April 11, 2016

No Image

Today in Movie Culture: 'Batman v Superman' VFX Breakdown, Alternate 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' Ending and More

Here are a bunch of little bites to satisfy your hunger for movie culture:

VFX Reel of the Day:

See breakdown of shots from Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice before and after their visual effects are added (via Geek Tyrant):

[embedded content]

Abridged Trilogy of the Day:

Want to revisit Christopher Nolan‘s Batman movies after seeing Batman v Superman but don’t have much time? Here’s the whole trilogy in just 90 seconds:

[embedded content]

Alternate Ending of the Day:

How It Should Have Ended have another alternate conclusion for Star Wars: The Force Awakens, featuring a cameo from Spock:

[embedded content]

Movie Science of the Day:

Have you ever wondered why Darth Vader breathes the way he does in the Star Wars movies? Kyle Hill of Because Science explains how the character’s condition was officially studied by anesthesiologists:

[embedded content]

Cosplay of the Day:

See all the best cosplay from Chicago’s C2E2 convention (including one modeled after a Star Wars: The Force Awakens spoiler) in the latest Beat Down Boogie video (via Fashionably Geek):

[embedded content]

Alternate Movie Poster of the Day:

This intricately detailed poster for The Princess Bride by Ise Ananphada is glorious. See her designs for Amelie and The Grand Budapest Hotel at Geek-Art:

Supercut of the Day:

Mad Max: Fury Road really deserves its Oscar for sound editing, which is on display in the following video Hearing Mad Max: Fury Road (via The Playlist):

[embedded content]

Reimagined Movie of the Day:

Hayao Miyazaki’s My Neighbor Totoro is one of the most adorable movies ever, so seeing it sold as a horror movie is a funny stretch (via Design Taxi):

[embedded content]

Film Analysis Parody of the Day:

Brokeback Mountain is given a very bad reading by some aliens from the future in the latest episode of Earthling Cinema:

[embedded content]

Classic Trailer of the Day:

Today is the 30th anniversary of the release of Critters. Watch the original trailer for the sci-fi/horror movie below.

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Al-Jazeera America Prepares Farewell Broadcast

Al-Jazeera America, the U.S. news network backed by the ruling family of Qatar, will sign off for good after a three-hour farewell broadcast on Tuesday.

Though the media outlet struggled to gain traction in the U.S., NPR’s media correspondent David Folkenflik reports that it held the promise of a noncommercial approach to television news. David says that “after an earlier channel called Al-Jazeera English failed to make a dent in the U.S., Al-Jazeera America was built on the acquisition of a liberal cable network called Current.” He adds:

“The deal intended to ensure major distribution, but some cable providers resisted, saying that was a bait and switch. Al-Jazeera executives also promised the channel would not distribute its shows online, which meant that much of its content never became available digitally. Internal strife proved common and Al-Jazeera America never caught on — drawing audiences in the tens of thousands. Ultimately, the channel’s Qatari patrons pulled the plug.”

Al-Jazeera America was launched in the summer of 2013, but — as we reported in January when the network announced it would be shutting down — management problems and paltry ratings soon spelled its demise.

The network’s goal was to produce serious journalism and thorough reports, and it won several awards during its short run, including a Peabody and an Emmy. Its most well-known documentary was an expose that alleged several professional athletes used performance-enhancing drugs. Much of the evidence, however, hinged on the word of one person, Charlie Sly, a former intern at an Indianapolis clinic, who later recanted his story. The documentary was slammed by former NFL quarterback Peyton Manning, one of the athletes implicated in the story, and prompted defamation lawsuits from Major League Baseball players Ryan Zimmerman and Ryan Howard.

The news organization will shut down Tuesday night following a three-hour live farewell designed to highlight the network’s three years of work. The Associated Press reports that the show begins at 6 p.m. and will be run twice before the the network goes dark.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

How Venture Capitalists Shaped The Golden State Warriors

The Golden State Warriors are just one win away from the best regular season record in NBA history. How was the team built? A lot like a Silicon Valley start up, actually. NPR’s Robert Siegel talks to Bruce Schoenfeld, who has written about the Warriors style of play.

Transcript

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

Speaking of superheroes, we don’t know yet if it’s going to be a second championship season in a row, but the Golden State Warriors season is already one for the record books. The National Basketball Association champs beat the San Antonio Spurs last night for their 72nd win of the season. That ties the all-time record, and there’s one more game to play.

What makes the Warriors especially interesting is that their success reflects a different approach to the game – lots of three-point shots from long range by a team that is smaller and faster than most. Bruce Schoenfeld has written about the Warriors style of play and management, and he joins us now. And Bruce Schoenfeld, in a nutshell, what’s so different about the Golden State Warriors?

BRUCE SCHOENFELD: Robert, the differences occur at several levels. On the court level, I think they’re at the vanguard of movement toward more three-point shots, shots from further away than you ever would expect someone to shoot from, which reflects the presence of their accurate superstar, Steph Curry, probably more than anything else.

But what really makes them different, I think, is the structure of the team and the way that the ownership group has created a business that looks very much unlike your traditional sports team.

SIEGEL: It’s worth remembering that just a few years ago, Golden State had one of the worst records in the NBA. How did they go about building this winning team?

