#David Rudin

[kwebtv]

Series Premiere

The Untouchables - The Empty Chair - ABC - October 5, 1959

Crime Drama

Running Time: 60 minutes

Written by David Karp

Produced by Charles Russell

Directed by John Peyser

Stars:

Robert Stack as Agent Eliot Ness

Nicholas Georgiade as Agent Enrico "Rico" Rossi

Jerry Paris as Agent Martin Flaherty

Abel Fernandez as Agent William Youngfellow

Steve London as Agent Jack Rossman

Chuck Hicks as Agent LaMarr Kane

Frank Wilcox as Federal District Attorney Beecher Asbury

Barbara Nichols as Brandy La France

Bruce Gordon as Frank Nitti

Nehemiah Persoff as Jake "Greasy Thumb" Guzik

Wally Cassell as Phil D'Andrea

Richard Benedict as "Fur" Sammons

Herman Rudin as Tony "Mops" Volpe

Betty Garde as Norma Guzik

Peter Mamakos as Gus Raddi

Norman Alden as Nitti Henchman

Walter Winchell as Narrator

Neville Brand as Al "Scarface" Capone

[derekfoxwit]

The Best Picture Oscar My Way (2000-2022)

After doing this list, I suddenly got inspired to do this sort of thing for some of the other Academy Award categories. For this project I got the following things to say:

Many of the win/nomination changes will be based more on some infamous or otherwise perceived snubs (i.e. Martin Scorsese needing to wait until The Departed for a Best Director win). In general, the changes are based on what the frequent consensus seems to be from what I’ve seen.

I may STILL keep a few of those same snubs if it simply lines up more with the film’s initial reactions at the time (i.e. Clockwork Orange).

There are some changes that the Oscars applied to certain categories over the years (i.e. Sound Mixing & Sound Editing becoming just Best Sound). For this list’s sake, I’ll apply some of my OWN cases of said changes applying (such as the Best Picture expansion from 5 to 10 occurring earlier since, in hindsight, they probably should’ve done that sooner). In case of that change, I’ll just apply it earlier (starting in 1997).

Said expansion has resulted in no less than 8 nominations in Best Picture at a time, so that’ll be my minimum (until 2021, where it was officially made the set amount no questions asked).

Gonna try to keep EGOTs as best as I can. Luckily for this category, there’s currently only one that’ll matter.

More inclusive wins (POC; LGBT) will be more likely to stay. There may be some exceptions after I’ve already made my own inclusive alternatives.

For the early years where Best Picture went to the studio instead (for some godforsaken reason), I’ll just pretend that’s not the case.

Due to some weird, borderline convoluted rules with Best International Feature Film (Mainly that this category doesn’t require US theater plays, but most other ones do), I’ll often go off of an eligible film’s year of original release unless they managed nominations the following year (City of God; Spirited Away)

For Best Picture, I’m only gonna list the nominated producer for newly added films (here’s the Wikipedia page for the rest). I will mostly go with the ones credited as “produced by” or “p.g.a.” (if the latter is shown) on IMDB as the nominees. Limit is five.

Italicized film titles are the ones I added. Bold ones are winners.

2000

Gladiator (still)

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon

Erin Brockovich

Memento - Jennifer Todd; Suzanne Todd

Almost Famous - Cameron Crowe; Ian Bryce

Amores perro - Alejandro G. Iñárritu

Traffic

American Psycho - Christian Halsey Solomon; Chris Hanley; Edward R. Pressman

Requiem for a Dream - Eric Watson; Palmer West

2001

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

A Beautiful Mind

Moulin Rogue!

Shrek - Aron Warner; John H. Williams; Jeffrey Katzenberg

The Royal Tenenbaums - Wes Anderson; Barry Mendel; Scott Rudin

Mulholland Drive - Tony Krantz; Michael Polaire; Alain Sarde; Mary Sweeney

Amélie - Claudie Ossard

In The Bedroom

Gosford Park

Monsters, Inc. - Darla K. Anderson

2002

Spirited Away - Toshio Suzuki

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

The Pianist

Gangs of New York

Punch-Drunk Love - Paul Thomas Anderson; Daniel Lupi; JoAnne Sellar

Chicago!

Catch Me If You Can - Steven Spielberg; Walter F. Parkes

The Hours

2003

The Lord of the Ring: Return of the King (still)

The Barbarian Invasions - Daniel Louis; Denise Robert

Lost in Translation

Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World

City of God - Andrea Barata; Mauricio Andrade

Finding Nemo - Graham Walters

Mystic River

Seabiscuit

2004

Before Sunset - Anne Walker-McBay

Million Dollar Baby

The Aviator

The Incredibles - John Walker

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - Anthony Bergman; Steven Golin

Sideways

Ray

The Motorcycle Diaries - Michaek Nozik; Edgard Tenembaum; Karen Tenkhoff

Shrek 2 - David Lipman; Aron Warner; John H. Williams

Shaun of the Dead - Nira Park

2005 (well crap, seems like in hindsight, a struggle to find many picks might have been part of the problem. Still don’t excuse that bullshit with Crash)

Brokeback Mountain

Good Night, and Good Luck

Munich

Capote

Pride and Prejudice - Tim Bevan; Debra Hayward

Howl’s Moving Castle - Toshio Suzuki

Memoirs of a Geisha - Lucy Fisher; Steven Spielberg; Douglas Wick

V for Vendetta - Lana and Lilly Wackowski; Joel Silver; Grant Hill

2006

Pan’s Labyrinth - Guillermo del Toro; Alfonso Cuaron; Bertha Navarro; Frida Torresblanco

The Departed

Babel

Letters from Iwo Jima

Little Miss Sunshine

Children of Men - Marc Abraham; Eric Newman; Hilary Shor; Iain Smith; Tony Smith

The Prestige - Christopher Nolan; Emma Thomas; Aaron Ryder

The Lives of Others - Quirin Berg; Max Wiedemann

The Queen

2007

No Country For Old Men (still)

There Will Be Blood

Ratatouille - Bradford Lewis

Juno

Atonement

Zodiac - Ceán Chaffin; Bradley J. Fischer; Mike Medavoy; Arnold Messer; James Vanderbilt

Persepolis - Xavier Rigault; Marc-Antoine Robert

Hot Fuzz - Tim Bevan; Eric Fellner; Nira Park

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days - Cristian Mungiu; Oleg Mutu

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford  - Ridley Scott; Dede Gardner; Brad Pitt; David Valdes; Jules Daly

2008

Wall-E - Jim Morris; Lindsey Collins

The Dark Knight - Christopher Nolan; Charles Roven; Emma Thomas

Slumdog Millionaire

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Milk

Frost/Nixon

Synecdoche, New York - Charlie Kaufman; Spike Jonze; Sidney Kimmel; Anthony Bregman

Departures - Toshiaki Nakazawa; Ichiro Nobukuni; Toshihisa Watai

The Wrestler - Darren Aronofsky; Scott Franklin

Doubt - Mark Roybal; Scott Rudin

2009

Inglorious Basterds

The Hurt Locker

Mother - Tae-joon Park; Woo-sik-Seo

Up

Fantastic Mr. Fox - Wes Anderson; Allison Abbate; Scott Rudin; Jeremy Dawson

A Serious Man

The White Ribbon - Stefan Arndt; Veit Heiduschka; Margaret Menegoz; Andrea Occhipinti

The Secret in Their Eyes - Mariela Besuievsky; Juan Jose Campanella

Avatar

District 9

2010

Inception

Incendies - Kim McCraw; Luc Dery

True Grit

Toy Story 3

The Social Network

Black Swan

Biutiful - Alejandro G. Inarritu; Jon Kilik

The Kids Are All Right

127 Hours

The King’s Speech

2011

The Artist (still)

The Tree of Life

The Descendants

A Separation - Asghar Farhadi

Hugo

Moneyball

The Help

Midnight in Paris

War Horse

2012

Amour

Django Unchained

Life of Pi

Argo

Once Upon a Time in Anatolia - Nuri Bilge Ceylan; Zeynep Ozbatur Atakan; Can Yilmaz

Moonrise Kingdom

Lincoln

Les Miserables

Silver Linings Playbook

The Intouchables - Nicolas Duval Adassovsky; Laurent Zeitoun; Yann Zenou

2013

12 Years a Slave (still)

Her

Prisoners - Kira Davis; Broderick Johnson; Adam Kolbrenner; Andrew A. Kosove

The Great Beauty - Francesca Cima; Nicola Giuliano

Before Midnight - Richard Linklater; Sara Woodhatch; Christos V. Konstantakopoulos

