text:
Tag Archives: U.S. Army
You see dead people.
(2016) Sci-Fi Horror (Netflix/Legendary) James Badge Dale, Emily Mortimer, Bruce Greenwood, Max Martini, Cory Hardrict, Clayne Crawford, Gonzalo Menendez, Ursula Parker, Aaron Serban, Stephen Root, Royce Pierreson, Jimmy Akingbola, Philip Bulcock, Ryan Robbins, Dylan Smith, Louis Ozawa Changchien, James D. Dever, Mark O'Neal, Michael Bodie, Declan Hannigan Directed by Nic Mathieu
There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of by the minds of mortal men. Sometimes the minds of mortal men think up some amazing things. Some of those things are way too dangerous and should be left alone.
A group of elite U.S. soldiers are in the country of Moldova whose government has collapsed. They are attacked by something strange; glowing vaguely human beings that might be ghosts who kill with a single touch. The commander of the U.S. force (Greenwood) calls in DARPA scientist Mark Clyne (Dale) who developed goggles that allow men to see the invisible to the naked eye spectral beings.
He is accompanied by Fran Madison (Mortimer), a CIA analyst who believes that the deaths are the result of some super-weapon that the insurgents have developed. Using the goggles that Dr. Clyne built, the soldiers determine that the specters can't be harmed with small arms fire. Clyne modifies searchlights so that they can see the specters more easily. They also find out that the creatures, which can move through solid walls, can't go through iron. They modify their explosive devices so that they fire iron filings at the things.
The soldiers find a laboratory and discover to their shock that these specters were the results of weapons experiments in which human beings were duplicated with advanced 3D printers and are kept alive by the brains of the originals. However, control was lost of the experiment and now the city is full of these specters and it won't take long before they overrun everything.
This was originally developed at Universal as part of their deal with Legendary who had just separated from their long-time distributors at Warner Brothers. However, when push came to shove the studio declined to release the film and Netflix eventually snapped it up. So Netflix essentially got a ready-made (relatively) big budget genre film.
Dale has been on the ragged edge of leading man duties for awhile and this should have been a career boost but sadly it likely won't be now. That's a shame; he's a fine actor and while I don't think this particular role really benefits him well, he at least does a decent enough job with an underwritten role that is largely a video game character.
In fact the whole movie reminded me of a video game. Sort of like Call of Duty meets Aliens with a dash of Ghostbusters thrown in only with the humor excised. That might work for some but I think it's a serious miscalculation. People who like videogames want to have some control rather than passively watch someone else's vision. The filmmakers would have been better served to make this less of a videogame cinematic.
The special effects aren't half bad in some places and while the plot tends to meander a little bit, it doesn't do so enough to make the film incomprehensible. I can see why Universal hesitated about releasing this wide; it seems to appeal to a niche audience and given that most videogame adaptations have been epic failures both critically and at the box office, I'm not sure that a videogame adaptation of a game that doesn't exist would do any better. It seems tailor-made for Netflix and while I thought it was a bit disappointing, it is entertaining enough and interesting enough to be worth a look.
REASONS TO GO: Some of the special effects are nifty.
REASONS TO STAY: The plot is a little bit convoluted.
FAMILY VALUES: There are some intense sci-fi action sequences.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: James Badge Dale and Max Martini also played military roles in 13 Hours.
BEYOND THE THEATER: Netflix
CRITICAL MASS: As of 3/26/17: Rotten Tomatoes: 80% positive reviews. Metacritic: No score yet.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: The Objective
NEXT: The Salesman
Posted in New Releases, VOD Review	| Tagged 3D printer, angry ghosts, Bruce Greenwood, cinema, Cinema365, Clayne Crawford, DARPA, Emily Mortimer, Films, goggles, human experimentation, James Badge Dale, Jimmy Akingbola, Legendary Films, Max Martini, Moldova, movies, Netflix, patrols, refugee children, Sci-Fi Horror, specters, Spectral, spotlights, Stephen Root, U.S. Army, VOD Reviews	| Leave a reply
Arrival (2016)
Posted on December 8, 2016 by carlosdev
Amy Adams contemplates an interplanetary craft.
(2016) Science Fiction (Paramount) Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker, Michael Stuhlbarg, Sangita Patel, Tzi Ma, Abigail Pniowski, Mark O'Brien, Jadyn Malone, Ruth Chiang, Anana Rydvald, Julia Scarlett Dan, Nathaly Thibault, Leisa Reid, Frank Fiola, Russell Yuen, Pat Kiely, Larry Day, Joe Cobden, Julian Casey, Carmela Nossa Guizzo, Andrew Shaver, Genevieve Sirois. Directed by Denis Villeneuve
We take language for granted. After all, despite the many languages on the planet, we are basically aware of all the various alphabets and pictographs that make up written language. We are also the same species and can communicate non-verbally if necessary. What happens when we encounter an alien species with whom we have no basis for communication?
Louise Banks (Adams) is a linguist teaching at a fairly well-known university. One day her class – already sparsely attended – is interrupted by the students all getting excited texts over the phone. At last Louise, watching her students abandon her classroom, finds a television set and discovers that an alien spaceship has arrived in Montana. As it later turns out, it is one of twelve positioned all over the world.
Of course, the big question is "what do they want?" When the military in the form of Colonel Weber (Whitaker) knocks at her door, she takes the opportunity. What scientist wouldn't want to be among those making first contact with an alien race? Certainly not Ian Donnelly (Renner), a theoretical physicist who is also on the team whom Louise meets on the way to the landing site, although landing is perhaps a misnomer; the alien vessel floats majestically 28 feet above the ground. It's not as if Louise has anything holding her at home, as she is completely alone. She often thinks about her teenage daughter Hannah who passed away of what appears to be cancer.
As it turns out, the aliens appear every 18 hours like clockwork but nobody has been able to communicate with them yet which is of course why Louise was brought in. The team enters the spaceship via a scissor lift which gets them to a certain point; after that the aliens thoughtfully manipulate gravity so the team can make it comfortably the rest of the way.
They appear behind a glass barrier with swirling white mist. The aliens, gigantic grey beings with seven limbs are dubbed "heptapods" as they somewhat resemble octopi with a missing limb. Louise discovers that the circular shapes that they conjure up in the mist is their written language. With eleven other scientific teams also working to make contact in places like Siberia, China and Venezuela, the scientists work overtime trying to interpret the alien language. Louise begins to make breakthroughs, understanding that the squiggly circles all represent concepts rather than letters of an alphabet.
However, differences in opinion over what the squiggly circles mean begin to raise tensions between the various nations. The Chinese are certain that the aliens are trying to give them a weapon and their leader, General Shang (Ma) has cut off communication with the other teams. The CIA type (Stuhlbarg) at the Montana site is inclined to believe the same thing. Now the race is to prove that the aliens are not out to start a war or destroy humanity utterly and it's a race that Louise is not sure she can win.
This is based on the story "The Story of Your Life" written by scientist and science fiction author Ted Chiang and from what I understand the movie is remarkably faithful to the short story. Villeneuve went to great lengths to insure the scientific accuracy on his production which also deserves kudos. This is most definitely not for those who think sci-fi movies should be full of lasers and space battles and sleek spaceships. The spacecraft used here resembles a contact lens more than anything and is pretty much bare and featureless. Villeneuve purposely made the alien environment foggy and grey with almost no color whatsoever. Some might find that boring.
Those who like their sci-fi cerebral won't find this boring. The concepts brought up by Chiang and Villeneuve include our perception of time, the importance of language, and of course our perspective on our place in the universe. There are also themes of loss, grief and faith. Villeneuve doesn't really spoon-feed you anything; he sets you up with an idea and allows you to process it however you choose. Not everyone will like that; my lovely wife felt that she was condescended to although to be truthful I didn't feel that way at all.
Adams who is already one of the top actresses in Hollywood today moves to another level here. Her Louise is surrounded by an air of sadness and regret. There is already much Oscar buzz around her performance here and she will certainly merit consideration for a nomination. It is a layered performance that is both emotional and smart. Roles that change the way you think about an actor are few and far between; this is one of them.
It is always refreshing to see a movie that really isn't like any other. Sure, first contact films have been done in many different ways but none quite like this one. Denis Villeneuve has put forth a bold claim to being one of the best filmmakers of this era; his filmography certainly backs it up. Arrival may be the best movie the French-Canadian director has done and given what he has on his resume that's saying something.
REASONS TO GO: The script is profound and thought-provoking. The filmmakers don't skimp on the science. Adams gives an Oscar-worthy performance. Arrival shows out of the box thinking on nearly every level of filmmaking.
REASONS TO STAY: May be too cerebral for some.
FAMILY VALUES: Some profanity is briefly uttered.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Renner and Adams previously co-starred together in American Hustle.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 12/7/16: Rotten Tomatoes: 93% positive reviews. Metacritic: 81/100.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Contact
NEXT: All We Had
Posted in New Releases	| Tagged Amy Adams, Arrival, based on a short story, CIA, cinema, Cinema365, college professor, Denis Villeneuve, Films, first contact, Forest Whitaker, heptapods, interplanetary craft, Jeremy Renner, linear time, linguist, loneliness, Michael Stuhlbarg, movies, Paramount Pictures, perception, predeceased, reviews, Science Fiction, scientific team, Ted Chiang, theoretical physicist, Tzi Ma, U.S. Army	| Leave a reply
NIghtingale (HBO)
Posted on August 9, 2015 by carlosdev
Happy wife, happy life.
(2015) Drama (HBO) David Oyelowo, Barlow Jacobs, Heather Storm. Directed by Elliott Lester
It isn't often that we here at Cinema365 review movies made for television, even for HBO, perhaps the most prestigious maker of television movies. While 'tis true that Nightingale got a limited and minuscule theatrical release both here and abroad, this movie, which continues to play on the cable giant and is also available on such streaming/downloading services like Amazon Prime, iTunes and Vudu, demands attention.
Peter Snowden (Oyelowo) has just done a very bad thing. He has brutally murdered his mother. She is a Bible-thumping, domineering woman who constantly treats her son, who served in the Army in the Middle East, as a child, refusing to allow him to invite an army buddy, Edward, over for dinner. That appears to be the last straw.
Except that Peter isn't what you'd call the most reliable witness. He has anger issues, is a pathological liar and clearly delusional. He is falling apart and his matricidal actions have sent him spinning further out of control down the darkest path a man can take.
This is a one-man show, depicting Peter within the confines of his home. He records video blog segments, speaks to his sister on his cellphone and at times attempts to wheedle Edward into coming over, generally speaking to Edward's wife Gloria who doesn't want Peter within a hundred miles of her husband (and for good reason).
To Peter, Edward is more than a friend – "I would do anything for that man," he declares and judging by his level of obsession towards him we can believe it. As the movie progresses we discover that Peter's fondness for Edward may go beyond Army buddies; there is certainly some romantic and even sexual overtones that are never overtly stated, but are clearly there.
What makes this film work is Oyelowo's brilliant performance. Snubbed by Oscar for his work in Selma which by all rights he should have gotten at least a nomination for, he has been at last embraced by Emmy for which he has justifiably received a nomination. We are put in a fairly confined space with Oyelowo and he has to hold our interest for 90 minutes essentially all by himself, and he does so superbly. There is a great deal of nuance, from the fits of rage, the moments of sadness and loneliness, and the calm near the end when events are spiraling towards their inevitable conclusion.
Of course, it's not just a crazy war veteran talking to himself, although there are moments of that. We hear him trying to deflect concern of his sister and his mother's friends from church who all want to know where she is; their increasing suspicions drive Peter further around the bend. Besides the phone conversations, he talks to a folding mirror in which his reflection is refracted into three separate images, an overt symbol of his splintering mind, and often he addresses his dead mother as if she is still with him. At other times he feels crushing guilt for what he has done.
This is an emotional roller coaster ride, the intensity of which might catch some by surprise and others may be too much to handle. The filmmakers pull no punches; they make no judgment on Peter (and in fact at times we feel sympathy for him) but only present his deeds and his words for review. Certainly we recoil in horror at what he does to his own mother (thankfully, all off-screen) and at his attitudes towards those who would keep him away from Edward who more and more seems to resemble some sort of life preserver to his psyche which is clearly going under.
This is very much like watching a car accident; you're horrified but you can't look away. If I have a quibble with the movie, it is that at times it is more acting exercise than film, but the acting is so extraordinary that you can forgive the movie its flaws.
We have reviewed documentaries that HBO has created, and this and other films have shown an increasing willingness from HBO to exhibit their films in theaters, which of course is an entirely different experience than seeing their films at home. This is a movie that works perfectly well on the home screen and in fact, that may be a better medium for a film like this. Regardless, Oyelowo's performance is worth viewing all by itself; it is one of the finest you will see in a theater or at home this year.
REASONS TO GO: An exceptional, Emmy-nominated performance by Oyelowo. Realistic and intense.
REASONS TO STAY: More acting exercise than movie.
FAMILY VALUES: Adult themes. Some foul language.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Very loosely based on a case that occurred in Illinois.
CRITICAL MASS: As of 8/9/15: Rotten Tomatoes: 81% positive reviews. Metacritic: No score yet.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: 'night, Mother
NEXT: Trainwreck
Posted in New Releases	| Tagged cell phone, cinema, David Oyelowo, dinner, Drama, Films, grocery store, HBO Films, home movies, mirror, movies, Nightingale, one-man show, psychosis, reviews, smoking, U.S. Army, vlog, war veteran	| Leave a reply
Posted on May 1, 2015 by carlosdev
Doing the monster mash.
(2015) Action Horror (Radius) Johnny Harris, Sam Keeley, Joe Dempsie, Kyle Soller, Nicholas Pinnock, Parker Sawyers, Philip Arditti, Sofia Boutella, Michaela Coel, Hassan Sha'er, Uriel Emill Pollack, Jessie Nagy, Wael Baghdadi, Jacqueline Hicks, Amanda Kaspar, Donna-Marie Foster, Orlando Ebanks, Tonya Moss-Roberts, Billy Roberts, Lulu Dahl. Directed by Tom Green
It's often hard to tell the monsters from the non-monsters. Sure, there may be some dead giveaways – fangs and claws dripping blood, for example but often the greatest monsters hide in the skins that blend in with everyone else.
Those who remember the predecessor to this film will know that a NASA probe had crash-landed in Northern Mexico, releasing alien spores that grew into life forms large and small (mostly large). The whole portion of the country had been cordoned off by both governments, designated an infected zone and few beyond the military were allowed to enter.
Ten years after, it's discovered that a fragment of the probe had also landed in the Middle East and that part of the country had been infected as well. The United States military were conducting bombing raids on the gigantic creatures. The collateral damage of homes destroyed, lives lost and lives altered had infuriated the local populace who want the Americans to go away post-haste. Insurgent groups were now proving to be as deadly to American troops as the monsters themselves.
