domingo, 7 de março de 2010

As Oscar ceremony approaches, the picture is unclear

Questions abound, answers are few. One answer: Kathryn Bigelow will be the first woman to win top director. We think

By KENNETH TURAN


If you write about the Oscars for a living -- which is what everyone at the L.A. Times seems to be doing this time of the year -- people expect you to have the answers, to know who's who, what's what, and, most important, which films are going to win.

This year, however, feels different. This year, to my mind at least, the questions are as interesting as the answers.

The one that interests me most is whether Kathryn Bigelow will become the first woman in the Oscar's 82 episodes to win best director. When you put it that way, you understand why the answer is almost surely yes. Not only is "The Hurt Locker" a spectacular piece of directing, but it's likely that academy members have become increasingly embarrassed over an omission that has gone on for so long. The chance to right that wrong with such an exceptional piece of work will be hard to resist.

That question is linked to one that's equally intriguing. Will "Hurt Locker's" move from way, way off the lead -- the film was released back in June but didn't gain real best picture traction until the last month or so -- be strong enough to displace "Avatar," the de facto favorite?

The James Cameron film dazzled with its genuinely revolutionary use of 3-D, an achievement that will likely be viewed as enough of a game changer to take home the Oscar.

But if below-the-line voters are likely to appreciate "Avatar's" accomplishments, will actors, irrationally worried that a digital future will not include them, vote against it? More to the point, will voters split their tickets on this matter, dividing the wealth in a Solomon-like manner by voting for Bigelow for best director and "Avatar" for best picture? That's my best guess at the moment, but the reverse could happen as well.

One thing feels sure: "Hurt Locker" is closing fast and will not be denied a major award.

Other races pose equally tricky questions. For instance:

Can Sandra Bullock hold off a late Meryl Streep charge? Whereas the lead actor award has been a lock for the five-times nominated Jeff Bridges since the day "Crazy Heart" opened, the lead actress race has a more complicated story line.

Although you hear many people say that Bullock will win, you hear almost no one say that hers was the superior performance. Rather the conventional wisdom has been that a Bullock victory would be a kind of lifetime achievement award: She's a popular actress, "The Blind Side" is her moment, and Streep has been nominated a ton.

Lately, however, the fact that it's been decades since Streep actually won the award (for "Sophie's Choice" in 1983) has been mentioned a lot, as has the fact that her work as Julia Child in "Julie & Julia" was the tougher and trickier performance. Bullock is still the favorite, but Streep is on the move.

Will the consensus picks in the supporting categories actually win or will there be a backlash? Since their films had their first festival screenings -- Christoph Waltz's "Inglourious Basterds" in Cannes, Mo'Nique's "Precious" at Sundance -- these two performers have been almost prohibitive favorites in their respective corners.

But given that no one, especially not academy voters, likes to feel that their choices can be taken for granted, will one of these favorites be upset in the name of spontaneity and surprise? This probably will not happen with the actresses, but there is an outside chance for an upset with the men, with the venerable Christopher Plummer, playing Count Leo Tolstoy in "The Last Station," having his share of supporters among an academy with some members who might have known Tolstoy in their youth. (Just kidding)

Will the writing Oscars follow the script? One of the most traditional of Academy Award patterns is that if a film has numerous nominations, its supporters will for sure cluster around the one that offers the best chance for victory. For "Up in the Air" and "Inglourious Basterds," that category is writing. "Up in the Air" seems secure for best adaptation, but "Basterds" will have to fight off a challenge from, again, "The Hurt Locker".

Will there be an upset in the foreign language category two years in a row? Last year observers were shocked when Japan's unheralded "Departures," the only audience friendly film in the group, bested four better known but colder items to take the Oscar.

This year, the same dynamic looks to apply. Four of the candidates -- "Ajami," "The Milk of Sorrow," "A Prophet" and "The White Ribbon" -- are as serious as serious can be. The fifth and least-known film, Argentina's "The Secret in Their Eyes," is by contrast an updated version of a traditional Hollywood vehicle, plus one with themes sure to appeal to a, shall we say, mature audience. Will history repeat itself? You'll have to tune in to find out.

Los Angeles Times

How Big Waves Go Rogue



An extra-tall wave struck a cruise ship off the Mediterranean coast of Spain this week, claiming two lives and injuring one person on board. Though the wave may not qualify as a “rogue wave,” it could have been created by the same forces.

To officially be rogue, the wave’s height must be more than double the “significant wave height” of the area, which is calculated by averaging the height of the tallest third of all the nearby waves.
The wave measured 26 feet tall and shattered plate-glass windows at the bow of the vessel. Still, it wasn’t very tall compared to some of the waves oceanographer Libe Washburn of UC Santa Barbara has seen.
“I was surprised it was really that damaged by a 26-foot-high wave,” Washburn said. “Twenty-six feet isn’t that big”.
Until recently, scientists were skeptical that rogue waves even exist, because evidence of them was mostly anecdotal. More often called “freak waves,” these monsters of the sea were confirmed only six years ago by satellite images and extensive studies carried out by MaxWave, a research group funded by the European Commission.
Waves over 100 feet tall have been spotted by oceanographers, scientists and vessel passengers. The highest wave ever recorded was 112 feet tall, spotted in the Pacific by a U.S. Navy tanker in the 1920s. Now, whenever large ships get lost at sea and never return, many are quick to speculate they were victims of rogue waves.
Rogue waves occur in the open ocean in a number of ways. One common cause is when two smaller waves coalesce to produce a very large wave for a short time.
“You get waves that add up — smaller waves that constructively interfere and for a short time produce a very large wave,” Washburn said. “When they add up, they can make an extra high crest and an extra deep trough”.
Another way rogue waves propagate is when an ocean wave encounters a very strong current that’s running counter to the direction of the wave, according to Washburn. The Agulhas Current, which flows down the eastern coast of South Africa, is notorious for producing rogue waves.
“It’s very dangerous at the Agulhas,” Washburn said. “Even if you’re on a big ship, that doesn’t mean you’re any safer”.
Storm-related wind is a factor as well. Strong winds transfer energy into the waves, creating interactions between them. Large waves take energy from smaller ones, creating a bigger and bigger wave, said oceanographer Peter Challenor of the National Oceanography Centre in the United Kingdom, in an interview with Agence France-Presse.
Images: 1) NOAA 2) NASA
Wired

Jon Venables back in prison 'over child porn offences'


Government refuses to comment on reports that killer of James Bulger was recalled over alleged child pornography offences