The Wind Rises - Toshio Suzuki

The Wolf of Wall Street

Gravity

Nebraska

American Hustle

2014

The Grand Budapest Hotel

Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Gone Girl - Ceán Chaffin; Joshua Donen; Arnon Milchan; Resse Witherspoon

Tale of the Princess Kaguya - Yoshiaki Nishimura; Seiichiro Ujiie

Whiplash

Selma

Intersteller - Christopher Nolan; Lynda Obst; Emma Thomas

American Sniper

Boyhood

2015

Carol - Elizabeth Karlsen; Christine Vachon; Stephen Woolley

The Big Short

Mad Max: Fury Road

Inside Out - Jonas Rivera

Spotlight

Bridge of Spies

The Revenant

Room

2016

Moonlight (still)

Arrival

Fences

La La Land

Hidden Figures

The Salesman - Asghar Farhadi; Alexandre Mallet-Guy

The Handmaiden - Park Chan-wook; Syd Lim

Your Name - Koichiro Ito; Genki Kawamura; Katsuhiro Yumiya

Hell or High Water

Manchester by the Sea

2017

Lady Bird

The Shape of Water

Call Me By Your Name

Phantom Thread

Get Out

Coco - Darla K. Anderson

Blade Runner 2049 - Broderick Johnson; Andrew A. Kosove; Bud Yorkin; Cynthia Sikes

The Post

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Dunkirk

2018

Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse - Avi Arad; Phil Lord; Chris Miller; Amy Pascal; Christina Steinberg

Roma

BlacKkKlansman

The Favourite

Hereditary - Kevin Scott Frakes; Lars Knudsen

Black Panther

Bohemian Rhapsody

Shoplifters - Kore-eda Hirokazu; Kaoru Matsuzaki; Hijiri Taguchi; Akihiko Yose

A Star is Born

Vice

2019

Parasite (still)

Jojo Rabbit

Joker

Little Woman

1917

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood 

Marriage Story

Portrait of a Lady on Fire - Benedicte Couvreur

The Irishman

The Lighthouse - Lourenco Sant’Anna; Rodrigo Teixeira; Michael Volpe; Robert Eggers

2020

Nomadland (still)

The Father

Soul - Dana Murray

Judas and the Black Messiah

Minari

Sound of Metal

Mank

Wolfwalkers - Tomm Moore; Stephan Roelants; Nora Twomey; Paul Young

2021

Drive My Car

CODA

Belfast

Dune

The Power of the Dog

West Side Story

Nightmare Alley

Licorice Pizza

King Richard

Titane - Amaury Ovise; Jean-Christophe Reymond

2022

Everything Everywhere All At Once (still)

All Quiet on the Western Front

The Banshees of Inisherin

The Fabelmans

Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio - Guillermo del Toro; Alexander Bulkley; Gary Ungar

Marcel the Shell with Shoes On - Andrew Goldman; Edward Chiodo; Caroline Kaplan; Dean Fleischer Camp; Jenny Slate

Nope - Ian Cooper; Jordan Peele

Aftersun - Barry Jenkins; Mark Ceryak; Amy Jackson; Adele Romanski

Top Gun: Maverick

Triangle of Sadness

[ulkaralakbarova]

A leukemia patient attempts to end a 20-year feud with her sister to get her bone marrow. Credits: TheMovieDb. Film Cast: Lee Wakefield Lacker: Meryl Streep Bessie Wakefield: Diane Keaton Hank Lacker: Leonardo DiCaprio Wallace “Wally” Carter: Robert De Niro Marvin Wakefield: Hume Cronyn Ruth Wakefield: Gwen Verdon Charlie Lacker: Hal Scardino Robert “Bob” Carter: Dan Hedaya Charlotte Samit: Margo Martindale Retirement Home Director: Cynthia Nixon Coral: Kelly Ripa Lance: John Callahan Beauty Shop Lady: Olga Merediz Bruno: Joe Lisi Gas Station Guy: Steve DuMouchel Janine: Bitty Schram Novice: Lizbeth MacKay Nun on Phone: Helen Stenborg Nun #3: Sally Parrish Film Crew: Costume Design: Julie Weiss Producer: Robert De Niro Producer: Scott Rudin Producer: Jane Rosenthal Original Music Composer: Rachel Portman Executive In Charge Of Production: Meryl Poster Production Design: David Gropman Casting: Ilene Starger Editor: Jim Clark Dialogue Editor: Magdaline Volaitis Supervising Sound Editor: Wendy Hedin Dolly Grip: Dave Lowry Still Photographer: Phillip V. Caruso Co-Producer: Bonnie Palef Music Editor: Dan Lieberstein Hair Designer: Alan D’Angerio Director of Photography: Piotr Sobociński First Assistant Director: Ellen H. Schwartz Set Decoration: Tracey A. Doyle Co-Producer: Adam Schroeder Script Supervisor: Anne Rapp Director: Jerry Zaks Screenplay: Scott McPherson Camera Operator: Rob Hahn Art Direction: Peter Rogness Executive Producer: Tod Scott Brody Leadman: Scott Rosenstock Boom Operator: Andrew Schmetterling Associate Producer: John Guare Stunt Coordinator: Frank Ferrara Orchestrator: Jeff Atmajian Co-Producer: David Wisnievitz First Assistant Editor: Mitchel Stanley Property Master: Tommy Allen Construction Coordinator: Nick Miller Chief Lighting Technician: Russell Engels ADR Editor: Lisa J. Levine Makeup Artist: Allen Weisinger Art Department Coordinator: Rhonda Moscoe Wardrobe Supervisor: Timothy Alberts Wardrobe Supervisor: Patricia Eiben Location Manager: Antoine Douaihy Seamstress: Laurie Buehler Construction Foreman: Gordon Krause Dialogue Editor: Stuart Emanuel Foley Editor: Raymond Karpicki Dialogue Editor: Michael Shore First Assistant Editor: Debra C. Victoroff Music Supervisor: Chandra Beard Executive Producer: Lori Steinberg Associate Producer: Craig Gering Movie Reviews:

[pdj-france]

Par Sean Thiessen | Publié il y a 2 heures Tom Cruise dans La Firme Le nom de Tom Cruise est quasiment synonyme de cascades. Ces jours-ci, il est surtout connu pour ses bouffonneries de haut vol dans Top Gun : Maverick et pour son rôle de longue date dans la franchise Mission : Impossible. Mais dans des films comme le thriller de 1993 The Firm, Tom Cruise ne fléchit pas ses muscles mais ses côtelettes dramatiques, et sa performance captivante est désormais diffusée sur Paramount +. Il est facile d'oublier que Tom Cruise peut faire un film sans cascades défiant le décès, mais son thriller juridique classique The Firm met son talent d'acteur avant tout. Basé sur le roman du même nom de l'auteur John Grisham, The Firm est un thriller juridique tendu rempli de rebondissements captivants et de dilemmes moraux qui rendent le genre si fascinant. Tom Cruise joue le rôle de Mitch McDeere, un jeune diplômé de la Harvard Law School qui occupe un poste confortable dans un prestigieux cabinet d'avocats. Le salaire et les avantages se font au prix d'heures exténuantes, que Mitch passe à découvrir que l'entreprise n'est pas aussi intéressée à faire respecter la loi qu'à la contourner. Quand les affaires louches du nouvel employeur de Mitch donnent lieu à un décompte des morts, le FBI approche Mitch pour l'aider à faire tomber l'entreprise. Gene Hackman et Tom Cruise dans The Firm Tom Cruise présente The Firm, rejoint par Gene Hackman, Holly Hunter, Ed Harris, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Hal Holbrook, David Strathairn et Gary Busey. L'ensemble chatoyant tourne dans un ensemble de performances puissantes sous la direction du cinéaste légendaire Sydney Pollack. Toutefois, le casting du film avait quasiment l'air très différent. Charlie Sheen et Jason Patric étaient les premiers prétendants au rôle de Mitch, par contre les producteurs Scott Rudin et John Davis voulaient aller plus loin. Bien que le budget a quasiment triplé, passant de 15 millions de dollars à 42 millions de dollars, Rudin et Davis ont demandé à Tom Cruise de diriger The Firm. L'entreprise Le réalisateur de Saturday Night Fever, John Badham, et le réalisateur de Die Hard, John McTiernan, étaient tous deux en lice pour diriger The Firm, Tom Cruise ayant même exprimé son intérêt à s'asseoir dans le fauteuil du réalisateur. La politique et les personnalités ont transformé la situation en gâchis, et le président de Paramount Communications, Stanley Jaffe, a choisi Sydney Pollack pour diriger. Alimenté par le pouvoir vedette de Tom Cruise et du reste de l'ensemble du film, The Firm a atteint un montant brut de 270 millions de dollars, le plus élevé pour un film classé R toute l'année. Gene Hackman n'a rejoint The Firm que quand le film était déjà en plein tournage. Meryl Streep a été considérée pour le rôle de Hackman, mais John Grisham a combattu l'échange de genre, retardant le casting. The Firm a finalement fait valoir ses arguments dans les salles le 30 juin 1993. Alimenté par le pouvoir vedette de Tom Cruise et du reste de l'ensemble du film, The Firm a atteint un montant brut de 270 millions de dollars, le plus élevé pour un film classé R toute l'année. The Firm est aussi devenu l'adaptation la plus rentable d'un roman de John Grisham jamais réalisée. durant la semaine de la sortie de The Firm, John Grisham et Michael Crichton représentaient les six premiers livres de la liste des best-sellers de poche du New York Times. En 1993, Crichton a aussi connu le plus grand réussite d'adaptation de sa carrière avec la sortie de Jurassic Park de Steven Spielberg. L'entreprise Les écrivains n'étaient pas les seuls à avoir connu des années record en 1993. Le cabinet a été nominé pour deux Oscars ; Holly Hunter était en lice pour la meilleure actrice dans un second rôle et le compositeur David Grusin a été nominé pour la meilleure musique originale. Tom Cruise avait déjà été nominé comme acteur pour Born on the Fourth of July des années 1990, et serait plus tard reconnu pour Jerry Maguire et Magnolia.

