"Q: 'So I want to ask you about Philistines and how Philistines have taken over the culture. I think the phrase you used is ‘Philistine supremacy’?'
"A: 'That's right. A lot of the time, when we talk about Philistines, we mean, oh, that awful person I know who doesn't appreciate the high arts. And it's a kind of snob thing. I'm not interested in that. Everyone's a Philistine, right? I'm a Philistine. You're a Philistine.
"'The really important thing is whether the literary elite are Philistines. And what we have now are English professors saying that, you know, Taylor Swift is as good as Mary Shelley. And the guy who runs the New York Times book review section hasn't read Middlemarch and doesn't think it's a problem. And there are just so many examples like that—that sort of suggest that the elite tier has kind of given up on being elites in a way.
"'I think part of it is we had what was called prestige TV, and people wanted to write about that and talk about that.'
"Q: 'Let me play Devil’s Advocate for a moment and say, no, 'Succession' is really good. The writing is very interesting. The cinematography adds a new layer to its presentation. The storytelling's good. It gives you room to explore various themes in a way that a play doesn’t because of its runtime and multi-season arc. Tell me why that’s crazy.'
"A: 'There are two questions here. Is Succession good? And is Succession the sort of thing that merits the cultural elite giving it the kind of attention that they have? And those are separate questions.
"'Maybe Succession is good. I neither know nor care. I found it boring. I couldn't watch very much of it. Personally, I think the cinematography is hugely derivative. ... But should we be talking about it in partnership with King Lear? Should we be devoting the kind of space and the kind of critical attention that we give to it, that we also give to the great works of fiction and drama? That’s obviously a no. Even the advocates can't really make a serious case for it. And, you know, King Lear is 400 years old at this point and is acknowledged as one of the great masterpieces of the West. No one's printing out the Succession scripts and doing a close reading. ...'
"Q: 'What would you do specifically about Shakespeare?'
"A: 'So the first thing I would say is, you’re not at school and you’re not that person anymore. And there are a lot of things you did and didn’t like at school that are no longer relevant. So just move on. Put that to one side. That’s over. Shakespeare’s the best. People get a little fussy about, can we say the best, and can we have rankings? Whatever. Yes, he’s the best. He’s the heart of the English canon. He’s the best reading experience you can have. You owe it to yourself to see or read some Shakespeare in the way that you would travel to see amazing landscapes, amazing buildings, have the best food of the world, hear the best music of the world. No one thinks it’s crazy to jump on a plane for eight hours to go and do something incredible on the other side of the world. But spending three hours with this book is too scary?'"
~ from an interview with Henry Oliver on developing literary taste in an age of TV binge-watching and dumbed-down mass culture: 'How to Be a Serious Reader'
"'Prime Minister,' the new documentary charting Jacinda Ardern’s ascent, apotheosis and eventual retreat from public life, bills itself as an 'intimate portrait' of political power. ... Most of the footage is seemingly shot by her partner, Clarke Gayford, and the result feels less like a political documentary and more like stumbling across somebody’s unguarded home videos and realising, with horror, that they want you to watch all of them. ...
"The myth-making begins immediately. We’re whisked back to 2017, those breathless days when Ardern – 37, photogenic, permanently on the brink of tears – was hoisted into the Labour leadership and proclaimed the Kiwi messiah by people who really ought to get out more. The film dwells on this moment with something approaching religious fervour. ...
"Admirers will be transported; critics will develop a nervous tic. And the rest of us will ponder whether the world truly needed two hours of Jacinda’s domestic cinema. Spoiler: probably not."
"The Internet creates the illusion that all culture is taking place right now. Actual history disappears in the eternal present of the web.
Everything on YouTube is happening right now!
Everything on Netflix is happening right now!
Everything on Spotify is happening right now!
"Of course, this is an illusion. Just compare these platforms with libraries and archives and other repositories of history. The contrast is extreme.
"When you walk into a library, you understand immediately that it took centuries to create all these books. The same is true of the Louvre and other great art museums. A visit to an Ivy League campus conveys the same intense feeling, if only via the architecture.
"You feel the weight of the past. We are building on a foundation created by previous generations—and with a responsibility to future ones.
"The web has cultivated an impatience with that weight of the past. You might even say that it conveys a hatred of the past.
"And the past is hated all the more because history is outside of our control. When we scream at history, it’s not listening. We can’t get it cancelled. We can’t get it de-platformed. The best we can do is attach warning labels or (the preferred response today) pretend it doesn’t exist at all.
"That’s how Netflix erases 'Citizen Kane' and 'Casablanca.' It can’t deny the greatness of these films. It can’t remove their artistry, even by the smallest iota.
"When Olga Khazan introduced 'The Big Lebowski'—her favourite movie—to her friend, she was nervous. 'I was worried that she would dislike it so much that she would kind of dislike me too, through osmosis,' she writes. Jitters such as hers, it turns out, are common.
“'If something really matters to you ... there’s a vulnerability in sharing it with someone else.' When we declare a favourite book, movie, or album and introduce it to others ... what we’re doing is saying, 'This is an aspect of my identity that I’m willingly putting out there in order for other people to know me. And if you reject this thing, you reject me.'
"Our friends often do like what we like. The trouble is, we usually want our friends to be even more similar to us than they actually are ... Whether a disagreement over a beloved book or movie sparks friction in the friendship depends on how well you know the friend, what else you have in common, and how important that particular book, movie, or show is to you ..."
Film-maker (and Monthy Python alumni) Terry Gilliam makes an important point about art in drawing an important distinction between Kubrick and Spielberg — "and it’s rooted in filmmaking philosophy as much as style." Gilliam described Spielberg as “excellent as a fairy‑tale storyteller." Kubrick's movies however provoke endless questions rather than tidy answers.
Spielberg and the success of most films in Hollywood these days, I think, is down to the fact they're comforting — even if the answers are stupid, they're answers. So you can go home and you don't have to worry about it. The Kubricks of this world, and the great filmmakers, make you go home and think about it.
There's a wonderful quote in in the book that Frederic Raphael wrote about the making of 'Eyes Wide Shut' (called 'Eyes Wide Open') and he's talking to Kubrick about 'Schindler's List,' and the Holocaust. And he says, the thing is that 'Schindler's List' is about success; the Holocaust was about failure. And that's Kubrick, and that's just spot on. It was about the complete failure of civilisation, to allow six million people to die.
"We are involved in a business venture. We screened the film for you to bring you up to date as to the status of that venture. Do not misconstrue this as our soliciting the input of raging primitives."
~ director Mel Brooks, explaining the fine points of artistic collaboration ...
Built just four years after the First World War, this was probably the world's first modernist house.
Designed and built in Los Angeles by Austrian emigre Rudolph Schindler for two families to share on site, almost every architect since has knowing or unknowingly borrowed from this seminal work of genius.
And yet architect Rudolph Schindler, a certified genius (and one of my own architectural heroes) is almost unknown!
A new documentary Schindler: Space Architect, showing this week and next (and later at some venues) at local Architecture Film Festivals is hoping to put that right.
If you have any interest in architecture at all, and you live in either Auckland, Wellington, Nelson, Christchurch, Hawkes Bay, Blenheim, Whangarei, New Plymouth, Palmerston North, Hamilton, or Dunedin (all the places the film-fest is being hosted) then I insist you get along.
It's really hard to be a pessimist when you're living in such beauty actually that beauty is all around all of us all the time but Schindler knew how to read it and how to bring it in so it was part of your life. That was his genius.
See it on the big screen while you can.
PS: And since everyone and his sister has been arguing recently about who's-the-biggest-feminist, I also insist you also see the film on another hero(ine) of mine: Eileen Gray, her beautiful house in the south of France, and how that pig of a man Le Corbusier vandalised what he could never have created it. Trailer here:
(Reposted from June 2005. Updated because, well, who even remembers what a video store is?)
I like adult films. There, I’ve said it. Can anyone else remember a time when the term ‘adult film’ referred to something other than the stuff that comes with the label NSFW? Something with some wit or intelligence that, you know, was meant for adults. For grown-ups. For folk who still have brain cells they wish to rub together.
I for one am heartily bored with what passes for movie entertainment these days – there’s more formulas than a chemistry lab, fewer real adult themes than you'll find at a corner bar, and better acting on most soccer fields after a heavy tackle.
Your video store online steaming app has movies categorised for everything. Everything that is, except for one category that for me is the most important: movies that makes you think, instead of making you want to put your foot through the screen. If, like me, you want something celluloidal that doesn’t insult your intelligence, then the one important question when choosing a movie should be, ‘Is it sharp?’
Sharp, (shahp), a. having a keen edge or fine point; terminating in a point or edge; biting, piercing; acute, keen-witted; alert, penetrating …
So as my video store online streaming app won’t do the job, I’ve sorted out my own ten working rules for finding movies that are sharp – or at least won’t blunt an evening’s entertainment with the usual dross. As a public service to help you avoid wasting valuable minutes of your life watching crap, I offer them here for your guidance. Thank me later.
The ten-minute test. This is most important: If it don’t grab you in ten, let it hit the bin.
Plot. The three most important things in a movie are plot, plot and big ti ahem, plot. As Tarantino should have said, ‘If it don’t have a plot, then it ain’t worth squat.’ Aristotle identified nearly two-and-a-half-thousand years ago what made a good plot, but the news still hasn’t got to LA: in two words, dramatic conflict. Without a decent dramatic conflict, there is no plot, and you fail on the Rule One Test. The only thing better than a good plot is a really good plot. The only director who can break this rule is Fellini. Why? Because he can.
No coming of age movies. Just because the entire population of the planet over the age of fifteen passed through puberty once doesn’t mean we have to share every one of those experiences. Who cares what they’re a metaphor for. [No, not even — especially not — Adolescence. Not when "the state’s fingerprints are all over it."]
No movies starring George Clooney, Julia Roberts, Brad Pitt, Nicole Kidman, Leonardo Di Caprio or today's modern equivalent — nor anyone who's referred to as "bankable." No pop stars (with the exception of ‘Hard Day’s Night’) And definitely no "reality" stars. And no 'franchises.' (If you can't say it in one movie then you need a better editor. Yes, Shakespeare had the whole Tudor thing going. But no, these film-makers aren't Shakespeare.)
Anything with David Mamet involved is worth a look. He might insult your sensibilities, but never your intelligence.
No high-school romances/sports stories/problems in class etc., etc., etc. Yawn. See rule 3 above. If it’s set in a high school, let it hit the bin.
Black and white. If it’s in black and white and your video store favourite online streaming app has it, there’s probably a good reason: because the film has legs. It’s lasted. Think Casablanca,or The Big Sleep here however, not the entire first year of ‘Coronation Street.’ If it’s ‘B and W,’ it’s worth the trouble. But bear in mind rule 1 above.
No gun fights/sword fights/car chases/explosions. Now, I don’t mean films like The Longest Day or A Fistful of Dollars here. Think Die Hard, if ‘think’ can be used about a whole franchise untouched by human minds. I mean gun fights/sword fights/car chases et al that are used as a subsitute for a decent dramatic conflict — used because the screenwriter was too lazy or inept the think of one. Aristotle identified that without dramatic conflict there is no plot, and in my revised and updated edition of his Poetics he went on to add that loud noises and Bruce Willis are no substitute for a film with a plot. ‘Hey, who cares,’ say the money-men, ‘let’s have a half-hour of gun fights/car chases/explosions to pad out the end of the movie.’ No, let’s not. Best to watch a movie in which the story actually has a real story delivered by a real screenwriter. Something that makes you think, not gawp.
Every rule has at least one exception. Except this one.
Goodies and baddies are for cartoons (and don’t bother with that childish Spider Man/Batman/Hulk/Arnie crap on film either, unless you’ve either just got to the head of the lobotomy waiting list and you want to show off, or you watch coming-of-age movies to pick up tips for the future). The best, most intelligent drama sets good against good, the worst sets good against psycho, sicko with a grudge or serial killer. Psychos, sickos and serial-killers makes for cartoon viewing and poor drama; whereas good-against-good makes for really good plot conflict, out of which real, memorable drama develops. Unfortunately, while there's a slew of good novels like this I can’t remember the last time I saw a film which adopts this technique. Perhaps I schould eschew film-watching and just read a good book.
What's the damn point of a biopic? Any of the damn things, not just this latest one.
It's sold as a biography. (Hence the "bio.")
But the story is contrived.
The impersonations are laughable. (Angelina Jolie as Maria Callas? You have to be kidding.)
And in the age of YouTube, even if I liked the musician (which is rare anywhere with these things), why see someone impersonating a musician, badly, when you can watch the real thing over and over again as many times as you like?!
Even (to cite examples contrived for the latest of these things) the actual (but pretty ordinary) 1964 Baez-Dylan performance at the Newport Folk Festival, or the actual (and much-mythologised) 1965 Newport Folk Festival a year later — when folkies allegedly boo the 'newly'-electric Dylan* (which is not at all how I hear it on my bootleg records, by the way, which don't use any fancy audio enhancement).
And if it is Bob Dylan you're after, that confirmed plagiarist, then there's already plenty of films of the actual Bob to watch made by genuine film-makers like D.A. Pennebaker, Martin Scorcese, and even Bob himself (though you really, reallydon't want to go there).
If there's one Bob film you do have to watch that truly captures lightning in a bottle (and also, incidentally, the real demise of the Baez-Dylan relationship) then it's Pennebaker's Don't Look Back.
The fly-on-the-wall Don't Look Back (a year before that 1965 Newport appearance) is the only one you really need.
Oh, but, the biopic's actor spent five years learning to play guitar just so he could copy Bob! Really? Bob spent years learning to really be Bob; why watch a piss-poor imitation when the real thing is so easily available?
Oh, but the screenwriters made a better story out of real life than it would have been otherwise! Ugh, you mean the life-story depicted isn't so much bio as it is fiction? Right.
Oh but, but ... But me no buts. Don't waste your time (or mine) on these things.
I look forward to the time when film-makers learn how to tell actual stories again, instead of comic-book action flicks or contrived pseudo-bios that are done better elsewhere.
"There’s a handful of movies that ... I [will] stop and watch, no matter how many times I've seen them ... "It also includes 'The Hunt For Red October,' a damn-near perfect movie that has a particular element woefully missing from modern fare. And modern culture, more broadly. "That element is the quietly competent man. Individuals that are good at what they do, and go about doing it without chest-thumping machismo or dude-bro bluster. "Consider the contrast between Will Smith's bluster in 'Independence Day' versus the exchange between Scott Glenn and Courtney B. Vance in Red October:
"[The difference on display here is] showboating vs doing-my-job-well matter-of-factness.... "Apparently, I'm not the only one to feel this dearth in modern fare. YouTube movie reviewer The Critical Drinker put it well:
'I really miss movies with male actors that look and talk and act like actual adult men who radiate authority and confidence instead of whiny hyperactive children inhabiting male bodies.'
"Entertainment reflects culture, and we have for decades seen our culture deride and undermine the concept of the quietly competent man.... "[T]o repeat, everyone in 'Red October' was supremely competent in a workaday fashion, rather than smashing us in the face with boasts and swagger. "That quiet competence should serve as the ideal. It should be a role model for kids, and an aspiration for men. It is also the essence of individualism, and it's why a libertarian blogger finds it suitable subject matter. It seems a natural draw for male behaviour, so it's a crying shame that our culture has stopped even depicting it, let alone celebrating it. ... "Fonzie once pointed out someone to Richie, observing that 'he's got the quiet cool' or something to that effect .... 'Quiet cool' seems like a pretty good idea."
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
~ Upton Sinclair
“Many hundreds of thousands of jobs worldwide now depend on the climate crisis.”
• Dr. @RossMcKitrick, 50:18: - “You start building this enormous population whose job is to ‘manage the crisis,’ and also explicitly, to make sure that people are alarmed about the crisis, because this whole industry depends on the existence of the crisis.”
• Dr. @MatthewWielicki, 50:51 - “If CO₂ isn’t having the huge negative impacts that we claimed it was having originally, how are we going to stay in business? How do we justify our existence if climate change isn’t this existential threat that we claimed it was over the last four decades or so?”
• Also, at 51:38 - “The IPCC has a self-preservation instinct to show that climate change is an existential threat, otherwise there is no reason for them to be collecting the money and doing the work in the first place.”
• Dr. Roy Spencer, 51:06 - “People like me, our careers depend on funding of climate research. This is what I’ve been doing just about my whole career; this is what the other climate researchers are doing with their whole careers. They don’t want this to end.” • Tony Heller (@TonyClimate) - “If NASA said ‘global warming is not a problem,’ their funding disappears. So, they can’t say that. I mean, you got the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. If they said the climate isn’t changing, they’d have no reason to exist.”
Watch the FULL “Climate the Movie” above or here — and let us know what you think! [Hat tip Chris Martz]
"How much longer [will] big-budget franchise films continue to draw audiences? ... Special effects add some sizzle to the steak, but it is still the same stale meal night after night. Sooner or later, even superheroes die.... "Hollywood has saturated the market with look-alike movies. Their pipeline of films is now exploding like the Nord Stream, but with this difference—studios are still sitting on a huge pile of future bombs.... "[Disney] launched 'The Marvels' on Friday and quickly set a record—for the lowest opening day and weekend ever for a Marvel film. It wasn’t even close. ... That’s what saturating the market does to you.... But who can say when the market for these kinds of movies will improve? ... "[T]he risk here is much bigger than box office receipts indicate. That’s because Disney isn’t just releasing bad movies, but actually destroying key franchises that drive the entire corporate strategy. "Walt Disney may have built his company on creativity, but his successors have replaced it with an empire based entirely on brand extensions. These are now crumbling.... "Of course, Hollywood will survive all this. Films won’t disappear. But they will change. "Studios have no choice. They must abandon the stale formulas that got them into this bind—transforming themselves back into creativity businesses, not brand management companies churning out extensions like new flavours of potato chips. If they didn’t learn that from getting whupped in 2023, they will figure it out in 2024 or 2025."
"I found out that Hollywood is more crooked, dumber, crueler, stupider than all the books I've read about it. They didn't go deeply enough into how it lacks art, and soul, and heart — how it's really a piece of crap. There are too many hands directing, there're too many fingers in the pot, and they're all kind of ignorant about what they're doing. They're greedy, and they're vicious. So you don't get much of a movie." ~ Charles Bukowski, from 'Bukowski: Born Into This'
One of my heroes has just died, at the age of 94. In every role he played, actor Sidney Poitier was the very model of dignity, intelligence and resolve. And he invariably had a twinkle in his eye too.
If you haven't before, I strongly recommend you catch up with my three favourites of all his films:
It's literally true to say that they don't make them like this anymore. Neither the films, nor the man.
UPDATE:
Sidney Poitier on the press's reductive focus on his 'blackness' [hat tip @FreeBlackThought]:
"You ask me one-dimensional questions about...the Negro-ness of my life. I am artist, man, American, contemporary. I am an awful lot of things, so I wish you would pay me the respect due."
Context:
"Why is it that you guys are hounds for bad news? At this moment, you could ask me many questions about many positive & wonderful things that are happening in this country. But we gather here to pay court to sensationalism... to negativism."
As Martin Scorsese put it, ‘He had a vocal precision and physical power and grace that at moments seemed almost supernatural’....
He played men of science and of academia and of action. Virgil Tibbs, from In the Heat of the Night, was a detective and expert in forensic deduction who insisted on being called Mr Tibbs. In To Sir, With Love, Poitier tells his delinquent, mainly white, teenage pupils, ‘You will show respect to me and each other at all times. You will address me as “Sir” or “Mr Thackeray”. Boys will be addressed by their last names; the girls will be likewise addressed, and as “Miss”.’ ...
Poitier was a man of immense self-possession... At a time when the segregation and fetishisation of race is being pushed as a radical act, we have lost a shining example of the fact that the colour of our skin is one of the least interesting aspects of our fascinating humanity.
"What is the cost of lies? It's not that we'll mistake them for the truth. The real danger is that if we hear enough lies, then we no longer recognise the truth at all."
“Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later that debt is paid.”
"If the Prime Minister's method for evaluating whether giant film subsidies are the best possible use of tax money is to go and ask the recipients of the subsidies whether they make a difference, well, I suppose we should all ratchet down our expectations for Budget 2020... "It makes for fun syllogisms though. If tax is love and 'Avatar' sequels are tax, are we required to love the 'Avatar' sequels? I hope not." ~ Eric Crampton: 'Jacinda Says I'm Wrong' .
Alright, so as the sun at the end of this short working week rolls quietly around toward Cocktail Hour, to get you suitably chilled for that first quenching sip I offer you my slightly revised version of John Doxat's list of literally fantastic martinis from his excellent wee book on the world's greatest drink Stirred--Not Shaken: The Dry Martini (1976):
Author's Note: These are not proper martini-esque mutations, but rhyming names for the Dry Martini in particular or peculiar situations -- actual, fictional, or improbable: readers may care to add their own fancies to this initial list.
