January 18, 2018

No Image

Today in Movie Culture: 'Blade Runner 2049' Practical Effects, Movies That Inspired 'Phantom Thread' and More

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

VFX Showcase of the Day:

Blade Runner 2049 has some of the best digital effects of last year, but as you can see in the gallery below the sequel also had some great practical models:

Blade Runner 2049 City Miniatures

Movie Influences of the Day:

Watch clips from movies that influenced Phantom Thread, including Rebecca and The Passionate Friends, side by side with similar scenes in Paul Thomas Anderson’s latest (via Free Cinema Now):

[embedded content]

Movie Comparison of the Day:

Now watch clips from the Edward Snowden documentary CitizenFour and the Edward Snowden biopic Snowden side by side:

[embedded content]

Movie Science of the Day:

Kyle Hill scientifically explains why X-Men and Logan character Wolverine would be the ultimate body builder:

[embedded content]

Vintage Image of the Day:

Cary Grant, who was born on this day in 1904, with co-star Ingrid Bergman and director Alfred Hitchcock in color on the set of the 1946 black and white film Notorious:

Actor in the Spotlight:

The latest episode of No Small Parts showcases the movie and TV career of Ann Dowd of The Handmaid’s Tale:

[embedded content]

Video Essay of the Day:

For Screen Smart, Ryan Hollinger celebrates the bizarre violence of Brawl in Cell Block 9:

[embedded content]

Movie Defense of the Day:

In his latest video, Patrick Willems humorously defends the divisive sequel Alien: Covenant:

[embedded content]

Cosplay of the Day:

Speaking of Alien, here’s a cosplayer doing the best Ripley with her own Jones as an accessory:

good cosplay pic.twitter.com/Q5Jd4mWOcK

— Josh Sawyer (@jesawyer) January 18, 2018

Classic Movie Clip of the Day:

Today is the 10th anniversary of the release of Cloverfield. Watch one of the most iconic moments from the modern classic below.

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

USA Gymnastics Severs Ties To Karoyli Ranch Where Olympians Say They Were Abused

Larry Nassar wipes a tear as he listens to a young woman deliver a victim impact statement at his sentencing hearing on Wednesday. Nassar has pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting seven girls but the judge is allowing more than 100 of his accusers to speak.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Editor’s note: This report includes disturbing descriptions of abuse.

Amid a national sexual abuse scandal, USA Gymnastics severed its relationship on Thursday with Karolyi Ranch, the world-renowned training facility where some gymnasts say they were assaulted by the team’s doctor.

“It will no longer serve as the USA Gymnastics National Team Training Center,” USA Gymnastics president and CEO Kerry Perry said in a statement. She added that next week’s training camp for the U.S. National Women’s Team had been canceled.

“Our most important priority is our athletes, and their training environment must reflect this,” Perry said.

Perry’s announcement follows a confession by multi-gold medalist Simone Biles over social media in which she said she is one of several Olympic gymnasts abused by Larry Nassar, who was the team’s doctor for nearly two decades. Former Olympic champions Aly Raisman, McKayla Maroney and Gabby Douglas have also accused Nassar of molestation.

In the post, Biles said was dreading returning to the training facility in Huntsville, Tex.

“It breaks my heart even more to think that as I work toward my dream of competing in Tokyo 2020, I will have to continually return to the same training facility where I was abused,” Biles wrote on Monday.

More than a 100 women are telling horrific stories of abuse by Nassar, as part of a criminal sentencing hearing that started Tuesday and The Associated Press reports will likely end next week.

Nassar has only pleaded guilty to seven first-degree sexual assault charges in Ingham County, Mich., but Judge Rosemarie Aquilina is allowing all of his accusers to speak if they want to before issuing Nassar’s sentence. He has already been sentenced to 60 years in prison for child pornography in a federal case.

On Thursday Michigan Assistant Attorney General Angela Povilaitis read a statement prepared by Maroney, who could not attend the hearing.

