DOCUMENTARY REVIEW: No Small Matter

Image: culturemixonline.com

NO SMALL MATTER-- 4 STARS

Documentaries often carry a sharp specificity by design. The backers and filmmakers have zeroed in on a pointed topic or singular issue they feel needs a spotlight or, even stronger, a public wake up call. Sometimes, they downright demand it. The challenge of an exemplary documentary is to convince next to its natural aim to inform. Their demands need worth, especially if the subject is too narrow to the point that it is inconsequential. That’s where the documentary No Small Matter lives up to its title. The demand matches the worth.

Contrary to many segments of misinformed public opinion and, worse, political dissonance, early childhood education is not daycare, playtime, or babysitting. It is not just simply “preschool” and something cute to do before kindergarten when public school systems start and take over. The mission field of early childhood education is filled with the embattled efforts of true learned professionals preparing our youths for future success when their brains, bodies, and hearts need foundation and formation the most. None of that better sound inconsequential because it isn’t. Anything less than that is antiquated thinking and this documentary pushes viewers forward from those misconceptions.

LESSON #1: BEGINNINGS MATTER-- Speaking with resolute clarity through narrator and producer Alfre Woodard, the consequence of No Small Matter and the need for high-quality early childhood education programs are supported by just about every child development theory in the book. The developing human brain is born learning and ready. It is a social engine of imitation and the majority of the proverbial wiring of our forged synapses is done before the age of five, far before the flash cards, spelling tests, science fair projects, and calculus classes. The strength of that internal wiring and preparation for executive functioning dictates the effectiveness of all of the heavy-lifting learning that follows and is a data-proven predictor of future successes.

Presenting interview subjects from the Institute of Learning and Brain Science hammers that background lesson home. The documentary presents agencies using new technologies that study the developing brain more than predecessors and experts ever thought was possible. For several years, the researchers have used their findings to guide the classroom practices of early childhood education. Their core message is that learning is cumulative and those working in early childhood education are “brain builders” more than solely being caring teachers. 

LESSON #2: THE OPPORTUNITY GAP-- It doesn’t take long for the “why” and “how” to become clear in No Small Matter. There is a diminished capacity of modern society to support parents. Simply put, life has become harder for families to give their children proper early childhood education. The huge growth of the 20th century and its economic evolution of the mythical American Dream has led to dual working parents, more distant or less existent support from extended families, expanded work hours, and greater income challenges across the board, with minorities who need that support the most hit the hardest.

LESSON #3: INEQUALITY OF QUALITY-- Even if you can access a comprehensive early childhood program, the costs can rival that of undergraduate colleges and universities, and the majority are not up to standard. It is quite telling in No Small Matter when it’s the branches of the military that offer some of the best family support systems in the nation. They get it. They know the gauge of citizen readiness while watching the country spend on average three times more on every inmate in a correctional facility than a pupil in school. Further, at the public level, only 3% of national education spending goes to early childhood education. That is the definition of underserved.

No Small Matter is as efficient as one of those meshed neurons in our noggins firing with complete clarity. There is a savviness to the animations of Julie Gratz and graphics by Tim Weidelman to present the forceful studies and sometimes damning data in an appealing and digestible fashion. Slick editing by John Farbrother (Abacus: Too Small to Jail) and Miranda Yousef (The New Bauhaus) combines the footage of a half-dozen different cinematographers to present the human-interest subjects of the film that represent the layers of impacted stakeholders. This is a tight and tidy 74 minutes that never belabors its points.

The spark of all sparks in the personality department for No Small Matter is the profile given to Chicago-area early childhood educator Rachel Giannani. Working two jobs to pay for continuing education and living expenses, Ms. Giannani is but one representative of the over half-million early childhood educators that net barely-above poverty level wages that have ranked in the bottom 3-5% of professions for the past two decades. When the cameras watch her work, you see the kind of magic you can’t put a price tag on.

LESSON #4: TOXIC STRESS IS A UNIVERSAL ENEMY-- Any teacher, regardless of their age level of expertise will tell you that they deal with and solve more problems than the purely academic ones. Without caring relationships, very little learning occurs and the largest social emotional hurdle for every component in the school cycle is toxic stress. Parents are pushed by it and their children absorb it. Beleaguered teachers and leaders carry plenty of their own as well. Removing the adult stresses can incrementally remove the kid ones. Add “healers” to the job descriptions next to “brain builders” for folks like Ms. Giannani.  

Pair No Small Matter with 2016’s documentary Resilience: The Biology of Stress and the Science of Hope by James Redford for more on that no-longer-invisible debilitation. Both documentaries go to great lengths to show the profound effects in multiple body systems and how they stack with age without intervention. No Small Matter gives excellent screen time to the fine work of the parent-child education programs of Texas-based non-profit Avance, Inc. Organizations like that typify the final takeaway.

LESSON #5: INVEST IN THE FUTURE-- No Small Matter can tug heartstrings as strongly as it backs its impassioned information. One answer to improvement for early childhood education is investment which goes beyond passing around some kind of guilt-ridden collection plate at the church of public discourse. The film’s stances that there is no better public return than investing earlier in lives and how high quality early childhood education can break generational poverty are ardent and tangible, not merely pipe dreams. Time and money go hand in hand for these grown-up issues. Better policies would make investing in programs, teachers, and resources far easier. The wish for No Small Matter is for momentum because momentum causes movements. It’s time to grant some powerful wishes for more people than cancer patients.

LOGO DESIGNED BY MEENTS ILLUSTRATED (#892)

Permalink

from REVIEW BLOG - Every Movie Has a Lesson https://ift.tt/2BhlxBb

Share:

Read More

Eurovision Song Contest: The Story Of Fire Saga ★★★

Will Ferrell and Rachel McAdams take on the Eurovision Song Contest in David Dobkin's Netflix Comedy.

