i live in LA....i have seen films since the 60's with a very critical eye. the review here is purely just one disgruntled opinion. actually these kind of trolls are dealt with in the film, and it must have stuck a nerve, so they had to dismiss the real genius of this film. trust me....any person who really knows the difference between,,,, amazingly creative and funny as hell, versus intelligently boring --will come out of this film thinking one thing. i have never seen anything like this before, and it was as entertaining as anything i have ever seen. i kept thinking the whole time watching it...who the hell wrote this..and wheni learned it was a foreigner.....i thought.....well, no one here in LA could have seen this subject, with such a fresh point of view...cause everyone is so....jaded. i have never considered Keaton a actor i would spend two cents on to go see,,,(beetlejuice was it,,,period).....but after seeing him perform in this fantastic twisted surreal romp,,,he WILL win the best actor Oscar. the film also..will win...BEST FILM. mark my words...and go see this... not just great...but ...incredibly brilliant film...right now.
It is easy to reduce this film to its several themes, but not as easy to explain why it so convincingly integrates them into a thrilling piece of art. In such a small maze-like space, Birdman leads us to contemplate the grotesque inanity of public taste, the desperate yearning for recognition and love, the agonizing insecurity of the actor willing to risk everything for validation, the relationship between self destruction and ambition, and the disintegration of a human psyche.
The movie recounts Michael Keaton's psychotic transformation from barely functioning artist into the all powerful cartoon figure "Birdman" . Riggan no longer exists at the end of the film. He has died psychologically and probably physically when he jumps out a window in his hospital room attempting to fly with his fellow birds. It is a brutal, intense journey unbearable to witness but fascinating to watch, superbly acted by all the cast.
I have always measured the quality of a movie by the duration of conversations it inspires among family and friends. We will talk about this one for a long time. It is memorable.
Correction, 957,093 voted early (including by mail) in 2010; 905,055 voted one stop. So we're on track to match if people keep voting at the same high rates Friday and Saturday.
@ForeThoughts, the most recently updated numbers from the Vote Tracker say 689,644 early votes have been cast so far in all of N.C., as of sometime this afternoon I would guess.
In 2010, 957,093 people voted one-stop over 17 days in the whole state. We only have two days left of early voting, so if 100K more vote on each day, plus we have another 50K votes from today, we are roughly on track to match those 2010 numbers (or slightly below).
How does this compare with the 17-day 2010 totals? In other words, are we on track at least to match those numbers?
Yes, right-wing think tank Civitas breaks down ballot data by age, race, sex, party affiliation, county, precinct and congressional district, but even they can't keep up with all the "illegals." You'd think they'd be all over that.
And many are illegals.
Hey, Cameron: I would like to see those numbers, too. Unfortunately, they're not really part of any public record, since *almost* all of them are booked and produced by Live Nation. While the attendance and the price figures are part of the city's public record, as that is how they get paid from the property, the guarantee itself is part of a sealed contract, and I can only make educated guesses as to how high it is. And the city doesn't cover those losses.
You might be interested in this piece, which deals with some of those questions as they relate to Walnut Creek:http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/a-few-shows-and-a-lot-of-land-should-raleigh-sell-walnut-creek-amphitheater/Content?oid=4171285
Thanks so much for reading!
Unrelated, but would love to see this breakdown for venues like Red Hat – Especially with their history of dwindling ticket sales for booked shows in the past.
My husband and I attended the Trace Adkins Concert, our sole reason for attending the fair. After paying $18 to get in the gate and $34 for tickets, we had to sit through about an hour of extremely loud music and singing from a no-name to hear Trace. Trace Adkins' group was extremely loud also. It was to the point we could not hear the words nor music. They both blended together and made a buzz banging sound in our heads. Why can't the musicians or fair folk realize this and have them turn down the sound to a level we can enjoy and understand ? We will really think twice or maybe three times before we purchase to a concert next year.
