Yesterday, we spoke about Lady GaGa being a motorbike. Apparently, the image (pictured right) is her new album cover and… well… it is fair to say that it isn’t in-line with her usual arthaus image.

With GaGa gathering up bug-eyed devotees like some kind of rampaging pop-missionary, there are those who are howling with rage!

A lot of fans really aren’t too keen on this new piece of artwork, thinking that it looks like a piece of shoddy photoshoppery, while others are absolutely convinced that the whole thing is a bit of a practical joke. On top of that, the idiots from the Christian church are throwing their hands up in disgust as well.

One fan spits about the new Born This Way picture:

“This better be fake. Because I am not OK with it”

Another adds

“WTF NO”

The outpouring seems to suggest that this isn’t up to the usual GaGa standard, making us believe that she’s pranking everyone for a bit of a wheeze. Or, just as likely, she’s actually going to use if for her new LP, also for japes.

GaGa tweeted in return to the criticism:

“Can’t believe it’s here! So happy+free to finally share this w you”

This prompted even more complaining for people who don’t realise that some fine, fine albums have really dismal sleeves.

All the while, this is drumming up interest in her new song, ‘Judas’, which appeared online recently. There’s no official video yet, but apparently, GaGa will appear as Mary Magdalene. Have a listen to it here.

Of course, with GaGa being famous and tackling themes of Christianity (or indeed, just flicking the fingers up at them – who cares really?), someone had to get their heckles up.

Cue Bill Donahue, president of The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights. He says:

“This is a stunt… Lady Gaga tries to continue to shock Catholics and Christians in general: she dresses as a nun… she swallows the rosary. She has now morphed into a caricature of herself.”

Meanwhile, her creative director, Laurieann Gibson, spoke about the video’s potential for offence.

“It went through several changes and late-night debates because at one point, there were two completely different views and I was like, ‘Listen, I don’t want lightning to strike me! I believe in the gospel and I’m not going there.’ And it was amazing because to have that conversation about salvation, peace and the search for the truth in a room of non-believers and believers, to me, that was saying God is active in a big way. And the place that it came to is surreal. We don’t touch on things that we have no right touching upon, but the inspiration and the soul and idea that out of your oppression, your darkness, your Judas, you can come into the marvelous light. So it’s about the inspiration and to never give up… We’ve created a new Jerusalem.”

Nice timing for Easter, eh?

Follow hecklerspray on Twitter or join our Facebook group or BUY ONE OF OUR STUPID T-SHIRTS!

When Banksy first started getting noticed, he was kinda fun. His work was witty and playful enough to warrant the attention. However, he then started to enjoy the smell of his own bullshit and slowly turned into an art-world Bono.

From being someone who was refreshingly cheeky, he became patronising and holier than thou – just look at his intro for The Simpsons for evidence of that.

A good number of people stopped enjoying his work, yet still wondered who he might be. And he’s going to be unmasked next week by a fellow artist in an oil painting, which really, is a pretty funny way of telling everyone who he is. Fight art with more art.

Of course, part of Banksy’s schtick is how notoriously secretive he is. And now, an artist called Mason Storm is going to show us the man behind the stencils.

Banksy’s face will be portrayed in a 6ft high oil painting to be exhibited in a Gallery show in London on the 28th October 2010 at Warehouse 45 Gallery in North London in a show called ‘Revelations’.

Naturally, the papers have been ‘revealing’ Banksy for years, with no-one really giving the impression of knowing for certain whether they’re right or not. It was like the press intrigue that surrounded The Stig. When The Stig was revealed, it turned out he was a very boring looking man who looked like he could’ve been sat on the BBC Breakfast sofa talking about badminton.

It goes without saying that this unmasking of Banksy has caused quite a stir in art circles. Will this painting be a lifelike representation or will it be some bollocks statement piece? More to the point, is it ‘moral’ to out someone who has chosen to be vaguely anonymous?

A source said:

“The whole thing has kicked-off. Mason Storm has been getting death threats from people… people following him around in black Range Rovers.”

“As a result, artists have refused to have their work shown in the same galleries, some of them removing their work from galleries showcasing him.”

Mason himself states:

“After 10 years of nefarious activities and stalking I have managed to capture the illusive Banksy at work, face on and will reveal him in a new oil, hopefully finished by Sept. Don’t rant it’s high time the mystery was revealed!”

You can’t ever trust what an artist says because they’re all barefaced liars (and god bless them for it),  but Mason’s work has been noted (in some circles) for it’s realism.