Four guys from Detroit who'd grown up together – Michael Parkes (Keeley), Frankie Maguire (Dempsie), Karl Inkelaar (Soller) and Shaun Williams (Sawyers) – and are marching off to war together. One last night of drug-fueled debauchery with strippers and they're in-country. Heading their unit is Sgt. Noah Frater (Harris), a tough as nails sort who has no compunction shooting an insurgent leader from hiding while in disguise or leading his team in full uniform.
They have a mission to head into the boondocks to find an American squad who is missing. Frater and his right hand man Forrest (Pinnock) don't have much faith that these still wet-behind-the-ears recruits will be of much use but they will have to make due. Of course, things go sideways and the group is under attack from insurgents who are as well-armed as they are, and who have a good deal of military savvy too. Soon the mission is put aside for survival as Parkes watches his friends die, and begins to suspect that Frater may not be altogether stable.
The first movie was something of a romance road movie hybrid with the monsters thrown in for good measure. Here, this is like a mash-up of Full Metal Jacket, American Sniper and Cloverfield.
The first film's director Gareth Edwards rode the critical success of it straight into the recent reboot of Godzilla and so he was unavailable for the most part for this film, although he does carry a producer credit; his input was fairly limited. His absence is notable; the movie here has some elements of his style but it's certainly completely different in tone. I have to say that in many ways this doesn't measure up to the first film very well.
The monsters are more numerous in the sequel, with the gigantic skyscraper behemoths, herds of tentacle-covered gazelles (why do alien life forms always have tentacles in the movies?) and tiny little things that fit in a jewel box. The creature effects here are outstanding and the movie is better when the monsters are around.
The humans don't fare as well. The soldiers are chest-thumping, gung ho hoo-rah sorts that have populated American films depicting the military to the point where you would wish for a behemoth to come and crush the lot of them just to get the stink of testosterone out of the air. I get it, this is a band of brothers. Now get on with the movie. This tendency is particularly ironic as the actors are all British and this is a British film.
There are some beautiful images here; the monsters themselves can be majestic and have a curious dignity; when mating, they create a light show that is absolutely thrilling. The Jordanian desert (where this was filmed) is stark and beautiful in its desolation. For the soldiers it must have seemed an alien landscape indeed, particularly for those used to the urban decay of the Motor City.
However, the beauty is marred by occasional confusion, at least on my part. The soldiers are kind of interchangeable and one can mix one up with another, other than the officers and of course Parkes. The plot occasionally meanders into "doesn't-make-sense" territory as the soldiers go deeper into the desert, not unlike Benjamin Willard getting deeper into the jungle in Apocalypse Now. Maybe this is meant to be something of a tip of the hat to that film.
The point here is that the monsters are not the insurgents and they aren't the aliens either. The Americans insist on seeing the things that are different from them culturally and biologically as threats and react to them with fear and violence. While Parkes, as the main character in many ways, grows into learning not to fear, Frater certainly doesn't get it and is determined to complete his mission even if he's the last survivor to do it.
I appreciate the parallels to our mis-adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq and am willing to take responsibility for my country's often ill-advised forays into the Middle East. I don't appreciate our the military bro-hood being emphasized to the point that I kind of got sick of it. I know the military can sometimes be a little too….enthusiastically military shall we say? Those of us who haven't served likely don't understand the culture and the intensity of their feelings. Life and death situations will do that to you. However, I can't help if this is how the world sees us…and how much truth there might be to their viewpoint.
REASONS TO GO: Creature effects are striking. Captures chaos of war nicely.
REASONS TO STAY: A little too gung-ho American in places. Detroit prologue a bit too long. Too many interchangeable characters.
FAMILY VALUES: Graphic war violence, disturbing images, plenty of salty language, nudity and sexual content, drug use and a partridge in a pear tree.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: Scoot McNairy, the lead actor in the original Monsters doesn't appear in this movie but he is an executive producer on the film.
NEXT: Offshoring commences!
Posted in New Releases	| Tagged action horror, aliens, ambush, British cinema, cinema, Detroit, Films, firefight, gun battle, insurgents, Johnny Harris, middle east, Monsters: Dark Continent, movies, NASA probe, Nicholas PInnock, Radius, rescue mission, reviews, roadside bombs, Sam Keeley, school bus, sequel, sniper, soldiers, U.S. Army, war drama	| Leave a reply
Posted on August 24, 2014 by carlosdev
Channing Tatum tells a disbelieving Abbie Cornish about his years as a stripper.
(2008) Drama (Paramount) Ryan Phillippe, Abbie Cornish, Channing Tatum, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ciaran Hinds, Timothy Olyphant, Victor Rasuk, Rob Brown, Quay Terry, Josef Sommer, Matthew Scott Wilcox, Connett M. Brewer, Linda Emond, Mamie Gummer, Alex Frost, Chandra Washington, David Kroll, Lee Stringer, J.D. Evermore, Kasey Stevens. Directed by Kimberly Pierce
For those of us who have never been to war, the things are troops that have been to war have been through is absolutely inconceivable (and yes, I do know what the word means). We absolutely have no clue. Coming home and readjusting to life after having been through those horrors has to be hard. The threat of being sent back after having been home – damn near impossible.
Steve Shriver (Tatum), Tommy Burgess (Gordon-Levitt), Rico Rodriguez (Rasuk) and their squad leader, Staff Sergeant Brandon King (Phillippe) survive an ambush in Tikrit during the Iraq war that leaves three of their squad dead, including Tommy's close friend Preacher Colson (Terry) who died in his arms. Rodriguez was severely injured in the melee protecting Tommy. None of them got out unscathed.
A couple of months later, the tour ended, Shriver, Burgess and King returned home to Brazos, Texas where they were received as the heroes they were. At a ceremony honoring the returning heroes, U.S. Senator Orton Worrell pulls Brandon aside and lets him know that anything he needs, his friends need, any help the Senator can give will be gladly given.
Despite all this, the boys aren't adjusting well. After the ceremony, they all go out and get drunk. Steve strikes his fiancée Michelle (Cornish) and digs a foxhole in the front yard. When Brandon comes over the check on him, he is unable to get through to Steve and reassure him that they are home. Tommy drives over drunk after his wife (Gummer) has kicked him out.
Brandon suggests they drive up to "the Ranch," a small cabin in the forest outside of town where they go to hunt, fish and drink. Tommy ends up shooting his wedding gifts after the cards are read. Steve, awakened by the commotion, shoots the cards to put an end to the proceedings.
The next day the three report to the local army base, expecting to receive their discharge papers and formally end their tour of duty. Instead, they are ordered back to duty through the military's controversial "stop-loss" policy which gives the military the right to extend the tour of service without the consent of the soldier. Brandon isn't ready for this. He refuses to report and is listed as AWOL. With his friends falling apart, Brandon decides to drive to DC to see the Senator to see if there is something he can do about this. Accompanying him is Michelle, who is separated from Steve. Can Brandon take on the Army and get his life back?
Pierce, whose previous film Boys Don't Cry was one of the most acclaimed movies of the last decade, seems a little bit muddled here. It's plain that she has a point of view critical of the stop-loss policy but she doesn't seem to know how to express it well.
She does know how to get the most of her actors and Tatum gives a strong performance, something he hadn't been known for up until that time when many – including myself – thought him wooden and more of a pretty boy than an actor. He gives Steve depth and foreshadows better performances in the post-Magic Mike era of his career.