Les performances du casting de The Firm étaient, pour de nombreux critiques, le meilleur élément du film. Tom Cruise et Holly Hunter ont été particulièrement célébrés, mais le scénario du film a laissé de nombreux critiques et spectateurs en redemander. Adapté par David Rabe et Robert Towne, le scénario de The Firm enlève un peu la puanteur du protagoniste que Grisham a réalisé dans son roman. Alors que Tom Cruise offre toujours une performance convaincante, certains ont fait valoir que le polissage du personnage principal du film avait supprimé l'énergie, le suspense et l'énigme éthique de l'histoire. Alors que Tom Cruise ait fait de The Firm un film à réussite, une tentative ultérieure d'en faire une série, sans Cruise, n'a duré qu'une saison. The Firm était l'un des derniers films réalisés par Tom Cruise avant Mission : Impossible ; seul Entretien avec le vampire les sépare. The Firm est sans doute la fin d'une époque dans la carrière de Cruise, livrant la performance finale de Cruise en qualité de jeune homme et ouvrant la voie à son image d'acteur plus adulte. The Firm n'est peut-être pas le film le plus célèbre de Tom Cruise, mais c'est une entrée captivante dans sa filmographie vaste et variée. Sa carrière est différente de celle de 1993, mais son engagement envers les grands films n'a jamais changé. La star d'action Tom Cruise est géniale, mais nous aurons aussi un faible dans nos cœurs pour le Tom Cruise de films comme The Firm, et nous pouvons lui rendre visite à tout instant sur Paramount +.

[mycinematheque]

Poster Design by Agustin R. Michel.

[uomo-accattivante]

Oh man, Megan Ellison should have produced this - not her brother. 🤦🏻‍♀️ So much drama, no wonder why we didn't hear anything for so long. I had no problem understanding the film, and I watched it before buying the book. The real losers in this situation are the international fans. This film has spectacular visuals which deserve to be seen on a large screen!

[tokillamockingbird427]

Random Lore

In Devil's Breath (By Michael Rudin) Rorke talks about bugging Elias to get "the boys" (Logan and David.) a dog. Specifically, a german shepherd.

So Rorke is definitely the reason Logan and Hesh even have Riley.

MWD breeds aren't limited to German Shepherd, they can also be Dutch Shepherds, Labradors, and Belgian Malinois (Like Lucy in Placeholder.)

Given that, it's likely that Elias pushed his sons into becoming MWD certified, then made sure they got a German Shepherd.

Devil's Breath was released as a kindle exclusive back in 2013, and is no longer available.

[only-johnny-deppp]

21 years ago, on this day (May 9), Johnny attended the 6th (and penultimate) Blockbuster Entertainment Awards, held at the Shrine Auditorium, in Los Angeles, California.

On that day, more than 25 million people chose the winners by voting on the internet and Johnny WON on the category “Favorite Actor-Horror” for his role as “Ichabod Crane” in "Sleepy Hollow". The others nominees were: Gabriel Byrne for his role as “Father Andrew Kiernan” in “Stigmata” and Liam Neeson for his role as “Dr. David Marrow” in “The Haunting”. Ps. All the movies were released in 1999.

As usual, our shy Johnny was caught by surprise, didn’t even know what to say and gave a funny speech thanking his fans, the producer Scott Rudin, his friend and director Tim Burton, his agent Tracey Jacobs and even a chicken.  😂 🐔

“All right, all right (chucks) All right, well, hey… Uhn… This is pretty weird… (chucks) Thank you very much… Uhn (bleeped) you say? I wanna thank all you guys, of course, for supporting me on this weird road for all these years. I want to thank Scott Rudin, Tim Burton, everybody; Tracey, my agent, my family, the chicken and ‘boo-bloop’ ... So be well, thank you very much.” ~ Johnny Depp (May 9, 2000) 

> Curiosity:

If you think Johnny is looking like his character “George Jung” from the movie “Blow”, you are not wrong. At that time, he was on the last days of the filming around Los Angeles, California.

[florrickandassociates]

TGF Thoughts-- 5x07: And the fight had a detente...

This episode is a wild ride, so if you haven’t seen it yet and you aren’t spoiled, don’t read this. Just go watch it.  

Ave Maria plays over a photo montage of cancelled men, including Kevin Spacey, Louie CK, and Scott Rudin. (Scott Rudin, if you don’t know the name, is a Broadway/Hollywood producer who treated his assistants like absolute shit. He’s the inspiration for the possessed producer episode of Evil—I think it’s the third episode of the series—and Robert King does not like him one bit.)  

And then the episode opens with Wackner, Del, and Cord discussing the Armie Hammer cannibalism ordeal. Whew, this is not what I wanted to be thinking about first thing on a Thursday morning. I do not think I can put into words how boring I find debating whether or not someone should have been “cancelled.”  Cancellation is usually about rich people facing consequences for shitty actions, and those consequences have never involved anyone’s rights being infringed upon, so why should I care about someone being cancelled? And, while I know that society/people on Twitter don’t always understand nuance, I’d like to think that when it comes to the most notable examples of cancellation... no one is losing their livelihood over false or minor allegations.  

There are so, so, so many issues in the world. Cancellation affects a handful of high profile, usually white, straight, male, celebrities. Why should I give a shit about, like, Louie CK not being able to make as much money as he used to? I just do not and cannot find it interesting.

I’m not surprised David Cord and Del Cooper find this topic interesting—Del likely hates worrying that all of his comedians could get cancelled and put him in a financially tricky spot; Cord probably says things like “Woke Mob” unironically. And as for Wackner, he almost certainly has a skewed understanding of what actually happens when someone’s cancelled and sees a place where he can step in and add some order. Blah. It’s just so boring.

"People are getting canceled without a trial, no evidence presented against them,” Wackner says. This is not it, Wackner! This is such a strawman argument. We don’t need the legal system to adjudicate people being assholes to each other, and in cases where a crime is committed or a particular individual can sue for damages, that is what happens. If you act shitty and then your sponsors realize you’re toxic and drop you, like, it is what it is. You can feel free to respond via a Notes App screenshot where half of your apology is actually just whining about cancel culture and then you say “I’m sorry if anyone took offense at what I did” instead of saying “I’m sorry I said/did hurtful things” and when people don’t take that seriously, maybe it’s because you didn’t take it seriously, either.  