She described the doctor as “a monster of a human being.”

[embedded content]
MLiveYouTube

“I had a dream to go to the Olympics and the things I had to endure to get there were unnecessary and disgusting,” Maroney wrote, adding that the abuse started when she was 13 or 14 and ended only when she left the sport.

“He abused my trust. He abused my body and he left scars on my psyche that will never go away,” she said.

Maroney also blamed USA Gymnastics, the U.S. Olympic Committee and Michigan State University for failing to stop Nassar’s behavior. “A simple fact is this: If MSU, USA Gymnastics and the U.S. Olympic committee had paid attention to any of the red flags in Larry Nassar’s behavior, I would have never met him. I wouldn’t have been abused by him,” she wrote.

Jaime Dantzscher, a bronze medalist in the 2000 Olympics, delivered her impact statement in person on Thursday. MLivereports she was one of the first women to publicly accuse the doctor of sexually assaulting athletes, passing off the abuse as specialized medical treatment.

The video below contains audio of Dantzscher’s full statement. Warning: The video contains explicit content.

[embedded content]
MLiveYouTube

She said Nassar massaged her genitals, laid on top of her, rubbing his penis against her and penetrated her with his fingers. The first assault happened when she was 12, she said. She described years of physical and psychological problems, stemming from the abuse, including bulimia and depression. Both led to hospitalization and one suicide attempt.

On Thursday Nassar, who has been sitting in the witness stand since Tuesday, submitted a six-page letter to the judge complaining that it was too hard for him to listen to his accusers while they described how he abused them. He claimed Aquilina had turned proceedings into a “media circus.”

She berated him for criticizing the process. In an MLive video, Aquilina can be heard saying:

“You may find it harsh that you are here, listening, but nothing is as harsh as what your victims endured for thousands of hours at your hands collectively. You spent thousands of hours perpetrating criminal sexual conduct on minors. Spending four or five days listening to them is significantly minor considering the hours of pleasure you’ve had at their expense and ruining their lives. None of this should come as a surprise to you.”

More women are expected to speak on Friday.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

What's The Best Way To Help Refugees Land A Job?

Syrian Kurds take cover from the rain after crossing the border between Syria and Turkey.

Bulent Kilic /AFP/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Bulent Kilic /AFP/Getty Images

It wouldn’t make any sense to send a French-speaking refugee to a German-speaking town in Switzerland.

But under Switzerland’s current system of placing refugees, that’s a situation that can easily happen. This problem isn’t unique to Switzerland, and it’s not the only kind of mismatch that might happen.

The solution, says a new study from Stanford University’s Immigration Policy Lab and ETH Zurich, is the creation of an “algorithm” — in layman’s terms, the set of rules given to a computer that will enable it to reach a specific goal. The algorithm described in the study, published online Thursday in the journal Science, uses data to predict where a refugee — or one person in a family of refugees — has the best chance of getting a job.

It’s especially important to improve the placement process now, during the biggest refugee crisis since World War II, says Jens Hainmueller, a Stanford professor and one of the study’s lead authors.

“There are big questions about how you can facilitate the integration of refugees into host countries, set them up for success and make sure they become productive contributors to the host country’s economy and society,” he says. “It’s a significant challenge for governments that are facing these increasing numbers of refugees.”

Using the algorithm in the U.S. would have improved the employment rates of about 900 refugees by an expected 40 percent, the authors found. Their sample of refugees were those who arrived to the U.S. in the third quarter of 2016 (the most recent data available) who were free to be assigned to any location. They also did a separate test using data from refugees in Switzerland, finding that it would have improved refugee employment rates there by about 70 percent.

To create the algorithm, researchers entered data about refugees who had already been resettled, including their country of origin, language skills, age, resettlement location and employment status. They used that data to create a model that can predict the place within the host country where a refugee (or one person in a family of refugees) awaiting resettlement has the best chance of getting a job. Using those insights, the algorithm then makes recommendations for refugee placements that take into account limitations such as the number of available spots at each location.

