Quantcast
Channel: Entertainment - Latest News, Photos And Videos
Viewing all 38214 articles
Browse latest View live

How Important Is It to See Minorities in Movies?

$
0
0
By Jia Ling Guan; she is a 15-year-old sophomore at Kenwood Academy High School in Chicago. She was born in Guandong, China and is a participant in The OpEd Project's Youth Narrating Our World.

I often hear people say, "The black guy in horror movies always dies first!"

But, it's not only the black guy and it's not just the horror movies. African-Americans, Asians, Hispanics, as well as other minorities are rarely chosen as the lead roles in movies, plays and other forms of entertainment. Even cartoons and animated films are white-dominated.


But even if non-whites were chosen for top roles, the whites would usually still be the last ones to die or get hurt in the movie plot.


An exception is Annie in theaters now starring Quvenzhane Wallis and Jamie Foxx in the lead roles, but receiving poor reviews for the remake of the Broadway show.


A 2012 study from University of Southern California's Annenberg School found that in the 100 top-grossing films of 2012, only 10.8 percent of the largest speaking roles were assigned to Black characters. Only 4 percent of those larger roles were Hispanic and 5 percent were Asian. Three quarters or more than 76 percent of all the roles were to white actors.

You'd probably think it's because people of color are underrepresented in Hollywood, and that most directors are white and whites wrote the scripts. That is true.


A UCLA study out earlier this year showed that only 10.5 percent of all lead roles in movies from 2011 were non-white actors. Nearly 88 percent of the directors of theatrical films in 2011 were white. And the writers on those movies were 92.4 percent white, with only 7.6 percent of the writers non-white.


But aside from the under-representation, stereotypes, segregation and other reasons are also parts of the missing equation.


How many times have you seen a movie where the Asians are not nerds or doing kung fu? How many times are black characters there only for comedy relief? Or Hispanic actors as maids and waiters?


Not often and if it were to happen, that would be abnormal and interesting to see.


There is also the difficulty when the film protagonist is not supposed to be white, but cast as white. Jake Gyllenhaal in The Prince of Persia, Benedict Cumberbatch in Star Trek: Into the Darkness and Johnny Depp in The Lone Ranger are just a few examples. The all-white cast of Exodus, has also been widely criticized.

Many people react negatively when they see a character who's not expected to be black, like Rue in The Hunger Games. If you had read the book, you would have known. And it's not surprising because we're so used to having the important characters as white.

The Motion Picture Association of America reported that close to 228 million people in the U.S. and Canada went to the movies last year, spending almost $11 billion on tickets to the movies.


The controversy with Sony Entertainment and The Interview, not withstanding, millions are expected to head to movie theatres this holiday season.


So what does it mean to sit in the movie theater or on your laptop watching new movies over and over and never seeing yourself reflected in the cast?


It means as a non-white you do not have the expectation of your story being told. You will sit through hours of stories starring the dramas, fictions, fantasies and realities of people who are not African-American, Hispanic, Asian-American or of mixed races. They are most often white.


We need to tell new stories. We need to see new actors who look, sound and act like the real America. Racism is not just a concept. It is as staring down at us from the big and small screens.

Day 2 at Santa Barbara International Film Festival!

$
0
0
2015-01-29-IMG_6584.JPG


As always with Film Festivals, you race to go see one film and the room is full so you hop into another theatre, seeing a film you hadn't expected and end up being so glad you did! Such was the case for me yesterday when I saw, "Fair Play", a film from the Czech Republic, directed by Andrea Sediackova. Set in the 80's, the story revolves around, Anna, a young athlete, living with her mother, with hopes to run in the 1984 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles. Anna's coach encourages her to use steroids to enhance her performance with a drug called Stromba. The film centers on Anna, and on her mother, living under the constant watch of some controlling presence, whether it be a coach or the communist government eager to catch subversive activity. Everyone in Anna's life has secrets that they are keeping, the coaches, the doctors, her mother, and her boyfriend. We get to witness Anna's struggle for truth and freedom to be herself, trying to do the right thing, as she is caught in a maze of needs of the people around her.

Directly after seeing that film, I raced back up to the Arlington Theater looking forward to seeing my friend, Mimi deGruy, present the Attenborough Award For Excellence in Nature Filmmaking to the Cousteau family, Jean-Michel, his son, Fabien, and his daughter, Celine. The Arlington was once again packed. I sat with Mimi and her daughter, Frances, for the 3D screening of "The Secret Ocean," before they were called up to present the Award.

2015-01-29-IMG_6598.jpg



Jean-Michel Cousteau introduced the film speaking passionately about his love for the sea and his desire for everyone to marvel at the magical world that he has dedicated his life to. "We are all connected to the sea." He spoke of the programs and capabilities we now have to get closer to the smallest creatures in the ocean through the equipment now available. "I can go deeper and stay longer. I can go down 1000 feet in 5 minutes, spend 10 hours, and come back in 5 minutes!"


We all put on our 3D glasses and watched, "The Secret Ocean," which is the most mesmerizing and amazing film. The camerawork shows stunning close-ups inside a grouper's mouth, a tight shot on a reef, "even if it looks like a plant, it is an animal," and a view of clams that live to be 100 years old that are extraordinary, to name three images in "a sea" of images that the film shows! Fashion designers need only see this film once and be inspired for endless collections! To see a lionfish up this close hearing african drumbeats in the soundtrack, I truly felt that I was on the most extraordinary of safaris! The film is incredible, total utter magic! The narration reminding us, "People protect what they love and we are all connected. We protect the ocean and we enter the future together."

2015-01-29-IMG_6618.jpg



Roger Durling came to the podium again and spoke about his friendship with the late Mike deGruy, one of the greatest underwater cinematographers that ever lived, whose life was dedicated to nature filmmaking and ocean exploration. Mike "was passionate about showing films like this. It was Mike who made this Award possible. He said 'I am friends with David Attenborough and I can convince him to come and receive this Award'. David did come from England! The next year Mike got James Cameron, then Al Gore after that. We very sadly lost Mike in 2012. We need to continue Mike's passion." Roger spoke of all the contributions and work that Mike had made and how much working with him had meant to him. "Tim Matheson, Mike deGruy and I were the best of friends, we were the 3 musketeers," all of them having worked together on many programs as well as sharing friendship. Roger then called Tim Matheson to come and moderate the panel of discussion with the Cousteau family.

2015-01-29-IMG_6622.JPG



Tim ran a lively and all encompassing discussion complete with many film clips. We learned about the work of Jean-Michel, stemming back from his own father, Jacques Cousteau. (Jean-Michel wrote a book about his father, My Father, My Captain. "My father asked me 'can you help me? We have no experience diving in the Indian Ocean.' I had been studying architecture to learn how to build cities under the sea, and I had worked on ships, and I had done a lot of diving in that part of the world." Since Jean-Michel had spent time there, his father wanted him to help him aboard the Calypso. Jean-Michel went to help his father and mother and so continued this great family partnership.

All the Cousteaus work independently on their own projects as well as together. Hearing Jean-Michel speak about Celine and her work and Fabien with his, it is clear to see how much mutual respect is between them. For Celine, it was a trip to the Amazon that her grandfather had taken all the family on in the 80's that had a big impact on her and where her work is focused now. "We all went back to the Amazon 25 years later after our grandfather had taken us. I am obsessed with the Amazon, where the indigenous tribes live." She said the tribes spoke to her saying, "We want the world to know we exist so that we can survive." Celine travels back and forth frequently to the Amazon for work on a documentary that she is making about these tribes.

Her brother, Fabien's work is in a different area. Fabien lived 31 days under the sea as documented in his work with MISSION 31. "It was to mark a step to make people get interested in the ocean through a sense of adventure and we made it interactive. I was an Aquanout! I did 3 years worth of science in 31 days!"

The work of the Cousteau family is multi-generational. Their on-going mission is to "get people immersed in this last frontier on the planet." The three major obstacles Fabien said are pollutants (physical and liquid), climate change and overconsumption. It is important "to teach people and educate them. This is our life support system and why we exist. If we protect the ocean, we protect ourselves."

Jean-Michel added, "Everybody has a heart. Don't point fingers. Reach the heart."

2015-01-29-IMG_6627.jpg


2015-01-29-IMG_6632.JPG




Mimi deGruy came to the podium to present the Attenborough Award. She introduced a clip from David Attenborough congratulating the Cousteau family. Mimi spoke about her late husband, Mike, and how much this work meant to him and how she was happy to present this Award to their good friends, Jean-Michel, Celine and Fabien. Mimi and her daughter, Frances, handed the family their awards. Jean-Michel warmly said, "I want to thank Mimi for being responsible for us receiving this honor tonight."

Celine concluded, looking out to all of us in the audience, "You are part of our family now, too, and hopefully after tonight you were inspired by some piece and hopefully you might go out and cause your 'ripple effect.'"

2015-01-29-IMG_6688.jpg



2015-01-29-IMG_6655.JPG


2015-01-29-IMG_6673.jpg


It was another inspiring day and evening at SBIFF!


Photo credits: Sally Fay

Serious Journalism and That Baby From "American Sniper"

$
0
0
2015-01-29-Babydoll.jpg
This is a fake baby.

