Monthly Archives: August 2017

In town for the Panorama music festival, Nine Inch Nails decided to drop by Webster Hall with Tobacco, fill it with fog, and slowly asphyxiate everyone inside with heat and punishingly loud music. While the size of the venue made it the definition of intimate (about a 1200 person capacity), it was more than that; Reznor forewent the subtle costuming from the festival shows and, right before introducing the band, stated you know who they are. And that was true. The show was announced on the Nine Inch Nails Facebook page eight and a half hours before doors, with tickets only available to fans who had a password or to those loyal nin.com store patrons via an email from the band.

The show featured the live debut of Shes Gone Away* and a few welcome surprises in the form of the tour debut of Sanctified, 1,000,000 and Somewhat Damaged, that last as the opener. Then there was the odd inclusion of about thirty seconds of How To Destroy Angels The loop closes. Since all of HTDA was there and on stage except for Mariqueen Maandig, the crowd was expecting a rare treat, but before everyone could really grasp what was happening, they stopped playing it and moved onto the next track. Gave Up, Reptile and Burning Bright" were devastating in the confined space and the addition of Survivalism had people screaming along and pumping their fists like protestors. The moment when all the lights went out during Burn" was truly terrifying; I thought Robin Finck was going to leap off the stage and stab me to death with a shard of shattered guitar, which, admittedly, would have been a pretty awesome way to die. Proximity, energy, and setlist aside, my absolute favorite moment of this evening was that, for the first time since I started seeing Nine Inch Nails almost twenty years agothey did not. Fucking. Play. The Hand That Feeds. The simple lack of that overused, cookie-cutter, threadbare-kitchen-rug of a song made this show stand out more than anything in recent memory. I am truly grateful. And spoiled.

Nine Inch Nails plans to tour in early 2018 in support of their trilogy of EPs, the third of which is slated for release in late 2017 / early 2018.

* From that episode of Twin Peaks.

More here:

Nine Inch Nails - Webster Hall, New York City - Gigs - Reviews ... - Soundblab

In The Glass Castle, the charismatic, larger-than-life father of a huge family drags his brood across the country, defending his unconventional worldview and nontraditional parenting methods against a skeptical world. This was also the premise of another movie, Captain Fantastic, which came out a year ago, featuring Viggo Mortensen as a very similar father, raging all film long about the failures and corruption of the square world. The Glass Castle, despite some good performances, mostly fails for the same reason Captain Fantastic did: It gives its father character a redemption, and a canonization, that he doesnt deserve.

The Glass Castle is based on the bestselling memoir by Jeannette Walls, who was a magazine gossip columnist in 1980s-90s New York City, and a sometime MSNBC fixture. Brie Larson plays Walls, and the book tells the story of her very nontraditional upbringing, in which Walls and her three siblings were herded around the rural West and South by their parents (Woody Harrelson and Naomi Watts), as their neer-do-well dad fled creditors, pursued one failed scheme after another, and drank a hell of a lot.

Walls fathers worldview isnt that far off from Mortensens in Captain Fantastic: a combination of vague political leftism, paranoia, and off-the-grid survivalism, although The Glass Castle version combines this with crippling alcoholism and a failure to ever follow through on any of his big plans. His oft-mentioned, never-realized plot to build a glass-enclosed dream home gives the memoir, and film, its title.

The Glass Castle toggles back and forth between Walls childhood and her adulthood, as a rising gossip columnist wearing Working Girl-style fashions and preparing to marry a finance guy (New Girls Max Greenfield, playing the part not nearly as Scaramucci-like as he probably should have).The flashbacks, over and over, show Harrelson as a caring but largely out-of-control dad, seemingly not allowing his children to go to school or see doctors, and exposing his family to all sorts of horrors, up to and including leaving them in the care of a relative who, its implied, is a known sexual abuser. Watts plays the mom as more of a space cadet, a much more natural use of the actress talents than the Twin Peaks revival has shown us so far.