“What we focus on is the probability that at least one person in the family finds a job, which makes sense from a family self-sufficiency standpoint,” Hainmueller says.

And the researchers say their inability to point to any one variable as the key to determining refugees’ success in finding a job seems to show that the algorithm is taking advantage of sometimes subtle interactions between variables that humans might not be able to pinpoint.

“There are some places that are just better for refugees in general. They might have stronger labor markets that make it more likely for any refugees to find employment,” he says. “We also found that certain places ended up being a better fit for certain types of refugees depending on their characteristics, things like their age, their gender, their language skills or the ethnic network,” says Kirk Bansak, one of the study’s lead authors. He’s a doctoral candidate at Stanford and a data scientist at the Immigration Policy Lab.

The idea for the algorithm came from workshops the authors had with refugee resettlement agencies in the U.S. and the Department of State about potentially improving the process of deciding where refugees are placed. (They collaborated with one agency on the study but declined to name it.)

“We had heard about all these other potential interventions, like cash assistance or training programs, but our attention very much focused initially on these [resettlement] allocations because we figured out pretty quickly that where you send refugees is a really important driver of their potential integration success,” Hainmueller says.

At the end of 2016, there were 22.5 million refugees around the world, according to the U.N.’s refugee agency. This year, the U.S. will resettle up to 45,000 refugees (in fiscal year 2018) — about half as many as it admitted in 2016.

The way the system works now is that placement officers consider factors such as medical conditions, the availability of interpreters and the location of other family members in the U.S. to help determine where a refugee will live in the U.S.

For refugees who don’t have existing ties in the U.S., placement officers at the International Rescue Committee, one of nine resettlement agencies in the U.S., look at factors such as employment rates and public transportation systems within cities, explains Robin Dunn Marcos. She’s the senior director of resettlement and processing at the International Rescue Committee.

Marcos sees this algorithm as a potential complement to the agency’s placement process.

“Many of the variables that would feed into the algorithm are things that we’ve been using for placement decisions,” she says. “The algorithm definitely seems like a valuable addition to our current approach.”

And as new data is added to the algorithm, it adapts to changing conditions, the researchers say. For example, if an agency adds data that shows newly-resettled refugees aren’t getting jobs in a certain city, the algorithm will be less likely to recommend they be placed there.

Cindy Huang, a senior policy fellow at the Center for Global Development who wasn’t involved in the study, says this algorithm is an example of how innovation can help vulnerable people. (One of the study’s co-authors, Jeremy Weinstein, is a non-resident fellow at CGD.) And it’s an improvement on other ideas she’s seen that involve attempts to use existing technology, like e-learning platforms, to help refugees — but that aren’t cost-effective because they weren’t designed with refugees in mind.

“What the study shows is that you can improve employment outcomes, which are critical to longer-term integration,” she says. “More refugees should be resettled, but this is a way to do more with the number that have already been accepted into a country.”

But since the findings from the algorithm are based on historical data, she cautions that it’s still unproven in a practical setting.

“To validate the findings and see how it works in the messy world, the next step is a trial to see how it performs in the field,” Huang says.

Bansak and his colleagues hope to create user-friendly software and data integration that would allow resettlement agencies to use the algorithm. They’ll need about $100,000 to make that happen, Bansak says.

Marcos sees a potential wrinkle in putting this algorithm into practice in the U.S.: current policies on refugee resettlement.

“When they first started looking at this, it was in the last administration when we were bringing in a much higher number of refugees,” she says. “Not only has the ceiling been slashed in half, but the additional bureaucratic steps that have been put in place have slowed everything down.”