Cornish, an Aussie, shows here why she is one of the most exciting young talents in the movies right now. She nails the perfect Texas woman – strong as a longhorn bull but tender and feminine as the proverbial Texas rose. There are reasons you don't mess with Texas and their women are a big reason why. Cornish makes Michelle represent that in a big way.
There is a good movie in the material but I get the sense that the writers didn't really know where to go with it. The ending is a big slap in the face to the audience who have followed the plot and committed to it, sadly and keeps this movie from being a flawed classic. Good performances and a thoughtful premise make this worth checking out but sadly, the filmmakers can't elevate this beyond another movie about the Iraq war that is ignored by the moviegoing public.
WHY RENT THIS: Strong performances by Cornish and Tatum. Has a lot of material to think about.
WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: Mishandles a good premise. Ending is just plain awful.
FAMILY VALUES: There is some fairly graphic violence and foul language throughout.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The script went through 65 drafts, which is a highly unusual number. Most feature films go from anywhere from two or three drafts to a dozen.
NOTABLE HOME VIDEO EXTRAS: There is a featurette that takes a look at the actors boot camp to get them into a military character mindset.
BOX OFFICE PERFORMANCE: $11.2M on a $25M production budget.
SITES TO SEE: Netflix DVD, Amazon (rent/buy), Vudu, iTunes
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Brothers
NEXT: The Taqwacores
Posted in DVD Review	| Tagged Abbie Cornish, alcoholism, ambush, AWOL, Channing Tatum, Ciaran Hinds, cinema, Drama, DVD Reviews, Films, foxhole, Iraq, Iraqi war, Josef Sommer, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, justice, Kasey Stevens, Linda Emond, Mamie Gummer, movies, movies about the Iraqi War, Paramount, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, PTSD, readjustment, Rob Brown, Ryan Phillippe, Stop-Loss, suicide, survivors guilt, Texas, Tikirit, Timothy Olyphant, U.S. Army, veterans, Victor Rasuk	| Leave a reply
My Country, My Country
Dr. Riyadh works both sides of the fence.
(2006) Documentary (Zeitgeist) Dr. Riyadh al-Adhadh, David Brancaccio, Carlos Valenzuela, Aaron Castle, Kristopher Scarcliff, Maria Hinojosa, Andre Remmers, Richard Armitage, Edward Wong, Scott Farren-Price, Peter Towndrow, Edward Robertson, Renato Gonclaves. Directed by Laura Poitras
There are many reasons to be against having our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Here in the United States, we tend to look at it from the standpoint of the safety of our soldiers and that is certainly valid. We want the brave men and women of our armed forces home safe. In a perfect world, they wouldn't need to be in harm's way.
We don't, however, generally look at it from the viewpoint of the occupied territory. One award-winning filmmaker, Laura Poitras (whose Flag Wars won a Peabody Award in 2003) spent nine months on her own in Iraq during the height of our presence there in 2005. She followed Dr. Riyadh al-Adhadh, a physician who runs a free clinic in Baghdad, a father of six and an activist in the Iraqi Muslim party and a devout Sunni.
He is running for public office during Iraq's first democratic elections since the fall of Saddam Hussein but has an uphill climb on that score – many of his fellow Sunnis are boycotting the election, believing them to be a sham and an American manipulation. While Dr. Riyadh is an outspoken critic of the American occupation (we see him visit the notorious Abu Gharib prison and interview some of the inmates through the barbed wire fence), he believes in democracy for the Iraqi people as being the best outcome possible for them.
Poitras also spent time with a team of Australian security contractors whose job turned out to be a lot more than insuring the delivery of ballots to and from the polling systems – at one point they make a weapon buying run to northern Iraq. She was also allowed to attend American military briefings, getting the point of view of the occupiers who were fully aware that the elections would provide the perfect opportunity for dissidents to kill lots of people and wanted to insure the safety of those wishing to vote.
We get a sense of the deep division within the Islamic community of Iraq, as moderates and extremists vie for control of the country. We also get a sense of the utter chaos that this great country has descended to, at least as of 2005. I certainly hope that things have improved there since then although I have to be honest – my gut feeling is that they haven't, at least more than negligibly.
I wound up truly admiring Dr. Riyadh; he is a man committed to the betterment of his community and his country. He was fully aware that his positions which he was unafraid to make public put a target squarely on his back and on that of his family (they joke about it near the end of the film). Poitras also had a target on her back but surprisingly it was from her own government; she was observed filming from a rooftop during an ambush sequence (which she denied at the time and later admitted to); detractors claimed she had prior knowledge of the attack and since the filming she has been put on a Homeland Security watchlist as a terrorist sympathizer, which is absolute bollocks in my opinion but then, it's not backed on anything concrete other than my belief that her status is more of a knee-jerk reaction on the part of the HSA. I would assume if they had any concrete evidence that she was supporting anti-American behavior that she'd have been arrested by now.
In any case, I found the film to be an objective look at the occupation from the viewpoint of the occupied, one which we should be considering. I got the sense that Dr. Riyadh and other Iraqis are not so much anti-American but anti-occupation; they want their country back and who could blame them? It's sad however that Poitras has been regarded with suspicion and harassment for presenting these views; perhaps while we are so concerned with attacks on the Second Amendment, we might also take a look at attacks on the First as well.
WHY RENT THIS: A look at occupied Iraq in as an objective a fashion as you're likely to ever see.
WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: I found it hard to follow in places and at times wasn't sure what was going on.
FAMILY VALUES: There are some disturbing images and a little bit of bad language.
TRIVIAL PURSUIT: First aired as a part of the prestigious PBS P.O.V. documentary series, this was an Oscar nominee for best documentary feature in 2007 although it didn't win.
NOTABLE HOME VIDEO EXTRAS: There is 15 minutes of additional footage shot at Abu Gharib.
BOX OFFICE PERFORMANCE: $33,620 on an unreported production budget; I'm guessing the movie probably broke even.
COMPARISON SHOPPING: Ghosts of Abu Gharib
NEXT: Accidents Happen
Posted in DVD Review	| Tagged 2007 Oscar Nominee, Abu Gharib, Baghdad, ballots, cinema, democracy, dissidents, Documentary, DVD Reviews, elections, Films, Homeland Security, HSA, insurgents, Iraq, Laura Poitras, movies, My Country My Country, Saddam Hussein, security consultants, Sunnis, U.S. Army, U.S. occupation, Zeitgeist Films	| Leave a reply
Ol' green eyes is back!
(2008) Superhero (Universal) Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, William Hurt, Tim Blake Nelson, Ty Burrell, Christina Cabot, Peter Mensah, Lou Ferrigno, Greg Bryk, Paul Soles, Debora Nascimento, Robert Downey Jr., Bill Bixby, Brandon Cruz. Directed by Louis Letterier
All of us have some sort of demon inside of us. They are of varying size and ferocity, with varying holds on us but we all have one. Some, however, have demons that are far more evident than others.
Dr. Bruce Banner (Norton) is living as inconspicuously as possible in a suburb of Rio de Janiero, working in a soft drink factory. When he is at home, he is doing complex research trying to reverse his condition – when his heart rate goes over 200, his physiology changes, turning him into a green behemoth of enormous strength and agility. Banner had accidentally irradiated himself with gamma radiation in an effort to find ways to regenerate cells but which now the U.S. Army in the person of General "Thunderbolt" Ross (Hurt) wants to create an army of behemoths. Complicating matters is that Banner's girl is Betty Ross (Tyler), the general's daughter. Yikes.