But then the film, in its third act, pivots and makes a hero out of this drunken man, through a couple of strategically inserted flashbacks. It also concludes with a rather ridiculous either/or: Be a soulless 1980s Manhattan yuppie, or buy in to the Rex Walls Way. There are no other options for how to live ones life. This pivot all but ruins the film because its so unearned.

The Glass Castle was directed by Daniel Desson Cretton, whose previous film, Short Term 12, was one of the best films of 2013 and among the best indie movies this decade. It also starred Larson, as a counselor at a group home, and cemented her as an actress of the top tier; that performance was much more deserving of awards attention than her part in Room, which won Larson a Best Actress Oscar two years ago.

Crettons new film, unfortunately, is a big step down, and the filmmaking isnt all that impressive either. One scene, in which Harrelson repeatedly throws a young Jeannette into a pool, is painfully on the nose even before Harrelson explains afterward that its a metaphor for life itself. Another big weakness? The film barely touches on Walls work as a gossip columnist, or how her unconventional upbringing led her to such work.

Harrelson has been on something of a roll lately. His Kilgore/Kurtz routine in this summers War For the Planet of the Apes was the best thing about that film, and he gave a stirring, quietly against-type performance in last years outstanding The Edge of Seventeen. Here, though? His performance as Rex is a lot of scenery-chewing and overacting. Larson is better, but shes starting to get typecast as a young woman coming to turns with victimizationwhich was a revelation in Short Term 12, but at this point shes repeating herself. Fans of the book, and Walls other writing, may appreciate the film version of The Glass Castle. But otherwise, theres not much reason to see it.

Whose Streets? Is an Illuminating Look at Ferguson Protests. B

Whose Streets? is part of a burgeoning genre of on-the-ground documentaries about the Ferguson protests and other recent major demonstrations against police brutality. Craig Atkinsons Do Not Resist, last fall, got there first, with a more overarching look at how law enforcement culture led to those events.

Directed by Sabaah Folayan, Whose Streets?, a Sundance selection from January, focuses more specifically on a handful of protestors who were on the ground in Ferguson. It follows a few protesters over the course of about a two-year period, through some raw and often uncomfortable stuff. Its infuriating, but very well done. The challenge with any film like this is that a lot of similar footage was shown on the news, for hours, every night for weeks and even months, back in 2014. Folayans film meets this challenge by going in-depth with several people, the most compelling of which is Britanny Farrell, a nursing student who at one point faced jail over her role in the protests. We also see one of those block-the-highway protests, from the standpoint, for a change, of the ones doing the blocking.

There are some egregious sins of omissionthe film mentions the Department of Justice report about systematic bias in the Ferguson Police Department, but leaves out the other DOJ report, from the same day, that sided with Darren Wilsons version of events. But overall, Whose Streets? is a compelling, nerve-wracking, and illuminating look at a fraught subject.

Here is the original post:

Film Review: The Glass Castle Fails on Almost Every Level - Splice Today

This is a rush transcript from "The Five," August 10, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

JESSE WATTERS, CO-HOST: Hello, everybody. I am Jesse Watters, along with Kimberly Guilfoyle, Mo Elleithee, Dana Perino and Greg Gutfeld. It's 9:00 in New York City. And this is "The Five."

President Trump turning up the heat. And doubling down on his fire and fury warning to North Korea as the hermit kingdom threatens to fire missiles toward our base in Guam.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Frankly the people who were questioning that statement, was it too tough, maybe it was not tough enough. They've been doing this to our country for a long time. For many years. And it is about time that somebody stuck up for the people of this country and for the people of other countries. So, if anything, maybe that statement was not tough enough.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WATTERS: Later this afternoon, the President continued his tough talk sending a strong message to Dictator Kim Jong-un.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: He has disrespected our country greatly. He has said things that are horrific. And with me, he is not getting away with it. I've read about where in Guam by August 15th, let's see what he does with Guam. If he does something in Guam, it will be in the event the likes of which nobody has seen before what will happen in North Korea.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you say that, what do you mean?

TRUMP: You will see. You will see. And he will see. He will see. It is not a dare. It is a statement. It is nothing to do with dare. That is a statement. He is not going to go around threatening Guam and he's not going to threat the United States, and he is not going to threaten Japan and he is not going to threaten South Korea.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WATTERS: Poor Guam now finds itself in a middle of a big game of chicken between these two men. So, he is really setting himself up for a serious situation next week. So if missiles are fired near the waters off of Guam, the president has to respond very dramatically.

DANA PERINO, CO-HOST: And that's what he says. It's interesting, because of people, you know, even General Jack Keane the other day when he was on this show. He said that he wishes he could give the President a do over on the fire and fury statement. But the President's instincts are always slightly different. And he is speaking to people in America who are like, what? I like strength.

WATTERS: Hmm.

PERINO: Like when President Bush said, bring them on, and dead or alive. And the media went to, oh, my gosh, he is a warmonger. I remember personally him saying, I'm for that.

WATTERS: Yes.

PERINO: Because it makes sense to me. I do think on the Guam piece, this is kind of interesting. Is it Guam because Kim Jong-un does not have the capability to send a missile anywhere else?

WATTERS: I believe that.

PERINO: But why would you waste an opportunity on Guam if you do not know if President Trump is going to act, why would you do that? I think that this calculation is sort of strange, but one of the experts we had on the story, Dennis Wilder, he believes that Kim Jong-un has given us his playbook and he is absolutely going to run it. He expects there to be an attack.

WATTERS: So, if missiles are fired off of the coast of Guam, Kimberly, I think it is about 17 minutes before they hit their target. So, the United States has to act very decisively. What would be the appropriate response?

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE, CO-HOST: Well, I think the problem is, if you even let it go to that point, we have waited too long. Right?

WATTERS: Yes.

GUILFOYLE: If you're going to try to intercept at that point of like maximum velocity from North Korea, then we are already operating at a disadvantage. Right? Because then we have very limited options available to try to avert disaster. And I think what President Trump is talking about is something that would, you know, I guess the precursor to that that would preempt it and wouldn't allow it to get to that situation where the advantage is with North Korea.

I don't think he's never going to give up the advantage as it relates to the United States and our positioning. And that's why I think he is doubling down on this. Everyone was upset about fire and fury, where he is like, listen, I'm going to back the words up. And he said, in fact, maybe that was not strong enough and that's his style.

PERINO: And Ed, one more thing, the United States does not necessarily have to act. Japan and South Korea are both mobilizing and they would closer and able to --

GUILFOYLE: Better tactical advantage.

WATTERS: Mo. How do you feel about the President's strong rhetoric with regards to North Korea?

MO ELLEITHEE, FOX NEWS POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: Look, first, I give them a tremendous amount of credit for the early diplomatic moves. Right? The fact that he was able to get a 15 to zero Security Council resolution that was a huge diplomatic win for the United States and a huge diplomatic win for him personally.

WATTERS: Uh-hm.

ELLEITHEE: I'm a little nervous about some of the rhetoric now. And you know, thinking back to my old international relations classes back when I was in college, one of the things that really stuck with me is the rational actor theory. That when it comes to international relations, it's like one big chess game. Every move you make is predicated on the notion that the other side is going to react rationally. I think that can be said about almost any country in the world except for North Korea.

PERINO: Uh-hm.

ELLEITHEE: He thinks that he may be speaking a language that the North Korean dictator can understand, but there is no telling how this guy interprets this. Right? He may not internalize it the way you or I as rational actors or any other foreign head of state would do it. And so, that makes me a little bit nervous. We are dealing with an incredibly unpredictable volatile person who now has nukes. It is tricky. And I'm not sure that doubling down and tripling down is the way to turn the corner.

WATTERS: So you believe this guy were seeing on the screen, might have a death wish and does not care about survival, what do you think about the hermit kingdom, Greg Gutfeld?

GREG GUTFELD, CO-HOST: I think it is a great name for a ban. Let me, you know what? I think Donald Trump, it is refreshing rhetoric. I think it's important. I disagree with Mo, I think it is important to speak their language. Because what you are seeing is negotiation and you're seeing bleathing. You wonder why he chose Guam, because it is a bluff.

I believe it is a bluff. And this is where I'm going to say something completely different that people may get angry about. But there is room for sympathy for North Korea, and here's why. The Korean War ended in a divorce. South Korea got the greatest parent ever, the United States. We love them, we protected them, we cared for them. To the consequences, the result is a massively successful economy, South Korea had a great parent. What parent did North Korea get?

Tommy's, China and the USSR. They could not afford to take care of them, they didn't want to take care of them, they didn't clothe them, they did not feed them, they were terrible parents. And the reason why they were terrible parents, is there were scared of North Korea becoming successful, so they treated them like crap. So, what you have now is you have a child, North Korea is essentially a child that is been scared.

And what is a child do? It's rational way of thinking, it's survivalism. And a scared child survives through bluffing. It acts tough. Because it knows that if it doesn't act tough, it's going get ruined. So, the solution if you think about this, how do you help this child that has been screwed by a terrible parents for 40 years? A child that smartly realizes that it must bluff its way to survival. A child that feels that it needs nuclear power or nuclear weapons to survive and who are we to say "no."

And I'm beginning to think that who are we to say no if you have been treated like crap for so long. I don't know. So, I think there is a way to negotiate with these guys. If you understand that for the past four decades everybody has gotten great stuff, but they have been stagnant in a permanent mass forever, essentially a mold that hasn't ever gone malignant but has promised to go malignant.

GUILFOYLE: Why is that?

GUTFELD: Because I think they realize this is their way. Like whenever things get bad, they act up. And it is their way of defending themselves. It is kind of -- it's a pathetic sad world.

GUILFOYLE: But I think this is about Kim Jong-un, I wouldn't say it's the people of North Korea.

GUTFELD: Absolutely.

GUILFOYLE: They are his victims.

GUTFELD: Yes. Exactly.

GUILFOYLE: So, this is about somebody who is just wayward and trying to, you know, it's a narcissist --

GUTFELD: I think it's the only way they know. It's the only that the family knows how to do this.

GUILFOYLE: I don't know.

WATTERS: So, how do you give this guy an off ramp where he saves face and can kind of comeback and not fire missiles at Guam?

PERINO: No. I think Secretary Rex Tillerson is trying as well. I think that actually the administration is talking with one voice. I don't think that they are necessarily thinking that President Trump is off on one place. Mattis is on the other. And Tillerson, I actually think they are saying variations on the theme from three different people, and that Tillerson is the one from the State Department saying, you know, there is a way for you to get back to get right with us. And you can choose that, but we are not going to molly coddle you because we are better parents.

WATTERS: Molly coddle.

PERINO: Interesting though about rational theory, somebody like Qaddafi. So, Qaddafi saw what happened to Saddam Hussein, and he was like, okay, please take a way nuclear weapons, and then I think, you know, there are other players, Iran has chosen a different path. And they have a different situation. But this one is I think different and that their problem is that they are a child that is now a threat to innocent people in the United States.

GUTFELD: Right.

PERINO: So we cannot be a good parent to them.

GUTFELD: Uh-hm.

PERINO: We have to protect ourselves.

WATTERS: Yes. I think by protecting ourselves is we have to find the on ramp for them to save face and return back into their dark existence, because it is a dark world they live in. And it will be a permanently dark world for those people, but it's the only way that they think they can survive.

ELLEITHEE: We also need to get the other parent to step up though.

GUTFELD: Yes.

ELLEITHEE: I mean, that's the thing. China --

GUTFELD: Yes.

ELLEITHEE: China, I mean, it's almost cliche now, but China is the key here.

GUTFELD: Right.

ELLEITHEE: And if they were part of the problem that helped get us to this place --

GUTFELD: Yes.

ELLEITHEE: -- and then it is time that they step up and do their part.

WATTERS: Last word, Kimberly, what do you think the prospects are of China really coming to save this thing from disaster?

GUILFOYLE: Strong.

WATTERS: You do?

GUILFOYLE: Yes, I do. I think they no choice now but to get seriously involved and not just in the rhetorical way.