(Photo credit: Alena Dvorakova)

Riveted to the screen, I am awestruck by this suspenseful, humanized version of what war does to people when suddenly, my 'out-of-body' cinema experience is jolted back to reality. The scene takes place at home in Texas when Chris Kyle, played by Bradley Cooper, returns from his first tour of duty in Iraq. Sienna Miller, who plays his wife, passes him their newborn son. Cooper holds the baby awkwardly. I look around to see if anyone else is noticing anything peculiar. One woman poked her husband. Someone else pointed at the screen whispering. A man, who was chewing loudly on popcorn, had suddenly stopped. I heard a giggle from a few rows back.


How could this be? "American Sniper" is nominated for six Oscars, including "Best Picture." The film has already won a laundry list of awards from groups like the Broadcast Film Critics Association and the Directors Guild of America. Not only that, wasn't the movie overseen by Clint Eastwood, one of our finest living directors? How such a prop malfunction was made, by such industry geniuses was troubling.
I clung to my "Hooray for Hollywood" optimism. Maybe the little tyke was under the weather. Or just nervous.



When I got home, I checked the Twitterverse and Google. The baby was indeed a fake and I was disillusioned beyond belief. After all, the movie had a healthy budget and all the elements of a blockbuster: suspense, tension, incredible acting, a believable story, sex (tastefully done), violence and it was thought provoking. But the film haunted my mind afterwards for the wrong reason. I tried to focus on the hell that war is and its effects on the family. I tried to understand how a person would be driven to serve four tours of duty in a seemingly endless war. I tried to imagine why a red-blooded American male wouldn't want to stay home and play house with Sienna Miller. But I just couldn't get past the fake baby. How could this happen, Clint? I understand actors are only human and that unavoidable things happen during filming. (I read the baby was out sick.) But couldn't the prop master have taken a walk and found someone wheeling a baby carriage? A trip to the park, fast food joint or the nearest Target would have surely turned up a baby or two. Problem solved. Maybe the production staff didn't think anyone would want to loan their precious offspring, but cooperation surely would have been easy as pie. After all, who wouldn't want their kid to be in a big time movie? Imagine the social media posts from the star struck (and lucky!) parents. That baby would be famous before it spoke its first words.

And then something amazing happened. The baby was interviewed by journalism royalty, the king of serious media, Charlie Rose. When Charlie interviews somebody, they're really important. Not only that, they're really, really real. So my sincere apologies go out to Mr. Eastwood, Mr. Cooper, the prop master at Warner Brothers Studios and anyone else I may have offended. For you non-believers, here's Charlie's discussion with the "Sniper" baby (note: interview does not air in its entirety.)

"Birdman:" A Triumph of Self-Consciousness

$
0
0
If there were an Academy Award for self-conscious film direction, Birdman would win hands down. The movie is shot as if in one continuous, nearly-two-hour take, with occasional changes of scene, but no actual cuts or normal cinematic transitions. This highly contrived and artificial technique necessitates that the camera incessantly follow characters from one location to another, with copious quantities of close-ups, inducing a claustrophobic effect. The net effect is to make the viewer continuously conscious of the camera, rather than the subject matter of the film. It is as if the director is insisting that we acknowledge his artsiness and technical expertise, rather than allowing the camera to work without forcing us to give our attention to it, and therefore to him.

Alejandro Inarritu's self-conscious direction takes other forms as well. His lead character is given to feats of occult prowess, including levitation and telekinesis. For most of the film, these acts occur only when he is alone, which allows the viewer to assume that they are acts only imagined by the character ostensibly performing them. But we cannot know for sure, since the actions are filmed as if they are real, so we are forced to think about the director and wonder what he intends. Later in the film, the character flies through the sky in public, and people in the street notice him. Is this too intended to be the character's imagination? In his coy self-consciousness, Inarritu never lets us know for sure.

Nothing in this film allows us to feel any actual emotional engagement with the characters. All of the actors give outstanding performances, especially Keaton, Norton, and Stone, and much of the dialogue is clever, but no one is sufficiently appealing or authentic to allow the audience to care much what happens to them. The film portrays an abundance of stormy emotion, and yet it is curiously lacking any real heart.

Inarritu self-consciously toys with the audience above all in the concluding scenes. In a cynical ploy, he manipulates the viewers' reaction by presenting an apparent suicide in a particularly dramatic form -- but he does so in a way that the audience is left for long moments not knowing for sure whether the suicide was real or not. This motif would be bad enough if it occurred only once, but Inarritu manages to employ it three times in the last 30 minutes of the film. Once again our attention is drawn to the director rather than to the substance of the film.

Birdman is a feat of technical expertise in search of any real meaning. Its deepest intention seems to be to make us admire Inarritu, and some of the awards the film has won suggest it may have succeeded in that purpose. If so, let us hope he may be satisfied, and may in the future employ his skills in the service of his art, rather than his ego.

Opening Night at the Santa Barbara Film Festival!

$
0
0
2015-01-29-IMG_6562.jpg



2015-01-29-IMG_6571.JPG



Opening Night at the Arlington Theatre on State Street in the heart of Santa Barbara began with a greeting from Helene Schneider, the Mayor of Santa Barbara. Ms. Schneider spoke before a sold-out house of 2200 people. She praised the Executive Director of SBIFF, Roger Durling, "The festival does so much for Santa Barbara. Roger is able to bring together people who shine. Santa Barbara thanks the Board of the Santa Barbara International Film Festival for all their work and contributions. There are 24 Academy Award nominees who will attend the Festival!" Schneider went on to thank UGG Australia as the presenting sponsor. There are 197 films in the festival selected from 3000 entries to be shown during these 12 days this year. Finally, she thanked "the individual who has really brought along the Festival over the last twelve years to where it is today", Roger Durling!

2015-01-29-IMG_6574.JPG




Roger came to the stage and spoke from his heart about how grateful he was to be doing what he loves. "I grew up poor in Panama. I came as an immigrant. My mom always taught me to count my blessings so I am counting my blessings! I am so fortunate to be at this majestic Arlington Theatre. We have 58 countries represented in the festival. We have diverse forms of expression. We are so lucky to congregate and see films. I am so fortunate that self expression is accepted here. Je Suis Charlie. I am so fortunate that you all are here. I encourage you to be bold, be brave, be free! Happy 30th SBIFF!" Then Roger introduced the Director of the Opening Night film, "Desert Dancer," Richard Raymond.

2015-01-29-IMG_6576.JPG





Richard Raymond came to the mike, "This is my first time being a Director here at the Festival. It means so much to follow in the footsteps, standing on the same stage where Scorcese, Ben Affleck and others before me have stood! I want to thank Relativity Films. I want to thank the people that made this film possible. This film was financed by so many brave people. I want to thank the wonderful actors Freida Pinto, Tom Cullen, who just won a SAG Award for his role on Downton Abbey, Reece Ritchie, Nazanin Boniadi, Simon Kassianides. I got the idea for this film because I read an article that told an amazing story of freedom of expression. It was a little like 'Footloose in Iran.'" The story is about Afshin Ghaffarian, who risked everything to be a dancer in his country, Iran, where dance is forbidden. Raymond continued, "Afshin would have loved to be here but he cannot leave the country. He is a political refugee. He did give me a letter to read to you though." Raymond read from the letter where Afshin thanked the cast, thanking them for their tenacity and truth, and wishing them good luck. "You have all my heart with you," he wrote.

"Desert Dancer," tells the moving story of Afshin Ghaffarian, a self-taught dancer, played by Reece Ritchie, who finds a way to express himself through what he loves in spite of the strict Iranian rules and enforcers who threaten him every step of the way. The film has amazing dance performances and compelling music. Freida Pinto is an extraordinary dancer in addition to Mr. Ritchie.

Watching "Desert Dancer", and reflecting upon it afterwards, you can't help but feel gratitude to live in a country where freedom of expression is allowed and celebrated and in our very constitution. The theme of freedom of expression resonated from Roger Durling's introduction earlier in the evening. The value of coming to a film festival like SBIFF is that you get exposed to the hearts of filmmakers from all around the world and you get to see what they have struggled so hard to communicate.

Following the film, people strolled down State Street to The Opening Night Gala at Paseo Nuevo Shopping Center, all outside with music, food and drink. Strobe lights jetting light up to the stars and general excitement all around for the days ahead.

2015-01-29-IMG_6588.JPG


2015-01-29-IMG_6592.JPG



Photo Credits: Sally Fay

7 Celebrities Most Likely to Buy a Home in 2015

$
0
0
Most people buy a home and plan to live in it for at least a few years, but we all know that many celebrities change homes as often as they change outfits. Here are our predictions for stars who are most likely to look for a new address in 2015, based on recent changes in their life, like major movie deals or relationship status updates.

Kate Hudson


2015-01-29-katehudson120970_w1000.jpg

Kate Hudson will most likely be in the market for a new home this year. The actress recently split from Muse frontman Matt Bellamy, who has already moved on to his own bachelor pad in Malibu. Kate Hudson still has the English-style home she purchased with Bellamy in Pacific Palisades, but it wouldn't be a shock if she decided to leave the marital mansion in the dust to pick up something that seems a bit more appropriate for a newly single gal. The couple purchased the home back in 2011 for $5.3 million; the sale of the home alone would certainly give the actress enough dough to work with when seeking a home with enough room for her and her two children.