Banner runs afoul of some toughs working in the factory and when they attack him and set his heart rate above 200, Banner hulks out just as the army arrives to capture him. Let's just say it doesn't go well for the army.
Banner returns to Culver University in Virginia where Betty now works and where she is dating psychologist Dr. Leonard Samson (Burrell). Betty is reluctant to reunite although she clearly still has feelings for Bruce but the suspicious Dr. Samson turns Bruce in and he is captured. But Emil Blonsky (Roth), a British Special Forces agent charged by General Ross to capture Bruce, has taken a super soldier formula and forces Dr. Samuel Sterns (Nelson), a genetecist who has been secretly working with Banner, to inject Banner's blood into his veins, turning him into an abomination. Only Banner as the Hulk can save the city now.
This movie is inevitably going to be compared to Ang Lee's 2003 Hulk starring Eric Bana in the Banner role; the earlier version is a much more cerebral turn which was excoriated by fans and critics alike, but which I found to be much better than it was given credit for. This new Letterier-directed version is much more action packed, which is what fans wanted. Consequently it got better marks from fans although that didn't translate into astounding box office.
Norton makes a terrific Banner; thoughtful, haunted and a little bit short on the fuse, temper-wise. There was a fall out between Norton and Marvel over the editing of the movie, causing the actor to distance himself from the film and Marvel to hire Mark Ruffalo for the upcoming The Avengers movie in the Bruce Banner role. One can only wonder what Eric Bana thinks of all this.
The action sequences are spectacular as you might expect although the CGI Hulk is still not quite as effective as he might be. There is more a connection to the Marvel universe here, with Doc Samson and the Abomination both in the mix and Hurt makes am mighty nice villain. This isn't the perfect Hulk movie, but it's a very good one and with homages to previous Hulk incarnations (including the Ang Lee version) in various ways, this is a fanboy dream.
WHY RENT THIS: Action-packed and a compelling story to underline it. Norton does a good job with the Banner side.
WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: Some of the CGI doesn't quite work.
FAMILY VALUES: There is a good deal of sci-fi/comic book violence and a few frightening images.
TRIVIAL PURSUITS: Paul Soles, who played Stanley the pizza parlor owner, provided the voice of Dr. Bruce Banner in the animated "Hulk" TV series in the 60s.
NOTABLE DVD FEATURES: In the Blu-Ray edition, there's an animated comic book feature that is also a part of the U-Control feature that allows viewers to access behind-the-scenes content while watching the film.
BOX OFFICE PERFORMANCE: $263.4M on a $150M production budget; the movie was just shy of being profitable.
TOMORROW: Please Give
Posted in DVD Review	| Tagged Bill Bixby, Brandon Cruz, cinema, DVD Reviews, Edward Norton, Films, gamma radiation, genetics, Greg Bryk, Hulk, Liv Tyler, Lou Ferrigno, Marvel Comics, military, movies, New York City, Peter Mensah, Rio de Janeiro, Robert Downey Jr., superhero movies, The Incredible Hulk, Tim Blake Nelson, Tim Roth, transformation, Ty Burrell, U.S. Army, Universal Pictures, Virginia, William Hurt	| 2 Replies


LYNCHBURG, Va. � The Gardner-Webb men�s soccer team played to a scoreless tie on the road against Big South Conference foe Liberty on Saturday afternoon.
Runnin� Bulldog goalkeeper Scott Krotee made six total saves to keep the home team off the scoreboard over the 110 minutes of action.
Gardner-Webb (3-13-1, 2-4-2 Big South) hosts Presbyterian at 7 p.m. Wednesday.
GWU volleyball goes 1-1 for weekend � The Gardner-Webb volleyball team beat host Campbell 3-0 on Friday but fell 3-1 at High Point on Saturday.
Erin Anderson�s career-high 21 kills led GWU (9-18, 4-6 Big South) on Saturday, with Tyler Cockrell adding 14 kills.
Anderson (13 kills) and Cockrell (10 kills) also paced the Runnin� Bulldogs� Friday win, with Molly Rhyne adding a season-high nine kills against the Camels.
Gardner-Webb plays at East Tennessee State on Tuesday at 7 p.m.
Sawyer, Stanton-Brooks pace GWU � Elisabeth Sawyer�s 5K time led the Gardner-Webb women�s cross country team, and Josiah Stanton-Brooks� 8K time was tops for the GWU men, as both teams picked up 10th-place finishes on Saturday morning at the 2012 Big South Conference championship meet.
Sawyer, a senior from Charlotte, finished in 19:29.34 to take 37th.
Stanton-Brooks, a senior from Seattle, ran a season-best 27:35.09 to finish 52nd.
Gardner-Webb�s men�s and women�s cross country teams return to the course for NCAA Regionals, which will be run at Charlotte�s McAlpine Park on Nov. 10.


If you have trouble printing these documents and are using MS Internet Explorer, please Switch to Firefox. If you still need help, email us, and the documents can be sent in Word format as attachments. Documents are in English unless otherwise noted.
All material on this website is for the exclusive use and promotion of ICAT events only. All rights reserved.


text:
Faith/Morality
Thank You GOP For Passing 'Right to Try' Over Democrat's Objections
by Jeff Dunetz | Jun 2, 2018 | Politics
An amazing thing happened last week, Congress passed a bill that would actually allow Americans to decide for themselves what risks their willing to take when it comes to prolonging their lives.
The Right to Try Act is an essential piece of legislation that allows terminally ill patients, in consultation with their doctors, to take medication that has not yet been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The hope is that by eliminating the bureaucracy that would stop terminally ill patients from making use of cutting-edge medicine, we could save thousands of lives that would otherwise perish before the cure is finally approved.
Senate Democrats tried to scuttle a bill that would allow terminally ill patients the opportunity to take experimental medication in an attempt to prolong their lives. The move didn't work, though it did force passage of a bill that some supporters of "Right to Try" admit was not the best version of the law to be proposed.
Trending: Schweizer Does It Again With New Book, 'Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America's Progressive Elite'
It's a head-scratching move by the Democrats, but Mark Thiessen at the Washington Post thinks he understands why they did it:
Completing this poll grants you access to The Lid updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Imagine the horror of learning you have a terminal illness for which science has not yet come up with a treatment. Now imagine receiving the same diagnosis, and then learning a promising new treatment exists that could save your life — but you can't get access to it thanks to governmental obstacles.
[Michelle] Wittenberg formed "Andi's Army" to lobby the Texas state legislature to pass a "Right to Try" law which would grant those in Texas with terminal illnesses (and who have exhausted all FDA-approved treatments) access to investigational drugs — so long as they have been proven safe in clinical trials, are part of the FDA's ongoing evaluation process, and the company developing the medication is willing to make it available. In 2015, Gov. Greg Abbott (R) signed the "Andrea Sloan Right to Try Act" into law.Today, 40 states have passed similar laws (including Indiana, where then-Gov. Mike Pence signed it into law). And on Wednesday, President Trump will sign a national Right to Try Act into law.
In the states, Right to Try has not been a partisan issue. The first 24 state legislatures approved the bills by a collective vote of 3,045 to 26. In most instances, it passed without a single dissenting vote. The issue brought together politicians who never worked together on any other issue.
But, sadly, this spirit of bipartisanship did not translate to Washington. Only 22 House Democrats voted for the final bill that Trump will sign. In August, a version introduced by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) passed the Senate by unanimous consent, but stalled in the House, which eventually passed a more limited bill from Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.). Last week, Senate Republicans tried to accommodate Democratic objections by bringing up the Walden bill for a vote, but Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) blocked it from coming to the floor. So the House passed the Johnson version, with Democrats nearly united in opposition.
In other words, Democrats in Washington managed to take an issue that unified literally thousands of legislators from both parties in 40 states, and turned it into a divisive, party-line vote. Thanks to Trump, Americans facing terminal diagnoses will now have a new chance at life. How tragic — and pathetic — that Democrats refused to join him in making that happen.
The Act was of great importance to Vice President Mike Pence who has been championing similar legislation for years.
He spoke passionately about the subject, just before President Trump signed the Act into law this past Wednesday.
Today, President Trump will deliver on a promise that he made to the American people, now more than two years ago. On the campaign trail, our President made it clear that this would be the administration that would open new pathways to treatments for families struggling with serious illness.
Four months ago, the President stood before the Congress of the United States and he said, and I quote, "Patients with terminal conditions should be given access to experimental treatments that could potentially save lives." And in a few moments, President Trump will sign this policy into law and give new hope to vulnerable families all across America. (Applause.)
There are several people to thank before I introduce the President. First and foremost, I want to thank the members of Congress who are here today; members of the Senate and the House of Representatives who work tirelessly and on a bipartisan basis to advance this legislation. This is how Congress should work to advance the interests of the American people. (Applause.)
I also want to thank these remarkable families, some of whom are on the stage and others who are sitting and others who are looking on across the country. These remarkable families who stepped up in a time of great hardship and pain and struggle in their lives to make America a better place for other families.
They fought to improve the access to the American people, to life-saving medicines and care. And to these families I say, thank you for what you've done for the American people. (Applause.)
Three years ago, I met a young boy from Indiana who is one of my heroes. And Jordan McLinn and his mom, Laura, helped us advance Right to Try in the Hoosier State. And I can tell you, from even before Inauguration Day came, Jordan found us and was a champion for Right to Try on the national level.
Another family we met along the way in Lancaster, in Pennsylvania, an 11-year-old boy named Zack, who I'm told is with us here today. He told me about his dad. Zack stood up at a Trump rally, and he bravely walked to the microphone and he asked me if President Trump was elected, if we'd get Right to Try to help his dad and to help a friend, both of whom are struggling with ALS. And I told him then that President Trump would get it done. And, Zack, President Trump got it done today. (Applause.)
And finally, I just want to thank a President who keeps his word to the American people every day. A President who cares deeply about the families of this country, especially vulnerable families — families that are struggling economically, and families that are struggling with serious illness.
I can tell you, every day of this administration, President Trump has fought to advance the interests of American families. And today, he keeps a promise that he made. And it's a promise he made from his heart, as you'll hear in just a few moments.
You know, not long ago, I met a little boy named Levi Delimpo — struggling, as many of the families here are struggling. And his mother told me that they have a verse that they cling to. It's a verse from the book of Jeremiah that says, "I know the plans I have for you; plans to prosper you, and not to harm you; plans to give you a hope, and a future." It's a verse about faith. It's a verse about hope. And to these members of Congress, to these courageous families, to a President who keeps his promise, let me say with a prayer on my lips: Thank you for giving a hope and a future to these and other American families.
Become a Lid insider!
Appearance On CBS Proves Jerrold Nadler Can't Read, Or Is Liar (Video)
Report: Ocasio-Cortez Might Be Looking To Take Out Chuck Schumer
Copyright © 2020 The Lid Blog. All Rights Reserved.
We invite you to become a Lid insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Gallstones are hardened deposits of digestive fluid that can collect in the gallbladder. The gallbladder is a small organ in the abdomen that holds bile before it is released into the small intestine as part of the digestive process. When they form, gallstones can range from as small as a grain of sand to as large as a golf ball. People with gallstones may have only one, or they may have many.
We all know that exercising is key to maximizing your weight loss after bariatric surgery, but exercise is also good for other things. Adding lean muscle means your body will burn more calories even when it's at rest. It can also reduce your risk of chronic diseases, like high blood pressure, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes.


In a private care arrangement, the care recipient gets support and assistance with daily activities such as cooking and shopping, and is helped to stay independent within the community. Part-time care and housekeeper companionship can also be successful arrangements.
Here we look at the pros and cons of employing a private care company.
Private care can be flexible, allowing as much or little care as you want. A reputable agency such as Guardian Carers will tailor a unique plan based around your requirements.
Disadvantages are that with some other agencies, different staff may be used from time to time meaning a lack of consistency.
Work out your budget: Consider the length of time you need care for, and make an estimate. Take into account pensions and savings. Check eligibility for Attendance Allowance.
Think about what's important: Your values matter. Specify if, for example, you want a female carer.
Get reviews and testimonials: Look online for recommendations.
Get information from different agencies so you can compare providers. State how often you want them to visit, what activities require help, and your budget.
Contact the agencies that can meet your needs and arrange to meet with them.
Ask whether staff references are taken up before offering work, and what happens if the carer is off sick. How many different carers may visit? What sort of training and qualifications do the carers have?
Enquire if the private care company has a standard contract you can see, and ask about hourly charges. You could also check about bank holiday cover and how and when payment is required. Ask what insurance is in place, and whether a trial period is possible.
Private agencies need to be registered with the Care Quality Commission. The agency may belong to the United Kingdom Homecare Association (UKHCA), which has a Code of Practice.
It is almost always considerably cheaper to arrange live-in care compared to the costs of a residential home, Normally private care is charged at an hourly rate - usually around £15–30 per hour. The costs will depend on the sort of care you want and it can be possible to pay upfront on a retainer basis, or to pay by Direct Debit.
The agency has to conduct an assessment of your needs before putting forward their care plan. This considers the assistance you need, and information about any illness.
Your mental status and ability to communicate will be assessed, and any problems with mobility or continence will be noted. Dietary preferences and cultural requirements are also important, and the agency may look at any health and safety issues based around carers accessing your property.
These steps should help you to find a good carer arrangement for yourself or a loved one.


text:
JSW, Lodha, 18 other firms keen to invest Rs 2,000 cr in Jaypee's projects
November 13, 2017 November 13, 2017 Brian Sanchez
JSW Steel and Lodha Group are among the 20 entities that have evinced interest to invest Rs 2,000 crore to complete the pending real estate projects of debt-laden Jaypee Group firm Jaypee Infratech.
According to sources, the Sajjan Jindal-led JSW Steel in association with Jaypee Group's flagship Jaiprakash Associates has expressed interest in the project.
Besides, sources said, the Mumbai-based realty firm Lodha Developers has submitted an expression of interest (EoI) for completing the projects as per the insolvency resolution plan.
The EoI invited by insolvency resolution professional (IRP) has received response from various entities, including corporates and asset reconstruction companies.
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has admitted the application by an IDBI Bank-led consortium seeking resolution for Jaypee Infratech under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Moving ahead with the process, the NCLT-appointed IRP Anuj Jain had on October 27 issued a public notice seeking applications from entities with regard to Jaypee Infratech.
The last date for submission of EoI was November 7.
Jaypee Infratech has defaulted on Rs 526.11 crore outstanding loan to IDBI.