I think this situation is easy to explain. The cyclist was doing everything correctly and following the law, the driver failed to yield right of way breaking the law. When a driver causes damages, injuries, or death from breaking the law, they are to be held accountable. Usually the defense is able to slither away and put blame on the cyclist/motorcyclist somehow and get away with it. This situation feels much more black and white and I hope you are wrong JE, or i will lose a lot more confidence in our justice system. Maybe the police officers and courts are able to relate to the driver more than the cyclist and that's why these cases end the way they do.
I wouldn't hold my breath on any kind of charges sticking against the driver, certainly not felony. A driver who kills a bicyclist (or motorcyclist) has about as much chance of being held accountable as does a police officer who kills a citizen.
What about failure to yield right of way? A left-cross is exactly that and puts the driver at full responsibility. Felony Death by Vehicle fits the bill with the information available
If it can be proved the driver was speeding, running red lights, turning without signaling, driving with lights off after dusk, driving with an impairment, or in any other way violating established operational standards, then I would be very comfortable seeing this potential misdemeanor infraction upgraded to Felony Death by Vehicle.
What? Even with relevant acts like Vanilla Ice??!?
These are more or less the remarks I made at the American Literature Association conference in Boston in May, 2013 with the exception of some improvisation I injected concerning Bosley Crowther, Manny Farber, and Sam Peckinpah and what I believe their works can contribute to understanding DeLillo. I also used graphic examples from the films of Tarnatino and Kubrick to illustrate how auteurs repeat images from film to film.
Also in NASL news, looks like there's a new book on Amazon about the Silverbacks called Guerrilla Soccer.
your employees have bad attitudes
It’s true that the dark money weedgate ads don’t actually say anything that is false. However, as Mr. DeGrave points out in his article, they omit relevant information.
For example, it is true that Sean Haugh is in favor of letting responsible adults make their own decisions about marijuana…not to mention alcohol, marriage, health care, retirement savings, tobacco and firearms, and so on. But the thing is, that’s not the only reason we should legalize the possession and consumption of marijuana.
Here in the US, we spend billions on arresting, prosecuting, incarcerating, and monitoring the probations of millions of our fellow citizens. About 3% of resident adults in the US are under correctional supervision: that’s over seven million people! And most of those are non-violent drug law offenders who should be getting medical attention as addicts, not having their lives blighted with a felony conviction and a stint in the pokey.
Meanwhile, world-wide income from drug trafficking, most of which is extracted from the US, is estimated to be running around $400 billion annually. And the folks raking that money in are not nice people: typically they belong to violent transnational criminal organizations. We’re not just talking about drugs but also about kidnapping for ransom, human sex trafficking, stealing natural resources, laundering money via big international banks, and corrupting corporations, law enforcement agencies, judges, and politicians. These folks constitute a much more serious threat to our national security than, say, North Korea or ISIS.
Legalizing marijuana by itself would tame the drug cartels. To accomplish that, we would have to end the drug war entirely (which Sean Haugh also supports). But focusing on pot would be a good start: Rand Corporation analysts estimate that up to 26% of Mexican drug cartel profits derive from marijuana; the US government believes the number could be as high as 60%.
So the bottom line is that if you agree with the transnational criminal cartels that the war on drugs is outstanding governmental policy, then you can vote for either Kay Hagan or Thom Tillis, because both of them are fine with the status quo. But, if you are tired seeing the government spend your money ruining the lives of millions of your fellow citizens and enriching the drug lords, then your only choice is to vote for Sean Haugh: the only candidate who would be tough on real criminals.
The whole fourth paragraph of this article is just undocumented opinions, which contrasts sharply with the preceding paragraphs based on NYT reporting.
Can it be that the Indy is full of unsubstantiated opinions , and not reporting like the NYT??
We should celebrate the apartment boom in Durham as a sign on our rebirth and healthy growth. This development helps those in need, much more than the Indy dreams.
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation