October 26, 2017

No Image

Today in Movie Culture: James Franco Does 'The Shining,' When Slapstick Meets Horror and More

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

Theme Park Cameo of the Day:

Watch James Franco and Chris Bauer in disguise as Jack Nicholson’s character from The Shining scaring fans at Universal Studios’ Halloween Horror Nights attraction:

[embedded content]

Mashup of the Day:

Speaking of The Shining, two Stephen King properties come together for this fan art mixing that movie with both versions of It:

Danny has the worst luck in the world!#Shining #It pic.twitter.com/1bkYNMxCmF

— The Horror Museum (@horrormuseum) October 25, 2017

Video Essay of the Day:

In this video essay perfectly timed for Halloween, Matt Draper considers the power of slapstick horror in Evil Dead II:

[embedded content]

Genre Showcase of the Day:

Tis the season for scary movies, so IMDb looks at the specific subgenre of psychological horror in this video:

[embedded content]

Vintage Image of the Day:

Bob Hoskins, who was born on this day in 1942, with director Robert Zemeckis and the title character on the set of 1988’s Who Framed Roger Rabbit:

Actor in the Spotlight:

In honor of the return of The Walking Dead, No Small Parts looks back on the career of Pollyanna McIntosh:

[embedded content]

Movie Science of the Day:

With lots of zombie movie watching going on this month, CineFix’s Reelistic explores the truth about epidemics compared to their cinematic depiction:

[embedded content]

Movie Trivia of the Day:

In anticipation of Halloween, ScreenRant looks at the dark secrets of a holiday favorite, Tim Burton’s Corpse Bride:

[embedded content]

Cosplay of the Day:

For now we’ll just have to imagine this, but Hugh Jackman teases that he’s going as the classic comic book version of Wolverine for Halloween:

Just maybe I will finally wear blue and yellow spandex for my #halloweencostume#tootallpic.twitter.com/0IwL6GoHzZ

— Hugh Jackman (@RealHughJackman) October 26, 2017

Classic Trailer of the Day:

This week marks the 55th anniversary of the release of The Manchurian Candidate. Watch the original trailer for the classic movie below.

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Twitter Says It Will Ban Ads From Russian News Agencies After Interference In 2016 Election

Twitter has said it will ban all ads from Russian news agencies effective immediately. The company made the decision as a result of role these agencies had in interfering with the 2016 election.

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

Twitter has announced that from now on, it will reject all advertising from the Russian news outlets Sputnik and Russia Today, or RT. It will also give away the nearly $2 million it earned from past advertising. Both Sputnik and RT are backed directly by the Kremlin, and U.S. intelligence officials say both were used by the Russian government to help throw the U.S. presidential election into chaos. NPR media correspondent David Folkenflik joins us now with more on Twitter’s move. David, it’s long been known that these two news outlets answer to Moscow. Why is Twitter doing this now?

DAVID FOLKENFLIK, BYLINE: Well, you know, the U.S. intelligence officials came to the conclusion the Russians were trying to disrupt things basically a year ago. It announced earlier this year that they had concluded that the effort was there to really help put a thumb on the scales for President Trump or for now President Trump.

And then, you know, not so many weeks ago, U.S. officials decided to try to make RT and Sputnik register as foreign agents – that is, as entities explicitly trying to do the will of the Russian government in the sense that a lobbyist might or, you know, a – I mean, an agent, somebody acting on the government’s behalf, not simply as a news organization owned by the government. This has put a lot of pressure on organizations that do business with RT and Sputnik to figure out how to respond.

SIEGEL: Well, is Twitter now saying that it agrees with U.S. intelligence agencies that the Russian news outlets tried to tip the election to Trump?

FOLKENFLIK: Twitter’s official statements have actually been relatively restrained, just sort of acknowledging the effort to disrupt and that the ability of RT to take advantage of the viral nature of social media platforms, particularly Twitter in this instance, are things that they have to take into account.

SIEGEL: And what are the Russian news outlets – say about this?

FOLKENFLIK: Well, they’re saying a few things. They’re accusing Twitter of hypocrisy. They’re pointing out that Twitter officials came to them with a rather extensive plan to step up their advertising on the site and that, you know, that Twitter had courted their business. In addition, Russian officials at the Foreign Ministry are saying that this violates all kinds of United States and international protections on freedom of expression, that these are journalistic outlets.

And you know, there is the point being made, I think with validity, that the ads really accomplished less in many cases than some of the content and the news coverage, the framing of things, the misinformation, disinformation and actual stories that got picked up without – for amplification without any subsidy, without any advertising at all.

SIEGEL: Now, the Russians of course aren’t the only ones getting a tough look from Capitol Hill. Three committees are questioning tech giants next week, Twitter among them. You think that had something to do with Twitter’s announcement today?

FOLKENFLIK: Oh, I think that’s not incidental at all. I think there’s a great desire on Capitol Hill to understand how this disruption worked. You know, some more than others want to take action to ensure, to press these companies, to take actions to ensure that this kind of disruption doesn’t happen. There’s some pressure for greater transparency, and of course Twitter and Facebook and Google have always wanted to protect their secret sauce and their algorithms.

And in some corners, there’s a desire to try to pressure these social media outlets in such a way that if they don’t take greater responsibility, that they could be regulated. And I think that’s the greatest fear of all for these social media platform. So you’re seeing them start to take actions and to take conciliatory measures to at least publicly signal their discomfort, which – what occurred on their platforms in the hope of staving off greater government action.

SIEGEL: That’s NPR’s David Folkenflik on the news that Twitter has announced that it will reject all advertising from the Russian news outlets Sputnik and Russia Today. David, thanks.

FOLKENFLIK: You bet.

(SOUNDBITE OF ST. LENOX SONG, “KOREA”)

Copyright © 2017 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 Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Addiction Prevention Advocate On Trump's Public Health Emergency Declaration

Gary Mendell lost his son to addiction in 2011, and went on to form the group Shatterproof, which advocates for better prevention and treatment for addiction. He was at the White House today to hear President Trump’s announcement designating the nation’s opioid crisis a public health emergency, and he shares his reactions with NPR’s Robert Siegel.

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

Gary Mendell listened to the president’s remarks today with special interest. He lost his son to addiction in 2011 and went on to form the advocacy group Shatterproof. He has worked with President Trump’s opioid commission and was in the audience today at the White House. He spoke to me from the White House just as the event was letting out.

Gary Mendell told me he takes heart in the emphasis the president placed on curbing opioid prescriptions on the front lines in doctors’ offices. And now that he knows the will is there, I asked him what concrete steps he’d like to see the administration take from here.

GARY MENDELL: Well, ideally I would like for every prescriber in the country not only to have to be educated in proper prescribing but also to sign a document that they adopt the CDC guideline as a standard of care. And if every doctor in the country were to do that, it would be totally a sea change in prescribing practices.

SIEGEL: The CDC of course the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

MENDELL: Correct.

SIEGEL: What do you say to the observation that even if we got things right at the point of prescribing opioids, we would still have the situation on the streets with fentanyl and with heroin and that indeed a lot of the people in need of treatment are not taking prescription drugs; they’re taking street drugs?

MENDELL: Sure. I would give two responses to that. Number one, let’s have less people become addicted. That’s the best treatment – is prevention. And the best way to do that is prescribing practices. And reducing the number of pills being prescribed is going to reduce the number of people who use heroin or ultimately fentanyl because 80 percent of those who use heroin today started with prescription painkillers.

And then related to treatment, addiction is the only major disease in this country without a national standard of care for the treatment of addiction. You can go to 10 doctors for heart disease. Each of the doctors will treat you the same way. But for addiction, everyone is treated with all different methods. So what this country needs to have is a national standard of care for the treatment of addiction.

SIEGEL: Just one other question, if I might. And I ask this because I know that you’ve – because of the terrible situation with your own son losing his life to addiction. You’ve no doubt thought a lot about addiction and what it’s all about. Some years ago, I went to Kansas where there was an epidemic of methamphetamine abuse, a terrible drug that was really ruining lives. People were cooking it in garages. They were blowing up their homes by mistake in trying to cook this drug. And they were using it without doctors to prescribe, without foreign drug suppliers sending drugs yet into the country. When do we get to whatever the hunger is, whatever the need is for drugs?

MENDELL: Well, there’s no one simple answer. For opioids, it’s very simple in overprescribing. We are prescribing today three times the amount of pills that we prescribed 15 years ago, and we still prescribe four times the amount that they do in the United Kingdom – four times per person. So if we bring that down into balance, everything will improve. Fewer people will become addicted. Less treatment will be needed. Less people will move to heroin because they haven’t started with prescription painkillers. It’s really one simple fix related to the opiate situation. Related to all drugs, as a society, we’re too much about pills for solutions and less about resistance as a society to what we may feel emotionally or pain we may have externally.

SIEGEL: Mr. Mendell, thank you very much for talking with us about it today.

MENDELL: It’s my pleasure. And I really appreciate you bringing awareness to everything we’ve talked about. So thank you.

SIEGEL: That’s Gary Mendell of the advocacy group Shatterproof.

Copyright © 2017 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 Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Winner Of High School Golf Tournament Denied Trophy, Because She's A Girl

Emily Nash, shown on Aug. 8 after winning the Massachusetts Golf Association’s WGAM Junior Amateur Championship. This month, in an unrelated high school tournament, Nash was denied a trophy despite her winning score.

Courtesy of the Massachusetts Golf Association

hide caption

toggle caption

Courtesy of the Massachusetts Golf Association

Updated at 4:15 p.m. ET.

Emily Nash was allowed to play. She just wasn’t allowed to win.

Nash, a junior at Lunenburg High School in Lunenburg, Mass., had the lowest score in the Central Mass Division 3 Boys’ Golf Tournament. But the first-place trophy was awarded to a boy who was four strokes behind her, because of the rules of the tournament.

According to the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association, girls can play in the boys’ golf tournament as part of a team, but they aren’t allowed to be entered as individuals.

That means Nash doesn’t get a trophy, or a spot in the boys state championship.

That was a surprise to her, although her coach was aware of the rule.

“I wasn’t aware that if I won I wouldn’t get the title or the trophy,” she told local TV station WPBF. “I feel like it’s a bit unfair.”

T.J. Auclair, a writer for the PGA, agreed. He called her 3-over-par score “impressive” and wrote that the rule that denied her a trophy is “so bad it makes a shank look good”:

“So, let’s get this straight. Nash’s score which was the best in the field by four strokes, was OK to count toward the team effort, but not OK to count individually?

“And for those wondering, yes, Nash did play from the same tees as the boys, which makes this situation all the more perplexing.

“It’s 2017. This rule sounds like it was created in 1917.”

One volunteer rules official who helped with the tournament told the Worcester Telegram & Gazette the situation is a “real injustice.”

Lunenberg High School doesn’t have a girls’ golf team, WPBF reports. And the boys’ team, despite the boost from Nash’s performance, didn’t qualify for a spot at states.

Nash does qualify to compete in the individual girls’ championship, which will be held in the spring, MIAA says in a statement.

“Female golfers have been welcomed to participate on a boys team in the fall if their school did not sponsor a girls golf team in the spring,” MIAA writes. “It has been clear to participants that female golfers playing in the fall boys team tournament are not participating in an individual capacity. “

“The individual tournament opportunity for female golfers takes place during the spring season,” the group said.

Nash’s father told the TV station, “It is what it is. Those are the rules of golf, and she plays by the rules.”

But pro golfer Brittany Altomare — who is from central Massachusetts, and played in the boys’ state tournament when she was in high school — said the rules should be changed, in this case.

Very disappointing. Gender does not matter she played the same tees a win is a win. She should be allowed to play as an individual in states as I did. https://t.co/jkcicYNC0a

— Brittany Altomare (@Britt_alto12) October 26, 2017

And David S. Cohen, a law professor at Drexel University, says the rule raises Title IX concerns. The law does does allow contact or skill-based sports to be separated by gender, he says — so MIAA could have kept girls out of the boys’ tournament completely.

“But … once they say, ‘We’re going to let girls participate,’ they’re required by Title IX to treat them equally,” he says. “And denying someone the trophy and the championship is far from treating them equally.”

He cited the case of a female Duke student who was allowed to try out for the football team. The courts ruled that once she joined the team, she had to be treated the same as the men.

Meanwhile, the male athlete who was awarded first place offered to give his trophy to Nash, saying she had earned it.

She declined but said she appreciated the gesture.

“He came over and said he didn’t win the tournament, that I did,” she told WPBF. “It was really nice of him and respectful.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)