. Which are made strikingly clear and come full circle.
This is a movie you have to watch with total patience. One critic compared director Jonathan Glazer with that of Stanley Kubrick, but for me the movie strikes a cord with Nicholas Roeg’s: The Man Who Fell To Earth by exploring science fiction as an art form.
Although I can understand how one could see Kubrick when watching this movie.  In 2001: A Space Odyssey, there are many moments with only visuals and no dialogue or music.  Under The Skin starts with a dark screen that has these odd sounds all around you (actually Johansson’s Alien Isserly practicing phonetics). You don’t see anything and then suddenly. You see a small circle of light and you see other parts begin to form. The results are that of the human eye (Johansson’s eye) that our alien creature has taken form of. You become transfixed and by this moment. 

Let’s face it, if a woman who looks like Scarlett Johansson picks me up and asks me to come with her, not knowing her full intent, I would be a dead woman. Scarlett Johansson does a great job with an almost entirely silent performance. It’s very different from her work in Her where her voice was used constantly and seductively, while in Under The Skin she displays the growing emotions that humans feel and her character starts to have doubts about what she is doing towards the end.

This is illustrated in a staggering scene in which the alien picks up a young man with the facial disfigurement of neurofibromatosis, played by Adam Pearson. The alien does not distinguish between his looks and those of her other victims, but there is a crisis, and the alien becomes vulnerable: a potential victim herself.

There are a few supportiving characters  (I presume Esswig is supposed to be the mysterious guy on the motorcycle) but the main focus rests on Johansson and she does a great jo


During another disturbing scene, Isserly (Johansson) witnesses a "rescue" in which earthling emotions of pity and compassion are on display – feelings she does not share. What follows lacks congruence to a rational human being.

Are there flaws with this film? I would say yes. Director Glazer seems to have mixed certain genres but not very effectively. Having Johansson drive around picking up men and engaging in conversations is naturalistic and documentarian but fails to contribute to the narrative of the story, whereas the ethereal seduction and evisceration of the men she lures into her lair are evocative of sci fi classics such as the aforementioned: The Man Who Fell To Earth and 2001 A Space Odyssey.

I was a bit put off by the driving around and picking up men aspect since according to the book a lot more should have happened which probably would have made the movie more conventional but easier to understand Isserly’s motivations and objective.
Isserly knows that her body can attract men and in the book she definitely uses her body for that effect, but she doesn’t understand how to take control over it or how to use it for her own pleasure — or that her body can be used for her pleasure.
This is evident during a scene where Isserly is with a male that showed her compassion and kindness. She kisses him and they attempt further intimacy when suddenly, Isserly breaks away, grabs a lamp from the dresser and begins to explore her pelvic region.

What many young women — and boys — don’t comprehend is that women don’t merely exist to please men particularly given the fact that many men and boys don’t know how to please a woman.

The ultimate tragedy comes later, when Isserly lets her guard down to try and live as a human and is attacked by a stranger (a male of course).

The assault breaks her, literally, revealing her true

form, and inciting a terrifying and violent incident that speaks to the impulsive but sadly inherent nature of mans fear and hatred of women, so to speak, and how that fear dictates their actions, manifesting as repulsion and dismissal.

The scene is layered in metaphors about sexual assault, and the way assault tears a woman apart and reveals something so dark and delicate that can be terrifying if you don’t understand it; (Strangely I felt empathy towards Isserly more so in her alien form than in her human form, because that is where she shows the most Humanity in the film).

Perhaps Under The Skin is also a metaphor for transgender issues and hate crimes, as Isserly’s attacker perceives Isserly as a beautiful woman, but upon discovering her true form, is repulsed and reacts violently.

So preoccupied are men by the beauty on the outside that they fear and reject the truth underneath.

The attack is a horrific display of brutality, is heartbreaking and PISSED Me the Hell OFF! But it brings the film full circle: during the first hour, I watched as Isserly drove around Scotland, picking up men and seducing them, her selection process based on physicality as opposed to aesthetics, a process that isn’t reflected back in the men she chooses, men who are so eager to follow a beautiful stranger to their demise.

Yet despite Isserly’s victims losing their lives none had met the violence that was perpetrated against her, which ultimately begs the question: If one is born with a penis is it inevitable that under the skin they are fcuked up individuals? Because sh*t like this ALWAYS happens to women.

