#as I predicted I have been thinking about this brilliant terrible film a lot today

[cassmouse]

That bit in Bad Seed Returns where Emma hums the Clair de Lune so her uncle knew it was her that trapped him under the car was basically the equivalent of that bit in B99 where they get all the criminals to sing I Want It That Way and I'm sorry but that's so fucking funny to me

[sophiamcdougall]

I keep thinking that the immortals give Nile a lot of authoritative-sounding information about how being immortal works, and yet their sample size is never more than six and frequently it’s one.  Including Nile, there have only ever been seven of them ... that they know of. Obviously, there might have been near-immortals who lived and eventually died before Andy was even born, but also, until encountering Quynh, Andy had no way of knowing that new immortals inspire clairvoyant dreams in each other. Even after the dreams and meeting Quynh in real life ... if I were in her shoes I think I might have read the situation as “destined to find my soulmate” more than “all immortals come with a sort of built-in homing beacon which broadcasts equally to all other immortals.” Not for centuries would either encounter any further evidence either way. And even now -- having dreamed of, and then found, Lykon, Joe, Nicky and Nile, how do you know you’re dreaming of the world’s entire population of immortals, rather than a random selection? Or those Destiny or whatever particularly wants you to meet? Nicky and Joe can only ever have had this experience once before, relatively recently, and Booker can never have had it at all. I guess it doesn’t matter, as acknowledging the possibility that there might be others out there wouldn’t practically change very much, but it’s part of a pattern of jumping to conclusions.  

“Eventually you stop healing.” This has only happened once (that they know of, see above) and only one member of the current team was there to see it. “Immortality has limits and in time, this will happen to all of us” is a good theory, but it should only be a theory. How do they know that something hadn’t happened to Lykon, and only Lykon, to rob him of his immortality? What if he got a defective dose of immortality in the first place? Or, given that their own existence proves the existence of the supernatural, is it out of bounds to think that he might have pissed off some other form of supernatural being? Now, I don’t exactly mind them jumping to conclusions on this one, because they all have good reason, actually, to want this to be true -- Booker and Andy because depression and grief and burnout, Nicky and Joe because wonderful as it is to share centuries with your true love, you’d probably rather not stick around for the sun boiling away the oceans. And in fact bearing in mind that they couldn’t truly have known this was coming adds tension and urgency to the scenes after the revelation of Andy’s mortality. But I kind of wish it had been expressed, because it makes the possibility that this might be happening to all of them now - when they’re surrounded by enemies -- even more compelling. It’s somewhat implicit in the acting choices but imagine if they were explicitly grappling with the possibility that Lykon was an outlier in a different way - the rest of them were always supposed to run out of immortality juice now, today.  “Your family will reject you.” This is the one that actually bothers me,  because Christ, NILE’S POOR MUM. And this isn’t a statement about how immortality works anyway, it’s a statement about anyone who happens to be related to an immortal. The whole team seem to offhandedly agree that Nile is better off not going back to her family, but the only person who actually explains why is Booker, and ... why is anyone accepting Booker’s experiences as representative of anything? Especially after discovering the betrayal! Booker is suicidally depressed! Obviously he thinks the world is terrible, interpersonal problems are insurmountable and every bad thing that’s happened to him is a universal law of nature! You don’t have to believe him! Especially since his situation, as described, has pretty much fuck all in common with Nile’s and there’s little reason to think it has anything much in common with the others, either. And yet even when Nile has her “refusal of the call” moment, she doesn’t say argue with Booker’s predictions, she merely says that she can defer the moment she must vanish from her family’s lives until her immortality becomes impossible to hide. But why? Booker does not mention parents, only his children. There’s no indication any of the others had offspring, but even if they did, it’s largely irrelevant to Nile who clearly doesn’t. She’s concerned about her mother and brother. Nile discovers her immortality a lot younger than the rest of the team, in a period with a much longer average life expectancy. All the rest appear to be in their mid thirties to mid forties. Given how far back in time their origins are, it’s unlikely that all of them had living parents when they discovered their immortality, and any that  they did have would have been decidedly elderly by the standards of the time. So how plausible is it that any of the others experienced any version of what Booker describes? I’d say not very, and it’s downright implausible that they experienced it with a parent. Children are supposed to outlive their parents. Booker’s situation was agonising specifically because it was a tragic inversion of that rule. Booker’s son had to die in pain while his father now looked younger than he did. But Andy, Joe or Nicky’s parents, even if they were around to witness anything, would have seen ... what? Their 45-year-old son still passing for 35?  Even if they knew about the immortality ... how exactly would they have wanted/expected their child to pass it on? Wouldn’t an 11th century parent have been far more likely to take up the unequal distribution of miracles with God rather than their kid? So why should Nile accept that her mother will behave like Booker’s son? Isn’t it enormously more likely that a woman who, like every mother, has always wanted and expected to be outlived by her daughter, and yet has been living with the daily terror of losing her in combat, will be enormously relieved to know that she’s not going to die prematurely? Is it even vaguely likely that the pain of not benefiting directly from your daughter’s magical healing powers, decades from now, is worse than the pain of losing her at 20? OK, so then there’s the brother. Outliving a brother isn’t like outliving a child either, but it’s at least somewhat easier to believe there could be jealousy and conflict there eventually. But is that possibility of pain worth inflicting absolutely certain agony now? Is it impossible to talk through potential issues now just because it didn’t work out that way for Booker? OK, but for argument’s sake, let’s accept your family will inevitably ask you to share your immortality with them. Booker says that of course you can’t pass it on, yet his entire freaking arc is predicated on the possibility that maybe you can. (Which is cool, actually! But it has unexplored implications!) One thing that I actually really liked about film is it made “getting kidnapped and vivisected” a convincing threat, whereas many sci-fi shows vaguely invoke it as a reason that superpowered characters must keep their abilities secret, without ever bothering to show how that would play out in practice. I mean, people with unusual abilities exist! Michael Phelps produces less than half the usual amount of lactic acid! And has twice the normal lung capacity! Which we know, because researchers have studied him! Yet nobody has ever carted Michael Phelps off to a secret laboratory and if they did he would have various legal options!  It works here, but part of the reason it works is that Copley raises the obvious objection - why should being a subject of medical research mean anything more than donating some blood, a cheek swab and maybe at absolute worst some bone marrow? That would be enough to map their entire genome ... what else does even the maddest scientist even want? The Old Guard is the first show I can think of which actually had a decent answer, and it’s that Merrick is a greedy hypercapitalist psychopath who doesn’t want to share. Which is brilliant, but acknowledges it isn’t actually the science that’s the problem. But none of that was available in Booker’s time! He not only had to deal with an apparently unique situation among the immortals, he also was caught at a unique moment in history: far enough advanced that his family was less likely to accept “miraculously chosen by god/gods/fate” as an answer, far enough advanced to contemplate the possibility that medical science could replicate his immortality, but nowhere near advanced enough to meaningfully try. But if you’re immortal now and your dying relative is freaking out ... wouldn’t you at least agree to giving them a blood transfusion? They’d know you tried. It’d probably calm them down. It might even work!  What is the wider significance of this? Basically fuck all, but it feels like it’s been years since I got to nitpick something that I genuinely enjoyed for the sheer, innocent love of being an insufferable killjoy rather than because I thought it was Problematic.  

