Dawn Chmielewski took a dare to go on “Dancing With the Stars” before watching a single episode of the reality show. Paired with a professional dancer, Chmielewski learned the ropes of ballroom dancing, went through a total transformation from entertainment reporter to performer and even faced the famous panel of judges. Her feat never made it onto the show, but we’ve got it all here on The Times website. 

Read the story, watch the videos and see the photo gallery here.

-- Emily Christianson

Photo: Jonathan Roberts and Dawn Chmielewski
Credit: ABC

But this is big news, worth bringing up in the endless wizard-vampire comparisons.

Summit Entertainment set the official estimate for “New Moon’s” midnight ticket sales at $26.3 million, breaking the record “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” set this summer at $22.2 million.

Harry may have fallen off the broom-wagon.

At least, that’s what it looks like from the hard numbers. But HP fans have proved loyal over the ten years author J.K. Rowling took to release the seven books chronicling the young wizards (and are now loyally attending the movies) -- and in our Company Town blog comments section, it seems no blood-sucking heartthrob is compelling enough take such a magical love away:

Sydnee gave us a list of points about Harry Potter’s superiority: I'm a "teenage girl" and this is just wrong. A) the Harry Potter Series trumps The Twilight Saga in writing quality times a million. B) Can never be beat by Twilight in the category of originality and C) the actors suck in comparison to the actors in the Harry Potter films. I mean come on! Harry Potter as an all star cast from Maggie Smith to Alan Rickman, and from Sir Michael Gambon to Julie Walters. Twilight has who? Robert Pattinson? Am I the only teenage girl (straight teenage girl) who does not swoon at the mention of that name? Taylor Lautner is a different story...:)...but i would take wizards over vampires any day. Just you all wait, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows pt.1 will top this crap.

JanaAyena gave us a balanced perspective: I do not dislike nor like Twilight. I just feel as if it really does not come close to measuring up to other great films/books...It's horribly unoriginal(remember Interview with a Vampire?) I also feel like it really only has one underlying plot(yes I have read all the books.)It's an extremely easy read. Harry Potter, which is also, for the most part, an easy read, at least has more interwining plots and conflicts that one actually has to read into to understand. It did make me a tad angry to know that it beat out Harry Potter in the box office. Sad, really.

And Joemamabush gave us the hard truth: Twilight sucks the cash from your pocket. If kids only thought about reading science, math or history we could head back to the top of quality life in America. But I guess we praise vampires...All I see is another suck film. RERUN no creativity....

But commenters and Twitter users who love the hunky protagonist and the trendy vamps (sans Miley Cyrus) are right behind in their defense of the series and share their thoughts about "New Moon" (after the jump):

Aunna: This movie was so great!Jacob was hotter than ever,when he took off his shirt OMG!I cant wait to see Eclipse.

so lame: To all the above haters, i feel so sorry that you couldn't relate to our Twilight obsession! Must be hard to fathom why we love the Twilight series so much. I myself love HP but Twilight just hits it in the center for me. Don't hate Twilight beating HP it's just that we love Twilight more than HP. We go back to the cinema not just once but twice, thrice or more.

jeepsR4grls still cant get over how amazing new moon was...can i see it again like NOW!!! and i got Catching Fire so I am super excited.

nosunshinehere New Moon was actually good. So my day has improved. Thanks robert pattinson.

Hairspraysarah Is going to go watch new moon again

tokyo_to NEW MOON WAS SOOOO FREAKIN GOOD! OMG OMG OMG.

Have you seen the new Twilight movie yet? Plan on it? Or, if you're not going to see it, why not?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo (top): Ian Nelson waits at a theater on City Walk to watch the premier of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince in July 2009 (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times); Moviegoers at the AMC theatre in Westfield Century City shopping mall for "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" (Matt Sayles / AP)

Oprah officially announced her decision to leave broadcast syndication for cable after her contract with CBS expires in 2011.

Our Company Town blog wrote she will most likely resurface on OWN, a cable network she is starting with Discovery Communications.

Commenters haven’t been saying much about the breaking news on Oprah’s split, but other social networkers are all a-Twitter about the decision:

cruedoll wrote: #oprah rules the world doesn't she? I don't think I have ever even watched her show

tylersnotes: Hey world why is it surprising that Oprah is cancelling her show in 2 years? She's starting a cable channel. Not like she's leaving TV.

drewpickard: I predict Oprah running for president in 2012. President of THE WORLD.

ShineyPink: this is a terrible day for @oprah lovers:(

So what do you think? Is Oprah making a smart move by packing up her show and placing it on cable? Do you think she will still be able to get guests like Sarah Palin and Tom Cruise on this new network? Or is this, the most popular daytime talk show, "jumping the shark"?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: Oprah Winfrey on stage at the 60th prime-time Emmy Awards from the Nokia Theatre. Credit: Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times

It seems the recent decision by the University of California Board of Regents to increase student fees by 32% has caused not only a "students vs. regents" demonstration at UCLA's campus today, but also a "students vs. non-students" quarrel in our comments sections.

The fee hike that everyone is arguing about (justifiably so) will come in two steps by fall 2010. Basic UC education fees will rise then to about $10,300, plus another $1,000 for campus-based charges and an estimated additional $16,000 for room, board and books.

No wonder there is such a heated comments war in our blogs: With the raise, the cost of a UC education will be triple what it was a decade ago. Compared to other U.S. four-year public colleges, which have raised tuition and fees by an average 6.5% to $7,020 a year, a 32% fee hike is pretty notable.

On the L.A. Now blog, the battle rages on with two parties: non-UC students -- who seem to be a mixture of out-of-college adults, community college students and general California residents -- and current UC students. The former argue that current students are being unreasonably demanding.

Balancing the budget is never easy, is it?

Here is what the non-UC students have had to say so far:

Pablo defends his own interests against the fee hike protestors: Listen up, UC students. I'm about to lose my job and I'm close to losing my house. Do you want me to sell my 10-year old car so that I can pay for your incredibly cheap tuition?

He also said: Who taught these people that they were entitled to free (or unreasonably cheap) stuff in life?

Duken4evr believes UC students should explore other means available to pay for their education: They can always go to community college like the rest of us. Screw those spoiled brat UCLA students. Hit up your rich mommies and daddies for the difference. Cry me a river. What a bunch of useless losers.

SoCalReality presents a parent’s point of view: This state is bankrupt! Your FREE education ended at High School. You want to be treated like an adult, act like one and PAY YOUR OWN WAY. The UC system already subsidizes your education with fees below their cost. What you want is continuing "Student Welfare" on the backs of us Tax Payers; go to a cheaper collage or to a Cal State like my kids. But NO, you want caviar education paid by others. GROW UP!

And Reality takes a stand about the actual educational material: IF UC wants to save some money...get rid of the worthless soft-science degrees such as gender and ethnic studies and make those profesors get real jobs instead of pusing their anti-American rants on the tax payer dime!

Then UC students took a stand (after the jump):

UCLA STUDENT expressed his/her point of view: As a UCLA student, in the thick of things, getting a student job, student loans and summer jobs are not enough. The student jobs that everyone suggests we get are not available, there are fewer of them, and they are limiting the amount of hours we can work each week. Many of these jobs are also at minimum wage. Furthermore, do you not think we already have student loans and summer jobs? We are already struggling to make ends meet, and for many, these fee increases are going to break our backs. The protests, however, are not just about the fee increases, it is also the devaluing of our degrees. In an effort to save money, they have fired all the "lecturers" at UCLA. They are also trying to decrease the number of classes we need to get our degrees. This means we are putting out less qualified less informed students. At this rate, not only will we be paying more, we'll be paying more for less. Before you ask us to stop whining, consider the reality of our situation.

Concerned Gaucho talked about the reality of the hikes for low-income students: I am a current UCSB student and the fee hike is going to seriously hurt my chances of remaining here. As a low-income student, I do not have the ability to ask Mommy and Daddy for money. I pray that the state will somehow compensate some federal funding because a shift to private assistance will hurt the "public" school system.

And the kiss of death, at least to any UCLA Bruin or anyone who can't afford a private school, is what John had to say: After these fees hike, it might be cheaper to go to USC than UCLA. USC at least gives plenty of financial aid.