We can only hope that isn’t some punk-ass stunt and that something really fun goes down next week. Just no deaths please.

And what is Mason Storm’s reaction to it all? Well…

Follow hecklerspray on Twitter or join our Facebook group

Banksy is, let’s be honest here, vaguely amusing but ultimately, irritating as piles. He’s the art-world’s Bono, constantly asking us to look at ourselves like we’re brain-dead scum. Of course, fans of his will claim a moral victory because he’s managed to put into his work what they couldn’t say in words. Or, more realistically, they like to be seen to care about… y’know… stuff.

And with his fame, Banksy has managed to make a decent living out of being unknown. He’s done pieces in war-torn areas, New Orleans and various famous landmarks, all the while, telling us how we’re hopeless consumers, willing to lap-up anything we’re told… then selling a shed-load of books.

And now, he’s managed to land the gig of creating the title sequence of The Simpsons. And it’s oh-so bloody controversial.

The intro was shown in the US last night and opens with the graffiti artist’s tag doodled all  over Springfield. That’s all well and good.

Then comes the controversial part.

It switches from the Simpson family’s living room to a massive sweatshop, with depressed looking workers in an austere warehouse painting cartoon cells and making Simpsons merchandise, filled with dead animals and blah blah.

Amusingly enough, this weak-wristed attack on mass-production will no doubt end up on a Simpson’s DVD at some point, made in some unpleasant warehouse somewhere. That’s nice isn’t it? It’s like Radiohead advising their fans cycle to their shows while jetting around the world in planes fuelled by rocking horse shit.

Apparently, this extended intro was inspired by reports that the show outsources the bulk of their animation to a company in South Korea.

Banksy has stated that his storyboard led to delays, disputes over broadcast standards and a threatened walk out by the animation department.

Then, Al Jean, The Simpsons executive producer, showed Banksy how to be funny by dismissing the furore with:

“This is what you get when you outsource.”

ZING!

The episode, called MoneyBart, will be shown in the UK on 21st October or, if you’re cod-political, you’ll get it on a torrent.

Here’s the intro.

Follow hecklerspray on Twitter or join our Facebook group

Joanna Pacitti’s life is like a fairy tale – a slightly crappy fairy tale with no magic that’s actually sort of boring.

But a fairy tale nonetheless. Joanna Pacitti starred on Broadway as a child, she’s sung songs for several terrible movies and she’s been romantically involved with one of the world’s least famous men. And now Joanna Pacitti is through to the next stage of American Idol.

And everyone hates her. Joanna Pacitti shouldn’t be on American Idol, they say, because she’s already a great singer. And we all know that American Idol is about terrible singers like Taylor Hicks.

American Idol is no stranger to controversy – like that time everyone thought that Paula Abdul was having it off with a contestant. Or that time that a Paula Abdul fan killed herself outside Paula Abdul’s house. Or that time that Paula Abdul smashed up her face on a dog. OK, we take it back. Paula Abdul is no stranger to controversy.

But get ready for that rarest thing – an American Idol controversy that’s got nothing to do with Paula Abdul whatsover. And it’s all down to a contestant named Joanna Pacitti.

Because American Idol is doing its best to be nice this year, we’re seeing fewer scenes of Simon Cowell heaping abuse onto obviously disabled people who’ll invariably take out their frustration by climbing a clocktower with a machinegun and taking potshots at strangers, and more about raw talent. And Joanna Pacitti – who was put through to the Hollywood round on Wednesday night – undoubtedly has raw talent.

The problem is, she’s probably got a little bit too much raw talent. Joanna Pacitti’s CV is bursting with achievements – she’s starred in a reality TV show and a documentary, she starred in Annie on Broadway when she was 11, she signed to A&M and released an album three years ago, she used to go out with some bloke from a TV show about dancing and she’s performed on the soundtracks of Legally Blonde and the Bratz movie.

And because of all this, American Idol fans are after Joanna Pacitti’s blood, as MSNBC reports:

A host of people posting on “Idol’s” official forum suggested she should be disqualified because of her background and suggested she may have an advantage if she makes it to the public vote. “The point is that because she is a ‘semi-pro’… she already has a built in fan base and voting block. That skews the competition in her favor, especially in the early rounds,” poster Marcdamon wrote.