[filmstruck]

Andy Griffith’s Mind-blowing Performance in A FACE IN THE CROWD (’57) by Jill Blake

Like a lot of Southerners, I grew up watching reruns of THE ANDY GRIFFITH SHOW (’60-’68). It was a staple in our household and we watched it together as a family every night. We were particularly fond of the first five seasons and we loved the rapport between Andy Griffith’s Sheriff Andy Taylor and Don Knotts’s Deputy Barney Fife, and their adventures in the small, fictional town of Mayberry, North Carolina (based on Griffith’s hometown of Mount Airy, NC). While some of the dialogue featured in the show is a bit outdated and sexist (unfortunately common in most of the sitcoms of the 1950s and 1960s), the groundbreaking depiction of a single father and widower raising his son, overarching themes of family, loyalty and hospitality, coupled with the familiar, quirky mannerisms that are second-nature to us Southerners, really resonated with my family. And they still do, a generation later with my young daughter. 

To me, Andy Griffith, and the character he created for his show (which he first debuted in an episode of the Danny Thomas series MAKE ROOM FOR DADDY [’53-’65]), represented so much of the goodness that can be found in the South. That goodness is so often overshadowed by the archaic, stubborn views of a few who insist on keeping the South married to its embarrassing, troubled past; and overlooked because of misunderstanding and broad stereotypes about Southern people from those outside the region’s loose borders. (As an aside, the South has a lot of work to do to improve its tarnished reputation, so it’s understandable that many people have an unfavorable view.) Andy Griffith was one of us, and he made good by representing his home with pride and dignity. He never forgot his roots and because of that, he made us proud. Griffith carefully constructed an image of a strong, principled Southern man who owned up to his mistakes while never losing sight of his moral center or succumbing to the power of his office. Sheriff Taylor was a model civil servant and elected official who respected and acknowledged that he worked for the people, and as such he had a great responsibility that he upheld at all times.

But there is another side of Andy Griffith’s acting talents, one that is in direct opposition to the folksy, wholesome images he created with his popular Andy Taylor character and later on with Ben Matlock, the always-successful criminal defense attorney in the series MATLOCK (’86-’95), and even in his late-career performance in the exceptional indie film WAITRESS (’07), written and directed by the late Adrienne Shelly. It’s a side that we’ve only seen in one performance; a side that is so dark and twisted and depraved that when compared to the image of Griffith that we know and love, it’s difficult to process and digest. And yet, it’s a brilliant, once-in-a-lifetime performance that should be considered the actor’s crowning achievement.

I’m referring to Griffith’s role as Lonesome Rhodes in Elia Kazan’s 1957 drama A FACE IN THE CROWD. 

In recent years, specifically in the last couple of decades, A FACE IN THE CROWD has been rediscovered by audiences and reevaluated by critics, with the film creeping back into cultural relevance and blowing the collective minds of everyone with a pulse. Based on a short story by Budd Schulberg, who also wrote the adapted screenplay, A FACE IN THE CROWD is an unflinching criticism of the American public’s eagerness to blindly follow a charismatic personality, by fully buying into the manufactured brand of that personality—one composed of deceit, greed, hubris and moral bankruptcy—while remaining blissfully ignorant to the truth. A truth that is easy to find, as it lies just under the personality’s dynamic, yet precariously fabricated image. Griffith’s Larry “Lonesome” Rhodes is a full-time drunk tank resident in a Deep South jail, whose meandering and charming tall tales impress a local radio producer, Marcia Jeffries, played by Patricia Neal. Jeffries puts Rhodes’ singing and storytelling on the radio, bestowing him with the nickname, Lonesome. He’s an overnight success, quickly making his way from the Podunk radio station to national television, with Jeffries invested as both his business partner and lover. 

A FACE IN THE CROWD follows the unexpected, yet somehow predictable, rise and fall of the dangerous cult of personality that is Lonesome Rhodes; a modern parable and cautionary tale warning us all of the predatory wolf in sheep’s clothing. A lesson that we still have yet to learn as we compulsively invest ourselves in the megalomaniac acolytes of Lonesome Rhodes. This is a film that was made sixty years ago, but feels like it could’ve been made sixty days ago. It has never lost its relevancy or its powerful message. Matter of fact, it has gained relevance in the last six decades. And that can be directly attributed to Andy Griffith’s incredible performance.

It’s hard to believe, but A FACE IN THE CROWD was Griffith’s film debut, and one of a very small number of theatrical films he made, as he spent the vast majority of his career on television. At the time of the film’s release, it wasn’t terribly well-received and Griffith didn’t earn the recognition that his performance deserved. No Academy Award nomination for him in a banner year for Hollywood films (David Lean’s THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI [‘57] being the big winner that year, including a win for Alec Guinness for Best Actor), which today seems like an unforgivable oversight. But I think one of the reasons why A FACE IN THE CROWD and Griffith’s performance is so well-received today is because of what we know about Andy Griffith as a person and the on-screen persona he created in his various television shows. We have an entire career laid before us that contradicts and even condemns the very essence of Lonesome Rhodes. Yet, Rhodes’s manufactured image is familiar and comforting. He looks like Sheriff Andy Taylor. He sounds like him. He even has that earnest, good ol’ boy quality about him that we find so endearing in Sheriff Taylor. Then there’s the masterminded bait and switch that Lonesome cleverly pulls off—at least for a time. And that’s what is so unnerving and terrifying.

I think a lot of times Elia Kazan gets too much credit for the brilliance of A FACE IN THE CROWD. And while I’m not disputing his talents as a groundbreaking filmmaker, I firmly believe the film’s potency as a prescient commentary should be mainly attributed to Griffith’s performance, and how the trajectory of his career in the years that followed has given the film valuable retrospective context. And of course, there’s no way to plan for how a film will be received decades after its release. And it’s utterly preposterous to think that Griffith spent years playing morally grounded, likable characters just so that one day when his role as Lonesome Rhodes would be reevaluated, we’d all crumple under the weight of an existential crisis. (Believe me, I’ve thought about this as some elaborate plot, where at the end Griffith exclaims, “The Aristocrats!”) It’s more like Griffith spent the rest of his career distancing himself from Lonesome Rhodes, and maybe that’s why we never saw this side of his acting again. And honestly, I can’t say that I blame him. No one wants to be “that guy,” unless you are “that guy,” and you love being you because you’re too stupid and self-absorbed to see your impending demise. Andy Griffith’s performance in A FACE IN THE CROWD is one of those rare gifts the universe sometimes throws our way. Sure, it’s a confusing anomaly and antithetical to everything we know to be true, with many of us honorary Mayberrians still assembling the pieces of our blown away minds—but it’s still a gift.

[pigeonesq]

HP tag

Thanks again @coe-lilium for the tag!! Prepare for a rambling essay. I couldn’t help it

What is your name? Charlotte. Very unimaginative of me.




How old are you? 27




What House(s) are you in? Stubbornly Hufflepuff. I was re-sorted into Ravenclaw which i kinda get, but my loyalty outs itself here, basically proving my own point. (However I do think the hat missed a trick not putting me in Slytherin as deep down I think I’m incredibly manipulative and have a thirst to prove myself etc)




What kind of blog do you run? 
A mess? I’m not sure exactly what someone is expecting when they follow me. There’s plenty of HP, fanfic, fanart etc, but too many random things thrown in for this to be a truly HP blog, (which it was always meant to be.) E.g. awkward, too honest personal admissions, feminism, lol stuff, lots of art and illustration (but Ive started to keep that within a side blog.) And my own art and fanart which probably should also have its own tumblr.




Your Patronus? A nebelung cat???




Your Pottermore House results? Hufflepuff/Ravenclaw and Pukwudgy




Which book is your favorite? Such a hard question. It used to be POA as I remember reading it for the first time (age 9, not moving from my position lying on the sofa, in huge discomfort but unable to move until I was finished,) and being absolutely floored by the revelation Sirius wasn’t bad. That scene in the shrieking shack was the most thrilling and tense thing I’d ever read. 
Today my fave is probably OOTP. There’s just so MUCH of it - the more the better. I’ve just finished listening to it, and even after all these years found it so entertaining. (Though I’ve just started HBP so next week that will probs be my fave.)




Which film is your favorite: I’m bad with the films as I can’t stop myself from noticing how inadequate they are. They captured the essence of the world beautifully. The feel of it, the setting, but too much of the story is lost for me to be able to fully enjoy them. I remember each time I saw them as they came out I would leave the cinema up in arms at what they cut, things they simplified, the characterisation they changed, dialogue they deemed unimportant and that hasn’t changed. I’m too die-hard. If I’m judging them as merely fun movies… Ugh I don’t know, probably the last one (though that dancing tent scene makes me cringe, as does the final battle with voldy, as does most of it tbh)

Which book is your least favorite? Soooo hard….. I can’t say!!! Traditionally it’s been HBP because I can’t deal with Harry pretending to be good at potions and following around Malfoy. Makes me feel all panicky!!! (That scene in OOTP where Harry goes into Snapes Pensive brings me out in a rash. I can’t handle that kind of conflict AT ALL)

Which is your least favorite movie? Chamber of secrets because of the terrible acting (except for Gilderoy OBVS) but also POA because of everything about it. Off the top of my head, the casting of Gary Oldman.

What is your favorite quote? I’m not really into quotes but probably, ‘you’ll get us all killed, or worse, expelled’ one.

Favorite Potter? Harry!!!!

Favorite Weasley? Ginny

Favorite Malfoy? Too hard!!! Fandom Draco for being a darling, canon Malfoy for being a ridiculous nasty little twat, and my lovely boy Scorpius. I’m kind of a fan of Narcissa too.

Favorite Marauder? Sirius Black easily. I’m no fan of Remus.

Favorite Golden Trio member? Harry

Favorite Silver Trio member? Luna

Favorite Female character? Hermione is my fictional best friend. (I’m keeping things basic here.)

Favorite male character? I’m sorry for being so predictable but it’s got to be Harry again!!! He is my ultimate favourite!!!.

Favorite Professor? Ok so obviously not my favourite, but I do love reading scenes with Umbridge. The classes where she winds Harry up so so easily are brilliant.

Favorite House? I think Gryffindor would have the best parties up in that tower, which would be amazing, but for like, 2 days max. Because then you’d also have to deal with Gryffindors, and me, an introvert, would crack after prolonged exposure. I think Ravenclaw would have a mixture of the most interesting but also least interesting people, and the types that steal Luna Lovegoods shoes, so that’s a no. Also I really tend to get swept up writing and reading and hours and days can fly by without me noticing or talking to another person or eating a proper meal. I think being in Ravenclaw would encourage this, which wouldn’t be good for my mental health. I tend to feel frenzied and wrung out and unable to sleep after bouts like that. I am curious about Slytherin, mainly because we have no idea what It would be like to be one. But I just have a feeling it wouldn’t be fun. Most of the time they’re acting like sycophants, laughing en masse at something Malfoy says, which sounds super lame. Then there’s the whole awkward ‘your friends parents could be Death Eaters’ thing. Hufflepuff it is then. chilled, stable, friendly, next to the kitchens.

What character do you dislike the most? Lucius Malfoy.

What ships are your favorite? I read loads of different ships but it’s got to be Drarry4eva. I can’t get enough. I used to be into Dramione and am supposedly still working on a 170k Dramione WIP but it’s such an effort to find the enthusiasm for them. It’s a terrible admission and I feel SO guilty for losing heart but my time isn’t eternal… Instead of writing that I’ve been planning a Pansy X ginny fic… So exciting! I think they’re both brilliant with so much potential.

Is there a movie that you liked more than the book? lol please

If you could make your own House, what would be the traits? I don’t know? Just wants to go out and have a good time, but also craves privacy and being curled up with tea and books??

What would your Amortentia smell like? Bonfires, baking, chai tea, turpentine, the sea, waxed jackets, old second-hand bookshops, nostalgic smells. the way people smell when they’ve been exercising in the cold. It’s a very particular smell, very fresh, not of sweat, but very strong. I have no idea what it is, but I’ve always loved it.

Which do you prefer - (I suppose the question was “animal”?) owl

Which is your favorite Harry Potter Era? Post-Hogwarts. I love finding out what those boys have been up to.

phew!! Sorry I went on so much. I’m going to tag… @pennigg101297

[wp-yahoo-style-1042-yahoopa-blog]

'Coming together to kill old Hollywood': Stars predict 'a sea of black' on Golden Globes red carpet

Laurie Metcalf, left, and Issa Rae were among the stars of film and TV gathered at the BAFTA Los Angeles Tea Party at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills on Jan. 6, 2018. (Photo: Getty Images)

Sunday’s Golden Globes red carpet will look vastly different than that of any awards show in the past. In recent months, it has been rumored that Hollywood is planning to use fashion to make a bold statement at the Jan. 7 awards ceremony: Stars like Meryl Streep and Amber Tamblyn are said to be planning to dress in silent protest by trading in their colorful gowns for all-black dresses. Based on the chatter at the BAFTA Los Angeles awards pre-event tea party on Saturday afternoon, the movement may end up being larger than what was initially predicted.

“It’s going to be a big funeral tomorrow,” said Issa Rae, who is nominated for Best Actress in a Musical or Comedy for Insecure. “We are coming together as women and as Hollywood to kill old Hollywood. And now we will have an emergence of a new resolve to change the dynamics of the past.”

Samira Wiley, left, and Issa Rae at the BAFTA Los Angeles Tea Party. (Photo: Kevork Djansezian/BAFTA LA/Getty Images for BAFTA LA)

The actress, like many, is planning to take a stand with her outfit. “It was a no-brainer for me to wear black tomorrow,” she said of her decision. “I didn’t even give it a second thought. And black is my favorite color. It’s also one of my favorite things to be!”

Allison Janney told Yahoo that the movement has taught her that fashion has the power to make a statement far beyond just helping someone to look good. “And you are going to see that tomorrow in a big way,” she said. The I, Tonya actress predicted that a majority of her colleagues would be wearing “their own version of a black dress.” And according to Janney, the Globes will give new meaning to a color that is typically associated with mourning. “I don’t think it’s going to look [like a] funeral. I think there is going to be a lot of hope and celebration with black dresses.”

The star was thrilled to be a part of the crusade. “I love that everyone is standing together and saying that these issues that have been behind closed doors — or not even behind closed doors, just not dealt with — are being talked about and dealt with. I think it’s a really powerful positive moment that is happening now in Hollywood and tomorrow on the carpet — we get to make a statement through fashion,” she said, sounding more excited about the protest than about her nomination for Best Supporting Actress in a Motion Picture for her role in I, Tonya.

Janney added that while everyone loves to gawk at what the celebs are wearing on a big day like Sunday, it’s important for the world also to read between the lines. “It’s not about what we’re wearing, but it’s showing that we all know what’s going on and we are taking action to deal with it.”

Allison Janney at the BAFTA Tea Party. (Photo: Getty Images)

For Janney, wearing a black dress symbolized that she was carrying a message of hope. “We are all in black dresses, but there is hope, and this is a first really great step that we are taking to all deal with the issues of harassment and abuse and inequality.”

When asked about her BAFTA dress, the Mom star joked that the designer slipped her mind but pointed out the fact that the dress was black. It wasn’t an intentional means of kicking off the protests a day early; however, Janney said that it was a mighty fine coincidence.

The ever-fashionable Diane Kruger told reporters that she was also ready to protest the next day. “It means a lot to me to be a part of a sisterhood that I feel has truly emerged coming out of this terrible time,” she said. “I feel proud to have the community. It’s just a symbol. But I think it’s an important and powerful statement to see us all united and just say enough is enough. We’re together in this.”

Sam Rockwell and Diane Kruger at the BAFTA Los Angeles Tea Party. (Photo: Getty Images)

The actress, who would be attending the Globes in support of In the Fade’s Best Foreign Language Film nomination, said she hoped that the movement would bring true change to the acting industry and beyond. She’s also ready to fight any backlash that may stem from her fashion choices tomorrow. “I read this interesting article on Deadline yesterday where people feel like there is going to be retaliation against these women, not right now but once things settle. And that kind of scared me because I saw some truth in that. I felt like that was right. We have to be careful about that,” she said. Still, she was going to wear black to the Globes, regardless.

Rachel Brosnahan is also using the platform of her Golden Globes nomination for Best Performance by an Actress in a Television Series — Musical or Comedy in The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel to help put an end to sexism. “I am standing in solidarity with the women in this industry, with women everywhere, against sexual harassment and assault and abusive power,” she revealed. “We are coming together in sisterhood and light, despite the black, and hoping to take collective action.”

Rachel Brosnahan at the BAFTA Tea Party. (Photo: Getty Images)

The star, who said that she loves fashion but knows little about it, added that working with stylist Sarah Slutsky has cued her in to how clothing can make a bolder impact than merely outfitting her for a big night out. “Sarah is very focused on young new designers and seeking out sustainable fashion. I’ve learned so much about the way that fashion can make a difference since working with her,” she explained.

Vicky Krieps, who is experiencing awards season for the first time as part of the cast of Phantom Thread, was planning to wear black to the Golden Globes for some time. She was, however, a late arrival to the movement. “I just heard about it on this carpet here today,” she said. “But I’m definitely proud to be wearing the color in support.”

Vicky Krieps attends the BAFTA Los Angeles Tea Party. (Photo: Getty Images)

The German-born actress noted that the concept of gender equality was not new to her but was happy that the issue is at the forefront now. “Growing up, my mother was always teaching me that people are equal — men, women, and people of different ethnicities and ages,” she said. “I’m always happy to be a part of carrying that message forward.”

Megan Mullally is all about the idea that clothing should be used to express oneself. “I think fashion should simply be a form of personal creative expression,” she told reporters. “I don’t think that anyone should be judged. If you are Bjork and you wear a swan dress, that means you’re f***ing badass and that you’re super-rad. It doesn’t mean that you are a weird freak that needs to be made fun of; it means that you’re cool.” The Will & Grace star added a note of caution: “I feel like this trap that celebrities are in where you have to toe the line and wear this certain thing and look this certain way, it inhibits creativity. And it’s also very expensive!”

Megan Mullally with Daniel Kaluuya at the BAFTA Los Angeles Tea Party. (Photo: Getty Images)

The actress, who said she was proud to be at the ground floor of the Time’s Up Now movement, was “of course wearing black” to the Globes. “We are sending a signal out to all the women in the whole world to say that we stand with you in solidarity. If you have, are, or will be sexually harassed or abused, we are there. We see you, we are with you. That’s the signal we’re sending out.”

Mullally said that she hoped stars would continue the movement, at least by wearing the Time’s Up pins at many awards shows to come, this season and beyond. “It’s really funny the way that it all happened with Harvey Weinstein and that being what started it, what stuck after all these centuries, that that’s what it is. But good!” she said, adding that “it’s very complicated and it’s very messy right now, and there is a lot of gray area, but it’s still better than what we had before.”

Peter Fonda offered a male’s perspective, telling Yahoo that he is completely down with the black dress movement. “There is so much that needs to be talked about, and fortunately right now is a brilliant time to be talking about it,” he proclaimed as he took to the red carpet with his wife by his side. “We all came from women. We owe them a huge favor. Without them, there is no us!”

Peter and Parky Fonda arrive at the BAFTA Los Angeles Tea Party. (Photo: Getty Images)

Read more from Yahoo Lifestyle:

Time’s Up invites you to help make a bold statement on the Golden Globes red carpet

Rashida Jones: The Golden Globes’ Red Carpet Blackout Won’t Be a Silent Protest

300 Hollywood women launch Time’s Up initiative to combat sexual harassment, gender imbalance

Follow us on Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter for nonstop inspiration delivered fresh to your feed, every day.

[billpott-s]

thoughts on the xmas special - DOCTOR WHO SPOILERS

before I read everyone else’s reactions I just want to get my “untainted” reaction down

first of all the MUSIC, goddamn every time they played the bad wolf/rose theme I was about to DIE (especially because I’ve just been rewatching s1/2 so) oh my god, how perfect and emotional though especially because I think I read somewhere that murray gold is also leaving which ????? how do they expect me to cope

not sure how I feel about the whole bill not being bill but still being bill thing? I mean, I accept it and it still was emotional but… still no closure for bill. also it doesn’t make sense but what else do I expect from a Moffat finale lol (like she would have to be dead to be in the system thing buuuuut she remembers heather rescuing her soooo her restoration isn’t from that death? idk (edit: just realised that im not confused by this any more because she doesn’t age because she’s made of water. obviously. so she could have died after living a long life and still look 20 something ok im good now lets move on)

although idk how this death technology thing really is supposed to work within this universe lol because how many characters have died and come back to life… like just take rory for one example. but it was cool plus the reference to new earth and the year 5 billion was pretty cool since I just rewatched new earth

but obviously I loved seeing her again and it is in a way, her, emotionally and I love her so much and she should have had so much more TIME

bill and the 9th doctor live together in my “I’m emotional about these characters not having more time on the show” headspace

speaking of which CLARA oh my god. I was sort of expecting it but then I forgot that I was expecting it and I was SHOOK ok, and I guess that means she does die in the end after her one second of eternity (I need to rewatch s9) which is ok I guess

but idk does it sort of ruin the emotional impact of hell bent now that the doctor does remember her? like didn’t they have the whole forgetting thing for a reason.. or is it ok because he’s not 12 anymore so they won’t have the hybrid but then again, the doctor would still love clara just as much

idk my sort of unrealistic prediction would be that clara would show up just as a cameo/side character within the story (like I thought maybe as a nurse because ww1 setting (and the obvious play on doctor/nurse) ), and the doctor wouldn’t recognise her but she would say goodbye to him and it would be super emotional for the audience without taking away the impact of s9 idk I feel a little conflicted about it

obviously I should be writing for this show

and nardole! remember before series 10 I was so eeeehh about his character but I teared up honestly, I did not expect to see him again. guess he’s also confirmed dead

can’t really remember the ending of s10 but does that mean the cybermen just destroyed the whole ship. honestly that episode had such potential its criminal that it was left unwrapped like that

ok thoughts on stuff thats not my babies coming back

the opening with the 60s footage was SO COOL even though we’ve already seen it it’s just SO COOL

shout out to rachel talalay for being a directing GENIUS how do we deserve her… @chibnall if you do anything right you won’t let her go

I haven’t seen any first doctor because I’m a fake fan who’s only seen like… 15ish classic doctor who stories - so I didn’t really have that much emotional attachment to him apart from what he means as a symbol to the show, and ofc an adventure in space and time which I do adore

I enjoyed him, for the most part… I mean it was interesting to have the thematic parallel between them

I was worried about the whole “sexist jokes” we’d been hearing about before the episode and yeah they were kind of cringeworthy but also not as bad as I’d expected… could have been a lot worse but still totally unnecessary and unfunny in my opinion

at least Bill put him in his place what an icon

I liked that the episode was more character focused than plot… obviously it needed to be and the themes worked with the “plot” but I can’t help but be annoyed at plot holes

like if there was a giant database of every human ever in the year 5 billion then why does the doctor not know about it

hmmm

but a lot better than moffat’s other regeneration episode tbh like I never need to see the time of the doctor again in my entire life

the christmas armistice scene? I HAD CHILLS OH MY GOD it was so powerful and I had tears in my eyes

just beautiful and heartbreaking and touching. wow.

also shout out to mark gatiss for not being as terrible as I thought he would be because I was not excited to hear he would be a main in this episode but he played it really well

then for some reason out of alllll the threads of 12 and moffat era who the one they decided to bring back was rusty the dalek??? ok maybe not what I would have done

although in some way I guess if you remember that episode from three years ago and how it sort of foreshadowed the 12th doctor’s characterisation, “you would make a good dalek” and all that jazz it does fit thematically???

idk I thought… a weird choice but ok

low key wanted amy and rory to show up via the glass people of death (like not a realistic expectation at all since they never knew twelve but it is the end of the moffat era we’re celebrating here so maybe??? sadly not)

overall a beautiful farewell to the twelfth doctor. a perfect fit for a character based episode to end his story on this show. I’m going to miss him so much but he had a wonderful last episode that he deserved

probably the best regeneration story since parting of the ways? maybe even the best regeneration story from new who (i just have a very special emotional connection to 9) (and I haven’t seen any classic who regeneration stories please don’t hate me)

can’t believe its been four years since i was bawling my eyes out at matt smith’s regeneration. I did expect to cry a lot more but maybe I’m just better at my emotions now??? also even though I’ve probably come to love 12 more, 11 was my first doctor so there’s that

(wait til I rewatch doomsday though because the tears will be FLOODING. I’m up to army of ghosts/doomsday on my new who rewatch but wasn’t going to do that to myself today lol I don’t hate myself that much)

JODIE!

wait I forgot twelve’s last speech

IT WAS SO GOOD OMG

the bits from the other doctors… so beautiful

tbh I can’t really remember it because I am the worst but I’ll probably have more coherent thoughts when I rewatch this (WITH SUBTITLES) tomorrow

strong accents can ruin the emotional moments a little unfortunately

JODIE OMG

rachel talalay is a blessing ok THAT SCENE WAS FILMED SO WELL. the ring falling off her hand

their hand??? how do we refer to the doctor now idk i guess they both work

JODIE IS SO TINY IN PETER CAPALDI’S GIANT ASS COAT

i hope she is swamped in it for the whole first episode of s11 omg comedy gold

when she looks into the reflection and says “brilliant” IS THAT GONNA BE HER CATCHPHRASE

I feel like 10 said that a lot??? hmmm

I LOVE HER SO MUCH ALREADY SHE’S ONLY SAID ONE WORD

HOW CAN I WAIT UNTIL WHENEVER S11 STARTS

she FELL OUT of the TARDIS???? is she ok

commentary from my family - dad: why is the tardis rejecting her? brother: because she’s a woman now

IM SO EXCITED FOR SEASON 11 OK

overall? I really enjoyed it, I had a few quibbles (mostly my usual but that doesn’t make sense which maybe you have to leave aside when you’re watching this show), the character stuff was almost perfect and just, such a good story. will miss 12 greatly but out of all the new who doctors he’s probably had the most solid run from start to finish in terms of consistent quality and this was the perfect ending for him.

p.s. pls let chibnall be the type that likes nostalgic cameos because I don’t know if I can handle a clean cut between eras, this is my first time because I only started watching in 2012. but I’m so keen for season 11.

[hrtechweekly]

For many years now, there has been an air of apprehension about the impact which machines would have on humanity. A couple of hundred years ago, the Luddites went to the extreme of destroying weaving machinery in textile factories through fear of losing their jobs and being replaced by machines. Fast forward to the present day and there continue to be concerns about human jobs being replaced by a machine of some sort. Should we be worried about machines taking over? Or should we embrace the change and the advantages which machines and technology can bring to our lives? And how does it stand in the context of Human Capital Management?

One of my earliest encounters of artificial intelligence came about when watching The Terminator. James Cameron’s masterpiece depicts how Skynet, a manmade computer system which was intended to remove human error from military operations, ultimately gained self-awareness and when humans tried to pull the plug, it sought to destroy the human race in retaliation. Part of this involved sending Arnold Schwarzenegger’s monosyllabic cybernetic organism back in time to kill John Connor, a human mandated with saving humanity. For a lot of people, this was a very scary insight into what machines, particularly clever machines, could be capable of one day. Then came the Matrix, another brilliant film (not including the third, that was terrible). Again, there is a battle of good vs evil, man vs machine, Neo vs Agent Smith, where machine is once more the bad guy. I could name countless other films which follow a similar pattern, could this negative connotation of machines be routed in our minds so that we have grown to instinctively fear them? Especially machines which can think for themselves and adapt over time.

Sadly, now is not the time to reminisce about fantastic films. What good has come from machines adding value to our lives? A few instances spring to mind, one of them being the cash machine (ATM for our non-British friends). Way back in the day when the cash machine was first introduced, cashiers became increasingly worried that their jobs were at risk, when in fact it allowed them to concentrate on the more value added activities for their clients as opposed to the more mundane cash handling. For the client the ATM was a godsend, giving them access to their money 24/7 rather than 9-5. Continuing the banking theme, AI and machine learning is being used to enhance the customer experience by providing intelligent, automated services via machine learning Chatbots, such as Facebook Messenger. This is becoming a very popular platform for many organisations to service their customers and perform tasks like changing a seat on an airplane, sell products and send alerts, just to name a few. Earlier today a friend of mine showed me how he could chat with his bank using this platform to find out how much he had spent last month, much to his despair!

On a more personal level, some of my favourite uses of intelligent machines in day-to-day living are probably not going to come as a surprise to you. The likes of Amazon, Netflix and Spotify are able to give me a brilliant, tailored experience based on things I’ve bought, watched or listened to. On top of this, I was on holiday for 2 weeks (cruising around the Med, highly recommend it!) where of course I took countless photos. A couple of days after returning home to blighty, my Google Pixel phone automatically grouped my photos into an album named Trip to Greece and Albania, as well as segmenting the different photos into the locations where they were taken, clever and very useful! I’ve recently (as of 2 days ago) wanted to get in on the cryptocurrency hype and make millions by buying Ethereum, to do this I needed a way to buy said currency, so I downloaded an app. I had no idea what to do and I was looking for the Help icon, however to my surprise I found a Chat button, where I was able to communicate with a chatbot to get plenty of information to help me get to grips with the app and with buying/selling cryptocurrency. Needless to say I am not yet a millionaire from it.

One final personal comment on this topic comes from visiting a fast food establishment last month to get myself some breakfast. I noticed that there were a number of big pieces of kit attached to the wall where I could select the items and pay for them, I thought this was pretty cool. I also noticed that where there were once 6 tills to deal with customers, this had been reduced to 2 to make space for a bigger food delivery area. I found this slightly disconcerting and it made me wonder, what happened to the people who were manning those 4 tills? Had they been let go or had they been moved to other roles within the restaurant? I hope the latter.

I’ve talked about machines and AI which came out of Hollywood, how these technologies can have an impact on consumers as well as my own experiences. How will this all impact HR in the workplace? By implementing new software, the HR function has been able to reap great benefits over the last couple of decades. Whether has been by way of system consolidation, process automation or moving to the cloud, savings and efficiencies have been realised by many organisations. I’ve spoken to and read about plenty of organisations that are looking to take advantage of AI, here are a few examples of where it could benefit them.

Automation of candidate screening: AI can learn about different qualifications, employment history and other relevant factors, then compare them with top performers that currently work for the organisation, resulting in better quality of hires and a quicker hiring process.

Chatbots: By giving employees access to chatbot capabilities, organisations can provide employees with a consumer like experience when querying things like holiday balance, payroll queries and procurement assistance.

Predictive Analytics: Machine learning capabilities will provide organisations with insight into top performers, likelihood of attrition and predicted performance.

Modern learning: based on an employee’s preferences, job profile and activity, machine learning will be able to target employees with relevant, specific learning that will aid their development.

As an employee within the tech industry, I’ve seen many great applications of AI via the deployment of many different systems, platforms and tools. I’m a big optimist, so I believe that the use of such tools will be able to cut down on the mundane tasks which employees are mandated with and give them the opportunity to focus on more interesting, strategic work, rather than completely replacing workers. Where this may happen, tech visionary Bill Gates has called for the robots to be taxed to make up for lost tax revenues, but also to use to fund a training and development pot to help move the displaced employees into new roles.

So should we rage against the machine? No, at least not for now.

Joe Honess, Analytics Solution Consultant @Visier

Should we rage against the machine? {#envisionHR #robots} @HRJump_ For many years now, there has been an air of apprehension about the impact which machines would have on humanity.