Let's do an experiment: Suppose Academy Award winning director Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker) directed a movie about about Luka Magnotta, a male porn actor and model wannabe who went on a killing spree in Canada and posted videos on YouTube chronicling his torture of animals and culminating with a horrific act of cannibalism perpetrated against his roommate/lover.

You just know that every male would be indicting the director with allegations of Misandry.  Yet as women we are expected to go through life seeing our bodies in horrific portrayals like the attack scene in Under nThe Skin and we are expected to do what? Shrug it off? Say: "Oh Well, Boys Will Be Boys"?

That said, ‘Under the Skin’ is a poignant, layered and heartbreaking work that uses science-fiction to examine huiman frailties, sexuality, gender dynamics using feminist themes in innovative ways — there’s never been amovie that’s taken

themes of being a woman refracted through the lens of an alien inhabiting a foreign skin; reconciling who we are on the inside with the body we’ve been given on the outside, a body that seemingly exists to be objectified.   t.g. santos

Spoiler Alert:

Didn't I TellYou?……

UPDATE: Oh great, while the fandoms of R&I shipping were busy creating subtext and fan fiction for a non existant lesbian couple, the existing lesbian couple on Rookie Blue: Gail and Holly have hit troubled waters.  Thursday night's episode began with Gail's police partner questioning her sexuality and then Holly's friends telling her tat Gail just doesn't measure up to their standards and Gail replying that she's : "Just Having Fun" (with Holly).  None of this is a good sign of things to come.

I believe that if viewers want lesbian story arcs on Popular TV Shows, then it behooves us to praise or give positive feedback to the lesbian storyline that already exist and NOT just offer "recaps" got that AE?

It does the lesbian community a disservice when we create lesbian story arcs for shows that either do not or will never have lesbian characters that are integral to the show (cough Rizzoli&Isles cough), or worse still: Assume that networks are obligated to represent us and that we don't have any responsibility.

Aliyah Obrien is scheduled to appear in at least 4 episodes of RB this season.  Given the way that lesbian s\characters are treated by netwoirk television, I am always concerned that the romance with be ended by the producers.  This is why it’s important to show as much support for Holly and Gail as was done for Jane Rizzoli and Maura Isles (and those characters aren’t even lesbians!)

The Networks notice such things and it’s time for us to notice also.  So don't whine b*tches if Rookie Blue loses it's only lesbian couple.

You Got Your Cake…Now Eat It AND STFU!

Vector from the Promotional logo for the TNT t...

I know my readers remember how I would viscerally react whenever I saw a certain blog going on and on about Gayzzoli and how gay Rizzoli and Isles is and blah blah blah.  

Those articles really used to annoy me because: 


1. I never saw anything particularly lesbian between the characters Jane Rizzoli and Dr. Maura Isles (not unless the story arc was about lesbians


 2. See reason 1.


With that established I noticed that as long as I wrote that R&I fans needed to get their heads out of their arses and realize that this duo is heterosexual, well the more that particular blog’s writer went on to tout a nonexistent lesbian relationship.  

Well that is until the network that airs Rizzoli&Isles decided to make a promo featuring all of the fake lesbian ideation that fans have created and the show has used to pander to its gay audience

NOW it’s a problem for that particular blog and its writer. Now it's not good that R&I are gay unless they are Gay on the show?

But that writer knew from the start that those characters were never hooking up, which is why that writer created the lesbian themed subtext for the show and annoyed the sh*t out of me by ALWAYS writing about how GAY R&I is.  

 I mean this is the same thing that happenedd with the L Word.  The show's fans often took it upon themselves to "fix" terrible episodes, then the show's writers STEAL the ideas and use them but still managed to fcuk up the show and get it cancelled. This is not how viewers take control. 

So if the producers of R&I play with your tender little hearts don't be mad because you got your cake. Eat It and STFU, this is what you wanted after all with all of your "subtexted" rcaps. Consider yourselves luck to have gotten Cake.

You and your following got what you deserve from this show and that the same as it always has been which is NOTHING! Now go write some subtext and GTF over it…You’re not in Kansas anymore.

Technorati Tags: ,



Contact Form


Email *

Message *