The post Eurovision Song Contest: The Story Of Fire Saga ★★★ appeared first on Movie Marker.

from Movie Marker https://ift.tt/3g5kp1X

Share:

Read More

EDITORIAL: Lessons on the New Future of Movie Theaters

Image: pxfuel.com

During this last month or so of our collective national and international quarantine, I’ve been holding the topic of re-opening movie theaters from my usual “What We Learned This Week” columns on the Feelin’ Film podcast for a “Soapbox Special.” There have been so many articles, so many perspectives, and so many rapidly evolving updates and changes that I couldn’t distill them down into one little lesson or column entry.

With several regions of America starting to re-open (including my own state of Illinois and city of Chicago), it was time to get on the stump and arm the cannons. I put some of what follows into spoken word recently on an episode of Mike Crowley’s “You’’ll Probably Agree” podcast, but the issue has grown since then. Click into the multitude of links in the lessons for the deeper referenced stories. They are well worth their reads and your attention. The theme of this all can be summarized as cautiously optimistic.

LESSON #1: WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO GO BACK TO THEATERS — I’ll open this rant back in late May with polling from Variety. It featured a survey of consumer comfort. Here are some bulleted results in numerical order:

• 91% requested hand sanitizer stations

• 90% say the most important factor is a cure for COVID-19.

• 86% supported limited screenings for cleaning time

• 75% support employees temperature checks

• 70% would rather watch a first-run feature at home

• 61% would feel better about mandatory face coverings

• 60% support audience temperature checks

• 47% were comfortable buying concessions

• 46% were comfortable using public restrooms at theaters

There’s more there in that article, but those were the highlights. Beyond even that poll, you’ve got more and more segments of the population who won’t feel comfortable with any public event, let alone a movie, without a vaccine in place. Putting any number of these initiatives in place would be costly, especially for theater chain companies reeling on the edge of bankruptcy.

LESSON #2: WHAT DOES THAT FUTURE LOOK LIKE — Any of those changes from Lesson #1 would make for a very different setting than the “normal” way we’ve been going to the movies for the last century. Many editorials and articles (Seattle Times in May, Vulture in May, and Quartz in June) have tried to talk that out exhaustively with every guess in the clouds. For example, many of us have embraced reserved seating as a way to select our spots, skip crowds, and guarantee seats even if we walk in last minute to avoid 20 minutes of senseless trailers (I know that’s not just me, *wink*). The activity timeline changes upward if we are to stand in a line for temperature checks and even downward if there are no concession lines or needs anymore, which is a tremendous business hit to the theater chains that have been bolstering their kitchen capabilities and choices beyond candy and popcorn for the better part of the last two decades. The other word in there everyone wants to avoid is “crowds.” Can that be accomplished with roped off sections, skipped seats, or an all-reserved seating model (which some older theaters don’t fully have)? In the meantime, you’ve got companies fumbling financial footballs and poking public outcry bears (bravo Michael Phillips) over requiring or not requiring masks (and reversing courses) and other measures before they even open. Do you really trust them to get all of this right on the first try here in July?

LESSON #3: THE OPTION OF AUTOMATION — Piggybacking off of Lesson #2, one potential solution could be artificial intelligence, as crazy at that sounds. According to Variety in May, some theaters in Korea were considering “contact-free” technology. Theater chain CJ-CGV replaced its human staff with AI robots and automated kiosks for scanning and handling ticket transactions. Concession stands were replaced with app-powered and LED-controlled pick-up/delivery boxes. Leave it to tech-savvy Asia to be the tip of that spear. Could the likes of AMC or Regal pull stuff like that off, again, while teetering on financial failure? How do data-danger-minded consumers feel about that?

LESSON #4: COMPANY SURVIVAL IS PERILOUS — The first three lessons constitute a forecast and some great ideas, but who or what can afford those measures? After months of virtually complete closure, save for some door-front concession hawking, large theater chains, especially AMC (which includes the Carmike brand), are in the financial toilet. Bailouts and loans are hard to come by and “junk” status is hitting stock reports. You even have Amazon interested in gobbling up AMC, which would be quite interesting. It may require a rescue such as that. This peril is international as well with CineEurope reporting a possible $20–31 billion loss for the year. Even reopening isn’t an instant cure. The majority of profits for these companies are dependent on concessions because of the high ticket receipt percentages going back to the studios, a gouge that has been increasing over the years at the high blockbuster level (Thanks, Disney). If the food areas are closed due to viral fears and health code regulations, that destroys earnings. 50% capacities of social-distanced seating doesn’t help theaters either. Even 50% might be optimistic. There are theaters opening at barely 25% capacity.

LESSON #5: “TOO BIG TO FAIL” IS LOOKING FAILURE STRAIGHT IN THE FACE — And with that we reach the studios’ level of wallet hit with an inactive theater distribution market. Even with their demanded big bites of the pie, half-filled (or less) theaters do not help them either. This is especially the case at the blockbuster level. No matter the anticipation demand or potential staying power of a really big hit flick with less competition, it is exponentially harder to recoup $200 million-budgeted tentpoles and their $100+ million marketing campaigns if sizable fractions of the screens holding butts are gone or entire chains are shuttered. That’s why the really big stuff like Tenet, Mulan, Fast 9, No Time to Die, and more are not automatically landing on streaming services or VOD outlets. Even at a Trolls: World Tour-equivalent $20 price tag per rental (and its modest success), those giants cannot recoup those huge red balances versus getting a ticket for every head instead of every household. A little thing like The Lovebirds or Irresistible can land in the green with VOD, but not Wonder Woman or Black Widow. A business with a blockbuster class level of movies that once looked too big to fail making its worldwide billions is now failing because they have no place to go and no one able to come to their shows.

LESSON #6: STUDIOS DID SOME THIS TO THEMSELVES — Believe it or not, the studios have slowly damaged their own theatrical success/potential for years with the incremental shortening of the windows between big-screen premieres and home media release dates. Folks my age remember the months of interminable wait back in the VHS and cable TV eras before streaming services were even a glimmer in someone’s eye. For example, Forrest Gump hit theaters over the July 4th weekend of 1994. It didn’t land on VHS until late April 1995 after a long theatrical run and a winter Oscar bump. After that, it wouldn’t hit paid cable for another bunch of months and then years before basic cable made it “free.” By comparison, Joker opened on the first weekend of October last year, hit store shelves the first weekend of January 2020, and no one cares if it comes to HBO or Showtime because Netflix, Hulu, or VOD is cheaper and better. What used to be six months at the minimum (or even an entire year if you were a Disney release) has shrunk to merely 90 days on average. Sure, both Forrest Gump and Joker raked for their times, but it’s an indictment on patience versus money-grabbing. People that are willing to wait can now weather a pretty comfortable amount of time compared to the past for their 4K players and big-screen TVs in their dens. In our current COVID-19 state, we’ve all got nothing but time on our hands to do just that. Why risk health if personal patience versus some “fear of missing out” can pay one $20–30 digital download/disc price to watch a movie repeatedly instead of hauling the entire family plus concessions once, especially for something they don’t deem “big screen worthy?” The studios trying to keep the buzz constant with shorter waits will now see leverage backfire in favor of the consumer. For a current case of that, just look at Disney/Pixar’s Onward and the mere weeks it took to cave from the VOD rental level to dismissively dishing it to everyone in Disney+. With studios building their own streaming shingles, you’re going to see more of that or see more wins for Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon.

LESSON #7: THE PRICE POINT OF DIGITAL — Let’s go further with the digital wants of consumers versus the new risks and hassles of theaters. Circling back to that opening Variety polling again, remember that 70% would rather watch a first-run feature at home. And that was back in May. Imagine now knocking on the door of Independence Day, no matter how much antsy-pant anticipation and hope is out there. That same Variety polling screened respondents on online pricing with some keen results. It asked how much a “reasonable” price would be to stream top-quality productions in their home. Here are those results in numerical rank:

• 47%- $10

• 20%- $20

• 19%- only if it was free

• 6%- $30

• 3%- $40

• 1%- $50, $60, or $80%

That’s 67% holding firm at $20 or under and studios need to do their own projections of math. Regardless, welcome to a more than a little bit of the #firstworldproblems portion of this entire “Soapbox Special.” Movies are wants, not needs, period. They are lovely fulfillment, but non-essential. For every one of those 6% hardcore FilmBros and cinephiles with the disposable income to drop $40 or more to see their precious Christopher Nolan film, over 95% aren’t budging or can’t afford it. Check your privilege.

LESSON #8: ADAPT OR DIE — One way or another, change is needed at the highest level that trickles down to every screen in America. A popular industry that has weathered the advent of television, cable, and now streaming opponents and competition in its century of existence should be able to survive this. Or can they? With the Paramount Accords lapsed, is it time for studios to buy or build their own sustainable theaters to show off their own wares and keep all the profits they used to share with the chains? If studios instead mine the digital landscape successfully, do we really need multiplexes anymore? That is a question posed recently in The New Yorker by Richard Brody in a good read. They’ll need smaller budgeted films to do that, scaling so many things down. Go back to the roots. You can make a dozen solid indies or five or more star-driven mid-budget programmers like the industry used to do in the 1990s with the cost of a single MCU film. Reverting back to that level of business would require some baths and haircuts, but it would rescue the industry. It’s time to embrace those needs. In another angle, columnist Nick Clement on Back to Movies says the film industry is “f — ked.” In many respects, I highly agree with him and his fantastic stump piece speaking on unemployment and the public state of some of those aforementioned #firstworldproblems. Time and patience are the biggest needs.

LESSON #9: “ABSENCE AWAY MAKES THE HEART GROW FONDER” — I’ve used this lesson before in “What We Learned This Week” and it’s time to end with it again. Shed away all the polling and conjecture. We all know the love for movies is there or we wouldn’t be talking about it. Look at the success of early openings and the lined-around-the-block comeback of drive-in movie theaters. It will be a topsy-turvy year, without question, even with a full return. We’ve had a zero-budget film named Unsubscribe streaking at an empty box office only to be dethroned by revival screenings of Jurassic Park putting it back to #1 in the nation, George Foreman-style, 27 years after it last ruled the multiplexes. If the year ended today, Bad Boys For Life would get the “biggest movie of 2020” championship belt in the record books. Just like Field of Dreams says, “people will come.” They just need to wait. Everyone, for that matter, from the greedy studio execs and sidelined movie stars to the lowly theater ushers and concession stand workers, needs to wait. This has sucked and it will keep on sucking, but the best answer is to wait and get through this better and healthier, personally and financially, than rushing and screwing it all up. The movies will be there. We want all the people to be there too.

LOGO DESIGNED BY MEENTS ILLUSTRATED

Permalink

from REVIEW BLOG - Every Movie Has a Lesson https://ift.tt/2BHtPlF

Share:

Read More

MEDIA APPEARANCE: Guest on the "Kicking the Seat" podcast talking the politics of "Irresistible"

The VOD debut of Jon Stewart’s new comedy Irresistible starring Steve Carell and Rose Byrne set off an impromptu new release edition of Ian Simmons’s “Reelpolitik” series on his Kicking the Seat podcast. The two of us looked into all of the leg pulls and the rug pulls to find and enjoy all the ways Stewart pointed fingers at parties to blame and mirrors at those that need to see those mentalities. Ian and I found this one to be a hoot and we hope it finds the right open minds and welcome audiences. Enjoy our thorough podcast chat linked below via Stitcher!

LOGO DESIGNED BY MEENTS ILLUSTRATED (#39)

Permalink

from REVIEW BLOG - Every Movie Has a Lesson https://ift.tt/3i61Ahe

Share:

Read More

The Best Indie Horror Movies on UK Netflix

Over the years, the indie horror scene has established itself as a wildly inventive, sprawling cinematic entity that is ideal for experimentation and unusually horrific narrative concepts. For many filmmakers – both established and up-and-coming – it remains a safe space to explore their darkest, most twisted ideas and realise them without the constraints of […]

The post The Best Indie Horror Movies on UK Netflix appeared first on Movie Marker.

from Movie Marker https://ift.tt/2BFIQUT

Share:

Read More

INFOGRAPHIC QUIZ: Junkyard Quiz of Iconic Film and TV Cars

Enjoy this game from our friends at LeasingOptionsUK! Click and drag with your mouse around the junkyard and find car parts from iconic film and TV cars. Click on a car part to select it and submit your answers. Press the “End Quiz” button at any time to view your final score.

Hit the RULES button to learn more or press PLAY to begin the game.

Permalink

from REVIEW BLOG - Every Movie Has a Lesson https://ift.tt/2YvCD6Q

Share:

Read More

INFOGRAPHIC: 6 Classic Bond Car Chases: Where Was He Really Going?

9Image: https://ift.tt/37VHGRl)

6 Classic Bond Car Chases: Where Was He Really Going?

In the early James Bond movies, a technique known as rear window projection, or “driving a desk” was used to show a scene in the background of a stationary car (normally in a studio) to make it appear as though the car is in the middle of a high-speed car chase. This was due to the fact there were many places that it was practically impossible to take a full film crew, such as Times Square or other busy urban areas, due to the costs and restrictions in place at the time.

Credit: London Audio Visual

Also, this was well before the invention of image stabilisation, meaning camera crews couldn’t simply rig their camera to the side of the car and the image would come out smooth and crisp like today. With this being the early days of Hollywood, this technique threw up some rather comical challenges, the biggest of which was that the direction of the steering wheel turned by the actor or actress would rarely match the movement in the background. This would mean if the car was really being driven in the direction it was supposed to be via the steering wheel, it would have taken a completely different route than we see onscreen.

via GIPHY

The team at WhoCanFixMyCar thought we’d retrace some of the early 007 car chase scenes to see where Bond and his accomplices would have really ended up if he had been steering a real car! The red routes below show where the car would have ended up if the steering input was real, and the white routes show the path the car takes according to the background and wider filming shots of the scene.

When people think of the first Bond car, they think of the Aston Martin DB5. But in fact, it was the modest Sunbeam Alpine that Bond put through its paces in Dr. No. The chase begins when, after leaving the apartment of Miss Taro, an enemy spy, Bond finds himself being pursued by an assailant.

The rear projection used in this chase is perhaps one of the most famous ever images of Sean Connery and Bond in general, making its way on to the cover of some versions of the DVD when it was released. Connery “controls” the car well in the opening of the scene until he stumbles upon some tight curves and hairpins, and then the chaos begins.

We pick up the action as Bond is about to launch the ejector seat after he had famously been rather comically threatened with a life-changing laser beam injury. As Bond finds himself outside Goldfinger’s car factory, there are a lot of tight corners and long straights, making it easier for the rear projection to keep up with what is going on.

However, as the car turns left before Bond vertically dispatches of his captor, he forgets to turn left on the steering wheel in his Aston Martin DB5, and it knocks the rest of the car chase totally out of sync!

After Bond is stranded in the middle of nowhere, he is generously picked up by a stranger on the side of the road. Unbeknown to him at the time, it is actually an agent of Spectre called Fiona Volpe. During the ride to Bond’s hotel, Volpe tries to scare him by driving at incredible speeds through the forest while they chat, testing him to see if he could hold his nerve.

The road is relatively straight, but this doesn’t stop the same old issues rearing their head. During the first right hand turn, the steering wheel remains turned even though the car is now on a straight. This means the rest of the journey is thrown off course and in reality, they would have ended up miles away from where they wanted to go had they been driving a real car.

After leaving a meeting at Osato Chemicals & Engineering, where Bond was discovered to be an undercover spy and in possession of a gun, Mr. Osato orders him killed. Luckily, as the bad guys were about to dispatch of him, Aki pulled up in the now famous convertible Toyota 2000GT and whisks him to safety.

The tracked action begins just as Aki calls Tiger, the head of the Japanese Secret Service, for assistance – the kind of assistance that involves a helicopter and a large, car sized magnet. Overall, Aki does well to match the movements of the steering wheel with the rear projection. The only issue is she tends to favour turning right on straight roads which means they end up a little off course.

This is the third chase on our list that Bond wasn’t behind the wheel. James and his soon to be wife Tracy are trying to escape the clutches of Ernst Stavro Blofeld’s goons, and since they are in the Alps during ski season, things start to get a little… slidey. As Tracy battles to steer the car against the snow and ice, the chase starts to go west when they enter the icy back roads.

As they emerge, the car takes a long, sweeping right as if to show the car was going over or under the road they had just been on, which in itself doesn’t make sense as their is no bridge or tunnel! But as the car turns right, Tracy turns left on the steering wheel leaving the couple, by the end of their journey, basically back where they started!

By 1974, you’d be forgiven for thinking the franchise would be getting a little better at the rear projection technique, but you’d be very, very wrong. The Man With The Golden Gun’s car chase begins with Bond picking up Sheriff JW Pepper, a Bond cult hero, in a car showroom and chasing Francisco Scaramanga through the streets of Thailand.

We tracked the direction of both the projected background and the motion of the steering wheel all the way up to the famous corkscrew jump at the end of the scene. With the exception of the chase in Goldfinger, which went astray because of one bad turn, this car chase is perhaps the most perplexing. Bond would have ended up travelling in a totally different direction should the way he was steering be believed!

Car Talk

6 Classic Bond Car Chases: Where Was He Really Going? 

Lee Coates, 3 months ago  6 min read

In the early James Bond movies, a technique known as rear window projection, or “driving a desk” was used to show a scene in the background of a stationary car (normally in a studio) to make it appear as though the car is in the middle of a high-speed car chase. This was due to the fact there were many places that it was practically impossible to take a full film crew, such as Times Square or other busy urban areas, due to the costs and restrictions in place at the time.

Credit: London Audio Visual

Also, this was well before the invention of image stabilisation, meaning camera crews couldn’t simply rig their camera to the side of the car and the image would come out smooth and crisp like today. With this being the early days of Hollywood, this technique threw up some rather comical challenges, the biggest of which was that the direction of the steering wheel turned by the actor or actress would rarely match the movement in the background. This would mean if the car was really being driven in the direction it was supposed to be via the steering wheel, it would have taken a completely different route than we see onscreen.

The team at WhoCanFixMyCar thought we’d retrace some of the early 007 car chase scenes to see where Bond and his accomplices would have really ended up if he had been steering a real car! The red routes below show where the car would have ended up if the steering input was real, and the white routes show the path the car takes according to the background and wider filming shots of the scene.

Dr. No

When people think of the first Bond car, they think of the Aston Martin DB5. But in fact, it was the modest Sunbeam Alpine that Bond put through its paces in Dr. No. The chase begins when, after leaving the apartment of Miss Taro, an enemy spy, Bond finds himself being pursued by an assailant.

The rear projection used in this chase is perhaps one of the most famous ever images of Sean Connery and Bond in general, making its way on to the cover of some versions of the DVD when it was released. Connery “controls” the car well in the opening of the scene until he stumbles upon some tight curves and hairpins, and then the chaos begins.

Goldfinger

We pick up the action as Bond is about to launch the ejector seat after he had famously been rather comically threatened with a life-changing laser beam injury. As Bond finds himself outside Goldfinger’s car factory, there are a lot of tight corners and long straights, making it easier for the rear projection to keep up with what is going on.

However, as the car turns left before Bond vertically dispatches of his captor, he forgets to turn left on the steering wheel in his Aston Martin DB5, and it knocks the rest of the car chase totally out of sync!

Thunderball

After Bond is stranded in the middle of nowhere, he is generously picked up by a stranger on the side of the road. Unbeknown to him at the time, it is actually an agent of Spectre called Fiona Volpe. During the ride to Bond’s hotel, Volpe tries to scare him by driving at incredible speeds through the forest while they chat, testing him to see if he could hold his nerve.

The road is relatively straight, but this doesn’t stop the same old issues rearing their head. During the first right hand turn, the steering wheel remains turned even though the car is now on a straight. This means the rest of the journey is thrown off course and in reality, they would have ended up miles away from where they wanted to go had they been driving a real car.

You Only Live Twice

After leaving a meeting at Osato Chemicals & Engineering, where Bond was discovered to be an undercover spy and in possession of a gun, Mr. Osato orders him killed. Luckily, as the bad guys were about to dispatch of him, Aki pulled up in the now famous convertible Toyota 2000GT and whisks him to safety.

The tracked action begins just as Aki calls Tiger, the head of the Japanese Secret Service, for assistance – the kind of assistance that involves a helicopter and a large, car sized magnet. Overall, Aki does well to match the movements of the steering wheel with the rear projection. The only issue is she tends to favour turning right on straight roads which means they end up a little off course.

On Her Majesty’s Secret Service

This is the third chase on our list that Bond wasn’t behind the wheel. James and his soon to be wife Tracy are trying to escape the clutches of Ernst Stavro Blofeld’s goons, and since they are in the Alps during ski season, things start to get a little… slidey. As Tracy battles to steer the car against the snow and ice, the chase starts to go west when they enter the icy back roads.

As they emerge, the car takes a long, sweeping right as if to show the car was going over or under the road they had just been on, which in itself doesn’t make sense as their is no bridge or tunnel! But as the car turns right, Tracy turns left on the steering wheel leaving the couple, by the end of their journey, basically back where they started!

The Man With The Golden Gun

By 1974, you’d be forgiven for thinking the franchise would be getting a little better at the rear projection technique, but you’d be very, very wrong. The Man With The Golden Gun’s car chase begins with Bond picking up Sheriff JW Pepper, a Bond cult hero, in a car showroom and chasing Francisco Scaramanga through the streets of Thailand.

We tracked the direction of both the projected background and the motion of the steering wheel all the way up to the famous corkscrew jump at the end of the scene. With the exception of the chase in Goldfinger, which went astray because of one bad turn, this car chase is perhaps the most perplexing. Bond would have ended up travelling in a totally different direction should the way he was steering be believed!

Conclusion

The use of rear projection was in Bond films all the way up to License To Kill in 1989, although they had begun to master the technique as time went on. Nowadays, the Bond producers use CGI to fill any gaps in the surrounding environment. It seems to us that out of the 3 car chases that James Bond was driving, and the 3 that his female accomplices were at the wheel, Bond messes up far more! With Thunderball and The Man With The Golden Gun being by far the worst examples.

To create the graphics above, we tracked Bond’s journey through the background of the car and compared that to the movement on the steering wheel. Of course, the movements of both of these can be seen as subjective. However, we plotted the route of each as accurately as possible, but more importantly we wanted to have a little fun!

LOGO DESIGNED BY MEENTS ILLUSTRATED

Permalink

from REVIEW BLOG - Every Movie Has a Lesson https://ift.tt/3hSZa5r

Share:

Read More

INFOGRAPHIC: The Evolution of Autonomous Cars On-Screen

Self-driving cars are becoming a more realistic prospect with each passing year as companies from the traditional (Toyota, Audi and BMW) to the more disruptive (Tesla, Google and Uber) race to be the first to produce an intelligent vehicle that can get you from A to B without you needing to lift a finger.

There's a financial incentive for this urgency to be number one. The global market for autonomous vehicles is projected to be valued at $615 billion by 2026.

So, it's no surprise this tech has captured the imagination of Hollywood since the swinging sixties. On-screen automation has been portrayed through predictions of future technology, supernatural forces, or partnerships with people working on the real deal. This has meant there's been no shortage of iconic self-driving cars on-screen.

To show how attitudes and predictions about driverless cars evolved, we've created a timeline of how they have been portrayed in film over the past several decades and looked at how close fictional tech was to reality at the time.

A Timeline of Self-Driving Cars: What Did the Movies Get Right?

Although the concept of self-driving cars has been around since the 1920s, with rudimentary demonstrations conducted to wow crowds at events like the World's Fair – it would be a few decades before anything remotely sophisticated emerged.

Alongside these advances, the most recognisable autonomous cars on-screen began to appear in the 1960s as the technology started to develop beyond basic radio transmitter commands and publicity stunts.

Let's delve into how close filmmakers were to the reality of self-driving vehicles and what their creations said about attitudes towards the future of travel.

1960s & 70s – Supernatural Cars & Initial Driverless Progress

The 60s and 70s saw some first steps being taken towards what we now recognise as truly autonomous vehicles. Most tests conducted during this time used buried cables to help guide driverless cars around tracks in test conditions.

However, it wasn't all life-sized Scalextric. In the mid-70s work began on developing the automated logic needed for vehicles to become truly self-driving laying the groundwork for the rapid progress over the following decades.

Key Developments

• The UK's Transport and Road Research Lab tested a driverless Citroen DS19 that interacted with magnetic cables embedded in a track - achieving and maintaining 80mph through the circuit more efficiently than a human.

• The University of Illinois' Coordinated Science Laboratory began research into the intelligent automated logic needed for truly automated cars.

On-screen, self-driving cars were taking a completely different road. With actual technology in such a nascent phase, moviegoers were shown visions of autonomous vehicles as something supernatural. Whether that was in the form of the delightful VW Beetle “Herbie” in The Love Bug, or the murderous Lincoln Continental from 70s horror classic The Car.

1980s & 90s – The Golden Age of Movie Sci-Fi Cars

The progress towards driverless cars really kicked into gear throughout the 80s and 90s with numerous tests from manufacturers, technology institutes and universities proving that long-distance travel – up to thousands of miles – was possible in (mostly) automated vehicles.

1999 even saw the unveiling of what was billed as the 'first truly driverless vehicle ', the ParkShuttle. Transporting people between Kralingse Zoom metro station in Rotterdam to the Rivium business park in Capelle aan den Ijssel, they're electrically operated and have no inputs for a human driver. The service is still in action today and, as of 2019, has been updated to allow the shuttles to drive through mixed traffic.

Key Developments

• During the 80s, DARPA's ALV project provided the first demonstration of a driverless road-following vehicle using lidar, computer vision and autonomous robotic control.

• The 90s saw numerous long-distance tests of self-driving vehicles. The most successful, Carnegie Mellon University's 1995 Navlab project , completed a 3,100-mile cross-country journey, with 98.2% of total functions autonomously controlled.

• The 'first driverless vehicle' hits the road in 1999 – run by the Conexxion bus company, the ParkShuttle is still operational and being updated to this day.

If you were asked to think of a 'sci-fi vehicle', odds are you'll imagine one that looks like the on-screen versions from the 80s and 90s. Sleek lines, full of gadgets and sometimes even the ability to fly, this era of cinema chose to have fun with self-driving vehicles rather than aim for accuracy.

This design-style remains in the popular consciousness, with Tesla's Cybertruck clearly taking inspiration from the era. Elon Musk may claim it's based on the Lotus Esprit from The Spy Who Loved Me – but put it alongside the angular police vehicles from Timecop and there's more than a passing resemblance.

That's not to say there weren't some more grounded examples on-screen. The computer-guided Ford Explorers from Jurassic Park aligned closer to what was possible at the time and, if anything, were a bit more primitive as they were attached to a track.

2000s & 10s – Fictional Tech Edges Closer to Reality

As the technology to power self-driving cars moved from government labs to the R&D departments of mainstream manufacturers, the 2000s and 2010s saw rapid progress towards roads populated with automated vehicles.

From consumer uses (i.e. replacing your manual-drive car/public transport) to commercial applications like trucking and logistics – these huge possibilities drew an equally huge investment.

However, with increased testing came higher risk as the fatal consequences of an accident involving a driverless Uber in 2018 made clear. This has led to stricter testing criteria and the need for the companies investing in the technology to reassure the public of the safety of autonomous vehicles.