It’s an interesting point – at what point do you stop being undiscovered talent? Would American Idol let, say, the fat one from ‘N Sync audition? The truth is, probably not. Unless his wife had just died and they could make a sad two-minute segment full of drippy piano music and wobbly decade-old home video of him and his wife skipping around in a meadow together. Because then that son of a bitch would be in like a shot.

But Joanna Pacitti doesn’t even have a tragic backstory – all she’s got is a pile of former successes that some say give her an unfair advantage. Should she be disqualified from American Idol? That’s for the show to decide.

But, still, at least this is one American Idol controversy that Paula Abdul has absolutely nothing to do with. Except that she briefly worked as an executive producer on the Bratz movie that Joanna Pacitti did the soundtrack to. But apart from that, absolutely nothing.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

Katy Perry once kissed a girl and she liked it, if her personal reports are to be believed.

Though when we have a confession to make we don’t normally make a literal song and dance about it, we can accept that this is the modern age and those youngsters do things differently. But according to some sources, Katy Perry‘s parents don’t see it that way, and have registered their disgust at their daughter’s activities and apparent sexual escapades.

Then we find out that Katy thinks her parents were misquoted, and that they are fully supportive of her career. But which is it, Katy - which is it?! Are you a libertine whose parents don’t like you? Are you a mental and a Christian (peas in a pod) who likes the lesbians and has supportive parents?

We need to know.

But it’s all gone and turned into a big pile of confusion, with reports and counter-reports flying in left, right and centre. If we were cynical, we might assume this was the work of some marketing twit who was out to make a bit of a splash with the Perry name.

But of course, we’re not that cynical.

Reports that Katy Perry‘s parents hate what she does came about from the greatest newspaper in the world, the Daily Mail, which in between saying videogames cause all the ills in the world ever, managed to fit some other words in. Namely, Katy’s mum saying:

“Katy knows how I feel. We are a very outspoken family and she knows how disappointed her father and I are. I can’t even listen to that song. The first time I heard it I was in total shock. When it comes on the radio I bow my head and pray. I hate the song. It clearly promotes homosexuality and its message is shameful and disgusting.”

Now we understand it’s a bad song, but is there any real need to get God involved in matters? We mean, he might use his ultra-powers to blow up the radio or something, but you could just forget about bothering him, turn the radio off and go do something else. He probably has enough to worry about, the poor little blighter.

Katy’s mama went on – probably while between bouts of praying for God to change channel on her TV:

“Katy was raised in a very strict Christian household, she started performing in church at nine. She was a special child; she loved to sing and had an angelic voice. That is why this is all so disappointing and sad.”

It must be terribly disappointing to have a daughter who is a worldwide star – really quite bad. But mummy wasn’t finished there, and she went on with even more words falling out of her gob:

“Katy is not a homosexual but I fear she has been led astray by the Hollywood crowd. Katy was spotted by a music producer, who invited her to L.A. That’s when she started to change. I was worried she’d start doing drugs and drinking alcohol. I still am. I spoke to her only recently. She said, ‘Oh Mom, I’m not going to turn into Amy Winehouse.’”

We do think if Perry were to turn into Winehouse MKII that would be enough to test anybody’s faith, regardless of how devout they were. As we all know, Amy Winehouse is proof there is no God.

But Katy Perry wasn’t about to sit still listening to mother dearest’s apparent rampant claims, and quickly jumped to the defence of her parents. In an interview with MTV, Perry used some words – in a similar way to how her mother did:

“I’m sure they opt out of singing ‘I Kissed a Girl’ or ‘Ur So Gay’, but they’re singing along to every other song on the record. They’re just glad I’m not strung out, doing centrefolds and s**t like that.”

They’re probably not going to be made that much prouder by you swearing now, are they? Oh well, at least that clears that one up. A bit.

But what about the claims that Katy’s track UR So Gay is homophobic and I Kissed a Girl is patronising to the gay community?

Well, what better way to win over fans than to make a sweeping generalisation, in which you assert that all people of a certain sexual preference have exactly the same personalities? There isn’t a better way, it would seem, with Perry stating:

“I think gay people have a wonderful sense of humour.”

She did go on, mind, carrying on about UR So Gay:

“I think they’ll get it and embrace it. It’s an anthem for power of the people – for females, gays, exes, anybody who’s been broken up with that wants to get over a guy.”

Well – that clears that one up. And here we were hoping she’d stir up that bit more controversy to help fuel her career, seeing as that’s all it’s been going on so far.

It’s certainly not talent that’s been pushing it.