SCHOENFELD: Well, they were bought by a group led by a guy named Joe Lacob, who was a Silicon Valley venture capitalist. And Lacob’s great insight was to see all the things that made the Warriors such a downtrodden franchise as opportunities.

And he looked around and said, I can buy this team and I can institute good management practices that aren’t typically used in sports. And with luck, we can be successful. And that was kind of scoffed that from all around the league. But as it turns out, that’s exactly what happened.

SIEGEL: What’s an example of the way in which the Warriors are managed that’s different from the way most teams are?

SCHOENFELD: Well, you know, in Silicon Valley you hire based on potential rather than track record. And that’s mostly because you’re hiring in a lot of categories that don’t yet exist, right?

If someone comes to you and says, I have an idea for a whole new business, a Google or Uber, in a category that doesn’t exist, you can’t hire people that have already done well in that category. You have to say well, you’re smart, and you seem to have been successful in other things, and I like the way you interview. Let’s do it.

So Joe Lacob came in and hired a general manager who had never done that before – he used to be an agent. He hired one coach, Mark Jackson, who had never coached. And then after the Warriors had become relatively successful, winning 51 games in a season, he fired him and hired another coach who’d never done it before.

Again, firing someone after a 51 and 31 season happens rarely in the NBA, but it happens pretty often in venture capital, where you say, OK, you’ve taken this company to a certain level. Now we need someone else who can come in and go the rest of the way. Now the question is, would any of this had mattered if he didn’t have Steph Curry shooting those three-pointers? And that’s not really answerable.

SIEGEL: And that coach who took over was Steve Kerr. So if the best team in the NBA sets up on the perimeter, along the three-point line, and takes lots and lots of three-point shots, and they’re managed differently than other teams – more like a Silicon Valley startup, you would say – are other NBA teams looking at this model and saying, we’re going to be more like the Warriors either on the court or in the front office?

SCHOENFELD: Yes, they are. Two of the greatest groups of copycats that I know of are Silicon Valley venture capitalists and pro sports team owners. So you have a lot of people looking at the Warriors and saying, hey, maybe this is how we should be doing it, too.

The difference, though, I think, is that Lacob was not just a venture capitalist. He was an extraordinarily good one, and has the – a skill set, has a – you don’t want to say lack of ego because he certainly has an ego, but he has in the moment the presence of mind to really listen and gather ideas and use those ideas.

He doesn’t think he’s the smartest guy in the room. I don’t know how many of these other owners that have pretty much succeeded at everything they’ve done – you know, it’s kind of a tall order to say let’s step back, let’s let other people really do the thinking here, and we’ll just be accruers and gather the information.

So there are people who are paying a lot of lip service to the way the Warriors are doing things. It remains to be seen if they can make other franchises successful in a similar fashion.

SIEGEL: Bruce Schoenfeld, who wrote about the Golden State Warriors for The New York Times Magazine. Bruce, thanks for talking with us.

SCHOENFELD: Thanks, Robert.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Medicare Seeks Savings And Innovation With A Switch In Doctors' Pay

The Obama administration is recruiting as many as 20,000 primary care doctors for an initiative it hopes will change the way physicians get paid and provide care.

The program, which was announced Monday, will be run by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The aim is to stop paying doctors based on the number of billable services and visits provided to Medicare beneficiaries and instead to tie payments to overall patient health and outcomes.

“We think there will be a high level of interest across states and regions among primary care providers,” said Dr. Patrick Conway, the chief medical officer at CMS. “The model aligns with how doctors and patients want to practice medicine.”

Under the five-year project, CMS will recruit primary care doctors into two separate payment tracks. Both will include a monthly payment to doctors for each Medicare beneficiary, but the amounts will vary.

The fee for doctors in the first track will average $15 a beneficiary; the physicians will also still be paid for each service they provide. The fee for the second track will average $28; doctors will receive lower fees than those in the first track for each service. (In both tracks, the monthly payments will be higher for patients with more complex health problems.)

The idea is that doctor groups will use the payments that aren’t tied to specific services to develop different ways to provide care, including telephone and video consultations. They might also use care managers to help patients with their medications and chronic illnesses.

The payment change “really allows them to move away from a visit-based, fee-for-service structure,” Conway said on a conference call with reporters.

Doctors who want to participate in the program have to commit to offering patients preventive care, support for chronic illnesses and 24-hour access to health care and health information.

Conway says CMS expects the second track, with lower fees for itemized services, to save Medicare about $2 billion over five years.

The project is based on a pilot program set up under the Affordable Care Act to test new ways to deliver and to pay for health care. The goals are to improving care and cut costs.

Fee-for-service systems encourage too much medical intervention, says Robert Berenson, a fellow at the Urban Institute who has written about medical payment systems. But, he adds, programs that only pay a flat fee for care and result in physicians or hospitals cutting back too much.

“This is an attempt to balance paying for visits at a reasonable rate and then reimbursing substantially for all the other activities that are necessary to provide care,” he says, such as phone calls and coordinating with other doctors.

The CMS program is similar to successful health care payment systems in Denmark and the Netherlands that combine fees for itemized services and flat fees per patient.

Berenson says, however, that CMS’s goal of including 20,000 doctors may be too high. CMS would be better off working out the glitches in the approach with a smaller number of physician practices before rolling it out more widely.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)