Peter Walker

Ministers faced increasing pressure today to release details about offences allegedly committed by one of James Bulger's killers, following a report that he was returned to prison in connection with child pornography offences.
The claim, in the Sunday Mirror, follows separate allegations that Jon Venables, now 27, who was released on licence in 2001 and given a new name, had become mentally fragile. According to other reports, he has been known to drink heavily and use drugs, and has revealed his true identity to others.
A ministry of justice spokesman said: "We cannot confirm or deny anything with regards to this".
James's mother, Denise Fergus, is calling for the government to confirm Venables's alleged offence and for him to appear in court under his own name. She is to meet the justice secretary, Jack Straw, this week.
Straw has said only that Venables was recalled to prison due to "extremely serious allegations", refusing to give further details.
He was supported today by fellow ministers, who warned that discussions of Venables's alleged misdeed could jeopardise any future legal proceedings, and that he would find it impossible to get a fair trial if his past was revealed in court.
Harriet Harman, the leader of the Commons, told BBC1's Andrew Marr Show: "We don't want anything to happen whereby they can't be brought to a trial because it is said that they can't get a fair trial because all the media reporting has been prejudiced".
The children's secretary, Ed Balls, told Sky News: "A society where politicians make those kinds of decisions would be the wrong kind of society".
He added: "It was right for people to try rehabilitation but the first thing always has to be making sure the public are safe".
The government's stance has been broadly backed by the opposition, although the shadow home secretary, Chris Grayling, said a "drip drip" release of news about Venables could be extremely difficult for James's parents.
He also questioned whether Venables had been properly supervised, telling Sky: "He appears to have been – if even half of the newspaper stories are true – able to act in a way that most if us would think is inconsistent with the actions of somebody that's supposed to be under the supervision of the state".
Venables and Robert Thompson, then aged 10, lured two-year-old James away from a shopping centre in Bootle, Merseyside, in February 1993, and battered him to death. Under the terms of their release, they must adhere to a series of strict conditions, including that they never make contact with each other or return to Liverpool.
At the time of the trial, Venables was viewed as the more hopeful case for rehabilitation, because he was apparently more remorseful than his co-accused.
The decision of the trial judge, Mr Justice Morland, to let the killers be named was criticised by some observers, who pointed out that such was their notoriety this would simply mean their having to be given new identities on their release.
Earlier this year, the judge who sentenced two brothers who tortured and sexually humiliated a pair of younger children in Edlington, South Yorkshire – a case with several parallels to the Bulger killing – opted to maintain the attackers' anonymity.
The Bulger trial heard nothing about any sexual element to the murder, although this was something considered by investigators.
A 2006 Home Office report by a group of leading child and adolescent psychiatrists found a strong correlation between sexually abusive behaviour in children and personality disorders which can lead to serious criminal behaviour.
The Guardian

The rights of woman: How far have they advanced?

Tomorrow is the 100th International Women's Day, and women everywhere this weekend are marching, celebrating and protesting. Emily Dugan on the journey of the century


It was in a dingy socialist meeting hall a century ago in Copenhagen that women from 17 countries gathered and launched the idea of a day which would champion the rights of women. All over the world this weekend women are marching, celebrating and protesting, not least in London where last night thousands of people thronged Trafalgar Square to mark the 100th International Women's Day.
The theme chosen this year is progress: the progress women have made in the past century, and the long journey that many have ahead of them. The latest statistics on the lot of women in Britain and around the world suggest that some undoubted gains over those 100 years have now stalled, or been reversed, more recently.
Just 19.5 per cent of the MPs in Britain are women; a record so poor that it puts the UK 69th in the world for our proportion of female parliamentarians – behind Afghanistan, the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan. Of course, 100 years ago women had no vote and would wait almost another decade to get a single MP with no Y chromosome, but equality is further off than it might appear. According to a hard-hitting report by the Fawcett Society to be published tomorrow, at the current rate of progress it will take 200 years to achieve an equal number of women in Parliament.
When it comes to implementing the laws of the land, women have even less say than in Westminster – and are now losing what little input they had. In 2008/09, the number of women applying for Queen's Counsel was at its lowest level in 10 years. Higher up, there is only one female judge on the UK Supreme Court and just 15 of 109 High Court judges are female.
The picture is not much better for those at the other end of the legal system: two-thirds of the women in prison are there for non-violent crime, compared to 45 per cent of men; and since 1997 the female prison population has soared – increasing by 60 per cent, as opposed to a 28 per cent rise for men.
Although women's freedoms in Britain are clearly manifest and to be celebrated, some women have yet to benefit. The broadcaster and parliamentary candidate Esther Rantzen says: "There are still women in this country who are forced into marriages, very subservient to the men in their families – I'm told there are women who are told how to vote by men. I'm very aware that the freedoms I was brought up to prize – equality of education, equality of ambition – aren't available to all the women in the UK".
There are also reasons to be troubled by the numbers exposed to violence. Some three million women in the UK undergo rape, domestic violence, trafficking, forced marriage and other violence every year. Twenty per cent of people still believe it is sometimes acceptable for a man to hit or slap his girlfriend if she is wearing revealing clothes in public.
But one cause for concern is more intangible: how women are perceived and how they see themselves. Natasha Walter, author of The New Feminism, is worried: "The eagerness for change has slowed. I think we've slowed down because of complacency: there was a feeling that the argument's been won and we've got the policies in place. Also, there's been a cultural change resulting from the mainstreaming of the sex industry, which has narrowed the options of young women as to what being attractive is".
All this is arguably a side issue for the five million or so women living in poverty in Britain. Women have 40 per cent more chance of being poor than men, with the gender pay gap still at 16.4 per cent for full-time work and 35 per cent for part-time.
The figures from the Fawcett Society suggest that Britain has some way to go before its society can be considered equal. Ceri Goddard, the Fawcett's chief executive, says: "Since the first International Women's Day, the feminist movement has achieved some pretty totemic successes – the right to vote, an equal pay act, and more access to education and work. But, for all the strides we've made, many of our successes are fragile: for example, after the increases of 1997 we might well end up with fewer female MPs this time. It's clear that we still need a major push to get women's equality away from the margins and into the centre of the key debates".
Campaigners yesterday highlighted the universal challenges faced by women around the world. Of course, the hardship and challenges faced by women in Britain can seem almost insignificant when compared to that tackled daily by those living in countries blighted by poverty, oppressive regimes and institutionalised misogyny. In the developing world, access to education, proper health care and basic freedoms can be forever blocked if you are born female. On the following page, the IoS has highlighted six personal experiences that illustrate some of these of these issues.
Ellie Levenson, author of The Noughtie Girl's Guide to Feminism, says the solution lies in choosing the right battles. "Internationally, there are huge issues about women being denied basic human rights – from female genital mutilation, which also happens here, to women not being allowed to go out on their own, being denied passports or not allowed to drive. Domestically, we have fights for equal pay in the workplace. In the home, while men do more child care, there are other areas such as care for the elderly and even cleaning".
The charity Concern, whose Women Can't Wait campaign will be launched tomorrow, draws attention to the fact that, for the first time in human history, there are more than a billion people going to bed hungry every night – and the majority of these are women. Phoebe Asiyo, a women's rights advocate in Kenya who is now the UN Development Fund for Women's goodwill ambassador, said: "Women are still more likely than men to be at risk of hunger because of systematic discrimination. It is unacceptable that though poor women produce the majority of food, they make up the majority of the world's hungry".
But there are reasons to be optimistic. In Britain, though the pay gap persists, there are signs that it is closing. Women's median weekly earnings for full-time employment rose by 3.4 per cent between 2008 and 2009, men's rose by just 1.8 per cent. In health care, life expectancy for women in Britain continues to outstrip men's. Opinions are changing, too. A survey for the Government's Equalities Office, to be released tomorrow, shows that 63 per cent of Britons believe there are too few women in Parliament.
Worldwide, some 39 million girls are denied even a primary education, but in the UK girls consistently outperform boys at school.
So are things still improving for women? That is certainly what the historian Lisa Jardine believes. "Britain loves to think things are slipping back, but things are systematically improving for women – it's just that we expect more. Women's expectations will stop being 'realistic' when they reach absolute parity with men. I don't know when it will happen, but it will happen".
Million Women Rise: Thousands join the march through the streets of London
If the theme was oppression, the mood was anything but. Whistles, songs, chants and cheers drowned out the regular din of a Saturday lunchtime on Oxford Street as thousands of women rejoiced in their collective – if temporary – power. Men on the pavement watched open-mouthed, unsure what to make of the colourful spectacle of yesterday's Million Women Rise march in London.
Monique Stretton could have told them. The 21-year-old from Leicester says that, for her, turning up was all about showing any of the three million women who experience violence every year in the UK they are not alone. "Hopefully, people who need help and who walk past will realise there is support out there and make that phone call," she says.
All along the route from Speakers' Corner in Hyde Park to Trafalgar Square, people are transfixed by the display of female solidarity. Camera phones flash as passers-by capture the moment. Bizarrely, it's mainly men who are taking pictures. "It's always the men," says Amy White, 24. "They take them while clutching on to their girlfriends".
Marchers like Amy and Monique embody the latest wave of women who are standing up for their rights, specifically in this instance not to be abused. They are young and passionate about their cause. "It's events like this that make people realise there is a feminist movement. It's celebratory, not angry," Amy adds.
For Sabrina Qureshi, who started the marches three years ago, the events are about raising awareness of violence against women. "I'd just had enough. A young woman I used to work with saw a man attack a woman in the street and she felt really powerless to do anything. So we decided to march to increase our visibility and to show that there is a way forward, a shared vision of a world without violence".
Qureshi adds they are helping to empower a whole new generation. "My three-year-old niece, who has been on all three marches, now calls herself a 'super she-ro feminist'." What she made of the event is not clear but four-year-old Zayna, who came with her mum, Syreeta Loney, was definitely impressed. "It's very big." Which, one hopes, sums up the impact it will have had.
Susie Mesure
'Parity with men will happen...'
It's clear women can do anything boys can do. What's disappointing is men aren't interested in doing everything women can do. Why isn't every union campaigning for men's rights to equivalent paternity leave?
Bea Campbell, Feminist and Green Party candidate
Things are systematically improving for women – it's just we expect more. Women's expect- ations will stop being 'realistic' when they reach parity with men. It will happen.
Lisa Jardine, Professor of Renaissance Studies at Queen Mary, University of London
All over the world women are raped, buried under veils or stoned to death. Middle-class women here have got it made. They should be standing up for women without a voice.
Claire Rayner, Agony aunt and vice-president of the British Humanist Association
We are at the stage of reassessing: women's rights are becoming women's choices. A lot was done quickly, heads down. It's time we got our heads up, looked round and made choices.
Jane Robinson, Social historian
There are huge issues about women being denied basic human rights internationally – from female genital mutilation, which also happens here, to women not being allowed to go out on their own.
Ellie Levenson, Author, 'Noughtie Girl's Guide to Feminism'
The Independent