Courtney Columbus is a multimedia journalist based in the Washington, D.C. area. She covers science, global health and consumer health. Her past work has appeared in the Arizona Republic and on Arizona PBS. Contact her @cmcolumbus11.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Roger Severino Discusses The HHS Division Of Conscience And Religious Freedom

NPR’s Kelly McEvers speaks with Roger Severino about the new Department of Health and Human Services Division of Conscience and Religious Freedom, which is intended to protect people from discrimination if they refuse to participate in health services, against their beliefs.

KELLY MCEVERS, HOST:

Now we’re going to follow-up with someone we just heard, Roger Severino. He’s the director of the civil rights office at the Department of Health and Human Services, and his office is charged with investigating complaints made by health care workers under this new initiative. Welcome to the program.

ROGER SEVERINO: Thank you for having me.

MCEVERS: Just explain why the Trump administration has taken this step.

SEVERINO: Well, it comes down to the president’s May 4, 2017, executive order, which was a turning point. He said that we’re going to vigorously enforce federal law protecting religious freedom. He said, we’re a nation of tolerance, and we’ll not allow people of faith to be targeted, bullied or silenced anymore. And this is just a natural outgrowth of that. We have a lot of statutes and laws on the books that protect conscience. They protect religious freedom. They have not been enforced as they deserve to be enforced, and this is a crucial civil right that is now getting the attention that has been long overdue.

MCEVERS: When you talk about tolerance, I have to ask this question. I mean, could this move mean that a woman who wants a procedure like an abortion or someone who is transgender would be denied health care?

SEVERINO: Well, the first thing to think about is that these laws are anti-discrimination laws. They ban discrimination against persons who exercise their conscience in the health care field. It actually enhances diversity to have people from all walks of life with different views on controversial questions able to practice medicine. And these laws…

MCEVERS: But I think my question is about – yeah, I think my question’s about the consequences of that move though, right? The consequences of that move is that someone could be denied a health care procedure that they might want.

SEVERINO: Well, it depends what you’re talking about. I think denial is a very strong word. What these (unintelligible) say is that the government itself cannot discriminate in its federal funding against providers who simply want to serve the people they serve according to their religious beliefs. If you do – or think about the opposite. If you were to ban people from practicing medicine, you’d have religious hospitals excluded from the public square because they want to follow their faith in helping the poor, the sick and the elderly and retain the religious identity without violating their conscience in doing so.

And America has reached a point where people understand that you should not be forcing others to perform abortions against their will. After Roe v. Wade, regardless of what people think about the legality of abortion, most people think that you shouldn’t be forcing other people to perform abortions, pay for them, cover, refer for them, and that’s enshrined in our laws. And that’s what this is about.

This is about enforcing the laws that have been ignored for too long, that have been passed by Congress year after year with bipartisan support. And multiple presidents have signed these laws. And that’s what this is all about – going back to protecting are fundamental principles of conscience and religious freedom.

MCEVERS: Will the civil rights division give equal weight to patients who feel like they have experienced discrimination as a result?

SEVERINO: Absolutely. There is no contradiction between respecting conscience and protecting against discrimination against people of faith and conscience and respecting all of the other civil rights. They’re all civil rights. This is a package of civil rights. They come together. It’s about freedom for everybody. And my office enforces civil rights laws regarding sex, discrimination, age, disability, race, national origin and the whole spectrum. And they will be fully enforced.

MCEVERS: I guess one person’s conscience – right? – can be somebody else’s feeling of being singled out, being considered as part of a group that’s not going to get something that they feel like they deserve. That’s the balancing act here, no?

SEVERINO: Well, I think people understand intuitively with the First Amendment. If somebody takes an unpopular view, the government should not come in and say, you cannot speak because we do not like your views – same thing in the health care space. The government should not be saying, you cannot have a job; you cannot be a nurse because of your views on abortion. This is about tolerance on all sides.

MCEVERS: Roger Severino is director of the civil rights office at the Department of Health and Human Services. Thank you for your time.

SEVERINO: You’re very welcome

Copyright © 2018 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?)