SPY MARTINI: The allegedly true instance of a Dry Martini with a 'bugged' olive, to pick up an espionage agent's conversation. (But what happened if he ate it? The C.I.A. declines to comment.)
CRY MARTINI: The sixth or seventh successive double Dry Martini which has induced sentimental or belligerent lachrymosity.
LIE MARTINI: The Dry Martini you tell your partner is your first, when in fact you've had two already.
BANZAI MARTINI: The Dry Martini you charge into. Or charge up.
NIGH MARTINI: Almost a cocktail -- so weak, and insipid, as to barely qualify as a Dry Martini. [See also "making love in a canoe" - Ed.]
TRY MARTINI: If in quotation marks, this is advice to the love-lorn from a practical cynic. Otherwise it is the first, experimental Dry Martini in a bar previously unfamiliar with the drink. Treat with caution.
BULLS-EYE MARTINI; The one that's so good you feel it click when it hits that spot.
FLY MARTINI: Exhortatory slogan composed, after a Three-Martini Lunch, by an advertising copy-writer having trouble with a campaign for a new airline.
THIGH MARTINI: Either the one that clumsy idiot on the next bar stool spills over your trouser leg, or the one that induces the young lady on the next bar stool over to reveal a little more.
SHY MARTINI: The one that induces immediate loss of speech.
FRY MARTINI: A tepid - or heated Martini. In no way recommended.
MY MARTINI: As in, "Just a moment, Buster, that's my Martini you're drinking!"
PIE MARTINI: The glass half-filled by vegetable matter -- huge stuffed olive, outlandish onion, grotesque slice of lemon -- leaving sparse space for liquor.
HIGH MARTINI: One in which your olive may be off.
SLY MARTINI: Order one Dry Martini and one orange juice. Drink the first and have the glass removed. Enter partner: "Are you ready yet?" You respond: "Just let me finish my orange juice."
Speaking of orange juice (which we should rarely do) reminds me of W.C. Fields's famous flask of Dry Martini, kept about him at all times, referring to it as his "orange juice." One the set one day some stage hands emptied the flask and refilled it with the juice. Later came the stentorian Fields's trumpet: "Who's been putting the orange juice in my orange juice?"
PI MARTINI: Short for Pious Martini. A Dry Martini without the gin. Or the pleasure.
TIE MARTINI: A waste of money -- the one you spill down your neckwear.
EYE MARTINI: A dangerous drink signalled by the near verticality of the toothpick, requiring extra caution when elevated to the imbibing position.
PSY MARTINI: A Dry Martini served Gangnam Style.
DRIVE MARTINI: The forth or fifth double Dry Martini after which all vehicular activity should be confined to the passenger seat(s). [See DIE MARTINI for the possible consequences should this advice be ignored.]
"Q: But are mainstream Hollywood films less sophisticated than when you were starring in them? "A: Gosh, the last film I went to, every trailer was a Marvel comic movie or a shoot-’em-up. It was all guns and superheroes. I just thought, Why isn’t someone doing something different? I would think that whoever could offer an alternative would make a killing. I imagine that’s what television does so well now." ~ Kathleen Turner, interview for 'Vulture'
“Ten years after Al Gore’s ‘Inconvenient Truth’ and its guilt- and fear-producing predictions, examine just how ‘accurate’ his ‘junk science’ proved to be on his way to the bank:
Rising Sea Levels – inaccurate and misleading. Al was even discovered purchasing a beachfront mansion!
Increased Tornadoes – declining for decades.
New Ice Age in Europe – they’ve been spared; it never happened.
South Sahara Drying Up – completely untrue.
Massive Flooding in China and India – didn’t happen.
Ice-Free Arctic – false; further, the largest refreezing in years occurred two years ago.
Polar Bear Extinction – numbers are actually increasing!
Temperature Increases Due to rapidy-increasing CO2 – no significant rising for almost 20 years.
Katrina, a Foreshadow of the Future – false; past 10 years, no F3 hurricanes; ‘longest [hurricane] drought ever!’
The Earth in a “True Planetary Emergency” Within a Decade Unless Drastic Action Taken to Reduce Greenhouse Gasses – never happened.”
I generally don’t care what modern film actors say, either in or out of their movies. But as long as others so unfathomably do, this (from screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky, just after Vanessa Redgrave received hers) would be my own attitude towards their awards ceremonies:
