Abridge Too Far: The Justice Theater Project Murders - Triangle Arts ...

The Justice Theatre Project will present a community-theater production of ?Julius Caesar? on Feb. 15-17 and 22-24 in Clare Hall at the Catholic Community of St. Francis of Assisi in Raleigh

William Shakespeare?s plays may be Public Domain, and therefore FREE to produce ? and ruthlessly abridge ? without paying royalties; but they are deceptively difficult to stage successfully. Not many community theaters in the Triangle or elsewhere have the capability to pull it off or a talent pool deep enough to communicate the power and poetry in the dialogue of the Immortal Bard?s timeless tragedies. Sadly, such is the case with The Justice Theater Project?s current ill-conceived and at times horribly miscast presentation of The Tragedy of Julius Caesar, which was penned in approximately 1599 in England, at a time when the end of the 40-year reign of Queen Elizabeth I was imminent and her failure to appoint a successor raised the very real threat of Civil War.

Shakespeare was not unaware of the havoc that puffed-up military commanders could wreak when they decided to seize power from civilian authorities. The assassins of Roman general and politician Gaius Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) claimed that he had ambition to burn and was about to make himself king and do away with the cherished Roman Republic (509-27 BC), which was run by the Senate.

But in the abridgement employed in the current JTP modern-dress production of Julius Caesar, under the direction of David Henderson, Caesar is played by the genial and grandfatherly and terribly miscast John Honeycutt, a fine actor and a sweet man who portrays the title character like a typical glad-handing politico ? think former President Ronald Reagan at his most avuncular ? without demonstrating that Caesar has the fire in his belly to depose the Senate and install himself as sole ruler of the Rome and its burgeoning empire. Indeed, it is impossible to the average viewer to see how Honeycutt?s Caesar has got his assassins? panties in a wad.

Moreover, at the end of Act I, when the Ides of March 44 BC has come, and these self-appointed ?patriots? carve up Caesar ? in an unnecessarily graphic manner, with blood bags spurting and splashing the stage with crimson ? JTP transforms Julius Caesar from a Grade A drama of political intrigue into a Grade Z slasher film. Act II commences with the famous funeral oration of Marc Antony (delivered with passion by Jade Arnold), but soon disintegrates into a series of chaotic and ultimately unintelligible battle scenes ? mostly viewed from the behind-the-lines headquarters of Cassius (the miscast Jeremy Fiebig, who may have had that ?lean and hungry look? about 40 to 50 lbs. ago, but now more resembles yours truly than Cassius) and Marcus Brutus (an ineffectual Brian Fisher, who never says or does anything in this JTP production to justify Marc Antony?s surprising end-of-play characterization of Brutus as ?the noblest Roman of them all?).

Director David Henderson?s misguided decision to transform Caesar?s barren third wife Calpurnia into a smoking-hot babe flashing smoldering come-hither looks at the general?s associates is another misstep, although Katie Anderson sizzles in that role. Funnyman Mike Raab is wasted as Casca, but George Kaiser and Michelle Johnson make nice impressions as Caesar?s ultimate successor Octavius and Brutus? fearful wife Portia.

The saddest thing about the current Justice Theater Project presentation of Julius Caesar is that newbies to the works of celebrated Elizabethan poet and playwright William Shakespeare (1564-1616) will wonder what all the fuss is about. I hope that in the words of the Broadway musical Kiss Me, Kate, JTP brushes up their Shakespeare before tackling one of the Bard?s plays in a future season.

SECOND OPINION: Feb. 14th Durham, NC Independent Weekly review by Byron Woods (who awarded the show 2 of 5 stars): http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/justice-theater-projects-julius-caesar/Content?oid=3291442.

The Justice Theatre Project presents JULIUS CAESAR at 8 p.m. Feb. 16, 2 p.m. Feb. 17, 8 p.m. Feb. 22 and 23, and 2 p.m. Feb. 24 in Clare Hall at the Catholic Community of St. Francis of Assisi, 11401 Leesville Rd., Raleigh, North Carolina 27613.

TICKETS: $20 ($15 students and seniors), except $12 per person for groups of 10 or more.

BOX OFFICE: 919-264-7089, marketing@thejusticetheaterproject.org, or http://www.etix.com/.

SHOW/SEASON: http://www.thejusticetheaterproject.org/Productions.html.

LIST OF RELATED EVENTS: http://www.thejusticetheaterproject.org/Productions.html.

PRESENTER: : http://thejusticetheaterproject.org/.

BLOG: http://whatwouldjuliusdo.blogspot.com/.

VENUE/DIRECTIONS/PARKING: http://www.etix.com/.

OTHER LINKS:

Julius Caesar (background): http://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/Library/plays/JC.html (Internet Shakespeare Editions) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar_%28play%29 (Wikipedia).

The Script: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2263 (Project Gutenberg).

Study Guides: http://www.thejusticetheaterproject.org/upload/Julius%20Caesar%202013%20Education%20Action%20Guide.pdf (The Justice Theatre Project) and http://www.bard.org/education/studyguides/Julius/caesar.html (Utah Shakespeare Festival).

William Shakespeare: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare (Wikipedia).

David Henderson: https://www.facebook.com/theatrescot (Facebook).

Gaius Julius Caesar (100-44 BC): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar (Wikipedia).

EDITOR?S NOTE:

Robert W. McDowell is editor and publisher of Triangle Review, a FREE weekly e-mail arts newsletter. This review is reprinted with permission from Triangle Review.

To start your FREE subscription to this newsletter, e-mail RobertM748@aol.com and type SUBSCRIBE TR in the Subject: line.

To read all of Robert W. McDowell?s Triangle Theater Review previews and reviews online at Triangle Arts & Entertainment, click http://triangleartsandentertainment.org/author/robert-w-mcdowell/.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]

Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)

Abridge Too Far: The Justice Theater Project Murders Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar", 5.0 out of 5 based on 1 rating
Tagged as: David Henderson, JTP, Julius Caesar, Justice Theater Project, The Justice Theater Project, William Shakespeare

Source: http://triangleartsandentertainment.org/2013/02/abridge-too-far-the-justice-theater-project-murders-shakespeares-julius-caesar/

lotto winner jerry lee lewis cesar chavez winning lotto numbers lottery tickets mega lottery sag aftra

Gun ban would protect more than 2,200 firearms

WASHINGTON (AP) ? Congress' latest crack at a new assault weapons ban would protect more than 2,200 specific firearms, including a semi-automatic rifle that is nearly identical to one of the guns used in the bloodiest shootout in FBI history.

One model of that firearm, the Ruger .223 caliber Mini-14, is on the proposed list to be banned, while a different model of the same gun is on a list of exempted firearms in legislation the Senate is considering. The gun that would be protected from the ban has fixed physical features and can't be folded to be more compact. Yet the two firearms are equally deadly.

"What a joke," said former FBI agent John Hanlon, who survived the 1986 shootout in Miami. He was shot in the head, hand, groin and hip with a Ruger Mini-14 that had a folding stock. Two FBI agents died and five others were wounded.

Hanlon recalled lying on the street as brass bullet casings showered on him. He thought the shooter had an automatic weapon.

Both models of the Ruger Mini-14 specified in the proposed bill can take detachable magazines that hold dozens of rounds of ammunition. "I can't imagine what the difference is," Hanlon said.

President Barack Obama has called for restoring a ban on military-style assault weapons and limiting the size of ammunition magazines.

A bill introduced last month by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. would ban 157 specific firearms designed for military and law enforcement use and exempt others made for hunting purposes. It also would ban ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

Yet there are firearms that would be protected under Feinstein's proposal that can take large capacity magazines like the ones used in mass shootings that enable a gunman to fire dozens of rounds of ammunition without reloading.

Feinstein said in a written response to questions from The Associated Press that the list of more than 2,200 exempted firearms was designed to "make crystal clear" that the bill would not affect hunting and sporting weapons.

The December shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., that left 26 students and educators dead forced Washington to focus on curbing gun violence, a risky political move not tried in decades.

The gun industry, which is fighting any sort of ban, says gun ownership in the U.S. is the highest it's ever been, with more than 100 million firearms owners.

Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden have traveled around the country in an effort to gain support for new laws. Feinstein's proposal is the only sweeping piece of legislation designed to ban assault weapons currently being considered.

But some gun experts say the lists of banned and exempted firearms show a lack of understanding and expertise of guns.

"There's no logic to it," said Greg Danas, president of a Massachusetts-based expert witness business and firearms ballistic laboratory. "What kind of effect is it going to have?"

Feinstein's bill defines an assault weapon as a semi-automatic firearm with a detachable magazine that has one of several military characteristics that are specified in her legislation. Examples of those characteristics include a pistol grip, which makes a firearm easier to hold, and a forward grip, which makes the firearm easier to stabilize to improve accuracy. The definition is similar to the one in Congress' original ban on assault weapons, which went into effect in 1994 and was widely criticized for outlawing firearms based on cosmetic features.

Feinstein was behind the 1994 law which, at the time, protected more than 600 firearms. The current bill would exempt by name and model more than 2,200 firearms by name and model.

Feinstein said her staff had worked for more than a year to draft updates for the ban that expired in 2004, and it was apparent in the wake of recent mass shootings that now was the time to introduce a new bill. She said her staff consulted with law enforcement agencies and policy experts for months to create the expanded list.

Naming firearms that would remain legal under an assault weapons ban is a politically motivated gesture that was used to help pass the original ban in the early 1990s, people familiar with the process said.

Any firearm that does not fall within the law's definition of an assault weapon would not be banned. As a result, the list gives vulnerable politicians cover from constituents who do not want to give up their firearms.

For example, a politician can look at the list and assure a constituent that the government would not ban the firearm he or she loves to use for deer hunting. Under the 1994 law and the currently proposed one, the government would not have the authority to take away guns people already legally own. The ban would only apply to specific firearms manufactured and sold after the law is enacted.

A list of exempted firearms was not part of Feinstein's original assault weapons ban two decades ago, said Michael Lenett, one of the lead congressional staffers on gun control issues in 1994. A separate bill in circulation exempted far fewer hunting and sporting firearms, Lenett said.

The purpose of creating such a list was to assure people that the government was not going after any legitimate hunting or sporting weapons. "The other purpose of the list was to have a high profile way of assuring certain folks ? including legislators ? that we would not be going after their weapons that they use for those legitimate purposes," Lenett said.

"It was a win-win situation," Lenett recalled, because, he said, if the list could help pick up votes needed to pass the bill and temper some of the opposition, it could assuage some opponents of the ban without making the law less effective.

But gun experts say the lists in 1994 and the expanded lists of today don't make much sense.

"The bill demonstrates a shocking ignorance of the product they are purporting to regulate," said Lawrence Keane, senior vice president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association based in Newtown, Conn., that represents gun manufacturers. "I have no idea how they arrived at this list. It would seem to be random, bordering on throwing darts at a dart board."

For instance, Feinstein's current proposal includes exemptions for three specific types of the M-1 Carbine, an assault rifle designed for the military that the U.S. currently bans from being imported. A draft of the legislation, created and modified in November and early December last year, banned the M-1 Carbine and didn't exempt any models, according to a copy obtained by the AP.

Feinstein said there was disagreement among firearms experts, law enforcement and gun safety organizations about whether to include the M-1 Carbine on the list of banned weapons.

"It has been used in multiple police shootings, and was originally used by U.S. soldiers on the battlefield," Feinstein said. "On the other hand, it comes in models that would not meet the military characteristics test." She said she decided to limit banned weapons to those that met the definition outlined in the bill.

At a Jan. 30 hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee on gun violence, National Rifle Association President Wayne LaPierre said Feinstein's bill is "based on falsehoods to people that do not understand firearms, to convince them that the performance characteristics of guns that they are trying to ban through that bill are different than the performance characteristics that they're not trying to ban."

The Ruger Mini-14 is a perfect example.

The model that has a fixed stock would be exempted by Feinstein's ban; the weapon was protected in the 1994 law as well. A Ruger Mini-14 with a collapsible and folding stock would be illegal.

The guns fire the same caliber bullet and can take detachable magazines that could hold dozens of rounds of ammunition. The folding stock only reduces the gun's length by 2.75 inches, according to the manufacturer's website.

"It's irrelevant," Edmund Mireles, an FBI agent who survived the Miami shootout, said of the differences in features. "They're equally dangerous."

Mark D. Jones, a senior law enforcement adviser for the University of Chicago Crime Lab, said the folding stock does not affect the firearm's lethal potential.

"Given that both firearms will accept a 30 round or larger magazine, it renders the differences between them entirely cosmetic," Jones said.

Kristen Rand, the legislative director at the Washington-based Violence Policy Center, said the Ruger Mini-14 model that would be banned under Feinstein's legislation is easier to hold while firing because it has a pistol grip, and it's easier to hide because it has a collapsible stock. That's what makes it more dangerous that the Ruger Mini-14 with the fixed stock which would be exempted under the Feinstein bill, she said.

"And that's supposed to save somebody's life?" asked Hanlon, the FBI agent shot alongside Mireles.

Hanlon considered the differences between the two models and whether the events of April 11, 1986, would have been different if the shooter used a Ruger Mini-14 with a fixed stock. "I don't think it would have changed a damn thing," he said. "I don't see what makes that gun less dangerous."

___

Follow Eileen Sullivan on Twitter: http://twitter.com/esullivanap

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/gun-ban-protect-more-2-200-firearms-132222943.html

asteroid mining memorial day ivan rodriguez planetary resources mothers day gift ideas natalee holloway scotty mccreery

Buffett, Brazil's 3G team up for $23 billion Heinz buyout

(Reuters) - Warren Buffett and Brazilian financier Jorge Paulo Lemann are teaming up to buy ketchup maker H.J. Heinz Co for $23.2 billion, in what could be the first step of a wave of mergers for the food and beverage industry.

Analysts and people close to the deal said Heinz could be a good starting point to consolidate similar staple food companies, particularly given the larger ambitions of Lemann's private equity firm 3G Capital.

Including debt assumption, Heinz valued the transaction, which it called the largest in its industry's history, at $28 billion. Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway

and 3G will pay $72.50 per share, a 19 percent premium to the stock's previous all-time high.

Heinz shares initially rose slightly above the offer price, although Buffett cautioned he had no intention of raising his bid and the stock fell back below that mark by midday. The stock has been on a tear, almost doubling over the last four years, though analysts said the price seemed fair.

They also said the deal could be the first step in a broader wave of mergers for the food and beverage industry.

"Maybe for the consumer staples group in general this may start some talk about consolidation. Even corporate entities are flush with cash, interest rates are low, it would seemingly make sense," Edward Jones analyst Jack Russo said.

Companies like General Mills and Campbell Soup - itself long seen as a potential Heinz merge partner - rose on the news.

Any acquisition could help Heinz further diversify and broaden its international profile. It already dominates the ketchup business, with a nearly 26 percent share of the global market and a 59 percent share domestically, according to Euromonitor International.

The company actually generates the largest portion of its sales in Europe, though its traditional North American consumer products business is the most profitable.

But its real growth engine has been the Asia/Pacific region, where sales increased nearly 11 percent in the last fiscal year, in part on demand for sauces and infant foods in China.

BUFFETT HUNTING GROWTH

The surprise purchase satisfies, at least in part, Buffett's hunt for growth through acquisition. He was frustrated in 2012 by the collapse of at least two unnamed deals in excess of $20 billion and said he might have to do a $30 billion deal this year to help fuel Berkshire's growth engine.

In a regulatory filing late on Thursday, Berkshire said it was providing $12.12 billion in equity, including common stock, warrants and preferred shares with a liquidation preference of $8 billion and a 9 percent dividend.

Barclays Capital's Jay Gelb the deal's valuation appeared high at 19 times Heinz's expected 2014 earnings per share, but that it would enhance Berkshire's consumer portfolio.

Berkshire Hathaway already has a variety of food assets, including Dairy Queen ice cream chain, chocolatier See's Candies and food distributor McLane. Buffett, famed for a love of cheeseburgers, joked he was well acquainted with Heinz's products already and that this was "my kind of deal."

It does represent an unusual teaming of Berkshire with private equity, though; historically, Buffett's purchases have been outright his own. He and 3G founder Jorge Paulo Lemann have known each other for years, and Buffett said Lemann approached him with the Heinz idea in December.

One Berkshire investor said he had mixed feelings about the deal because of the limited growth prospects domestically.

"We're a little hesitant on the staple companies because they don't have any leverage in the United States," said Bill Smead, chief investment officer of Smead Capital Management in Seattle. But at the same time, he said, Buffett was likely willing to accept a bond-like steady return even if it was not necessarily a "home run."

A second investor, Michael Yoshikami of Destination Wealth Management in Walnut Creek, California, said he liked the purchase because it provided cash flow for other deals.

"This is a better use of cash than current money market instruments," said Yoshikami, the firm's CEO and chairman of its investment committee.

3G EXPANDS

For 3G, a little-known firm with Brazilian roots, the purchase is something of a natural complement to its investment in fast-food chain Burger King , which it acquired in late 2010 and in which it still holds a major stake.

Historically, 3G was more of an investor than an acquirer. Its biggest shareholdings include Delphi Automotive , Newell Rubbermaid and Anadarko Petroleum .

Lemann, a globe-trotting financier with Swiss roots, made his money in banking and gained notoriety for helping to pull together the deals that ultimately formed the beer brewing giant AB InBev. Forbes ranks him as the world's 69th-richest billionaire, with a fortune of $12 billion.

3G's Alex Behring runs the fund out of New York. He appeared at a Pittsburgh news conference on Thursday with Heinz management to discuss the deal - and to reassure anxious local crowds that the company will remain based there and will continue to support local philanthropy.

But at the same time, Behring said it was too soon to talk about cost cuts at the company. Unlike Berkshire, which is a hands-off operator, 3G is known for aggressively controlling costs at its operations.

PITTSBURGH ROOTS

Also to be determined is whether CEO Bill Johnson would stay on. Only the fifth chairman in the company's history, Johnson is widely credited with Heinz's recent strong growth.

"I am way too young to retire," he told the news conference, adding that discussions had not yet started with 3G over the details of Heinz's future management.

The company, known for its iconic ketchup bottles, Heinz 57 sauces as well as other brands including Ore-Ida frozen potatoes, has increased net sales for the last eight fiscal years in a row.

Heinz said the transaction would be financed with cash from Berkshire and 3G, debt rollover and debt financing from J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo. Buffett told CNBC that Berkshire and 3G would be equal equity partners.

That would imply roughly $6 billion to $7 billion of new debt needs to be raised.

Heinz shares soared 19.9 percent, or $12.02, to $72.50 on the New York Stock Exchange.

A week ago the stock hit a long-term high of $61 a share - near records it set in 1998 - having risen almost 5 percent this year and nearly 12 percent since the beginning of 2012.

The Heinz Endowments, a pillar in Pennsylvania philanthropy, said the sale of the company would have virtually no impact on their work. Heinz shares represent just over 1 percent of the endowment's $1.4 billion in holdings.

The deal is also a potential boon for new U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, whose wife, Teresa, is the widow of H.J. Heinz Co heir John Heinz. Kerry's most recent financial disclosures from his time in the U.S. Senate show a position in Heinz shares of more than $1 million, although the precise size is unclear.

Centerview Partners and BofA Merrill Lynch were financial advisers to Heinz, with Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP the legal adviser. Moelis & Company was financial adviser to the transaction committee of Heinz's board and Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz served as its legal adviser.

Lazard served as lead financial adviser. J.P. Morgan and Wells Fargo also served as financial advisers to the investment consortium. Kirkland & Ellis LLP was legal adviser to 3G Capital, and Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP was legal adviser to Berkshire Hathaway.

(Additional reporting by Olivia Oran and IFR's Stephen Carter in New York and Drew Singer in Pittsburgh; Editing by Maureen Bavdek and Leslie Gevirtz)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/buffett-brazils-3g-team-23-billion-heinz-buyout-153021695--sector.html

miami heat bulls california earthquake california earthquake tyson chandler tyson chandler stephen hill

Three questions that will be answered by UFC on Fuel 7

The UFC brings a title fight -- kinda -- to Fuel TV on Saturday night. Though Comcast and Fox's networks did reach a deal to bring Fuel to its subscribers, the channel won't yet be available for this weekend's bouts and the interesting card in England. No matter who tunes in, here are the intriguing questions around this weekend's bouts.

Is welterweight a better UFC fit for Jorge Santiago? Despite a long and successful career in Sengoku and Strikeforce, his last stint with the UFC didn't go so well. Santiago lost to Demian Maia and Brian Stann. After a first-round knockout in the Titan Fighting Championships, Santiago is back as a welterweight. He'll take on undefeated phenom Gunnar Nelson.

Are Cub Swanson or Dustin Poirier ready for the title shot? Though the UFC's featherweight division is top-heavy and a fight is set between champion Jose Aldo and Anthony Pettis, Swanson and Poirier's bout will show if there is another worthy contender. Swanson, who lost to Aldo in the WEC, wants to be part of the conversation:

?I just want people to mention me up there. I don?t care if I get in next. I?m just concentrating on this fight. But just mention my damn name when you mention the people who deserve it. That?s all I want.?

Poirier lost to Chan Sung Jung in May, then beat Jonathan Brookins in December. He took the fight with Swanson as a late replacement for Dennis Siver, and is hoping a win puts him closer to a title fight.

"The truth is, if I go out there and beat Cub Swanson, I'll be right there at the title if not maybe one more fight away," Poirier said.

Saturday's fight will show if one of these men belong in the discussion.

What is the value of an interim belt? Perhaps this question is a bit too philosophical for a fight preview, but it's worth asking as Renan Barao attempts to defend his interim bantamweight belt against Michael McDonald. Barao won the belt last summer because champion Dominick Cruz has been out for an extended time as his knee heals. But with Cruz waiting in the wings, does this belt have the same oomph as the one Cruz is holding? It feels like whoever wins this fight won't so much be the champion as the no. 1 contender for Cruz's return. Regardless of the accessory handed out at the end of the fight, the two should put on a fight worth watching.

Will you be tuning in? Don't forget these are daytime fights. The Facebook preliminaries are at 12:15 ET, and the main card on Fuel is at 3 p.m. ET.

Source: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mma-cagewriter/three-questions-answered-ufc-fuel-7-164302355--mma.html

tagged Heptathlon London 2012 shot put London 2012 Track And Field Jordyn Wieber michael phelps Kerri Strug

Online petition to stop Washington divorce bill

by TERESA YUAN / KING 5 News

Bio

KING5.com

Posted on February 15, 2013 at 7:38 AM

Updated today at 9:40 AM

State senators will take up the issue of divorce Friday, just one day after Valentine's Day.
?
Senate Bill 5614, also called the "Family Second Chances Act,? would extend the divorce waiting period in Washington from 90 days to one year before a marriage would be officially over.

Supporters say the idea is to avoid impulsive decisions. The bill's sponsors believe even a small reduction of divorce in Washington could benefit families and their children.

But opponents say the bill hurts people in abusive marriages. They have started a petition online.

"For those who are divorcing abusive spouses, the current 90 days is too long a wait, filled with fear and abuse from those they are divorcing. This new bill, if voted in by our senators, would be making that wait a living hell for the abused,? reads the petition.

?

?

Source: http://www.king5.com/news/State-senate-takes-up-divorce-bill-191393041.html

born to run pranks pregnancy test april fools day 2012 ja rule amityville horror acm

The Makers of Military-Rape Documentary The Invisible War on How Winning an Oscar Could Help Change Military Policies

When director Kirby Dick and producer Amy Ziering started filming The Invisible War, a documentary about sexual assault in the military, they quickly realized that they wanted their work to influence change. They knew it was a lofty goal, considering both that the subject matter of rape was not necessarily a topic for Good Morning America and that the Department of Defense wasn?t necessarily the most progressive institution in Washington. But since their film premiered at Sundance, it has facilitated astounding strides in policy, reaching as high as Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who?two days after watching the film?created a special-victims unit for each branch of the military and directed military commanders to transfer all sexual-assault investigations to a higher-ranking colonel. All this and a nomination from the Academy for best documentary feature.

The Hollywood Blog spoke with Dick and Ziering about their post-premiere outreach, how they found their film subjects on Facebook, and why an Oscar would change everything. Highlights from our chat:

The Hollywood Blog: At what point during the making of the film did you decide you could use it for real change?

Kirby Dick: We were talking to all these women and men, hearing these incredible stories of their patriotism and commitment to serve, and then the betrayal they experienced. We realized that even though we were speaking to hundreds, there were hundreds of thousands of men and women that this had happened to.

I personally didn?t think these kind of changes would happen this quickly. I remember Amy and I having this discussion with people in the Pentagon, and they were just adamant that it could not even be raised, that the unit commander had to make those decisions [about reporting rape]. . . . Likewise, we did not expect that the military would be using this film as part of its sexual-assault training programs. Today, the estimate is that over 250,000 men and women in the military have seen this film.

Amy Ziering: That?s incredible. That?s 10 percent.

Dick: Even slightly over 10 percent now. Maybe 12 percent. We?re moving up. It?s also happened from the top down, too. For example, the chief of staff of the Air Force, General Wells, flew in all 135 wing commanders from around the globe to the Pentagon to watch the film, and then had a discussion about the issue. We later learned, in more than three decades, there had been no instance where all the wing commanders were called back . . . it may never have happened before.

Ziering: Also, just as a reference point, Senator Richard Blumenthal during Hagel?s confirmation hearing, one of his questions was, ?Senator Hagel, have you seen The Invisible War?? Which I think is pretty amazing that he used that as a question to the nominee. Hagel responded, ?Yes.?

Rape isn?t necessarily a topic that?s easy to advertise to the public. Why were you able to make it happen and get important people to pay attention?

Ziering: The question is more cinematic. Artistically, it was our aim and ambition to expect policy change. We have lofty goals in that mission, and that certainly was one of ours, but we also did want to make an extremely compelling and moving film. That was the interesting challenge of an art and political film. Everybody warned us from the start the difficulty of making this kind of film.

I credit Kirby?s incredible editing skills and directorial skills, and the material we have. It just all ended up coming together in a very effective, calculated way, where people were able to watch the film and respond to it in the way that they have.

Dick: Also, I think that Amy did the interviews with the survivors. She was able to get them to a place where they could not only talk about their experience but in the most intimate and revealing way. These interviews became the soul of the film. I remember being initially concerned because it?s very hard to get v?rit? footage of going on bases and things like that. You?re not really even allowed on bases. Certainly we wouldn?t have been allowed on bases.

You tracked down some of your interview subjects online. What was that process like?

Ziering: That was mostly [executive producer] Ken Burns. We put up a Facebook page. I remember that, signing off on the copy, and it was like, ?We?re a documentary-film team. Here?s who we are. We?re interested if you have any experiences of sexual assault in the military. Our conversation will be confidential, off the record. Please get in touch.? Then they?d e-mail, and I?d follow up with a phone call.

Dick: The other thing that [producer] Tanner King Barklow would do was search the Internet and Facebook, looking for any kind of conversations about this issue, where perhaps somebody might obliquely say, ?I know what you?re talking about.? Then we would Facebook them and see if they would be interested in speaking off the record about what they did know, and in most cases their experience was that they were assaulted in the military. It?s very hard to find these people. They were afraid, with justification because their perpetrators are still out there. For the people who report it, almost all of them experience very severe reprisals, so that made them reluctant, but Amy was able in those initial conversations to convey to them that this was an entirely different situation.?

Your film is inspiring because, despite incredible trauma, these women remained strong and proactive. Were there any subjects who weren?t in situations that were as supportive?

Ziering: [Rape in the military is] the number one cause of homelessness in our women veterans. The vast majority are not uplifting stories. I?ve been so haunted, honestly, by the level of the debilitation of these women, who were cut short so early in life, and in such a way that they couldn?t ever recuperate and again reintegrate into society in any way.

After we finished the film, I made this promise that I would try and find a way to physically help some of these women that I really was very worried about. A lot of the homes we visited, all the shades were drawn for years. Children would grow up in these dark homes, because that?s the only way these women feel safe.

One of our executive producers, I talked to her about this vision, and she said, ?I?ll fund it.? So we just started our first recovery program. It?s up in Santa Barbara. It?s the five women from the film. It?s a two-week program. If it works, we?re going to do one more and go from there. Hopefully, it can be some kind of prototype or model.

One thing that absolutely confounded me is the court ruling in the survivors? case: essentially, that rape was an occupational hazard of military service.

Dick: The actual court ruling was what happened to them was incident to military service and therefore they couldn?t sue. Which is the same thing as an occupational hazard. It?s a real challenge, there?s no question about it. Lower courts have interpreted the fairest doctrine, and it?s very much in the military?s favor, as courts tend to be in the United States.

Susan Burke has filed for more cases in different jurisdictions, and she is hoping that one or more of them is actually heard by a court and moved up the judicial system to the Supreme Court. She eventually hopes the Supreme Court revisits its decision. It?s a long shot, but what it does do is that it introduces all this testimony and evidence into our court system.

The documentary puts forth that sexual aggressors are drawn to the military, specifically because they believe it?s easier to rape people and get away with it. Are people with a history of sexual assault allowed to join?

Ziering: There was a period where they granted what were ?moral waivers.? People who had certain crimes?I?m not sure exactly which crimes?on their record, were [still] allowed into the military. Very recently, Senator Barbara Boxer had an amendment passed, which was signed into law by the president, which prohibited people with a sex crime on their record from joining the military. She said she?s been trying to pass that bill since 2005 and really was unable to get anywhere with it until the film came out.

Was there anything that surprised you when speaking to higher-ups about this problem?

Ziering: One general, very, very high ranking, said to me that the film explained to him this issue better than 40 years of briefing papers. He never really understood it in all sorts of ways until he came to our film.

Dick: Then also, there?s a series of Navy recruit studies that I think one or two of my statistics are from. The military has done very few studies on this. The military is an institution that can very easily conduct studies because it can just order its population to take them. In my opinion, it deliberately wasn?t doing that because it didn?t want this information to get out and get to the public. But one of the few studies they were doing were these Navy recruit studies. They had not been very widely disseminated, but when we were in the Pentagon, half the people we spoke to whose job it was to deal with this issue of sexual assault were unaware of those studies. It was really shocking.

What would an Oscar do for you in terms of change?

Ziering: Awards are nice, but this kind of recognition would really help move this issue along and get us greater political capital with the administration and the Department of Defense. No question. It would take it to another level.

Source: http://www.vanityfair.com/online/oscars/2013/02/invisible-war-oscar-nominated-documentary

giuliana and bill giuliana and bill bill rancic nflx jennifer hudson chicago blackhawks giuliana rancic

Washington boys put Mid-Illini title under wraps

The first surge of the second half for Washington didn?t stick. The second one did in a 53-47 victory at Limestone in Mid-Illini boys basketball on Friday.

Washington (25-1, 12-0) clinched the conference title outright and completed the road portion of its league schedule. The Class 3A No. 3-ranked Panthers will take a 14-game win streak into Saturday against visiting Metamora. Canton visits Washington next Friday.

?If you can go unbeaten on the road in this conference that gives you a real opportunity,? Washington coach Kevin Brown said. ?This is a tough place to play and? against a very good team. It was a full house and a lot of emotion. It was like the postseason started early.?

Trailing 38-37 after three quarters, Limestone (17-9, 7-5) opened the fourth with a basket from Terence Shelby and a fastbreak layup from David Anderson to lead 41-38.

Washington got two jumpers from Casey Danley and a putback basket from Alec Peters as part of a 13-2 surge for Washington.

Limestone got as close as 51-47 on a steal and layup by Lorenzo Burns. The Rockets went without a basket over a five-minute stretch midway through the fourth.

?I?m proud of the way our kids battled against a quality, veteran team,? Limestone coach Eddie Mathews said. ?We just need to get six or seven points better.?

Peters had game highs of 21 points and 15 rebounds. The Valpariaso recruit had three baskets, including one on a two-handed dunk, as part of a surge that put Washington up 37-27 in the third.

Limestone junior reserve Nick Page sank two 3s to help the Rockets close the frame on a 10-1 burst.

Page was 3-for-3 on 3s. He and Shelby each scored 11 for Limestone, which got no points and three assists from scoring leader Hank Mathews, who fouled out in the fourth.

?Nick came in and hit some big shots when we needed them,? Eddie Mathews said.

Tucker Harlan sank six of nine shots and scored 13 for Washington. Danley, a junior guard, scored nine in his season debut. He had been sidelined following shoulder surgery in the fall.

?I didn?t plan on using him that much but we got into some foul trouble in the first half and he gave us a huge lift,? Brown said.

Burns scored 10? for Limestone.

Washington and Morton were Mid-Illini co-champions in 2011-12.

Lonnie Schwindenhammer can be reached at 686-3214 or lschwindenhammer@pjstar.com.
?

Source: http://www.pjstar.com/sports/preps/x1037512177/Washington-boys-put-Mid-Illini-title-under-wraps

MBTA national signing day Solomon Islands Mary Leakey Side Effects weather nyc bob marley