“There are a lot of reasons these accusations never go to trial. The victims finally get to accuse the victimizer face to face,” Wackner explains. Were the victims asking for this?

Marissa shares my question, noting that if the victims don’t want to speak up, then the victimizer would have the court to himself. This raises a new question: who is even bringing these cases? Are Wackner, Cord, and Del just deciding they want to do things as cases and then getting everyone else on board? This sounds bad!  

Apparently, according to Wackner, “if #MeToo relies on mob rule, it’ll exhaust itself.” What... evidence is there for this? I get why people panic about the POSSIBILITY of this happening, even though I don’t share their panic, but is there any actual evidence that #MeToo is losing steam because of false allegations because cancellation isn’t a formal process? I don’t believe there is.  

The test case we have the pleasure of seeing this week is about “Louie CK two,” whom I shall refer to as LCK2 instead of learning his name.  

Now, suddenly, Marissa is asking one of LCK2’s victims to testify. She doesn’t want to participate because it’s just another way for LCK2 to get his career back. Marissa decides to be idealistic and say this is a real opportunity to confront LCK2 with his crime. I suppose she isn’t wrong, and that is what happens next, but, again, meh.

Apparently David Cord is going to defend LCK2. You know what would get cancelled in five seconds? A David Cord funded show that has David Cord actually on it, railing against cancel culture! Can you IMAGINE the thinkpieces?

God, when is this episode going to move on from this extremely irritating premise?

Marissa decides she wants to be the prosecutor. Wackner says if she prosecutes LCK2, she has to prosecute the academic who used a word that sounds like the n-word and lost her job for it.  Marissa thinks the academic shouldn’t have been fired, but Wackner insists she has to take both cases.

“Let’s go into court,” Wackner says, and, thank goodness, we do go into court: REAL court, where we are talking about REAL issues.  

In court, Liz and Diane are suing the police over the death of a black girl who was tased by the police. Her friend is on the stand and it’s quite emotional. Also, Diane tries to pass Liz a note and Liz ignores it. Why would you have two name partners on this case if they aren’t even going to try to work together?  

You can tell things are tense between two TGF characters when they talk at the same time in court but are on the same side.  

Hiiiiii Abernathy! ILY!

The victim had a heart condition, which the police lawyer argues is the actual cause of death. Police lawyer also argues that since this witness posted some ACAB lyrics on Instagram, she must be biased. Eyeroll.

Liz calls the other lawyer racist; the other lawyer tries to make Liz look like she is only on her client’s side because she’s black and that Liz is being absurd.  

Cancel culture court happens. We’re dealing with the academic case first. I don’t feel like talking about the cancel culture shit too much, so here is my take on this case as a whole: (1) I don’t think the actual word in question, which isn’t actually the n-word, is enough on its own to get someone fired (2) I also don’t think anyone can use that word, regardless of its meaning or history, without understanding how it will come across. (3) The teacher did not get fired for simply using this word once (4) This teacher believes that anyone who is from a group that’s been marginalized in history should have to confront that marginalization with as little sympathy and respect as possible because it will help them be more resilient. So basically, if you are from the dominant group then you don’t get challenged. She believes it is her job to do this. She is an egotistical asshole who has no business teaching.  

Cord wants everyone to have to say the full word in question. He says this pretentiously (though I don’t think saying “Said word” is that pretentious, tbh) and Wackner rules against him and also makes him wear a powdered wig for using “obtuse language.”

Marissa is not trying at all with this case at first, since she doesn’t believe in it. That’s shitty, Marissa. If you want to be a lawyer at a firm like RL you’re going to have to fight for all of your clients.  

Marissa makes a Latin joke and ends up in a powdered wig, too.  

The prof says, in one sentence, that she didn’t know what she was doing using the word and also that the black student who took offense thinks college is supposed to be warm, cuddly, and unchallenging. So it was a challenge, then, prof?  

I like this student. And I love that she calls Marissa out for obviously not trying.  

“The optics matter. Racially,” Diane says to Liz, who agrees. Diane, strategically, makes it about gender first (the cop is male, some jurors may react to a woman questioning a man), then makes it about how she should be the one questioning the cop since Liz is black. It would make the jury more “comfortable” (hey, there’s that word again!) Diane says. She says she is being pragmatic.  

Diane says that she could be “more dispassionate”. Be or come across as, Diane? Either way, Liz, who knows full well what the optics look like given that this isn’t her first time in court, doesn’t agree with Diane that they need to come across as dispassionate.  

Then Diane just changes the subject to the firm drama. “Liz, you’re shoving me out of my name partner position because of my race.” Like that’s the issue!  

“I am doing nothing. You are the one who got our racist clients to whine to STR Laurie about us,” Liz counters. “Those clients bring in a great deal of money, and they are not racists,” Diane insists. Yes. Sure. Diane just happened to choose white male clients who were “comfortable” with her to talk to. I have no doubt they’d have reacted poorly to any change in representation, but Diane was counting on those particular clients having some discomfort with their new lawyers.  

Liz calls her out and Diane’s still trying to play it like she just had to inform her long-term clients and it just had to be done this way. But, when Liz asks if Diane thinks the clients would’ve had the same reaction if their new representation were to be white, Diane says that maybe her clients are worried about racial grudges. So, what you’re saying is you knew exactly what you were doing, huh, Diane?  

I get why Diane doesn’t like being pushed out, because who would, but Diane, this isn’t about you. And if you didn’t want to make it about race, perhaps you shouldn’t have appeared on a panel about how great it is that your firm is majority black? You can’t have it both ways.  

Liz notes that Diane felt “entitled” to her name partnership. This is accurate, though based on revenue and stature I don’t think it can be denied that Diane deserves name partner status (generally speaking). Diane went over to RBK, was like, “sure, I’ll be a junior partner, thank you so much for the opportunity, I can’t even pay my capital contribution right now but what if I were name partner in three months?” and that is both entitlement and knowing one’s own worth, but mostly entitlement.  

(Liz does not act entitled, but if we want to get into who deserves their partnership more—again generally speaking, not their partnership at a black firm specifically—it is definitely Diane! Liz literally only has this job because her dad was important.)  

“I think that Barbara Kolstad was shoved out because you felt entitled to her position,” Liz shouts. OMG, a mention of Barbara?!?!?!??!?!? THANK YOU, WRITERS!!!

(This is a slight bit of revisionist history but I’ll allow it, and I think it’s right in thought even if it’s not right on the details. Barbara wasn’t shoved out—Barbara chose to go to a different firm that offered her a better deal—but I don’t think Barbara would’ve been on that trajectory had it not been for Diane’s presence at the firm. Barbara was in charge of a firm that shared her values when, suddenly, her partner decided that they needed to pursue profit over all else and needed Diane to execute that strategy. Maybe no one made a move directly against her, but Adrian and Diane changed the mission of RBK until it was no longer somewhere Barbara wanted to work.

“We can’t work together if you don’t respect me,” Diane screams at Liz. “No, we can’t work together if you use race cynically,” Liz responds. Diane gets even angrier, swears a bunch, and then says “You want to come after me, you come after me with an honest argument about my lack of competence, my lack of worth.” Diane, you are fighting a completely different battle here! You can be entitled and also correct and also good at your job. This is what you used to accuse Alicia of all the time. The fact you’ve turned this into something about your skill level when it’s about the meaning of having a black firm is only proving Liz’s point.

“Your unworthiness—which you don’t seem to want to acknowledge—is that you can’t be the top dog in a black firm,” Liz says. Exactly. But Diane just storms off.

Now the cop is on the stand. He did not know the victim had a heart condition. Uh, obviously, why would he have known that?  

Liz is aggressive in court; Diane thinks this is the wrong strategy. Without knowing who is on the jury, I have no idea which one of them is correct.  

The next move is to get the cop’s ex-wife, who he abused, on the stand.  

Goodie, it’s cancel culture court. Things go well for Marissa, but Del wants to know why Marissa wasn’t that passionate about the n-word case. Marissa says she feels like it’s not the n-word, like that is a valid reason to not represent your client to the best of your ability. “It is. It always is,” says Del.  

Marissa heads back to RL, and as she walks, the camera follows her and moves through the space until we end up in Liz’s office, where she gets a news alert about the cop from the COTW. He’s been killed, seemingly in retaliation for his actions. The news is quick to suggest the trial might’ve encouraged the killing. “Oh, fuck.” Diane says as she watches the news. Aaaand credits (at 20 minutes in!)  