The company, which is into road construction and real estate business, has constructed the Yamuna Expressway, connecting Delhi and Agra. The company is developing more than 30,000 flats in Noida, most of which are incomplete.
Home buyers have been protesting against significant delays in completion of the projects.
As per the public notice issued by IRP, the interested body corporates having minimum net worth of Rs 1,000 crore as well as investment companies and fund houses with minimum assets under management of at least Rs 1,000 crore will be eligible to put in their applications.
Net worth, the total of share capital and free reserves, as on March 31, 2017, will be considered while deciding the eligibility of the applicants.
Listing out the eligibility criteria, the IRP had said the parties interested will have to satisfy the mandatory requirements of the resolution plan provided in the IBC and its regulations.
They should have the ability to execute real estate projects either directly or through joint ventures, contractors and the like through a resolution plan to be sanctioned under the IBC.
The corporate entities should be of good financial health and repute as well as have the ability to invest Rs 2,000 crore or more to complete the construction of flats.
Interested parties should protect the interest of home buyers generally and in particular by timely construction and possession of flats.
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court refused to allow Jaypee Associates to deposit to Rs 400 crore with its registry as against Rs 2,000 crore directed by it, and asked the real estate firm to submit a substantial amount to prove its bona-fide.
The bench then said that the firm may consider depositing at least Rs 1,000 crore by November 13 with its registry.
Pomerantz Law Firm Reminds Shareholders with Losses on their Investment in Diana Containerships Inc. of Class Action Lawsuit and Upcoming Deadline – DCIX
Ventura Law Provides Thanksgiving Turkeys for Danbury Daily Bread Food Pantry


March of the incompetents: why are politicians so useless?
It was once said that all political careers end in failure. This now seems optimistic: most of them simply carry on.
We have an overload of failure in politics at present, it is saturated in failure, it has an embarrassment of it. There is the monumental kind, of course, like invading a country for a dud reason or calling a referendum you can't win: that's always cropped up on occasion. But also on the rise is the kind of obvious, flunking-a-school-test sort of failure that reveals a terrible ignorance, or a basic misunderstanding of one's brief.
This week's howler came from the Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab, who confessed he "hadn't quite understood" how reliant Britain's goods trade was on the Dover-Calais crossing. Britain, he mused, was a "peculiar, frankly, geographic economic entity," or in other words, an island that is quite close to France, the entry point to its biggest trading partner.
Last week it was Jeremy Wright, the culture secretary, turning up to talk with a room full of editors and taking five attempts to come up with the name of a single female newspaper columnist, and even then remembering just the one. He also admitted—this man in charge of overseeing the country's media—that he doesn't subscribe to any British papers or magazines, before sniffily adding that he "wouldn't answer pub quiz questions," a line which might have been more effective if he hadn't just tried quite so disastrously to do so.
A few weeks earlier there was something more serious, when the Northern Ireland Secretary Karen Bradley told a journalist that on accepting her post she had not known that "people who are nationalists don't vote for unionist parties and vice versa," the fundamental fact of politics in the province.
And not long before that, the Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson, when asked how the Kremlin should respond to the expulsion of 23 of its spies, publicly urged Russia to "go away and shut up." A spectacular gaffe from a supposedly professional performer in international relations.
Now, before you point out that politicians have always messed up—no doubt Cicero occasionally forgot the price of a pint of milk when put on the spot—I can just about remember a time when this still had consequences. And you don't need to go back to a lost postwar golden age when several ministers round the top table would have written important books. No, I'm thinking in particular of poor Chloe Smith, the junior minister fed to Newsnight to explain the Treasury's U-turn on fuel duty rises, who was mauled alive when she struggled to explain where the money for the freeze would come from or when she had heard about the policy. That was in 2012. The interview, which stood out as infamous, was said to be "career-ending," and she was indeed relieved of her economic brief within months. Six years on, it looks like just another evening in British politics.
For there is Williamson, undaunted, undamaged, cheerfully and incompetently stonewalling questions on live television until cut off by Richard Madeley. There is Bradley, career prospects intact, meeting Northern Ireland's main parties in early November in an encounter described as—what else—"an embarrassing waste of time." There is Diane Abbott, whose struggles with basic arithmetic have become a reliable feature of her interviews, sailing magnificently on, her days equally un-numbered. Smith must be raging.
The received wisdom is that the public and the media have recently become more tolerant of slip-ups because they are now overshadowed by bigger political battles—Brexit, the event horizon that absorbs all else, and to some extent the rise of Donald Trump. But it isn't true. We have in fact become less tolerant: the more urgent and unwieldy the larger crises, the more viciously we focus on the small but certain, the interview stumble, the awkward dancing, the badly eaten chips. Bradley's slip-up got a week of headlines, and a viral meme on Twitter, #ThingsKarenBradleyNeverKnew. When an MP flubs an interview, the internet takes note.
No—it is the politicians themselves who have changed. Two weeks of bad headlines was once enough to finish a career. No longer. Now it is something to take in your stride. A shamed minister in the centre of the storm now treats the media as celebrities do the paparazzi: they sweep on by, rolling their eyes. The truth is they're not shamed at all, because they've forgotten how to be.
Mention their terrible drubbing on television? A haughty brush off. Question them about a political pratfall? Why are you so obsessed with them? "Disgraced" MPs now simply carry on with their day the best they can, condemnation in every headline over breakfast, a thrashing on the World at One, then lunch, before turning up to a television studio for a mildly inconvenient evening beasting. Parties used to regard major broadsheets as important political barometers; now they regard them as they might old men grumbling about the weather.
It is a strange evolution for politicians, this new ability to take a public shaming, for weeks, and suffer no consequences. Perhaps it has something to do with social media: attack politicians long enough for indefensible reasons—their race, their gender, their religion—and they'll grow hard, protective shells. Perhaps it has something to do with the precarious main parties, balanced perfectly in their weakness, and their wobbly leaders who feel the need to reward loyalty over competence. Or perhaps it means something more troubling. Perhaps the reason politics is stuffed with incompetents is because the media is weakening. It still shouts, but no one hears. It can no longer hold them to account. That really would be a catastrophic failure.
Who are the longest serving parliamentarians of all time?


What Is The Best Bakeware Set For Beginners?
When it comes to baking, you need to be prepared with all the tools that baking requires. There are actually a lot of tools that you will need if you want to learn how to bake – from measuring cups and spoons down to springform pans and other molds. You will have to be equipped with at least a small set in order to create multiple types of baked goods.
The main benefit of having a bakeware set at your disposal is that you will have practically everything you need to create various baked dishes such as cakes, cupcakes, breads, and even casseroles. Most sets will include the basic tools beginners can use.
Whether you are cooking for your family or you want to start a business, these bakeware sets can help you accomplish the dishes and pastries you want to try. It's a good idea to go for a bakeware set as well instead of buying pans individually so you can be assured of the consistency of the product you are buying.
With the multitude of bakeware set options out there, it's only right that you pay more stringent attention to what you are buying. After all, you are paying money for it. You don't want to waste that money by choosing low-quality bakeware set that will only last a couple of uses.
Bakeware sets can come in various shapes and sizes. Before you purchase a set, make sure that the pans and trays will fit your available storage space. Also make sure that each piece can be stored or placed in your countertops or even freezers and refrigerators.
As for the ergonomics, try to choose a bakeware set that comes with a nice set of handles that you can comfortably grip with or without oven mittens. Handles are usually overlooked when buying bakeware sets. This is an easy mistake that you could easily avoid if you pay attention to the design of the bakeware set.