In Baghdad, mortar rounds mark Iraq election day


At least 12 people are killed as insurgents test the stability of Iraq's young democracy

By Ned Parker

Reporting from Baghdad - Dozens of mortar rounds thudded across Baghdad on Sunday morning and at least 12 people were killed as Iraqis went to the polls in an election testing the stability of the country's still-fragile democracy.

Insurgents had vowed to disrupt the elections -- which they see as validating the Shiite-led government and the U.S. presence -- with violence in order to increase uncertainty over a looming U.S. troop drawdown and widen still jagged sectarian divisions.

As the polls opened at 7 a.m., bombs began exploding and mortar rounds landing across the city.

In the Shurta neighborhood in west Baghdad, at least eight people were confirmed dead as rescuers pulled 20 victims from a three-story building that collapsed after an explosion.

In east Baghdad, across the Tigris River near Sadr City, four people were killed when a blast ripped apart a residential building.

Mortar rounds were also lobbed toward the Green Zone, the heavily fortified area that is home to the U.S. Embassy and the prime minister's office.

The attacks were aimed at unnerving the city's residents to keep them from participating in the second election for a full term of parliament since the U.S.-led invasion seven years ago. About 6,200 candidates are competing for 325 parliament seats.

The city's roads were nearly empty as only authorized vehicles were allowed on the streets. The country's borders have been sealed, the airport closed and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers and police officers are on alert.

In Baghdad, small bands of people continued to venture out to the polls.

"If we had to crawl, we would crawl" in order to vote, Ali Abdul Wahab said, even though "anyone we vote for will be bad".

In Najaf on Saturday, a car bomb ripped through a parking lot used by pilgrims in the Shiite holy city, killing three people in an attack that was almost certainly intended to ignite sectarian passions. Two Iranians and an Iraqi were killed in the explosion about 300 yards from the Imam Ali shrine, one of the holiest sites in Shiite Islam. The attack wounded 54 people, 19 of them Iranians.

Times wire services were used in compiling this report.

Los Angeles Times

luishipolito@outlook.com

Carregando...