How do you feel about all of this? Should UC students be able to pick themselves up by their own bootstraps and shoulder these fee hikes with financial aid (with the University of California's plans to increase financial aid opportunities) or extra jobs? Or are there more serious implications from the increases, which may force students to take out private loans or even drop out of the UC system? Tell us below.

-- Kelsey Ramos

UC regents approve fee hike amid loud student protests

More photos > > >

Photo: Protesting students lie on the ground at UCLA. Credit: Damian Dovarganes / Associated Press

Apparently there's this sport called "football" in which the players don't wear helmets and they actually use their feet to move the ball around the field. And currently these athletes are holding their semi-regular qualifying tournament whose winners are allowed entry into the main event that they boldly call the World Cup. 

Controversy struck when Ireland squared off against France today in northern Paris when a gentleman from the home team used his hands, allegedly, to help his team get the ball into the gigantic net. Seems that in this version of football using your hands in such a matter is a no-no.

The Fabulous Forum blog is no stranger to this unusual and curious game, and when the L.A.Times soccer, er, football writer, Grahame L. Jones, showed the video above to his readers and asked them if France's Thierry Henry cheated to get his nation into this World Cup, over 100 readers commented to the affirmative. Read their takes after the jump.

Reader ctcomm not only confirmed that there was an offense but introduced us to the catchphrase created to describe the foul: There is no doubt he handled the ball. It was direct and deliberate. England were beaten by "the hand of God", now the Irish floored by a "Paw from Paree". FIFA will cave and finally introduce Video Goal Replay by the next world cup (if not 2010)

Fergal said: Handball once, a foul, but probably instinctive. Handball twice? Blantant cheating. It is so unfair to be denied the world cup by blantant, deliberate cheating.

Irishgirl stood by her country: Yes Irish rage is totally justified!!! It is a disgrace - not only for letting cheats like Thierry Henry to go through to the World Cup by cheating and setting such a bad example for the game but also on FIFA...why do they refuse to bring in video replay for referees???

Jonny King called for strict punishment: If there was evidence of an athlete using steroids he is stripped of his gold medal..... just like Rashid Ramzi the bahraini gold because cheating is not acceptable in the rules of the sport. There is video evidence of Henry clearly cheating, if not the team at least Henry should be stripped of their success and taken out of the competition.

Meanwhile Ruzdu was one of the few who felt that France should advance regardless of the apparent foul: A penalty was refused at the 98th minute. Ireland did cheat too. So France deserves to go to Capetown, that's it. This goal is only justice. 

How it Goes claims that if the shoe were on the other foot, the losing team would have used their hands too: Ireland would have done the same thing if given the chance. This is the fault of the officials. It is Ireland's fault for letting France get that close. I'm happy to see France get in. It's too bad that poor quality teams from Asia and Oceania get in rather than Ireland and Russia.

So the question is, what should have been done about what most people consider a "handball"? Should there be replay in this sport? Should players who blatantly cheat on the field be punished in the same way as players who cheat off the field like steroid-users? And finally, local sports talk show host Jim Rome often states "if you aren't cheating, you aren't trying" - do you think that's a fair assessment of how many people play pro sports?

-- Tony Pierce

Photo: France's captain Thierry Henry embraces Irish player Richard Dunne at the end of the FIFA 2010 World Cup second leg qualifying match against Ireland at Stade de France in Saint Denis, outside Paris, 18 November 2009. The match ended 1-1 and France qualified for the World Cup. Credit: EPA/Ian Langsdon

Many of the initial responses to the blog post about President Obama’s bow to the emperor of Japan last weekend were -- critical would be too tame a word -- downright searing in their comments.

But in the last few days, commenters came out of the woodwork supporting the president’s gesture of respect, however overdone or flawed, or condemning those who were quick to cast the first stone criticizing the gesture as a gaffe. Yet even with this show of patriotism, the disapproving comments have not ceased.

In the spirit of this blog’s traditional purpose -- celebrating and printing our readers' opinions -- we have printed 10 comments below from those more tolerant of the gesture. If you'd like to read the harsher comments,  click here.

