Monday, June 26, 2006

Fun with Mrs. Smith

Known for adopting Third-World babies, Angelina Jolie was adopted by an entire Third-World nation when it came time to birth the spawn she created with fellow, First-World actor Brad Pitt.

Maybe "adopted" isn't quite the right world. More like "rented." And by "rented" I mean it was Pitt and Jolie renting the otherwise sovereign nation of Namibia for around
350,000 US dollars.

Not a bad deal at all, considering the country formerly known as South-West Africa threw in control of its air-space and a Prime Minister who took a personal
interest in expelling all journalists who dared disturb the Brangelina.

As if to make sure everyone knows whose Tinseltown star still shines brightest, Tom Cruise countered by
threatening to rent Tokyo, Japan.

Tokyo has seven times as many people and many, many more tall, sparkly buildings than the African nation of Shiloh Nouvel Jolie-Pitt.

Cruise's Tokyo rental would ostensibly be for some sort of all-time movie action sequence, but I suspect the real motive may lie in a mass ceremony involving electrical shocks, placenta soup and
Xenu (and karaoke and schoolgirl panties.)

I kid the
Scientologists (and the Japanese,) but I'll give them this; right after Cruise mentioned renting a city, some group called Mercer Human Resource Consulting came out with a handy list of the costliest cities in the world.

I've analyzed their picks in case anyone else who wants to rent a costly metropolitan area to impress friends, colleagues and a skeptical public is reading jsb.

Moscow: You think you are paying for the real thing, but end up with an obvious counterfeit.

Seoul: If the World Cup has taught me anything, it's there is really no such thing as a "typical looking" Swede or Ghanaian or Ecuadoran. In fact, the citizens of modern nations come in different shapes, sizes, shades and colors. Except for South Koreans. They all look exactly the same. Might as well just rent a block or two.

Hong Kong: Why would you rent what England gave away for free?

London: Its population has been fleeing to far-off cities such as Boston, Toronto, Sydney and Johannesburg for centuries now. Rent one of them. They're cheaper and newer.

Tokyo: You never want to be somewhere Tom Cruise has already been. (Ironically, this is not something Katie Holmes's next boyfriend will have to worry about.)

Oslo: They had the Olympics there once ... maybe? It's real dark in the winter ... bright in summer? Actually I have nothing. Avoid it just for that.

New York: It would have been my pick, until I heard it had been
named the world's politest city. Nobody respects a polite city. Suck on that, Bloomberg.

As you can see, I cannot recommend renting a city at all. Instead I advise going the route of Brad and Angelina and renting a whole impoverished nation. You can do so for less than the cost of three bedroom house in one of America's better suburbs.

For those in the market, might I suggest Toga or Somoa? Or, for the adventurous, The Gaza Strip.

Of course, the moral of the story is being a huge, bat-shit insane celebrity is a world of fun.

Isn't that always the moral?

2 comments:

C.R.Cavazos said...

They can also try renting the mexican state of Chiapas. It is full of foreigners there, specially long haired unbathed italians and frenchs who can't start a revolution in Italy or France.
They don't pay a rent to lurk there right now, so any change in the real state revenue deal will be a welcome one.

JT said...

A combination of GDP and Human Development Index Ranking should always be used in determining what impoverished nation to rent.