Mariah Carey


2015-01-29-MAriah_Carey_2005.jpg

Mariah Carey will certainly be in the market for a new abode this year; with her recent split from Nick Cannon, she and her soon-to-be-former hubby will be seeking bachelor and bachelorette pads. Mariah's net worth is about $250 million, which is plenty for a new crib. The marital mansion is on the market for $12.995 million.

Nick Cannon


2015-01-29-Nick_Cannon_2010.jpg

Speaking of Mariah Carey's former beau, Nick Cannon landed a publishing deal with Scholastic to publish an illustrated poetry book for kids. The book is set to be released in March. With the sale of his former home and proceeds from his new book deal, Cannon should be in a good spot to splash out some cash for a rockin' bachelor pad.

Aziz Ansari


2015-01-29-Aziz_Ansari_2012_Shankbone.JPG

Nick isn't the only one getting in on the literary action. Aziz Ansari locked in a profitable book deal this year. Ansari got a hefty sum of $3.5 million as an advance for his book, which talks about living the single life. The comedian currently resides in a lovely 1960s home in Los Angeles, which he scooped up back in 2013 for $2.687 million. We are sure the "Parks and Recreation" star will be looking to upgrade once his book is released in September.

Paul Rudd


2015-01-29-Paul_Rudd_LF.JPG

Paul Rudd is having a pretty good year already. He's the leading man in Marvel's new movie "Ant-Man," and Marvel has a reputation for making actors very rich; Robert Downey Jr. is listed as one of Hollywood's highest paid actors thanks to the comic book company. While Rudd's current home sounds pretty sweet (it has an Irish pub in the basement!), with the extra cash flow he may be thinking about springing for a second place to call home. With a house in New York, we're thinking somewhere a bit warmer. We hear California is nice.

Chris Pratt


2015-01-29-Chris_Pratt__Guardians_of_the_Galaxy_premiere__July_2014.jpg

Chris Pratt is one of those rising stars you just know is about to get even bigger. He started out on the show "Parks and Recreation" but has since climbed to the top where he now sits among the A-listers. Pratt was the leading man in the popular film "Guardians of the Galaxy" and is also the voice of the main character in "The Lego Movie," which grossed $468 million. So what's next? Pratt is set to star in the much-anticipated "Jurassic World," which hits theaters this June. The actor currently lives in a beautiful resort-like home in Los Angeles with his wife, actress Anna Faris. The two purchased the property back in 2013, but we wouldn't be surprised if the couple went for an upgrade now that there is a lot more money coming in.

Taylor Swift


2015-01-29-Swift_performs_in_St._Louis_Missouri_in_2013.jpg

Six months of touring earned Taylor Swift $30 million in 2014; that's $5 million a month! The 23-year-old star is also raking in the big bucks with sponsorships from Keds, Elizabeth Arden and Diet Coke. Swift was also a chart-topper last year with her newest album "1989." Swift currently owns a fitting country-style home in Beverly Hills; maybe we should follow the location of her newest love interest to predict where she will move next.

Follow me on Twitter @AlannaFinnNYC for more celebrity real estate updates.

Like Other Major Events, Grammys Cracking Down on Ticket Scalping

$
0
0
It's a feud that's gone on for decades - the constant battle between primary sellers and scalpers looking to provide the best possible ticket deals for consumers. Mending walls will probably never be built, and the increasing stronghold secondary market resellers have on ticket inventory has now begun to bleed into more exclusive events, much to the chagrin of organizers and marketeers. The Grammy Awards, for instance, is the latest program that's been threatened with a budding ticket resale market, but this year's ceremony has cracked down on scalping with a barrage of lawsuits against resellers.

Enter Craig Banaszewski, the CEO and founder of VIP Concierge, a ticketing company that targets big-name events throughout the U.S. and allows common folk to walk amongst celebrities for a fee. Banaszewski has been the focal point of the Grammy's lawsuits after he was caught reselling fraudulent tickets to the ceremony in 2013. Ticket holders were denied upon entrance because of improper serial numbers, causing eyes to shift towards the shady business Banaszewski was carrying out.

There is a line between scalping and selling illegitimate tickets, and modern technology has become incredibly adept with weeding out fakes in recent years. Super Bowl XLIX tickets on the secondary market have seen prices skyrocket in comparison to years past, which has made anti-counterfeit technology extremely vital to the ticket and purchase security. Thermochromic ink designs and holograms have become commonplace so that any fan with a $10 black light can decipher real from fake. Events like the Grammy Awards, however, are a different animal.

Because scalping at prestigious events like the Grammys is a fairly new concept, counterfeiting hasn't been completely removed from the playing field. Banaszewki's VIP Concierge has been taken through the ringer for their battle with the ceremony and faces a series of lawsuits because of their ripple into the Grammy ticket market.

The company is accused of making references to the Grammy's trademark phrase of "Music's Biggest Night" while also infringing upon exclusive photos from past awards shows and displaying them on its website. Grammy tickets are sold and given exclusively to committee, promotional and sponsorship partners, but the ceremony believes that ticket reselling breaks trust among sponsors. Simply put, buying third-party Grammy tickets will likely place the purchaser in a high-risk situation, so it's better to just watch from the convenience of their couch.

With this year's awards taking place at Staples Center on February 8, it's likely that there will be a new wave or resellers trying to crack the show's elaborate entrance code. With lawsuits abound, however, both scalpers and third-party buyers alike should be aware of the risk they take when taking on the ticket process of the Grammys.

Are British Actors Superiorly Talented and More Desirable, Than American Actors?

$
0
0
It took watching a recent Academy Award nominated film to put forth the following question. Are British actors superior in both talent and desirability, in most cases, than American actors? And it is such a question, which certainly is not the first time it's ever been asked.

A June 27, 2013 BBC America blog at website Anglophenia, both founded and superbly written by Kevin Wicks, asks a somewhat similar question, titled, "Are British Actors Better Trained Than Their American Counterparts?" Within the web-article, Mr. Wicks interviews Edward Kemp, the artistic director of Britain's very sought after and prestigious Royal Academy of Dramatic Art (RADA). The first question put forth to Mr. Kemp, is when Mr. Wicks begins in saying the following, "Many U.S. casting directors believe that British actors are better trained than their American counterparts, use their bodies and voices more effectively, have more facility with accents and are more skilled at comedy. How much do you agree with this?"

Mr. Edward Kemp's response to such a question reveals his professionalism, depth of insight, as well as by no means to demean American actors. Because his answer is primarily based on the response he receives from auditioning potential American students desiring to study at RADA. For according to such feedback from those potential U.S. students, they see the studio based training upon which much of American entertainment is based, both film and TV, as woefully unsatisfying. Yet those same potential U.S. auditioning students see RADA as liberating, in that it offers broader based training, and a superb foundational launch pad to propel one's career into many genre's and different media, which of course does include theatre as well as film and TV.

Perhaps this is why a certain gentleman named Benedict Cumberbatch, who, although in his case, studied acting for theatre at the London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art (LAMDA) according to IMDb, has been in both theatre, TV, film and radio. This also explains why, he can go from playing a villain in the second Star Trek film reboot, Star Trek Into Darkness, to the first slave owner of Solomon Northup in the film 12 Years a Slave, to also playing mathematician Alan Turing in his current Academy Award nominated role in the film The Imitation Game.

Furthermore later into the Kevin Wick's Anglophenia discussion with Edward Kemp, the artistic director says that RADA students, obviously primarily British, get lots of vocal training on accents. So much so, that it is also facilitated and augmented by weekly individual singing lessons. Such training on accents he says, "...develops both their ear and vocal flexibility."

Now, to dispense with the suspense. I've mentioned The Imitation Game, which I have seen. Yet it's not the most recent Academy Award nominated film I have seen. That is referring earlier to the very first sentence, followed by the question, are British actors superior in both talent and desirability, in most cases, than American actors? For the film that birthed that question within myself that I had seen recently, was Birdman.

"Okay now look Darryl, there are no British actors in Birdman," one may say. Well actually there are two, actress Naomi Watts, whose maternal grandmother was Australian, and actress Andrea Riseborough. Only in this particular case it's not also so much the nationality of any actor in Birdman, but more so a terrific scene in the spectacular film. Now a spoiler is definitely ahead. For the scene involves Scottish actress Lindsay Duncan, and recently Academy Award nominated actor Michael Keaton, for which he's already been awarded three Critics Choice Awards (including ensemble), a SAG Award (ensemble) and a Golden Globe all from the film.

Birdman is a dark comedy, as Michael Keaton plays Riggan Thomson, a well-known Hollywood actor who had starred in three blockbuster superhero Birdman films. Yet currently to refresh himself as an actor, he's currently directing and acting in his own drama play during preview nights, before his plays opening night on Broadway. Whereas Lindsay Duncan plays the well-respected, no-nonsense, soft spoken New York Times Theater critic Tabitha Dickinson.