Frank Morgan wrote: Respect for others is a great virtue which I rejoice to see in our President.

Jayaprakash wrote: It is a diplomatic win over Japan's hearts by this simple action. Obama is more diplomatic than we think.

Zach wrote: A bow? People are calling for impeachment over a bow?!

Joe Bell wrote: The handshake/bow was a good mixture I think, as it is custmary for Americans to shake hands when greeted, and Japanese to bow when greeted, so a mixture of the two was mutualy respectable. Americans are too proud, and in this day and age, we have no right to be.

konnichiwa wrote: I love how there are a ton of people here throwing around casual racism and then claiming Obama is the one ruining the United States because he bowed to another official. It seems that a sign of respect clearly upsets a lot of folks in the good ol' US of A

scottosan wrote: Obama! Don't shake hands if your going to bow... either shake hands and don't bow or bow and don't shake hands and keep your hands at your sides…I hate your morals and everything else that you stand for but hey, at least you tried.

Frederico Franca wrote: THERE'S NO LONGER ROOM FOR YOUR ATIQUATED POINTS OF VIEW! OPEN YOUR EYES! TAKE A LOOK A YOUR PRESIDENT ICONOCLAST GESTURE AND GET PROUD!

Rick Cain wrote: Uhm, Japan is an ally. We should respect their emperor. There's no need for cold war style posturing. Heck Donald Rumsfeld shook hands with Saddam Hussein, now THAT was embarassing in retrospect.

Dee wrote: Courtesy doesn't cost a thing, and anyone with just a tiny bit of knowledge of Asian courtesy would recognize the bow as being courteous. 

Pedeye wrote: Finally a president whose biggest foreign policy gaffes are showing too much respect for others. Beats getting more soldiers killed for dubious or manufactured WMD reasons.

You can leave your own comments below.

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: President Obama greets Japanese Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko during his first Asian tour as president. Credit: Mandel Ngan / AFP / Getty Images

Wanda Eileen Barzee, the woman who helped her husband keep kidnap victim Elizabeth Smart captive for nine months in 2002, was sentenced today to 15 years in federal prison for the abduction.

In a Salt Lake City federal court, Barzee pleaded guilty to charges of kidnapping and unlawful transportation of a minor across state lines, said a Times article by Nicholas Riccardi today. She and authorities agreed upon the 15-year sentence provided she testifies against her husband, Brian David Mitchell.

Mitchell kidnapped Smart from her bedroom in Salt Lake City in March 2002 and brought her to a remote camp where Barzee helped him keep her chained up. She was found by a motorist in 2003.

U.S. Atty. Brett Tolman said the agreement means that Smart will not have to testify against  Barzee. Smart was not in the courtroom today.

Federal prosecutors hope to prove at a hearing on Nov. 30 that Mitchell can face charges in federal court after he was found mentally incompetent for state court charges.

What do you think about Barzee’s sentence? Were the charges of kidnapping and unlawful transportation of a minor appropriate? Do you feel the length of the sentence (15 years) is a proper application of justice? Will this, as the U.S. attorney said today, begin the process of "bring[ing] long-awaited closure to Smart and her family"?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: Elizabeth Smart kidnapper Wanda Barzee following a hearing in federal court Tuesday in Salt Lake City. Credit: Colin E. Braley / AP

A post on our Top of the Ticket blog today about President Obama’s greeting of Japan’s Emperor Akihito has already generated over 1,000 comments from readers.

This weekend, the president has done a lot of bowing to show respect on his first Asia tour as president. The photo above was taken after the president gave a speech in Tokyo's Suntory Hall. However, the emperor's bow was a little different. Times staffer Andrew Malcolm, who wrote the post, allowed the photo (and the video) of Obama’s gesture to speak for itself -- see it here.

We mostly enjoyed what readers had to say about the president’s greeting -- a mixture of outrage and patriotism, snarky one-liners and more serious diatribes.

Here are the top 10 best comments so far (leave your own below):

1. Mitch wrote: Obama to Emperor of Japan: "May I shine your shoes, Sir?"
2. Plain Jane wrote: Obama WASN'T bowing - He SAW a Japanese Yen on the floor and went to pick it up because it might be Worth More Than Our Dollar!
3. Veteran wrote: Was that before or after he appologized for World War 2?
4. bmcc wrote: Palin would have winked at him. You betcha!
5. Maripo wrote: I'm surprised he didn't curtsy.
6. MP wrote: Whatever happened to the good old days when we could count on a Republican in the White House to puke on foreign dignitaries?
7. marty1234 wrote: I wish are first black president had been a rapper at least he'd have some attitude...
8. Wax on wax off wrote: Look eye! Always look eye! -Mr. Miyagi
9. helen roach wrote: I wonder why they didn't run the dust mop over the floor. It would have looked much nicer in the picture.
10. Xavier wrote: See, Obama is not a Muslim. He's a shintoist.

What are your comments on the president’s bow to Japan’s emperor? Tell us below.

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: President Obama after a speech at Tokyo's Suntory Hall. Credit: Reuters

According to an article today by Times staff writer Thomas H. Maugh II, the new numbers reflect epidemiologists’ more accurate estimates, which include cases that might be listed on death certificates as pneumonia or other infections but were ultimately caused by swine flu. Previous reports included only laboratory-confirmed cases.

The H1N1 influenza differs from the traditional flu in a few ways -- it is very easily spread, affects young people more than old and doesn’t seem to follow the standard cold-weather transmission patterns, says an article from our health blog Booster Shots. 

Blog commenters and Twitter users have been alternately supportive and skeptical of being vaccinated against H1N1 so far, using the hashtag #swine on their updates. People are also quick to defend themselves when they sneeze or give other indications that they might have the flu:

cidelson wrote: Don't be lulled into complacency on swine flu, public health officials note how it continues to spread

Aaron Nichols wrote: This is fear mongering at the highest level – Now that makes me sick!

Soupking wrote: This is all HYPE. You couldn't pay me thousands of dollars to get "vaccinated".

Lindy Lee wrote: In our city, one child has died and thirty three percent of a local high school has the influenza. Many have been hospitalized. There are NO vaccines. Nobody was prepared and Obama was dishonest with us.

Connor_Davidson wrote: Is not all that well. P.S it's not Swine Flu

What do you think about the CDC’s report estimating so many H1N1 deaths? Have you gotten immunized or have you decided not to?

There has been a shortage of vaccines in California. Do you think the state is doing enough to respond to the outbreak of H1N1? Should President Obama and the federal government be doing more to help, or do you feel they have it under control?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: A vial of H1N1 flu vaccine. Credit: Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times

His resignation is effective immediately, overriding a contract set to expire at the end of 2011. Tonight’s show was his last on CNN.

The anchor updated his Twitter account, loudobbsnews, with “Be sure to watch CNN tonight at seven eastern for what will be, for me at least, a memorable show.”

Dobbs is perhaps best known for his anti-immigration views, which Twitter users repeatedly referred to as word of Dobbs’ resignation spread:

sarahhirsch says: And Fox said to CNN "red rover red rover let Lou Dobbs come over" Good riddance.

daveweigel says: Lou Dobbs leaving CNN to spend more time with his racism

mkapor says: Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Zohreen says: One more thing to add to things thankful for at fam thankgiving din in 2 weeks

nutzareus says: Only option is FOX News for Lou Dobbs. Seems appropriate. :-)

Last month, Dobbs met with Roger Ailes, chairman of the Fox News Channel. According to a New York Times blog post, Dobbs was viewed as a potential hire for the Fox Business Network at that time.

Tell us your thoughts -- did Lou Dobbs break his contract with CNN to start a job with Fox? In your opinion, would that be the right move for him? If not Fox, where might he be going next?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: Lou Dobbs announces his resignation from CNN on his show Wednesday night. Credit: Tony Pierce / Los Angeles Times

[Updated Wednesday: Muhammad's execution was carried out Tuesday night.]

According to the article by Times reporter David G. Savage, Muhammad was convicted in 2003 of the shooting rampage that occurred the year before. Of the 16 people shot, 10 died.

U.S. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft made the choice seven years ago to send Muhammad, then 41, and his teenage accomplice, Lee Boyd Malvo, to Virginia to be tried despite the fact that more of the mayhem took place in Maryland.