From the promos, I thought this was going to be a Very Serious Episode about police brutality. From the opening, I thought it was going to be an insufferable episode about cancel culture. I was wrong! (Though, I suppose, some of the cancel culture stuff is still insufferable.)  

Yay for Carrie Preston, who directed this episode. I read an interview with her and she talked about how there’s a “look book” for directing TGF episodes and I have never wanted to see anything as badly as I want to see this look book. (Am I exaggerating? Probably. But I might not be.)  

After credits, Marissa finds Carmen and Jay to ask them if “n-word-ly" is offensive. She acknowledges she’s being annoying but they let her continue anyway. Jay finds it offensive. Carmen does not. This seems fitting with their characters, and I love that this scene acknowledges that not every black person is going to have the exact same reaction to everything.  

I want Carmen to have more to do! While I’m glad the show isn’t forcing her to have a large role in every plot just because, I feel like she’s gone missing for the middle part of the season. My guess is that their priority with Carmen is setting her up to be an ongoing part of the cast who grows into being someone we want a lot from rather than forcing her plots from the start... but surely we could get a little more of her! I doubt she’s a one-season character like I assume Wackner will be.  

The cop’s murder changes the vibe in court. Abernathy calls a moment of silence in his memory. “We’re fucked,” Liz whispers to Diane.  

And indeed they are. The cop’s ex no longer wants to talk about how abusive he was—she wants to talk about how great he was. Whose idea was it to still put her on the stand?! Idk about legal procedures but this seems like a really avoidable mistake!

Diane argues that the cop’s death has prejudiced the jury. Abernathy decides to call a “voir dire de novo,” using an obtuse Latin phrase that would not be permitted in Wackner’s court. (Love the little parallels in this episode, like this, the transition between courts earlier, and how much of Marissa being called out on her whiteness feels like a thematic extension of everything going on with Diane.)

Cancel culture court continues. Carmen shows up.

I don’t really get how June, the victim of LCK2, potentially losing a headlining gig for a bad set instead of retaliation from LCK2, scores him a point. One, if she was a rising store, one bad set shouldn’t have damned her career. Two, isn’t it enough to prove that he masturbated in front of women who didn’t want him to do that???????  

Having June perform her act with no prep in Wackner’s court so they can judge whether or not she is funny is a wildly bad idea. So now Wackner is an arbiter of humor as well as cancel culture?  

This whole system is silly and I reject the whole premise but June should not lose two points for the logic that Wackner + the audience don’t find June funny --> June must’ve had her career derailed because she just isn’t funny (how’d she book the headliner gig, then?) --> LCK2 scores points??? He still masturbated in front of her without her consent!  

Using cancel culture to show Wackner’s court is going too far/slipping into bad territory: I’m on board with this. Using Wackner’s court to actually comment on cancel culture: Ugh. The writers seem to be trying to do both.  

Lol at Abernathy having Stacey Abrams’ book on his desk.

Marissa argues the n-word case more passionately, because these writers love to make situations that seemed clear cut seem more uncertain. It’s no coincidence they have the sexual harassment case look murkier (though, again, June being bad at comedy does not negate the sexual harassment!) right before they have the n-work case begin to tilt in favor of the professor’s cancellation.

Hahah what bullshit about trying to prepare the students for a world that won’t be kind to them. Do you seriously think your black students need YOU to prepare them?  

This lady thinks history classes have to describe rapes in detail to get students to sympathize. No, no they fucking do not.  

She also says she’d use the n-word if she were teaching a topic where it might come up. Um, no?

Mr. Elk (this is what I call Ted Willoughby, Idiot Reporter, after he said “things of that elk” in his first appearance) is attacking Diane and Liz on his show. Diane and Liz are, apparently, “Marxist slip-and-fall lawyers” and Mr. Elk plays a clip of Diane saying cops need to be held accountable. Obviously, this was before the cop’s death and meant to be about the legal system, but it looks like Diane’s calling for his murder. I also love how they go out of their way to only pause the clip on unflattering frames of Diane.  

Liz wants to use this in court—I forgot that Liz is super sneaky but this tracks; she is always quick to use things to her advantage and we’ve known that about her since her strategy with the DNC in 2x07 (to make outlandish allegations and then drop them before presenting proof). Julius wants to get Liz and Diane security.

That security is, apparently Jay. I think they’ve shown Jay as security before when Lucca went viral. I didn’t understand it then and I don’t understand it now.

I was, briefly, worried for Liz and Diane’s safety, especially after I saw all the angry cops waiting for them in court. Then I thought, oh, well at least they’re in court, they should be safe from being shot there. Then I remembered 5x15. Then I laughed at myself.  

Liz’s new strategy works and Abernathy uses more Latin. But, they can’t get any more jurors thrown. (They’re going for a mistrial.)

Oh, Carmen is back again! She did SO MUCH in that court scene where she appeared and then disappeared! She’s chatting with Marissa and spots LCK2 in the RL offices.  

Apparently, LCK2 negotiated a contract with Del, with David Lee’s help. (Why would David Lee be doing entertainment law?) Suddenly everything makes sense to Marissa.

She calls Del to the stand. This—and, honestly, everything after this—makes me wonder how much of this would ever make it to air. Why would Del televise this?

What a shock—Del wants LCK2 back on his streaming service (which I don’t think has a name LOL).  

Somehow Marissa’s questions become about Wackner and whether or not Wackner is an impartial judge, which doesn’t seem like the core issue. Wackner has made it pretty clear that his stance is that he doesn’t care if others are corrupt around him or try to use him; he’s going to be impartial no matter what. Why not play that up instead of making the entire show look staged and Wackner look complicit, Marissa?  

Like, why is Marissa asking Wackner if he’s prejudged the case?! Why isn’t she just trying to like, get him to declare a mistrial because there is a conflict of interest? She can make a version of this argument without accusing Wackner of PREJUDGING, which she knows—I know, so she knows—will set him off. Wackner truly believe he thinks he is impartial. It’s not smart strategy to question that (even if we all know that Wackner is not impartial!)

Wackner blows up at Marissa and shouts at her. He tells her to get the fuck out of court.

This is certainly dramatic, but again, would Del ever choose to air this? I doubt it.  

On her way to work, Diane notices hot pink spray paint in the elevator. When she exits the elevator, the whole firm is gathered in the lobby. Someone has painted COP KILLERS across the elevator bank. “Security doesn’t know how they got in,” Jay says. “Of course they don’t,” Diane responds. “They suggest we call the cops,” Jay says. I love this little exchange. I wasn’t exactly wondering how someone got in, but I like the show making it clear how unprotected Diane and Liz are right now and why.

Julius appears and says that Mr. Elk is saying something new. Diane and Liz sit down to watch and the tone of this episode completely shifts.  

I had forgotten completely that Liz’s dad’s assault issues are out in public until Mr. Elk called him “a disgraced civil rights leader.” It doesn’t feel like they’re out in public! Also I would believe Mr. Elk calling him disgraced for no reason at all.  

Y’all, when Mr. Elk said the name “Duke Roscoe,” my jaw dropped. WHAT A CALLBACK.  

This scene, and really, everything in this plot from here on out, is a delight. It just keeps going and going. It is the best kind of fanservice.

1x11 has been, for no real reason, on my mind since 5x04. It popped out to me as an example of this show’s humor so I talked about it in that recap. I nearly mentioned it in my 5x06 recap when Diane laughed at Julius’s suggestion that they start a firm together. I rewatched 1x11, by complete chance, like two weeks ago. How weird that I'm somehow on the show’s wavelength about this!  

Also I made a joke about Mr. Elk last week without knowing he’d be back this episode. I would like to think I conjured this.  

(1x11 is a really pivotal episode for TGW, even if it isn’t one of the most notable episodes overall. It's composer David Buckley’s first episode and that ending, with Diane laughing, is one of the earliest moments of TGW showing its sense of humor and playing to its strengths.)

Mr. Elk notes that they “rarely see” Kurt, which is apparently evidence that Diane is a lesbian. Hahahahahahah. Mr. Elk also wouldn’t want to note Kurt, despite his recent controversy, because to his viewers, Kurt’s beliefs would make Diane seem more sympathetic.  

GUYS, THE WRITERS DECIDED TO MAKE A CALLBACK TO AN ICONIC MOMENT FROM AN EPISODE THAT AIRED OVER A DECADE AGO AND THEN BUILD ON IT. I cannot express how fucking happy this makes me.  

Now, Mr. Elk says, Diane and Liz are an item!  

What’s better than Diane laughing hysterically at the original allegations? Diane doing it again, eleven years later, JOINED BY LIZ.  

This also works super well to cut the tension between Diane and Liz. I assume this isn’t the end of the name partnership drama, but I think it might be the end of Diane and Liz being pissed at each other. Since the name partnership drama was never really about Diane and Liz (Liz seems to want Diane to stay on...), I’m fine with that.  

Because this is an episode full of callbacks that delight me, Del asks Liz when he gets to meet her son! HER SON STILL EXISTS!  

It sounds like Liz and Del still aren’t fully official, which clarifies why they don’t seem to be a couple in public.  

Del brings up the Diane rumor (jokingly) and Liz jokes along. I love that we get to see this playful side of Liz.  

Wackner’s watching his outburst with regret. Del calms him down and notes that this is good TV (why... would Del air this... it makes DEL look worse than anyone!). Wackner calls Marissa to apologize; she picks up and accepts his apology.  

Abernathy calls Liz and Diane into chambers. He’s worried he was “insensitive”-- he's noticed the tension between Liz and Diane, but now he thinks it was a lover’s spat.

Diane puts on a poker face and leans in towards Liz. She starts nodding attentively and thanks Abernathy. Liz smiles and doubles down: she’s not just going to play along, she’s going to milk it. She gets a juror kicked for homophobia, which means a mistrial. Shameless. I love it.  

Diane and Liz playing off each other as Abernathy tries to look like as much of an ally as possible is comedy gold.  

Diane even calls Liz darling. Omg.  

LCK2 is on the stand, being charismatic and annoying. Of course he is. This is what happens when you give someone who is known for being able to connect with a crowd... a crowd and the benefit of the doubt.

LCK2 is talking about “stupid women” in his new set. Why... is Del giving that a platform at all? See, the fact that Del thinks it is not only interesting but also somehow essential to let LCK2 make jokes about sexual harassment is why I can’t take this episode seriously. Why should I be more outraged about someone who did something shitty not getting a trial for his shitty but legal behavior than I am about powerful people continuing to offer shitty people platforms? Only one of these seems outrageous to me.

Wackner decides that the professor did something “awful but lawful” and that’s it. So you’re saying that if it isn’t illegal, it doesn’t get decided in your court, either? What was the point of this, then?  

The professor says she doesn’t want that—she wants the school to know she’s being punished so she can get her job back. The student storms out, rightfully. Wackner’s job isn’t to offer someone who wants punishment some form of penance, like she can exchange community service hours for offensive remarks. It’s to... well, idk what it is to do, since this whole thing doesn’t really make sense and he makes the rules, but I don’t think his verdict has to be about giving anyone what they want. I’m disappointed that Wackner comes up with a punishment and I don’t think it’s going to get her her job back.  

LCK2 loses, too, because he hasn’t made amends. Wackner doesn’t want to fine him because he’s too rich for a fine to matter. Cord argues that LCK2 deserves a second chance. I mean, sure, but is he being denied a second chance? He doesn’t deserve an easy path back to his fame just because he wants it.  

Wackner mentions prison. At first I was like, oh, that’s a nice throwaway line that he mentioned prison! This ties into what I was saying a few weeks ago about how Wackner likes the institutions that already exist—he just thinks they’re imperfect! It’s fitting that he’s not a prison abolitionist!  

And then the episode actually went there: Wackner, thanks to David Cord’s private prison company, actually sentences LCK2 to prison. This is deeply uncomfortable (and of questionable legality). Wackner’s system is just going to recreate prison? Worse, private prison? He’s creating an unchecked, privatized legal system?! This sounds bad! Kudos to the show for taking this to some place so dark—I knew Wackner’s system would start to show cracks, but I didn’t realize they’d go this far.  

And I’m not sure what the end game is with this! All I know is I’m not on board with Wackner sending people to prison (except as a plot—I am very on board with this plot) and neither is Marissa.

I do not think viewers of the reality show will like the prison twist or the fact that Cord is financing a court and prison! Can you imagine the scandal!

And what do the contracts look like that allow Wackner to sentence someone to prison? Can LCK2 leave any time he wants? If so, then how does the prison sentence help? If not, is that legal?  

Del wants it to be a 2 week sentence, not 3, because this means LCK2 will have to miss his taping in two weeks. I have many questions. (1) Is Wackner’s show airing live? If not, then why do they need to rush the taping of the special? They could push it quite easily. (2) Why can’t they push the taping? This guy is a huge deal and enough potential $$ that Del wants to rehabilitate his career... so why does the taping have to be on this particular day and time?  

Is there really an Exxon Mobile case, I wonder?  

I like that we spend a good amount of time watching Marissa’s reactions to this latest addition to Wackner’s court. Combined with the score, Marissa’s facial expression serves to underline that private prisons are not good here! This isn’t Wackner getting legitimate methods of enforcement... this is just opening a pandora’s box of highly questionable extrajudicial practices.  

I do love that this episode ends up here: it starts out like it’s going to be about cancel culture silliness and ends up being about the escalation of Wackner’s tactics.

Funny how both of the cancelled people end up being found guilty by Wackner, huh! Almost like they actually did something wrong and faced the consequences!  

Liz and Diane get called in to talk to Liz’s favorite department: HR. They’re asked to sign “love contracts” to confirm things are consensual. I find it hilarious that HR gives them the paper before even asking if it’s true.  

Liz grabs a pen and signs. Diane follows her lead. They look at each other and smile politely at HR.

I am... not sure how to read this last scene! Is it a fuck-you to HR? A way of easing tensions? A way for Liz to get people to stop talking to her about removing Diane as name partner because no one will want to ask if they’re really involved? Something else? Help me understand!

Curious to see where things go next. I can see LCK2 coming back for another episode but it also wouldn’t surprise me to never see him again. Similarly, I could see some glances/discussion of Diane and Liz’s romantic relationship next week, or I could see it never being mentioned again, or I could see it being mentioned next season out of the blue.  

[nicollekidman]

Wait whats the background on that west side story revival?

well..... ivo van hove, the director, sucks shit.... amar ramasar, who palyed bernardo, was a predator who also sucks shit, it was bankrolled by david geffen, who famously sucks shit, scott rudin was the major producer who is perhaps the BIGGEST piece of shit we know of working on broadway, and the production itself was absolutely top tier garbage so. we're celebrating bad people not being able to make their terrible show <3

[reginaldqueribundus]

for no reason whatsoever: my last 100 Wikipedia tabs

(from the app)

Ray William Johnson

Kenny G

Spanish flu

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (film)

David Thomson, 3rd Baron Thomson of Fleet

Virgin boy egg

OnlyFans

Free public transport

Mandingo (film)

Imagine (John Lennon song)

Gal Gadot

Barosaurus

Magic Fingers Vibrating Bed

Prostitution in the Netherlands

Patty Hearst

Jessie (Toy Story)

List of serial killers by country

Iridescent shark

Star Trek: Discovery (season 4)

Isenheim Altarpiece

Winnipeg International Children’s Festival

Psilocybin mushroom

Subnautica

World Happiness Report

Chinese dragon

The Anarchist Cookbook

Target Canada

Marion Stokes

Dick Van Dyke

Russell Williams (criminal)

Porter Robinson

Monster (2003 film)

Flag of Georgia (country)

2019–2021 Persian gulf crisis

QAnon

ClayFighter

Kate Bush

Geneva Conventions

Martin Luther King Jr.

List of Canadian provincial and territorial symbols

List of common misconceptions

Sigmund Freud

Immunosuppressive drug

Coca-Cola BlāK

List of pirates

The Big Comfy Couch

Elon Musk

Dan Schneider (TV producer)

Azure Dragon

Dustin Diamond

Black Eyed Peas

A Jest of God

John Harvey Kellogg

On Beyond Zebra!