Thomson spots Ms. Dickinson while both are in a bar as she's writing notes. He then joins her to attempt small talk, hopefully to get a decent review from her. Yet she abruptly informs him that she's going to destroy his play, after opening night, even before seeing it. This now mystifies Riggan Thomson. Then she explains why.

She basically tells him that she hates him, for he represents all who came before him. For she sees him as just another creation from the Hollywood factory, producing spoiled and selfish children, all untrained in real art, who all measure their talent only by how well their film does on opening weekends. It's as if Tabitha Dickinson sees herself as a gatekeeper to the theater world. Like a roman praetorian guard, she will protect the sanctity of the theater from the likes of him. All of that angers Riggan Thomson, who tells her that he has risked everything for his play.

A week ago a woman and I discussed Birdman. The woman liked the film, as she saw a relationship theme between Riggan Thomson and his daughter Sam, played by Emma Stone. Whereas I, thought that was only a subplot. For the overall theme the unfolded before me while watching the film, was seeing an actor's attempt to jettison the unwanted label of being typecast.

So this begs another question. Are American actors therefore more susceptible to typecasting, than British actors? For actor Matthew McConaughey speaks of un-branding himself in the November 2014 issue of MAXIM, written by David Swanson, saying on pg. 86, "I put the memo out to my agent, and that was that. It took about a year for the industry to stop sending me any more of the things I'd been doing, and then there was nothing. Bone dry. Nothing." Similarly he tells of un-branding from acting in five romantic comedies in a November 2014 issue of GQ. Yet later, came the $5 million budgeted film Dallas Buyers Club. And we know the rest of that story.

Now we have British actor David Oyelowo, who like Benedict Cumberbatch, he also studied at LAMDA, and plays Martin Luther King Jr. in the current Academy Award nominated film Selma. But before that, he plays an elementary school principal in the sci-fi film Interstellar, also starring Matthew McConaughey. Before that, he was in Lincoln. And before that, there was his role as a P-51 Mustang fighter pilot in the World War II film Red Tails, by George Lucas as executive producer who spent almost $100 million of his own money on the film. He is such an actor, who has been appearing all over the place.

Perhaps also, there's the aspect of one's culture, spoken of by the second commenter to the BBC Anglophenia web article by Kevin Wicks. For the second commenter Andrea says, "...in the UK, acting is taken very seriously and considered as an honored profession." Indeed, we know of two British actresses, Judi Dench and Helen Mirren, whom both had been awarded the male equivalent of Knighthood by Queen Elizabeth II, as Dame Commanders. And we must include Daniel Day Lewis, as the only actor to have won three Best Actor Academy Awards. Having seen him in nine films, The Unbearable Lightness of Being, My Left Foot, The Last of the Mohicans, In the Name of the Father, The Crucible, The Boxer, Gangs of New York, There Will Be Blood and of course Lincoln. He is not just an actor. He is also a Talent Titan.

So again, are British actors superior in most cases than American actors? One gauge of answering such a question, is the voting dollars, euro or whatever, of the public audience.

The Sony Hack, Gender Pay Gap and the Agents' Role

$
0
0
Congrats to Charlize Theron for reportedly negotiating an equal paycheck to her male co-star, Chris Hemsworth, for The Huntsman. According to some reports, Ms. Theron used the Sony Hack to help negotiate the equal deal.

True, knowing what others are being paid helps women achieve equal pay. Prior to the Sony Hack, the actress previously did not have the knowledge, but her agent and/or manager must have had an educated estimate. Knowledge is power in such situations, which is why actors and actresses have managers and agents to negotiate deals. These professionals have the inside scoop because they know their other clients' deals and the other deals done by their agency. How is it that these same agents are able to get better deals when they are representing men?

Are these agents so misogynistic that they are steering their own female clients wrong and losing money in the process? Are these agents turning a blind eye in fear that another actress will take the gig for less? Could it be so malicious that agents are in collusion with the production companies and getting some kind of kickback? I highly doubt it's the latter, but based on this Sony Hack, agents are not doing their jobs for actresses. Jennifer Lawrence and Amy Adams would probably agree.

Regardless the reason for the bad representation, every actress can probably save ten percent in agent fees by negotiating her own deals. Based on what we recently have learned, actresses can't do much worse than their agents. Agents, who are supposed to be good counsel, agents, who are supposed to have clients' backs, should get their acts in gear and start negotiating for their female clients, just as they do for their male clients.

Now, if women with agents are getting such bad deals compared to their male colleagues, what are the average workingwomen to expect? Hopefully, the average workingwomen will know it is not their fault that they are underpaid compared to men. Heck, if the professional agents aren't making it happen, then it is an uphill battle. Still, there are things women can do to help close the gender pay gap. Women should expect the first offer is less than what the men earn. Women should answer: "What the job is worth?" the next time they're asked. Also, "What are you looking to make?"

Women should become informed consumers about what the job is worth by using sites like: Salary.com or Payscale.com. Most importantly, women who hire people should do their best to ensure that they are not continuing the problem.

Why Am I So Hooked On Empire?

$
0
0
2015-01-30-empire_article_story_large.jpg

"Empire" is what everyone told me love was.

It will sneak up on you unexpectedly and surprise you when you are least looking for it.

Comparing "Empire" to love is a little dramatic, but I am hooked. Let's call it infatuation then.

I have to be honest and say I caught on to this show late. Everyone (I mean literally everyone and their mama, my mom called me about it) was suddenly asking:

"Have you watched "Empire"?

I was perfectly content watching what I consider a blessing and a curse of excellent television series cropping up in the last couple of years. It's a blessing because of the obvious, its quality entertainment. A curse because it will sometimes leave me anxious because I have "so many DVR programs to catch up on!"

I saw 50 Cent's not so subtle shots at "Empire," implying the show was copying the hit "Power" and thought -- I watch "Power" anyway so I don't need to watch this.

It isn't the same.

What I think is so powerful about "Empire," which became the number one new show of the season, is that it is a perfect combination of many relevant social factors combined into one show that just happens to work.

To sum up the pilot: Patriach Lucious Lyan is hiding an illness that doesn't give him much time and he realizes he needs to pick one of his three sons to run the business, which is complicated by the release of their mother Cookie (Taraji Henson), from prison.

The shows manages to discuss just about EVERY social issue going on currently without losing a foundation:

Lucious Lyon has a major illness he is trying to fight (ALS) and three sons each fighting for his musical empire. I established this right? Good, but the breakdown of the illness and the family hits on every news package we see at night and every article we read online during the day.

In addition, siblings pitted against each other is a tale as old as time but this time, it's told in a modern way that is surprisingly unpredictable.

Just when I thought oldest son Andre (Trai Byers) who has the Ivy League education would obviously be the successor (but has no musical talent), the show introduced his bipolar disorder that for now, he keeps hidden from everyone but his wife.

Of course a person with a mental illness can run a business, but not everyone has Lucious as their father.

The oldest son is also in a interracial marriage, a social component at the moment being that 1 in 4 marriiages are interracial -- but what's nice about the show is that yes, mother cookie brings it up once, but its not a topic that's really even important to the show.

The unimportance of that factor makes it important.

The middle child Jamal (Jussie Smollett) is gay and at constant battle with his father who can't accept him. Jamal has the musical talent, but is basically treated as the stepchild. Actually not basically, his father literally dumped him in a trash can in a flashback when Jamal put on his mother's high heels as a kid. Jamal seems to be level-headed and also has the talent -- but dear old dad has said he will never let his gay son take over.

The youngest son Hakeem (Bryshere Gray), has the musical talent but he is a loose cannon. In a quality Hakeem moment, he gets drunk, pees on the floor of a four star establishment and then yells at the people eating for looking at him. In the same moment, he also proceeds to call President Obama a sell-out as his friends record the moments that now forever live in infamy -- on their cell phones. It ends up going viral on social media (of course).

What I think makes the show great is that it seems real. We all know it's a scripted show and that I will probably never have anywhere as much money as Lucious, but the characters are so complex that they do seem like people you would know.

It's Shakespearean without being old, the three sons battling and also a battle for control from the plotting wife.

The cast makes these characters come alive, especially the fantastic Taraji Henson (Cookie), who I believe otherwise would be a hated character if played by anyone else.

Lastly of course, is the music! It's a music show that (gasp) actually has good music in it.

So, before someone else asks you, have you seen "Empire"?

Kat Dahlia's My Garden Review

$
0
0
2015-01-29-th5.jpg


She blew us away with the her 2013 single "Gangsta" and landed on the Latin Airplay chart with "Crazy." Now two years after signing with music label Vested in Culture and Epic records, Kat Dahlia has released her highly anticipated debut album My Garden.

After three release date changes, a 2013 DUI arrest, and a 2014 musical hiatus (due to a cyst on her vocal cord), the Miami native has plenty to sing about. And while many will attribute the abusive relationship she was in after moving to New York City as the inspiration behind her debut album, her music is much more than just some battle wounds.

It's sort of all over the place -- and it's not such a bad thing. Drawing from her Cuban roots in "Tumbao", a spin on Celia Cruz's "La Negra Tiene Tumbao," and providing a dance worthy hip-pop anthem with "Clocks," a song inspired by New Year's Day, Dahlia is a multi-layered artist that can make it in the pop charts with her song "I Think I'm In Love" and score an adult contemporary hit with the song "Lava."