In 2002, Maryland had put the death penalty on hold because of racial unfairness. So while only three of the killings took place in Virginia, a death sentence was a possibility in that state. Thus Ashcroft chose Virginia to hold the trial.

Malvo was convicted of the murders, but because of his young age, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

The prosecution and families of the victims have said they are comforted by the sentence. The Supreme Court justices turned down a final emergency appeal from Muhammad's lawyers that he needed more time to develop his appeals since the process has taken place at a rapid pace.

So the question is, is this execution happening too quickly? Was it right that Muhammad was tried in Virginia instead of Maryland? Or do you agree with the speedy execution?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: John Allen Muhammad listens to the jury's recommendation of death in Virginia Beach Circuit Court on November 24, 2003. Credit: Getty Images

Rumors are flying around the Web that the Oprah Winfrey show may soon be packing up its longtime broadcast syndication in Chicago and moving to her new Los Angeles-based cable network, the Oprah Winfrey Network.

Even though OWN has yet to launch, there has already been a considerable amount of controversy with the channel’s executives, as three top programmers have left the venture in the last six months.

Winfrey’s production company Harpo Inc. has not confirmed the rumors, saying only that the iconic talk show host would make a decision by year's end. The show’s contract with syndicator CBS Television Distribution expires in 2011.

Meanwhile, people on Twitter don’t need any concrete details to spread rumors around the social network like wildfire, using the hashtag "#Oprah" -- here are some of today’s tweets about Oprah’s predicted move:

JakeJNelson: Its not like anyone is watching anyway...What would be so entertaining about #Oprah

milordsuccotash: #Oprah braves move to her OWN network!! Great move O, she owns and controls her brand!

courtneywade: O is off her rocker.

Henjealy: OMG, WHAT? Probably leaving us for some Olympic-laden city. I see how it is.

What are your thoughts? Do you think Oprah is wise to consider making the switch to her OWN network? Can she survive on cable, away from syndicated broadcasts? Let us know below.

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: Oprah Winfrey on the set of her show in 1996. Credit: Los Angeles Times

A shooting at Ft. Hood Army base in Texas this afternoon has left at least 12 people dead and 31 wounded.  ABC News identified the shooter as Maj. Malik Nadal Hasan. [Update: A previous version of this post stated that there were other shooters.]

Army deputy chief of staff Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli has been at the head of the efforts to reduce the number of Army suicides, which hit a three-decade high in 2008. [Update, 5:01 p.m.: A previous version of this post said Gen. Chiarelli was headed to Ft. Hood today. The Army tells us he is not.]

News organizations are offering updates as quickly as they can. Twitter users are also expressing their concern and speculation on the social network, using the hashtags “#fthood” and “#forthood.” Topping the trending topics, which show the most popular topics at any given time, are “Fort Hood,” “Texas” and “Major Malik Nadal.”

Here are some of the tweets about the shootings:

Lizzs_Lockeroom: Why does it always take a tragedy to bring attention to a long standing problem on soldiers mental health...

TormentedOne: They give us: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, Personal Courage.

Swineheart: A guy would have to "have his head on straight" to get to Major. Seems more likely an ideological issue.

How did you react to news of the shooting?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo credit: Reuters

The box-office surge is partially due to its popularity overseas (like in Japan), but also because of positive word-of-mouth recommendations.

However, readers’ reactions to the film still mirror public opinion seen and heard after Jackson’s sudden death in June: a battle between sympathy for the tragedy of losing a legend and repulsion to repeated allegations of child molestation during his life.

Times film critic Ann Powers gave the documentary an overall positive review, and some readers agreed:

Natalie wrote: 'This Is It' speaks loud and clear to debunk all the myths about Michael Jackson that media/tabloid has implanted in the public's mind. He is a true genius who masters his craft, yet he is also humble and childlike. There is so much talent and goodness in this man that the world has just chose to ignore -- and now we've lost him forever. This film is a gift to all of Michael's fans and music lovers.

For All Time wrote: Through 'This Is It' we learn more about the kind of person MJ really was inside than the last 30 years of slanderous gossip about him. His relentless pursuit of musical perfection, his rare kind of professionalism with fellow players and his unmatched energy level will never be seen in show business ever again.

But others stood by their opinion that Jackson’s personal problems overrode any good brought about by his music:

David wrote: Cant we let this narcissistic madman fade away?? Oops..there is still cash to be squeezed out of him.

archangel wrote: Oh, please Jackson "channeling God"! And which channel was he tuning into during his drug induced God delusions? The Baby Channel, Barney, Comedy Central, the Doper Channels (MTV/VH1). I'm in a quandary deciding which the worse pathos is; Jackson for his mediocre, tainted and trashed legacy... or the media for squeezing this landfill stench from a dead guy just to rack up the sales? Enough!

joel wrote: of course foreigners would cough up the money to see jackson they think he was a god. most countries over there think its ok to molest a child.

If you have seen “This Is It,” tell us what you think. Do you think we ought to appreciate a great film honoring this departed musical legend? Or is it impossible to separate Jackson’s personal life -- and his controversial relationships with children -- from his music?

And if you haven’t seen the film, are you planning on attending? Are you waiting for the inevitable DVD? Or have you had enough of the King of Pop?

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: Movie poster for "This Is It." Credit: Sony Pictures

It has been almost nine months since Chris Brown was arrested for assaulting Rihanna while the then-couple drove home from a pre-Grammy party, an incident that caused a huge uproar in the music community and among fans. Brown was sentenced in August to five years of probation and 180 days of community labor.

After the assault, readers responded passionately, both defending Chris Brown and supporting Rihanna as a victim of abuse:

What wrote: Plaxico gets 2 years of his life taken away for taking a gun into a club and shooting himself accidentally in the leg. Harming no one but himself. Chris Brown gets probation for beating the crap out of Rihanna. Our justice system/prison business is extremely flawed.

General wrote: I don't care if she spit in his face and called him an idiotic womanizer. I don't care if she called him every name you can think of. There is no excuse for what he did. A picture tells it all and he doesn't look too hurt to me. Biting someone? That is just sick.

Shakaila Jones wrote: I LOVE MY Christopher Maurice Brown 4get rihanna. I am ANTI-Rihanna right now. She has slaughtered Chris's good name and I dont like her at all. I didnt like when they started dating cuz she took my man and now because of this heck no. I never will like her again. Now everytime people mention chris brown name they are going to call him an abuser and all that nonsense. I will do anything to clear Chris name and rid him of that triffling, jealous, mean, RIHANNA!!!!!!!

Later this month Rihanna will return to the music scene with the release of her new album, “Rated R.” The album features the eye-opening serious single “Russian Roulette” that marks her music comeback from the February incident -- yet regardless of where Rihanna stands, the feelings of our readers remains strongly polarized (comments after the jump):

music fan wrote: The song IS NOT promoting domestic violence. It is doing the exact opposite - capturing all of the feelings and justifications people in those relationships use to stay and showing the very real consequences of that at the end of the song with a gun shot.

Mike OHara wrote: The song is bland and dull. No amount of controversy or cover art can change that.

Elijah wrote: Can’t you feel the pain in the record? Can’t you see how Rihanna is hurting...Watch her perform this song live— and watch closely– some tears will form in her eyes— because they did in mine!!! All I could think about was the photos of beaten Rihanna when I heard this…..it really sad. I wonder what Chris Brown thinks of the song. Musically it will be #1 hit…..

Andrew Haigh wrote: you are all reidng to much into the chris brown incident! this song is amazing for her comeback with RATED-R! its gonna go far! & shes not promoting suicide, you all jus read to much into it, she obviously wants to move on from chris brown that friggin idiot but you all keep bringing the situation back up! leave her be shes back doing what makes her happy making music!

Now that some time has passed, how do you feel about the Chris Brown-Rihanna incident? Do you think Brown’s sentence was a fair enactment of justice, or do you think he was cut a lot of slack because of his star status?

What do you think of Rihanna's new music? Does it speak at all about her recovery? Let us know your thoughts below.

-- Kelsey Ramos

Photo: The cover of Rihanna’s new album, “Rated R.” Credit: Def Jam Recordings