Garrison Keillor

Iman Vellani

Missing and murdered Indigenous women

Belle Delphine

JonTron

List of former sovereign states

Megan Wants a Millionaire

Murder of Jasmine Fiore

Crime in the United Arab Emirates

Garda Síochána

2021 Suez Canal obstruction

Fremulon

Boshin War

Non-fungible token

Down with Webster

Curry

Darkwing Duck

Hamster

Iraq

Tourette syndrome

Balan Wonderworld

Serfdom

18th century in literature

19th century in literature

15th century in literature

COVID-19 misinformation

4chan

Lindsay Ellis

Brocket 99

My Girl (film)

Comparison of traffic signs in English-speaking countries

Seattle Seahawks

Board of Control for Cricket in India

Jester

List of Nigerian actors

List of Russian film directors

People v. Turner

Johan de Witt

OPEC

Scott Rudin

Constantine (film)

Thylacine

Numerology

Aragorn

I Heart Vampires

Berthold Woltze

[mycinematheque]

[art-now-germany]

Quiff,, Wolfgang Schmidt

Sincerely to: Andy Hall, Sheikha Al Mayassa bint Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, Paul Allen, Edythe L. and Eli Broad, Rosa and Carlos de la Cruz, Patricia and Gustavo Phelps de Cisneros (Venezuela and Dominican Republic), Donald and Mera Rubell, Steven A. Cohen, Theo Danjuma, Maria Baibakova, Adrian Cheng, Ingvild Goetz (München), Victoria and David Beckham, Leonardo Dicaprio, Alan Lau, Camilla Barella, Ralph DeLuca, Arthur de Ganay, Ramin Salsali, Moises Cosio, Pedro Barbosa, Monique and Max Burger, Joaquin Diez-Cascon, Luciano Benetton, Roman Abramovich and Dasha Zhukova (Russia), Robbie Antonio (Philippines), Hélène and Bernard Arnault (France), Maria and Bill Bell (United States), Peter Benedek (United States), Debra and Leon Black (United States), Christian and Karen Boros (Germany), Irma and Norman Braman (United States), Peter Brant (United States), Basma Al Sulaiman, Marc Andreessen, Laura and John Arnold, Camilla Barella, Swizz Beatz, Claudia Beck, Andrew Gruft, Robert and Renée Belfer, Lawrence Benenson, Frieder Burda (Germany), Richard Chang (United States), Kim Chang-il (Korea), David Chau and Kelly Ying (China), Pierre T.M. Chen (Taiwan), Adrian Cheng (China), Kemal Has Cingillioglu (United Kingdom), Nicolas Berggruen, Jill and Jay Bernstein, Ernesto Bertarelli, James Brett, Jim Breyer, Christian Bührle, Valentino D. Carlotti, Edouard Carmignac, Trudy and Paul Cejas, Dimitris Daskalopoulos (Greece), Zöe and Joel Dictrow (United States), George Economou (Greece), Alan Faena (Argentina), Mark Falcone and Ellen Bruss (United States), Amy and Vernon Faulconer (United States), Howard and Patricia Farber (United States), Larry and Marilyn Fields (United States), Marie Chaix, Michael and Eva Chow, Frank Cohen, Michael and Eileen Cohen, Isabel and Agustín Coppel, Anthony D'Offay, Hélène and Michel David-Weill, Antoine de Galbert, Ralph DeLuca, Amanda and Glenn Fuhrman (United States), Danielle and David Ganek (United States), Ken Griffin (United States), Agnes Gund (United States), Steven and Kathy Guttman (United States), Andrew and Christine Hall (United States), Lin Han (China), Henk and Victoria de Heus-Zomer (Holland), Grant Hill (United States), Maja Hoffmann (Switzerland), Erika Hoffmann-Koenige (Germany), Tiqui Atencio Demirdjian, Beth Rudin DeWoody, Eric Diefenbach and JK Brown, David C. Driskell, Mandy and Cliff Einstein, Rebecca and Martin Eisenberg, Ginevra Elkann, Tim and Gina Fairfax, Dana Farouki, Michael and Susan Hort (United States), Guillaume Houzé (France), Wang Jianlin (China), Dakis Joannou (Greece), Alan Lau (China), Joseph Lau (China), Melva Bucksbaum and Raymond Learsy (United States), Agnes and Edward Lee (United Kingdom), Aaron and Barbara Levine (United States), Adam Lindemann (United States), Eugenio López (Mexico), Jho Low (China), Susan and Leonard Feinstein, Nicoletta Fiorucci, Josée and Marc Gensollen, Alan and Jenny Gibbs, Noam Gottesman, Florence and Daniel Guerlain, Paul Harris, Barbara and Axel Haubrok, Alan Howard, Fatima and Eskandar Maleki (United Kingdom), Martin Margulies (United States), Peter Marino (United States), Donald Marron (United States), David MartÍnez (United Kingdom and Mexico), Raymond J. McGuire (United States), Rodney M. Miller Sr. (United States), Simon and Catriona Mordant (Australia), Arif Naqvi (United Kingdom), Peter Norton (United States), Shi Jian, Elton John, Tomislav Kličko, Mo Koyfman, Jan Kulczyk, Svetlana Kuzmicheva-Uspenskaya, Pierre Lagrange, Eric and Liz Lefkofsky, Robert Lehrman, François Odermatt (Canada), Bernardo de Mello Paz (Brazil), José Olympio & Andréa Pereira (Brazil), Catherine Petitgas (United Kingdom), Victor Pinchuk (Ukraine), Alden and Janelle Pinnell (United States),Ron and Ann Pizzuti (United States), Michael Platt (Switzerland), Miuccia Prada and Patrizio Bertelli (Italy), Howard and Cindy Rachofsky (United States), Mitchell and Emily Rales (United States), Dan Loeb, George Lucas, Ninah and Michael Lynne, Lewis Manilow, Marissa Mayer, David Mirvish, Lakshmi Mittal, Valeria Napoleone, John Paulson, Amy and John Phelan, Ellen and Michael Ringier (Switzerland), David Roberts (United Kingdom), Hilary and Wilbur L. Ross Jr. (United States), Dmitry Rybolovlev (Russia), Lily Safra (Brazil),Tony Salamé (Lebanon), Patrizia Sandretto (Italy), Eric Schmidt (United States), Alison Pincus, Heather Podesta, Colette and Michel Poitevin, Thomas J. and Margot Pritzker, Bob Rennie, Craig Robins, Deedie and Rusty Rose, Stephen Ross, Alex Sainsbury, Alain Servais (Belgium), Carlos Slim (Mexico), Julia Stoschek (Germany), Budi Tek (Indonesia), Janine and J. Tomilson Hill III (United States), Trevor Traina (United States), Alice Walton (United States), Robert & Nicky Wilson (United Kingdom), Elaine Wynn (United States), Lu Xun (China), Muriel and Freddy Salem, Denise and Andrew Saul, Steven A. Schwarzman, Carole Server and Oliver Frankel, Ramin Salsali, David Shuman, Stefan Simchowitz, Elizabeth and Frederick Singer, Jay Smith and Laura Rapp, Jeffrey and Catherine Soros, Jerry Yang and Akiko Young (United States), Liu Yiqian and Wang Wei (China), Anita and Poju Zabludowicz (United Kingdom), Jochen Zeitz (South Africa), Qiao Zhibing (China), Jerry Speyer and Katherine G. Farley, Susana and Ricardo Steinbruch, Kai van Hasselt, Francesca von Habsburg, David Walsh, Artur Walther, Derek and Christen Wilson, Michael Wilson, Owen Wilson, Zhou Chong, Doris and Donald Fisher, Ronnie and Samuel Heyman, Marie-Josee and Henry R. Kravis, Evelyn and Leonard Lauder, Jo Carole and Ronald S. Laude, Francois Pinault (France), Udo Brandhost (Köln), Harald Falckenberg (Hamburg), Anna and Joseph Froehlich (Stuttgart), Hans Grothe (Bremen), UN Knecht (Stuttgart), Arendt Oetker (Köln), Inge Rodenstock (Grünwald), Ute and Rudolf Scharpff (Stuttgart), Reiner Speck (Köln), Eleonore and Michael Stoffel (Köln), Reinhold Würth (Niedernhall), Wilhelm and Gaby Schürmann, Ivo Wessel, Heiner and Celine Bastian, Friedrich Karl Flick, Monique and Jean-Paul Barbier-Mueller (Genf), Christa and Thomas Bechtler (Zürich), David Bowie (Lausanne), Ulla and Richard Dreyfus (Binningen und Gstaad), Georges Embiricos (Jouxtens and Gstaad), Friedrich Christian "Mick" Flick (Hergiswil and Gstaad), Esther Grether (Bottmingen), Donald Hess (Bolligen), Elsa and Theo Hotz (Meilen), Baroness Marion and Baron Philippe Lambert (Genf), Gabi and Werner Merzbacher (Zürich), Robert Miller (Gstaad), Philip Niarchos (St. Moritz), Jacqueline and Philippe Nordmann (Genf), Maja Oeri and Hans Bodenmann (Basel), George Ortiz (Vandoeuvres), Graf and Gräfin Giuseppe Panza di Biumo (Massagno), Ellen and Michael Ringier (Zürich), Andrew Loyd Webber, Steve Martin, Gerhard Lenz, Elisabeth and Rudolf Leopold.

https://www.saatchiart.com/art/Painting-Quiff/694205/3616535/view

[uomo-accattivante]

When Paramount released the Amy Adams–starring Arrival in November 2016, it was one of the biggest hits of the year for the studio. It grossed $203 million worldwide, was critically acclaimed, and netted eight Oscar nominations, including Best Picture and Best Director for Denis Villeneuve. On paper, the upcoming sci-fi drama Annihilation looks like a similar project for the studio. It’s from an acclaimed filmmaker (Alex Garland, who made Ex Machina), has a big female star (Natalie Portman), and is aimed at the kind of grown-up audience Paramount has targeted in recent years with movies like Fences, Allied, and The Big Short. Only this time, the studio doesn’t seem eager to be associated with the project.

Annihilation is being released in American theaters on February 23, but with much less promotional fanfare than Arrival got (February is hardly a prime time to release a film for Oscars contention). Outside of the U.S., Canada, and China, the movie isn’t getting a theatrical rollout at all— its international release will be handled by Netflix, to whom Paramount sold the rights in December. This arrangement is practically unheard of for a major studio, since it openly acknowledges that Paramount doesn’t think the film will make money. The move has also prompted a disappointed reaction from Garland, who said he made Annihilation to be seen on the big screen; it’s the kind of decision that could drive acclaimed filmmakers away from working with the studio in the future. So what’s the rationale behind Paramount’s decision?

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Paramount sold the international rights to Annihilation after poor test-screening results last summer indicated the film might be “too intellectual” for general audiences. Based on a bestselling book by Jeff VanderMeer, Annihilation follows a biologist (Portman) as she journeys into a hostile, unknown territory called Area X; trailers for the film have emphasized its suspenseful action and surreal visuals. Garland’s last movie, Ex Machina, was a pint-sized hit, grossing $25 million and garnering an Oscar nomination for Best Original Screenplay. For the indie studio A24, that was a solid result, and it was enough to get the director a deal at a major studio. But it seems Paramount wanted something more mainstream from Garland.

Annihilation will still hit screens in the world’s two biggest markets—the U.S. and China—but the Netflix partnership is an unusually public show of nervousness over the film’s profitability. Paramount can use the money from the deal to help recoup the film’s reported $55 million budget, but if Annihilation is a hit, the studio will miss out on any international grosses. The deal also effectively signals Paramount’s lack of trust in the vision of the filmmaker it hired. According to The Hollywood Reporter, one of the studio’s top financiers, David Ellison, clashed with Garland and the producer Scott Rudin over proposed reshoots that would have changed the ending, which the director refused to budge on. Rudin had final-cut privileges on the movie, giving him control over the finished product, and he opted to back Garland.

It’s a more extreme version of the clash between commerce and artistry that’s repeatedly played out in Hollywood in recent years, though it’s rare for such drama to break out after the film is completed. Marvel hired Edgar Wright to make an Ant-Man movie, and it parted ways with him weeks before shooting started over “differences in their vision of the film.” The Disney producer Kathleen Kennedy had Tony Gilroy reshoot huge portions of Rogue One after dissatisfaction over the initial cut; in the case of the upcoming Han Solo film, she fired the directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller in the middle of production because she didn’t like their overtly comic take on the character. Last year, the former Warner Bros. president Toby Emmerich was reported as seeking to avoid working with “auteur directors” in the future who would be given final-cut rights (aside from established box-office players like Christopher Nolan and Clint Eastwood).

Paramount selling Annihilation’s international rights feels part of a whole with these tales of friction between executives and filmmakers. Rudin’s support of Garland meant the director couldn’t be replaced for reshoots as those other filmmakers were, so instead Paramount is backing out of its commitment to promote and release the work worldwide. Garland has already communicated his negative feelings over the deal (though he acknowledged the Netflix deal would bring the movie to even more viewers). In a December 2017 interview with Collider, the director said he was disappointed to learn Annihilation wouldn’t be seen on the big screen in much of the world, including in his native Britain. “We made the film for cinema. I’ve got no problem with the small screen at all … But from my point of view and the collective of the people who made it—[it was made] to be seen on a big screen.”

Annihilation isn’t a small-scale drama; it’s a visually inventive sci-fi epic, the likes of which major studios have produced for decades. Paramount bowing out of its international theatrical rollout is another example of the industry shifting away from films that aren’t proven box-office quantities. Ironically, the same kind of Netflix deal is reportedly being mulled for another Paramount movie, God Particle, part of the loosely connected Cloverfield franchise. The other two Cloverfield films were hits for Paramount, but according to The Hollywood Reporter, the studio’s new CEO Jim Gianopulos has identified the $40 million–budgeted space thriller as a risk. “He sat down and looked at what is theatrical, what is not in this day and age,” a source told the Reporter. Paramount films like the upcoming Transformers spinoff Bumblebee fit the bill; God Particle and Annihilation, it seems, may not.

Paramount’s decision is partly motivated by internal politics, too. Annihilation was ordered by the late Brad Grey, the studio’s prior CEO, who was ousted in February 2017 after a string of flops. His replacement, Gianopulos, has less attachment to the projects Grey shepherded and is seeking to shore things up after the studio’s disastrous 2017. Almost all of Paramount’s big films last year—Transformers 5, Baywatch, Ghost in the Shell, and Monster Trucks among them—were financial failures, and the only major tentpoles it can look forward to in 2018 are Bumblebee and a new Mission: Impossible movie. But it’s rare for an upcoming film to lose theatrical distribution because of the failure of unrelated past projects; Annihilation, after all, had very little to do with Baywatch not connecting with audiences.

Annihilation and God Particle could be one-off casualties dumped onto Netflix as the studio tries to get its books in order. Or this could be the sign of a more worrying Hollywood trend, in which the very idea of a bigger-budgeted film that isn’t a guaranteed financial success is simply anathema to a big studio, with Netflix used as a last-resort, cost-saving measure. Another studio, New Line, has cut a deal with the service for an upcoming Shaft movie starring Samuel L. Jackson and Jessie Usher, in which the studios split the production costs and Netflix gets the international rights. It’s a model other studios could soon follow. But there’s a difference between making such a deal up front and doing it well after a movie has completed production. (There’s also a certain irony to Paramount collaborating with Netflix when the latter is openly intent on dismantling the model of theatrical release that the former relies upon for commercial success.)

When Garland made Ex Machina in 2015 and released it to strong reviews, healthy box office (it made more than twice its budget worldwide), and Oscar success, he seemed primed as one of the most exciting new voices in Hollywood. He was a perfect candidate to helm a bigger-budgeted studio film. Paramount’s demonstration of its lack of faith in Annihilation is a particularly chilling reminder of how risk-averse many big studios have become, and perhaps a sign to artists to consider taking their work elsewhere.

[insanityclause]

I remember an extra on Avengers could not sing Tom's praises enough, because he encouraged the crowd for filming, and was super personable with extras when not. He threw the wrap party. Then there's ISTL and HR (he gave out mugs!), where he very much lead the set by example (see EO, who was inspired by him). He's given handwritten thank-you letters to crew on his stage jobs. More sets could stand to have a leading man like Tom setting a professional, kind example (looking at you Joss Whedon)

Absolutely. 

Compare to people like Whedon, David O. Russell, Scott Rudin. Night and day. 

[flipper-kisses]

Margot and Rami are doing PR like Rami did for BR to detract from bad press on the director. The studio is thinking of delaying the David O Russell movie because they’re worried backlash against his sexual assault accusations will tarnish Oscar hope in light of what’s been happening with Scott Rudin. So they’re doing PR in the hopes people will talk about them and not the director.

Hooo boy. I did see a comment on Instagram about this.