WATTERS: All right. Up next, President Trump confronting Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell over the failure to pass the health care bill.

Ed Henry with the inside story of the tense phone conversation between the two men, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PERINO: President Trump is stepping up his criticism of Mitch McConnell taking several digs at the Senate Majority Leader today.

Our chief national correspondent Ed Henry is tracking all the way these developments from the White House. Ed, I got to your title right this time. So, give it to us straight.

GUTFELD: Boo.

ED HENRY, FOX NEWS CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: No more booing Greg.

GUILFOYLE: You're mean.

HENRY: You know, in remarks to this golf club today, President Trump was very direct and blunt in saying that he is disappointed in the performance of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell saying that a bill to repeal and replace ObamaCare should have been on his desk. Week one, maybe even day one of this new administration.

And in a private phone call of McConnell yesterday, the President was even harsher sure, not just going after him about his performance as majority leader but very upset about the speech McConnell gave earlier this week in Kentucky at a rotary club where McConnell basically said that because of the President's lack of political experience, he is suffering from excessive expectations about exactly what Congress can do with his agenda.

Yesterday and today the President has also fired off a series of tweets going after McConnell directly including one this afternoon in which he said, quote, "Mitch, get back to work and put Repeal and Replace, Tax Reform and Cuts and a great infrastructure Bill on my desk for signing. You can do it."

A couple of hours later reporters press the President on comments by Sean Hannity and other conservatives that if McConnell cannot get the job done, maybe he should simply step aside and resign as leader.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Well, I will tell you what, if he does not get to repeal and replace done, and if he does not get taxes done, meaning cuts and reform, and if he does not get a very easy one to get done, infrastructure. If he does not get them done, then you can ask me that question.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: But the bottom-line on the President raising the temperature on all of this is that he stuck with McConnell at least for now in terms of shepherding his legislative agenda. And if Special Counsel Robert Mueller continues to turn up the heat on that Russia investigation, the President is going to need as many allies as he can get on the hill.

And Dana, you heard more booing from Greg there, I simply don't care because I know that viewers listen closely to my reports in order to stay woke.

(LAUGHTER)

PERINO: Very good, Ed. We love having you. Thank you so much.

HENRY: I appreciate it.

PERINO: We're going to take it around the table. Now, Kimberly I'll start with you.

GUILFOYLE: Oh my God!

PERINO: Do you remember I used to say, addition is better than subtraction. And public criticism is never necessarily good. But I also think that this was actually pretty mild from Mitch McConnell. I think that if you read, if you see how Mitch McConnell said it versus how the media reports it, it got all, you know, buckled up.

GUILFOYLE: Yes, blown out of proportion. And escalated pretty quickly like a hot air balloon. You know, but first of all, we know that yes, I think I got taken out of proportion in terms of what Mitch McConnell was saying. But as it relates to the President, he does not like anything like that of any nature. Meaning, if you're going to try and like poke at him a little bit, he is going to punch hard back at you.

He does not tolerate it well. And he has no time for it. He is no bid for it. So, it is not helpful in any regard, what I would have liked to see is all this effort put into health care.

PERINO: Yes.

GUILFOYLE: And to getting immigration reform and tax reform and all the little things that we need, you know, to get done. So, it does not seem like that's working relationship is working so well.

PERINO: I think it is probably not that bad. But Jesse, Mitch McConnell does need President Trump's help, like in order to get tax reform done, and actually on tax reform, unlike with health care reform, they already have a plan. The President is going to be out there and blue states where they have -- I'm sorry, red states where they have blue governors so that they'll try to press them, and they actually have like a communications plan to see it through.

WATTERS: Yes. They both need each other. I like how Trump is treating McConnell like a boss, treats an employee. He is like, hey, Mitch, get those reports on my desk, at five, or else you are fired. I mean, it's unbelievable. But you understand why the President expected ObamaCare to be repealed and replaced.

PERINO: Yes.

Here is the original post:

If North Korea targets Guam, how should the US respond? - Fox News