Bakeware sets can be made with an assortment of materials including stainless steel, porcelain, Pyrex, and silicon. If you ask me, each of these materials come with their own pros and cons, but each of them is really effective when it comes to baking.
Stainless steel is very durable and easy to clean, great for those who don't want to spend too much time scrubbing their pans and trays. Porcelain and Pyrex are very attractive, easy to clean, but can be fragile. Some extra care is needed when handling these materials. They can also be a bit heavy. Silicone is very light, flexible and easy to clean but isn't exactly the prettiest bakeware out there.
How big the pans and trays you should get will depend on your baking needs. If you're a beginner, I suggest getting a set with a medium size. Doing so will allow you to create small to medium sized baked goods, just ideal for practice since you won't end up with too much waste if anything goes wrong.
To determine the overall usability of the bakeware set, determine whether all of the pieces that come with it can be useful for you. Make sure that the bakeware set you are getting will provide you with all the tools you need.
I would also like to suggest not going for bakeware sets with too many pieces if you don't really need them. Getting a bakeware set with too many pieces will only cost you more money and more space in your kitchen. Stick with basic pieces if you don't plan on doing a lot of baking yet.
If you're looking for a durable bakeware set that's also ideal for beginners, then you must check out this Calphalon Nonstick Bakeware Set.
What's great about this bakeware set is that it is made of completely heavy-gauge steel that makes it easy to clean and maintain. It's material also allows it to become warp-resistant despite being subjected to high heat temperatures.
Another interesting feature of this bakeware set is that it comes with a non-stick interior that can release food up to 2x better than classic Calphalon bakeware.
This set comes complete with 2 8-inch round cake pans, a 13-inch by 9-inch cake pan, a 12-cup muffin pan, a 15-inch by 10-inch cookie sheet, and a medium-sized loaf pan. It's just right for small to medium baking needs.
This bakeware set also comes with a highly attractive design. It has a light color that will allow you to easily pair it with your existing kitchen utensils and will also let you have an easier time preventing common issues like browning.
Lastly, this bakeware set is also very easy to clean and maintain since it is completely non-stick and dishwasher-safe. It even comes with a handy 10-year manufacturer warranty that you can rely on if you ever need any fixes or replacements.
Another great bakeware set for beginners is under the Rachael Ray brand. For those of you who aren't familiar with Rachael Ray, she is a TV celebrity chef known for creating all sorts of dishes including baked ones.
If you decide to get this 5-piece bakeware set from Rachael Ray, you will get a set of pans that you can use for making cookies, brownies, pizzas, or even small bread.
What's great about this bakeware set is that every piece it contains is completely made of durable carbon steel. It even comes with silicone grips that will allow the pieces in the set to be comfortable to the touch and easy to grip even with oven mitts on.
This set is also able to withstand temperatures up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit, the ideal temperature for most baked dishes.
Lastly, this set comes with a very attractive design that will make it easy for you to pair it with your existing kitchen appliances and utensils. It's even completely non-stick for easier cleaning and maintenance.
Needless to say, whether you plan to use this bakeware set for yourself or if you plan to give it as a gift, it can surely make any person have an easy time when it comes to baking whether they're a beginner or not.
These are beautiful bakeware pieces. The agave blue is a nice color accent.
It truly has a non-stick surface. Customers had no issues baking even the stickiest of recipes.
The pans have a nice weight.
It offers an even cooking surface. There are no cold spots.
This is another cooking set from Rachael Ray's line of bakeware sets. If you want more pans and trays for baking this is a good option for you because it has more pieces than the former bakeware set.
This set comes with a very attractive design that will make it easy for you to pair it with your existing kitchen appliances and utensils. It's even completely non-stick for easier cleaning and maintenance.
What's great about this bakeware set is that every piece it contains is completely made of durable carbon steel. It even comes with silicone grips that will allow the pieces in the set to be comfortable to the touch and easy to grip even with oven mitts on.
I highly recommend this for those on a budget. It has an affordable price tag, great for those who still haven't decided on what kind of bakeware will truly suit them. It has a nice chocolate brown color that can match your existing cookware at home. This is made from a heavy gauge steel that can protect it from common bakeware issues like scratches and warping.
What makes this different from others is the raised circles on its nonstick coating. This prevents baked goods from sticking to the surface of the pan. Not only is this easy to use and easy to clean, it is also backed by a hassle-free lifetime guarantee.
This 10-piece set has everything you might need for baking. It's not just ideal for beginners, it can be useful for experienced bakers as well. For a 10-piece bakeware set, it is quite affordable.
The nonstick coating truly delivers when it comes to prevent baked food from sticking to its surface. It heats up evenly, so your pastries will be cooked well. The design is also attractive, making this a great gift idea as well.
All of these are winners in my book but let me help you out further in making a decision. Get the Perlli Complete Bakeware Set if you are serious about baking and you want to incorporate it in your daily things to do. It has everything you need and every pan in this set performs well.
The Circulon NonStick Set and the Calphalon Nonstick Bakeware Set are perfect for those on a budget and who have a limited kitchen space. You have everything you need in these sets.
If you are looking for something you can pass to your children and can last for a long time, Rachael Ray's Nonstick 5-Piece Set and the 10-Piece Set are great investments.
You can only enjoy baking if you invest in the best bakeware set and if you're a beginner, we suggest you get the Calphalon Nonstick Bakeware Set as it is easy to use, maintain, and clean.
You're probably looking for more kitchen essentials to buy. Do check out our homepage for valuable product recommendations and to read more product reviews.


Could be that you are using a laptop or other unsuitable computer ??
You are not wrong there Zig, beautiful work indeed, my congratulations Arbo.
The free software 'Mach1filter.exe' (available somewhere here – if not then contact me) makes a pretty good job with creating the toolpath for rotary (spindle) machining of Lithophanes. (As with most image work the original image has to contain good contrast etc. and some practice will be necessary to achieve the best results).
Thanks to suggestions from others I have been able to improve my technique and this is the latest Lithophane, laser cut into Corian.
As there is no Z axis movement I was able to use a constant velocity of 4000mm / min for the X axis (excepting the acceleration and deceleration zones for each line scan). The final work does need backlighting (unlike opal Plexiglas) so it looks like I will be making a few of John's (PicEngraver) LED / diffuser light frames when I get a chance.
General Mach Discussion / Re: Single home switch and soft limits enough?
My limit switches are mounted in such a way that any over travel (to the mechanical stop) does not damage the switch. The switches will stop the axes travel during the usual G01 moves but with G00 moves the axes will hit the mechanical stop, however, because the limit has been activated the motors will be stopped.
With a high torque motor operating at a high current this setup may leave a lot to be desired but it suits my way of working and has served me well for many years now.
FAQs / Re: installed new license but steppers not moving?
The file 'License.txt' is just an information file and removing it will make no difference to the operation of Mach3 so it looks like you have inadvertently done something else.
Perhaps re-installing Mach3 may solve the problem.
(It may be a good idea to make a back-up copy of your existing Mach3 folder and save it somewhere safe in case you need to retrieve any data at a later stage).
In LazyCam you need to select the Layers Tab to set the depth and set layer etc.
I wonder what the first CNC machined project will be ?
If you use G01 then you could set the feed-rate (F) to any speed that suits your purpose.
Post details of your machine and controller and as many other details as are relevant together with your current profile .xml file (in Mach3 folder) as a new topic in the General section and suggestions to resolving your problem will follow.