Each song is like an audio recording from a church confessional, expressing confusion, anger, hope, and happiness. It's a musical diary, or garden, that makes you feel like your face-to-face with Dahlia, hearing her story live and in person. Maybe that's what makes her album relatable, no matter what walks of life you have been through.

Listen to Kat Dalhia's debut album by clicking here: https://play.spotify.com/user/katdahlia/playlist/4fZe2ILKKdZWWVod7PVSch

If E.T. Comes Calling

$
0
0
So what happens if the aliens land? Here, on Earth.

I'm not talking about detecting a radio signal or a laser flash from hundreds of light-years away. I'm speaking of visitors who actually set their boots on the ground. What do we do?

It may surprise you to learn that there's precious little preparation for such an eventuality.

Now, if you're among the many tens of millions of Americans who think aliens are already afoot in the land, you're confident you know humanity's reaction. Scoffing denial.

But face it: Few scientists are convinced by the evidence offered for visitation. So let's consider the question assuming that the extraterrestrials aren't here.

First, there's the popular take. Thanks to a half-century of movies featuring aliens who've steered themselves to our watery world, the public reckons that a landing will play out in only one of two ways: (1) The whole incident, which is usually high on weirdness and low on damage to humans, will be covered up by a paranoid government (think UFOs), or (2) the aliens haven't come in peace and will proceed to either ravage the planet or remodel it to suit themselves (think Independence Day).

But limiting ourselves to this pair of scenarios is cramping our style. So here's another idea: In a movie being screened at this year's Sundance Film Festival, Danish director Michael Madsen lays out a more cerebral storyline, and one that might be more realistic. In The Visit, a fictional piece presented as documentary, real scientists, politicians, military types, and United Nations officials sit behind their stunningly neat desks and mull over what to do about a house guest who's arrived from the stars.

Of course, before the mulling begins, an off-screen voice offers a solemn disclaimer: "As far as we know, no alien has ever landed on Earth." This will undoubtedly cause audiences in New Mexico to twist in their seats, but maybe Madsen wants to forestall the misunderstandings that followed Orson Welles' 1938 War of the Worlds broadcast: fiction mistaken for fact.

After that, the film showcases a string of experts ruminating on the difficulties posed by a non-human species landed in the front yard. They mostly address two concerns: How do we handle the public, and what kind of conversation can we have with our guests?

The former, of course, is a well-known hot-button issue. In fact, and despite the implications of the film, neither world governments nor the United Nations are primed to deal with beings who don't have DNA. Indeed, they've shown essentially no interest in this issue; for example, the UN has neither adopted nor deliberated protocols to deal with a SETI signal, let alone considered their actions in case of a physical visit. The UN has plenty of fish to fry, but they're not alien fish.

In The Visit they suddenly are interested. There's repeated high-level talk of quarantining the evidence and telling the public as little as possible (conspiracy fans shake their heads knowingly), all in the interests of security and the equanimity of the populace. Unsurprisingly, this is a view more congruent with continental attitudes than American: In Europe the experts, including governments, are presumed to know best.

But in fact, and refreshingly, security's not much of an issue. Neither public panic nor a military threat occur. Despite abundant footage of tanks urgently shambling through the forests, there's no face-off with the extraterrestrials.

You probably have your own views on whether visitors would be benign, but in any case the lack of conflict is certainly for the best. If the UN (or, for that matter, the Pentagon) doesn't have a manual for dealing with extraterrestrial invasion sitting on the shelf, it's not only because these organizations figure the chance of that happening is remote. It's also because there's not much they could do. If aliens have the technology to visit Earth, they're at least centuries beyond us technologically. Picture the asymmetry of the Christian crusaders facing a contemporary military. If E.T. is here to cause trouble, about the best you could do is negotiate.

The real essence of the encounter pictured in The Visit is not in such mundane matters as whether or not the visitor is going to raze our infrastructure but the sociological implications. "How does your mind work?" the experts ask. "Do you have imagination? A concept of good and evil?"

What we really want to know is how much they are like us. Sure, maybe it would be nice to understand their rocket technology or ask if they can tell us what really happens at the center of a black hole, but the essential value of extraterrestrial contact would be to calibrate ourselves.

This is a more nuanced line of inquiry. The Visit, alone among the many films dealing with putative alien encounters, takes it on.

The Visit is ascetic, spare, and slow-moving -- kind of like space itself. It makes Last Year at Marienbad look like an action film. But the purpose of the movie is not simply to tickle your reptilian brain but to prompt you to muse on what you'd want to know about a being from another world with its own environment and its own evolutionary history. In this sense The Visit dares to go where no sci-fi film has gone before.

American Horror Story's Unfulfilling Smorgasbord of Gore

$
0
0
2015-01-30-ahs_401.jpg

This year's American Horror Story gave us a serial killer clown, a serial killer "song and dance man," two pinheads, a tattooed seal, a bearded lady, a three-breasted woman, a double amputee, a lobster-clawed bad-boy, a psychotic magician and his malicious dummy, a two-headed twin, a lizard lady, the smallest woman in the world, the tallest woman in the world, past and present and future decades, snuff flicks, a kid who eats chicken heads for fun, a man with a 13-inch dick -- about the only thing that wasn't actually exposed on the show -- S&M, tar and feathering, and mass murders that included the cutting off of limbs, slit throats, drowning, beheadings, shooting rampages, sawing a body in half, and buckets of blood And this was before the fat lady didn't sing. Kind of a surprise as many of the leads did.

Subtitled, appropriately, Freakshow, creators Ryan Murphy and Brad Falchuk threw in almost every horror staple except the evil kitchen sink; they came close with a Tupperware Party massacre. But they did leave out one essential ingredient necessary for horror: Terror. For every sawed off limb or bullet to the brain or multiple stabbing, Freakshow never made your heart race or lead you to check under your bed or double bolt the door locks.

The only true pulse-racing scene from Season Four involved no gratuitous mutilation, no gunshots, and no blood. When the Strongman (Michael Chiklis) strangled Ma Petite (Jyoti Amge), the scene worked because of what it didn't show: Gore. The buildup to her death, ending with the flicker of her tiny feet as she struggled for life against a reluctant killer, made us squeamish, holding our breath and hoping, desperately, that he'd change his mind and set her free.

Way before Janet Leigh stepped into Psycho's shower, the ability to scare viewers has usually required placing the audience in the victim's mind, triggering our own haunted visions of being terrorized, whether by a slow capture or a hidden stranger, or an unexplained bump in the night. If you take a young woman and place her in a magician's box and slice her in half so her guts spill out -- yeah, that happened, by a diabolically good Neil Patrick Harris, and it was displayed so graphically it could have been labeled gore-porn -- then we lose the fear and end up with nothing but a bellyache.

Had we been kept in the dark about that magic trick, either by not knowing if the murder would succeed or by shielding us from the crime, with a simple trickle of blood or reaction shots from the crowd, our mind could have played its own evil tricks. Alfred Hitchcock knew instinctively what American Horror Story has never understood, that implication is everything.

That's not to say that the critics, who are as rabid in their dislike of this season as Joni Ernst is to fact checkers, are correct in labeling Freakshow a disaster. Quite the opposite: It was a literal carnival of twisted fun, led by the marvelous Jessica Lange in a role so borderline camp any less of an actress would have turned it into the kind of Marlene Dietrich parody not seen since Madeline Kahn Lili Von Shtupp'ed us in Blazing Saddles. Each episode gave us an orgasm of art direction and staging, some wonderful performances (Kathy Bates and Sarah Paulson are two, or perhaps three, further examples of the talent so common on AHS), and tongue-in-cheek homages to all the horror classics us freak geeks grew up watching.

Freakshow, rather, became the TV version of Madonna's Sex phase. (A couple of scenes even resembled the "Erotica" video.) Intentionally or not, Murphy and Falchuk have tried to outdo each year's season to such an extreme that the shocks are no longer shocking and the unpredictable is as predictable as the gore. Like Lady Gaga's Artpop, it was also hyped so much before its debut that anything short of the original Twin Peaks was bound to disappoint. Word to David Lynch: Don't get us too excited about the TP reboot until we've actually seen it.

In the need to provide a smorgasbord of thrills, the writers also lost their narrative. Season One had a fairly simple storyline of a somewhat unhappy family who unwittingly move into a haunted house. It had its problems, most notably that the two leads were one-dimensional and unlikable, and it had its pluses; cue Jessica Lange in what has still been her best role in the series. Season Two, Asylum, set in the 1960s, went way over the top with its monsters and aliens diversions, but it managed to tie up things up beautifully by the end, aided by a delicious Adam Levine-starring, modern-day framework horror movie staple. It was a brilliantly executed arc, and touched on the psychological horrors of homophobia, racism, anti-Semitism, the Catholic Church, and xenophobia in all its ugly, paranoid forms.

Coven, the series' third installment, is when the writing became the casualty. Set in modern-day New Orleans, the coven of witches started out as almost teen-horror flick fare, then tossed in Frankenstein's monster gone sexual amuck, zombies that were more "Thriller" than Walking Dead, and characters who died and came back to life so many times it was like watching Liza Minnelli's career. Considering the penchant for bringing in gay icons like Stevie Nicks and Patti Lupone, more for show than anything else, that analogy is more apt than it is bad pun.

Still, Coven, like the other three seasons, had great moments, and is a hundred times better than most horror movie offerings. Cinema's dummy Annabelle has nothing on Doogie's dummy Marjorie. As for TV, last summer's The Strain was pure B-movie stupidity, yet no one seems to be in an uproar about that zombie-vampire dud. "Pretty Girl" from season one, Kathy Bates' Obama TV watching and Jessica Lange's "Knotty Pine!" hellish end in Coven; the decadence is often as delicious as it is disturbing.

By the time Freakshow rolled into town, the show added yet another bizarre turn. Lange's Elsa Mars sang David Bowie's "Life on Mars," no matter that the show takes place in 1952 Florida. It was a seminal moment, defying every rule about what makes clever horror. They also brought in Twisty the Clown, who stabbed a happy couple in the park, via Zodiac, and a sweet, misunderstood young psychopath named Dandy (Finn Wittrock). Add sort-of Siamese twins Dot and Bette and those Brian De Palma Sisters split screens, and the story line looked like The Cyclone of theme park attractions.

The ride fell short after the Halloween episode, which culminated in Twisty's death, quickly turning into a hodgepodge of thriller clichés and meandering storylines that felt like they were written on the set, so many shocks and gory deaths, and enough red herrings to fill up the Everglades.

The murder of the police officer on Episode One never resolved, nor did the framing of Jimmy for the massacre he did not commit, the final Meep-ish fate of Stanley (he of the above-mentioned gigantic organ, which itself was merely a peepshow tease that served no other purpose than to simulate sight gags), even the need to bring in the fat lady, except to make up for other characters killed off to early.

The worst example of misguided horror had Matt Bomer make an appearance as a gay prostitute and the Strongman's love interest, who ends up as one of Dandy's too-many victims. Beginning with the here-out-of-place Roxy Music tune that almost absolved the imperative period motif needed for the time period, the scene played out like a spreadsheet.

Dandy meets hustler, Dandy flirts with hustler, Dandy takes hustler to the woods, Dandy makes hustler undress, Dandy stabs hustler multiple times, there is no time for registered fear or bewilderment or hope for hustler, Dandy dismembers hustler. Zero tension existed in the exchange between hunter and prey, and they could have taken a commercial break in between obligatory slasher shots. And used the extra buckets of blood for the next ten remakes of Carrie.

By the season finale, which began with Dandy murdering almost the entire cast -- now there's a quick fix to rid the writers of pesky denouement -- a storyline for Lange's Elsa Mars came full circle, which, satisfying or not, at least gave the impression that she was the one character who'd been pre-programmed in the creators' minds. Most of the other characters and plots were hacked off before their time, along with that wonderful split screen, and the songs. By the time Jimmy auto-tuned Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit," for no apparent reason, it was painfully clear that that motif needed to return to the land of those other freaks on Murphy's Glee.

Freakshow ended like that deserted, eerie Ferris Wheel that stood on the edge of the set and no one ever rode. It looked fantastic and you kept waiting for someone to take it for a spin, but it was ultimately an ornate piece of furniture that had no apparent reason for being there in the first place.

Before anyone gives up on the show's future, it pays to remember what the show did provide. In addition to keeping the horror movie genre alive and, if not well, than thriving, it employed several handicapped or otherwise physically limited actors who were great in their roles. It gave us Twisty and Dandy and Dot and Bette, a beautiful episode involving the fate of Pepper, and periodic scenes and segments that enticed and enthralled, and reminded us that the real freaks are so often the ones in charge of law and order and conventional wisdom.

By next season the backlash will have subsided, and the hype, hopefully, toned down, the audiences' expectations dimmed but not lost. The people behind the curtain of American Horror Story have been given the opportunity to do something unheard of in their pantheon of dread: Go back to basics, place the story in front of the pyrotechnics, and give us a magic trick that's at the center of all great horror; a scare so good we don't notice how it was done.

Atwitter With Dan Stevens: House of SpeakEasy

$
0
0
"Are there any thespians in the house?" asked Simon Doonan at City Winery for the second annual House of SpeakEasy gala on Wednesday night, looking for sympathy. The writer and window dresser long associated with Barney's (he's now the store's creative ambassador at large), had launched into his story about having been tapped for the part of Nigel in the movie of The Devil Wears Prada, a good choice in everyone's estimation, but he had reservations. "It's the role of the helpful homosexual," he quipped, "and I'm not that helpful." Concluding they were merely picking his brain, "Nigel" did in fact go to a thespian, Stanley Tucci, and yes, there were at least three thespians present in a roomful of writers and other book lovers: Uma Thurman, Jim Dale and Dan Stevens.

Riffing on the theme of Runnin' Wild, Doonan was one of three featured performers for the event celebrating an organization dedicated to supporting writers, building new literary audiences, and connecting the two in entertaining ways. Another speaker was Susan Fales-Hill, a memoirist and writer for television who began her career as an apprentice on The Cosby Show. A mixed salad of genetic material, she revealed that though she is married for 18 years to the same man, and therefore not wild in the least, she secretly yearns for Downton Abbey's Mr. Bates. Only Dan Stevens from that cast, a heartthrob to many as the ill-fated Matthew Crawley, attended with his wife Susie Hariet. A sometime writer, known to tweet, he's editor-at-large of a literary magazine, The Junket.

Humorist P. J. O'Rourke went wild on the subject of baby boomers' absorption in the self. This entertainment was leavened by Jim Dale's skillful recitation of familiar quotes from Shakespeare, two of John Dewar and Son's Last Great Malts, Aberfeldy and Craigellachie single malt whiskies, and a literary quiz masterminded by the evening's M. C. Amanda Foreman. A mother of five who goes by the name of Bill, Foreman's latest credit is with BBC2. She will present a show called The World Made by Women, based on a book of the same title that will be published by Random House in 2016.

Thank goodness! The word is alive and well!

A version of this post also appears on Gossip Central.

The Loft Is So Much Better Than You Think It Is Going to Be

$
0
0
The Loft is a surprisingly entertaining film that keeps the audience in the dark as to its villain(s) until the very end. The fact the ending is logical and difficult to anticipate makes this movie an above average feature. There is also some solid acting from a cast not particularly known for the type of roles they are inhabiting.

The premise of the film is that five friends partner up to buy a loft where they can have complete privacy. Vincent (Karl Urban) is the man with the plan but his buddies Luke (Wentworth Miller), Marty (Eric Stonestreet) and Philip (Matthias Schoenaerts) eagerly commit to their share of payment and accept their keys. All of the men are married but this does not seem to be a problem except for Chris (James Marsden) who intends to be faithful to his wife (Rhona Mitra). His fidelity lasts until he meets Anne (Rachel Taylor) and falls completely in lust.

Now all five men are using the lift for their various trysts. Everything is going smoothly until one morning they discover a body in the bed. Since there is no sign of a break in and the alarm code has been entered they become suspicious of each other. Still all claim complete innocence, but in this film no one is who or what they claim to be.

Both Urban and Marsden have more screen time than the others so they could be considered the leads. However in this movie the supporting players get to have the meatier scenes. Stonestreet who is best known for his current role on Modern Family as Cameron, is a complete surprise here as the drunken, woman chasing Marty. Equally good is Miller, who once starred in the Fox series Prison Break. Here he is an intellectual and also a shy man.

The movie operates with a present day story interspersed with numerous flashbacks. In many movies this has proven to be an annoying way of telling a story and I generally prefer a linear approach. In this film, however, the back and forth storytelling works. Each flashback provides another peeling back of a layer of deception. There is one "aha" moment after another.

In The Loft movie the women are not the prominent players but Isabel Lucas and Taylor, who play Sarah and Anne, manage to make their presence known. Both are beautiful women and that adds to the validity of their roles.

The movie is rated R for violence, profanity and nudity.

The Loft arrived with little advance fanfare so it might not even be on your entertainment radar. If you like movies that keep you in the dark until the reveal then this is a movie you want to see. Believe me, it is so much better than you think it is going to be ,

I scored The Loft a high up 7 out of 10.
Jackie K. Cooper

Here's Everything You Need to Know About What's Going on With Bruce Jenner in One Sentence

$
0
0
No matter how many outlets -- from trashy gossip rags to (supposedly) reputable entertainment magazines -- make claims about Bruce Jenner's current "journey," as Kim Kardashian recently put it, citing however many anonymous sources "close to the family" (even if those sources turn out to be the family itself, which can often be the case), let's remember that Jenner has said nothing about what is happening and this entire situation -- whether it's true that Jenner is transgender or not and whether it's a strategic publicity campaign or leaked info or totally untrue -- paints being trans and coming out as trans as something that's rooted in and deserving of rumors and secrecy and shame and that isn't good or helpful or healthy for any of us.

Also on The Huffington Post:

Why Aren't All Commercials As Good As The Super Bowl Ones?

$
0
0
From a car-starting Darth Vader kid, to a football playing Betty White, to a horse befriending dog, Super Bowl ads have entertained, shocked, and even moved us. Even ads from decades ago still have us talking and laughing, such as the 1984 Apple ad, the 1992 Pepsi Cindy Crawford ad, and the 1993 MJ v. Larry Bird ad.

This has left many asking: Why aren't all commercials as good as the Super Bowl ones? If business can make good and even great ads, why don't they always do so?

To answer this question we need to consider the real purpose of an advertisement. When we do this, we find an answer and get an important business lesson.

The primarily purpose of an advertisement is to be effective, not good.

Most of the time, for ads to be effective the ads don't need to be "good" or "quality." Normal ads might even be more effective if they lack the good qualities and complexities we see and love in Super Bowl ads.

It must be remembered that the Super Bowl is a rare case. Here, the audience is actually paying full attention and wanting to enjoy and judge the ads. This allows the ads to be complex and nuanced. Further the discussion and judging culture around the Super Bowl ads necessitates quality to get a positive "buzz."

In general though, when watching Rachel Ray, Big Bang Theory, Friends, or most any other show, things are much different.

Normally, businesses have to fight to win the attention of highly distracted TV viewers, who are often channel surfing or multitasking. In these cases, even if viewers dislike the ads and find them annoying, the ad can still be effective if the ads increase awareness, gets stuck in viewers' memories, or slips in unconsciously.

Daily advertisements must deal with viewers who are often not even looking at the screen as they play on their computers, clean, or get ready for work. This means the ads cannot be like the "artsy" ads that grace Super Bowl timeouts. Instead the ads must be loud, aggressive, and full of brand references.

Also most ads get heavy rotation. This means the ads need to be effective over relentlessly viewing. Many Super Bowl ads rely on a twist, shock factor, or a heartfelt narrative. Excessive viewings of these types of ads would lose value quickly and could even retroactively degrade the value. Super Bowl ads are like an artsy song while everyday ads are like the second radio single from any Maroon 5 album--mundane but infinitely digestible.

When we contrast Super Bowl ads with normal ads we learn a powerful business lesson: Being effective does not always mean being quality. It's a lesson many of us find hard to swallow. But it's bitter pill we all need to take.

Quality has its place in TV advertising, but so does annoyingly effective mediocrity. Unfortunately, the latter is usually the norm. However, we can all be thankful that for one evening each January, the stars align such that what makes an advertisement effective is also what makes it enjoyable.


------------------
Troy Campbell is a marketing researcher at the Duke University Fuqua School of Business and Center for Advanced Hindsight.

You might also enjoy his articles on:

Marketing Soccer to Americans
Master the New Science of Business Psychology in 5 Steps
The Psychology of 2014: Understanding Protests, Ice Buckets, Taylor Swift and More

Interview: Director Kevin Macdonald on Black Sea

$
0
0
Kevin Macdonald directed one of my absolute favorite movies of the last ten years, the twisty political thriller State of Play. As such, I was especially excited when I had opportunity to chat with the director about his latest project, Black Sea (now in theaters). The film stars Jude Law as Robinson, the civilian skipper of a beat-up old submarine, leading a crew of English and Russian seamen on a trek to lost Nazi gold in the middle of the titular body of water. Naturally things don't go entirely to plan. What follows are some highlights from my conversation with Mr. Macdonald, covering State of Play, Black Sea, shaping the film's main character with Jude Law, the differences between working in and out of the studio system, and more:

Right up top, I want to say that I'm a huge, huge fan of State of Play. This is a movie that I screen in my classes, and I have been screening for the past six years.

Well, that's very good because, yeah, I think that movie didn't quite get the reception I would've liked for it, but people didn't really understand what to me seemed like such an important issue, the death of the newspaper and the death of good reporting.

That's exactly the context in which I show it. I think it's almost like an artifact. I think ten years from now, or even sooner, we could look at it like a memorial for the way newspapers used to be.

Exactly. But it's funny because at the time, I thought, you know, it's such an important issue, and that people would really talk about that when it was released, but nobody really did. I was surprised by that because I thought the people who should talk about it are journalists, and they're the ones reviewing it and talking about it. It didn't really catch on. Maybe it's just the wrong movie at the wrong time.

Certainly I've been a one-man committee trying to get the word out about it.

Well, I appreciate that. It's always nice when your orphaned children find a parent somewhere.

That's a good metaphor for it, absolutely. Now, in terms of Black Sea, obviously, this is slightly different from State of Play

Very different, yeah.

But I do see some similarities in that it is an ensemble piece.

It's also kind of -- there's sort of a similarity but I'm stretching it in that it's about obsession, and about somebody who does a job really, really well and who may not have a job for that much longer. And in a way, his job gets in the way of him having an ordinary life. I think with Russell Crowe's character [in State of Play] and Jude Law's character, what's central to this is the idea that a lot of people, particularly men, can take their jobs so seriously, and the jobs take over their lives.

And when they don't have a job anymore they lose their sense of self and self-respect. And they can feel very angry about that and very resentful. And this sort of -- I guess it's the 99% versus the 1% kind of feeling, so that tied into it as well, feeling like they're being ripped off by the system, and they're suffering and the 1% seems to be getting richer and richer, and everybody else isn't. So, there's some relationship there.

And what you've just described is really the heavy emotional and sort of thematic undercurrent of this story.

You know, we tried to sort of, I guess, weight what's otherwise, hopefully, an entertaining thriller with some thematic undercurrents that are there. If you want to go in that direction as you're watching it, you can. But I think also, I hope that the audience will watch and appreciate it just as a piece of entertainment, as a kind of thrill ride.

What were the roots of the story in that sense? Did you go in kind of wanting to do kind of a Treasure of the Sierra Madre type thing?

Yeah, that was kind of the idea from the beginning. It was inspired by this Russian submarine accident that happened in the year 2000, the Kursk disaster, where some submariners ended up at the bottom of the sea, the Barents Sea in Russia, and they couldn't be rescued even though they were only 100 meters down. And they suffocated and died, and I thought that's a horrible way to go but it'd be an interesting scenario for a movie about a bunch of people stuck at the bottom of the sea and what happened to them.

What are they doing there? And I thought maybe they're looking for treasure, and then this idea came along. What if you made a version of The Treasure of the Sierra Madre on a submarine? That was kind of the pitch that I took to the writer Dennis Kelly, who at that time was best known as a playwright. He's now written a musical, Matilda, which he won a Tony for last year. He's written this very interesting series, Utopia, which is a dark and fascinating, conspiracy kind of thriller series.

I read in the press notes that you made a conscious choice that this would not be a military sub.

Yeah, I thought that that was one of the things we could do differently. I guess when you do a genre film like this, you're torn in two directions. One, you've got to be, to some degree, faithful to the genre. There's certain things that one wants to have in a submarine movie. But also, at the same time you want to go the other way, which is to do things differently. And one of the things that's never really been done to my knowledge is like a non-naval, a non-military submarine film. These guys are ex-Navy. They've all been in the Navy but now they're not particularly thriving.

Obviously, Jude Law is the head of the ensemble but did you worry about us getting enough of a connection with the characters? Especially with the Russian characters, who we don't even get to share the language.

Well, yes and no. Obviously, in an ensemble that is always a risk, especially one as big as this, but I figured that you get in touch with, hopefully, a few of them. But actually, I kind of like the -- the sort of movies that inspired this, things like The Wages of Fear and Sorcerer, its remake which was done by William Friedkin. You discover a character through the action and you observe people, and you're not told a lot about who they are. You have to just sort of imagine.

You know, like in life, you piece together their stories. And I kind of like the idea of it being like that, that it's not sort of given to you on a plate, but you're going to see people and you get little clues as to who they are but you don't know who they are. Except perhaps Jude, as you gradually go through the film, you get a clearer and clearer idea of who he is and what motivates him.

I was wondering if you could talk about that. What was your process like as far as getting Jude Law involved, and also, constructing the character with him?

Well, Jude was obviously not an obvious person to have in the role. He's not the first person you'd think of as an authoritative, blue collar, tough working guy. That's the opposite of the description of Jude Law, you would think. So, I didn't have anyone in mind for the role, and Jude happened to read it. We share an agent in L.A. He happened to read it and got in touch and said he liked it.

And I thought, well, if there's one thing I've learned in my career, it's if somebody interested, they may well have something in them that really will work for this, and you shouldn't discount anyone. So, I went to see him and we started talking about it, and I realized that he was very, very serious about wanting to do a kind of transformative performance.

And that's very exciting, when you see an actor who really wants to change themselves and throw themselves into the part completely. So, we met a few more times, and then I cast him, and then we worked together on it for several months. And he worked with a voice coach to learn his voice and to learn this very difficult Aberdeen Scottish accent.

He did weights, these particular weights to build up his upper body and his forearms, so he looked more kind of sailor-y. He changed his posture, shaved his head. He went on a real submarine for five days with the Royal Navy, the only one of us who did that. He went out on the water for five days. So, he really threw himself into it, and I think he gives a performance unlike anything he's ever done before, and I think he really pulls it off. I'm thrilled with it.

I remember reading a quote from somebody awhile ago, that eventually, all leading men get to become character actors.

I hadn't heard that but that's very interesting. I mean, I was talking to someone else earlier what kind of films I'd seen and liked that influenced this. One of them I really like is Run Silent, Run Deep. That movie has Burt Lancaster and Clark Gable, and it's to me one of the great Clark Gable performances because it's so different. It's a bit like what Jude's done because it's so different than the leading man, sort of matinee idol that you expect Clark Gable to be. He plays this quite dark, obsessive and bitter, it's kind of a Captain Ahab figure.

And he's kind of lost his looks a bit, and it's really, it's a strong performance. So, that makes that similar to what Jude is doing, and I think another thing, as you get older, you have to, I think, learn your craft better and be more interested in just the acting because you're not going to get by on your looks anymore. Although, having said that, I think if you look back on Jude's career, you can see that there's a real pattern of him doing kind of really interesting character parts, whether it be in Ripley or whether it be in playing the assassin in Road to Perdition or whether it be Karenin in Anna Karenina. There's a few other I can't remember but he's done this handful of kind of interesting character parts and he's always been really, really good at them.

I totally agree with that. I think in terms of what he did here, it felt very ego-free.

Yeah, and I think one of the things I loved about working with him was that he is ego-free. It's like working in theatre. You know, in theatre, the actors are there to work and to explore the character and to really act. And that's what Jude is like. You can say anything to him. In film sets, normally, with particular stars, there's all those egos going around and all that sense of you can't really say anything too negative, so you have to go about it in a very subtle way. With Jude, it just felt like we were working together. Let's work together and try and make this good.

Expanding on what you just said, I would love to get your insight into the difference between making a more traditional studio film versus something that's more independent.

Well, obviously, I've only really made one studio movie, which was State of Play.

In a funny way, that was not representative at all because it's a funny example because it's based on this British TV series.

Which is a great show by the way.

It's very, very good. But the British TV series is pure entertainment, where the Hollywood movie actually has something to say. It's about journalism, and so, that's kind of the oddity. It's not...it's probably a more socially engaged work, the movie, than the TV show, and that's not what you expect of Hollywood. But having said that, when I worked on this movie, we had a very low budget but because we had Jude, I didn't have pressure to put other stars into it.

I was able to cast people who were right for the role. I could get the best character actors who were going to look the part and act the part, and be fantastic to work with, and that's what I did. And I really enjoyed that. And I think, for me, one of the pleasures of this movie is just seeing these different character actors doing their little turns and bringing these three characters to life in a way that's very subtle. Dennis Kelly hasn't given them kind of big, character-revealing moments all the time, but there's those little dollops where you're understanding who they are and what drives them.

In big picture terms, the submarine genre is very much a thing that people keep going back to. It's sort of an evergreen. What have you learned about the submarine genre's appeal?

Well, I think the submarine genre and the space movie are very similar. Interstellar in a kind of way is a submarine movie, in some ways. And I think that in some ways, Alien is very like a submarine movie. I think that it's the idea of being in a vessel which is your ark. Without that vessel, you are going to die. The environment is so unfriendly, and you are somewhere where you wouldn't survive without that vessel.

So, the vessel and its safety becomes of absolute importance, and the claustrophobia of that environment and the worry that you have as a crew member of what happens if the captain goes crazy, what happens if he makes the wrong decision, are we all going to die? That builds up a sense of psychological intensity and concentration in these movies, which means that you see both the best and the worst of human nature occurring in them. I think just because of the compression of psychology in the submarine, the sense of space, the claustrophobia of the space and the sense of the precariousness of life in that environment.

********

Many thanks to Mr. Macdonald for his time. Check out Black Sea at a theater near you, and listen to the latest MovieFilm Podcast via the embed below to hear the audio from this interview:


FACE IT: Let's Talk About Talking About Sex

$
0
0
The New York Times recently led its "Review" section with a very long, data-filled summation of where men and women stand on the subject of sex. Alongside pieces on "How Auschwitz is Misunderstood" and "Who Will Rule The Oil Market," you could learn that "one of the more common questions for Google is "How big is my penis?" and that "women show a great deal of insecurity about their behinds."

Was the newspaper of record--the one that still resists reporting gossip--finally getting down and dirty? Even while cloaking those 'he says, she says' numbers in so-called academia? (Would you tell a pollster the truth on how many times a week?) Forget that there was little context to the survey, or that it felt excruciatingly intrusive. The truth is, it was yet another public step into an area many feel should be kept private.

Alas, more analysis and sex-tistics are soon to come: the justification, I predict, being the movie version of 50 Shades of Grey, which opens in a few weeks. There is nothing inherently wrong with surrounding a fictional phenomenon with interesting perspectives. But you have to wonder when it becomes an excuse for just a tad more titillation, the ultimate in high-brow meets low.

50 Shades, by, the way, has not been previewed by its makers: usually a sure sign that it will not land on any ten-best lists. On the other hand, the movie will likely be critic-proof and already, pre-sales are huge. I confess I have never read one word of the trilogy by author E.L. James: perhaps a shameful admission for someone who supposedly keeps tabs on the culture. Is it snobbism because the books are apparently literary-challenged? Is it reluctance, because I might be intrigued by the sexcapades? Is it pure and simple jealousy that this first-time writer is making zillions? But enough about me.

These are strange times we live in, when virtually nothing is private and everything is virtual. Just ask "60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft, whose sleazy texts to a former lover recently enjoyed a tabloid run. Just ask actor Stephen Collins, whose audio messages landed him in what might be called his own Seventh Hell. Much like what the Sony folks learned regarding business affairs, public figures--in fact all of us--- need to save erotic thoughts for in-person dealings. Or for academic researchers, apparently.

At times it is difficult to imagine that anything new can be said, or more revealing can be shown, about sex. Personally, even if I cared about the size of one's genitalia, I wouldn't share it, and I don't care what anyone else thinks on the subject. I am insecure about a lot of things, (though not my behind) but am not sure why that matters to anyone else. As for what we see on screen, I will refrain from saying things were sexier when they were implied. Nor will I say that I mostly dislike how Lena Dunham's girls and boys express their sexual desires because I fear younger generations will wonder why they should ever look forward to coupling.

Perhaps I am in the minority, but regardless, stay tuned, as "experts" lecture about dominance and submissiveness, and why we may secretly crave them. Already the discussion has begun:The author of that New York Times piece claimed she was finally ready to reveal all her research, writing, "Call it everything you wanted to know about sex, but didn't have the data to ask."

Really? Who asked?

D'Angelo Makes SNL Matter for a Few Mesmerizing Minutes

$
0
0
2015-02-01-dangelo.JPG

D'Angelo raises a power salute during his second SNL performance


Saturday Night Live became relevant again for about five minutes during Episode 13 of its 40th season. But it wasn't the writers or the cast that did it.

It was D'Angelo.

In his best comeback TV performance thus far, he paid tribute to Mike Brown, Eric Garner, Trayvon Martin and all the other young black men who became just "lines in chalk," as his song, "The Charade," lamented so powerfully.



Let me give you the bridge and chorus of that song, so you can feel just how high he elevated SNL for those few minutes:

With the veil off our eyes we'll truly see
And we'll march on
And it really won't take too long
And it really won't take us very long...

All we wanted was a chance to talk
'Stead we only got outlined in chalk
Feet have bled a million miles we've walked
Revealing at the end of the day, the charade...


Yes. He sang that on the show that even Chris Rock couldn't save earlier this season.

He's been away for a long time, D'Angelo. Touring Europe extensively -- or so I've read -- while retooling and regrouping apparently in ways we cannot even begin to imagine.

But we could see it in both performances. He is still the quintessential Old School soul singer of yesteryear. But now he is also one of the most subversively progressive black performers we have right now.

And it is riveting, this melding of the simmering sensuality for which he was adored in his first incarnation -- and from which he probably and justifiably ran for a while -- with this unique new groove that I admit is almost indescribable. And yet still so "soul-filled."

So no, this isn't the ebony love god who bared nearly all in That Video which I won't post here because it's not about that anymore. But it's linked -- go on, take a look. You know you want to. Especially if you remember it as fondly as millions of others -- especially women -- do.

But while you're looking, listen. Because he can still make you feel like that.

And he sucked all the silly out of SNL and really said something the other night. I honestly don't know how the cast could go out there and do those awful skits after that.

I didn't stick around, that's for sure. I watched D'Angelo and his band standing there, fists raised, with that "chalk" outline of a body on the floor before them... and then I turned off my TV altogether. All I wanted was to revisit Black Messiah, his latest album, to listen far more seriously than I previously had.

I admit it. I didn't "get it" at first. Perhaps I was turned off because the first review I read attempted to explain -- scientifically -- why it made people want to make love whenever they listened to it.

But I don't think that writer really "heard" it. I am going to sit down, close my eyes and listen until I hear everything he returned to say to us.

Because D'Angelo isn't just back. He's bolder and even more beautiful than before -- the swag's still there. And the new ensembles -- to die for.

But musically he's taking that "less traveled" road. And reminding us that black music matters, too.

Photo credit: Author screenshot
Viewing all 38214 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>