Even as the sci-fi concept of self-driving cars moved closer to reality, there was clearly still a bit of mileage to cover.

Key Developments

• Throughout the early 2000s, countries including the UK, US, and Australia began programmes to test the viability of driverless trucks and automated commercial vehicles for use cases like mining and haulage.

• Google began secret development of its self-driving car in 2009 – a project which became its own subsidiary of their parent company Alphabet in 2016 under the new name, Waymo.

• Manufacturers including Nissan, Mercedes-Benz, Tesla, Audi, and Volvo all announce plans for autonomous models during the 2010s against a backdrop of heightening regulations on safety and stricter criteria for testing.

Heading into the 2000s, movies tended to lean more towards a more grounded sci-fi approach of keeping driving tech believable and less flashy. For instance, the Spinner from Blade Runner 2049 makes even flying cars feel lived in and almost mundane. Bumblebee from Transformers is the obvious exception that proves the rule here – we haven't made contact with the Autobots just yes.

This was taken a step further through the use of actual concept cars from manufacturers like Audi and Lexus, which began a trend in movies which continues today, combining product placement with thrilling autonomous car sequences.

What's Next For Autonomous Cars? 2020 And Beyond

The most recent advances in autonomous tech include…

A recent study by trend analysts Research and Markets has predicted that the global autonomous market is likely to reach a value of $615 billion by 2026. Their forecast looks at existing valuations from 2017 when the market for self-driving vehicles accounted for $27 billion. Put simply, this means that self-driving cars are big business.

However, there's still a hurdle for autonomous vehicles before they'll be widely adopted and that's public opinion.

2020 survey results shared by Partners for Automated Vehicle Education (PAVE), a partnership of industry bodies and non-profits aiming to improve people's understanding of self-driving vehicles found that 3 out of 4 Americans don't trust that the technology is ready for wider use. They also found that 20% of respondents think autonomous vehicles will never be safe and 48% would never get in a taxi or ride-sharing vehicle that was self-driving.

However, this hasn't stopped companies like Uber pushing for driverless fleets and modern sci-fi has been taking notice of the potential for a completely autonomous vehicle to pick you up and ferry you from A to B at the tap of a screen.

Season 3 of 'Westworld' proved the writers have been keeping up with developments in the autonomous vehicle field. Their self-driving ride-share vehicles and the intelligent motorbike used by its protagonists are not all that far-fetched and you can expect to see advancements in these areas springing up in the next few years. Let's hope whoever wins the race to automate our roads has more noble intentions than the show's sinister Delos Corporation!

If you want to learn more about weird and wonderful technology in the automotive sector – read our in-depth look at the craziest car patents. For more motoring news, check out our car blog and, while you're here – why not browse our car leasing deals

Sources

• https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190719005370/en/Global-Autonomous-Vehicles-Market-Outlook-2026--

• https://blog.sciencemuseum.org.uk/self-guided-cars/

• Biss, K., Chien, R.T., Stahl, F.A., Weissman, S., "Semantic Modeling for Deductive Question-Answering Systems", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTERS, C-25(4):358 - 366, APRIL 1976

• https://www.2getthere.eu/driverless-parkshuttle/

• https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/history/alv.html

• https://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/tjochem/www/nhaa/nhaa_home_page.html

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_self-driving_cars

• https://spectrum.ieee.org/transportation/advanced-cars/how-googles-autonomous-car-passed-the-first-us-state-selfdriving-test

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_self-driving_cars

• https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190719005370/en/Global-Autonomous-Vehicles-Market-Outlook-2026--

• https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/19/21262576/self-driving-cars-poll-av-perception-trust-skepticism-pave

LOGO DESIGNED BY MEENTS ILLUSTRATED

Permalink

from REVIEW BLOG - Every Movie Has a Lesson https://ift.tt/2CEACwT

Share:

Read More

GUEST COLUMN: 10 Rules to Follow While Attending Film Festivals

(Image: https://ift.tt/3dCWENr)

10 Rules to Follow While Attending Film Festivals

by Kathrin Garner

Film festivals are a wonderful opportunity to see what’s new in the movie industry, but also to connect with people and hang out. The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the plans of many film festivals. Some of them pushed their dates, others got canceled, some got postponed, and so on. But, sooner or later they’re going to happen and when that time comes you’ll want to get the most out of the movie festival experience. We’re going to help you out with 10 rules worth following.

1. Get informed 

The first and most important rule for attending film festivals is to get informed first. Every film festival has its own set of rules and guidelines that people should follow. A common mistake that people make is that they just get ready and go to a film festival, without informing about it online. Nowadays every movie festival has its own website that you can visit and learn more about its rules and guidelines. 

2. Plan ahead 

Weeks before a film festival begins the website and social media profiles inform the public about all the movies they’ll be able to see. See the list of films and plan your attendance accordingly. Some movies will appeal to you while others won’t. You won’t have a great time at a film festival if you end up seeing a movie that doesn’t even interest you. When you plan ahead it’s easier to have a great time. Nowadays there are apps you can download to help you plan your schedule.

3. Detox before attending 

Detox is the best way to eliminate all the toxins out of your body. If you’re a marijuana user then you may also want to detox before attending a film festival. The good thing is that it’s easy to get tips for the best THC detox and eliminate it out of your body quickly and easily.  

4. Maintain your distance

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the world in more ways than one. While countries are lifting their restrictions it seems like social distancing is here to stay for now. Although some events which draw bigger crowds of people are given green light, they still have to meet social distancing requirements. So if you plan to attend a film festival you will need to maintain your distance. Don’t forget about that because the last thing you want is for someone to remind you of social distancing. Not only will you follow the rules that way, but you’ll also protect yourself against the virus.

5. Connect and network

Film festivals are not just about movies you can see. They allow you to connect with others, network, exchange ideas and have fun. As you’re already aware, film festivals have after-parties and other special events where you can have the best time of your life. 

6. Keep your phone on silent

Probably one thing in common that most people have is the sheer frustration when someone’s phone keeps ringing or notifications keep arriving in a place where silence is important. When you’re watching the film at a festival you need to make sure to keep your phone on silent. And no, vibration isn’t the best option because nobody likes to hear that annoying sound of a vibrating phone. In fact, this is one of the most common rules that all festivals have for their visitors.

7. Dress appropriately 

Every now and then we see photos of film festival goers and they’re looking absolutely awful. Although, understandably, you want to look your best and feel confident and empowered, you should choose your outfit wisely. Ideally, your outfit should be classy and chic. If you want to wear something sexy, make it classy and fabulous. Avoid outfits that don’t have any chic or classy vibe.

8. Keep it cool with famous people

A celebrity is coming to the film festival? You probably want to take as many photos as you can, get them to sign something, or have a chat. All these things are nice, but keeping it cool is important. Celebrities attend film festivals because it’s their job to appear at that specific event and they don’t have that much time to spend with fans. Don’t scream, shout, or follow them around. 

9. Don’t talk

Don’t you find it annoying when you’re trying to watch a movie and other people talk? When attending the film festival the biggest rule to follow is to avoid talking in a movie theater. No phone, no talking, just focus on the movie.

10. Keep it clean and tidy 

Sometimes film festival-goers leave their snack bags and other stuff in the theater, and that’s not a nice thing to do. Don’t create a mess. Instead, you need to behave like a civilized person and avoid thinking “it’s someone’s job” to pick it up.

Bottom line

Get the most out of your film festival experience by following our simple 10 tips and rules. Keep informed about the specific guidelines of a film festival you want to attend. That way you’ll know what to do or avoid doing.

---

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kathrin Garner is an enthusiastic journalist and writes an article on social issues. As an activist, she takes part in the FMA Health program, which is a discussion platform on the relevant medical cannabis topics. So, if you want to know the best how to detox your body in a short time, feel free to contact her. Also, she is a volunteer at Global Advances in Health and Medicine.  She searches for current issues and writes about it to a wide range of readers.

Permalink

from REVIEW BLOG - Every Movie Has a Lesson https://ift.tt/3ewLrPC

Share:

Read More

How To Build A Girl – Latest Trailer

It’s 1993, and there’s only one way for a curvy, bright, funny, working-class sixteen year old (Beanie Feldstein) to break out of her tiny, crowded house in Wolverhampton, and go on the somehow noble sex-quest she desires – to reinvent herself as swashbuckling, top-hat-wearing rock critic Dolly Wilde, and explode all over London. The only […]

The post How To Build A Girl – Latest Trailer appeared first on Movie Marker.

from Movie Marker https://ift.tt/3drVR1t

Share:

Read More

MOVIE REVIEW: Irresistible

(Image courtesy of Focus Features)

IRRESISTIBLE-- 3 STARS

Jon Stewart’s new film Irresistible holds a broad and powerful mirror up to the lies and guises of America’s election economy. Right when you think an outspoken personality like the beloved former host of The Daily Show is going to shout from his now-taller cinematic pontiff a chosen side or favorite, he remarkably doesn’t. This is an even-handed farce of finger-pointing where both political sides have dirty hands and the media in the middle is wholly and equally complicit. Stewart unleashes this cringing astonishment in a surprising movie that pulls your leg and also very rug right out from underneath you.

The political labels are coming at you for full exposure. If that’s a porcupine you try to avoid (astounding social acrobatics if you’ve got them), good luck. However, if you need a way into Irresistible consider the lyrics of heartland rocker and political centrist (who knew) Bob Seger’s 1978 hit “Still the Same.”  

You always won, every time you placed a bet

You're still damn good, no one's gotten to you yet

Everytime they were sure they had you caught

You were quicker than they thought

You'd just turn your back and walk

You always said, the cards would never do you wrong

The trick you said was never play the game too long

A gambler's share, the only risk that you would take

The only loss you could forsake/The only bluff you couldn't fake

And you're still the same/I caught up with you yesterday

Moving game to game/No one standing in your way

Turning on the charm/Long enough to get you by

You're still the same/You still aim high

There you stood, everybody watched you play

I just turned and walked away/I had nothing left to say

'Cause you're still the same/You're still the same

Moving game to game/Some things never change/You're still the same

The simple song is a recurring background musical motif that echoes the deception happening from the red and blue directions of this movie with pure white citizens being manipulated in the middle. Between the insincere sameness of the bets, charms, aims, bluffs, tricks, and more, line after line of Seger’s ditty nails a piece of the duplicitous characters in Stewart’s film.

The guileful gamblers of Irresistible are political strategists Gary Zimmer and Faith Brewster played by the twosome of Steve Carell and Rose Byrne. Each are fantastically introduced during the 2016 national election in front of small gatherings of faceless press with their eager microphones, flashbulbs, and cameras. Letting you know exactly what kind of outrageous people they are and the type of movie that contains them, both proudly proclaim their job is to lie straight into faces. Their matching responses are delivered precisely as if it were one of the sterilized and scripted soundbites we tend to expect. Instead, it’s the veracity we never hear but should be able to decipher.

LESSON #1: SPIN WITHOUT SHAME-- With their finely stretched fabrications, Gary and Faith relish this cruddy combat, veiled as “working with” not “working for.” Truth be told, they don’t value the people they’re collaborating with or studying. Both spin doctors blow off teachable moments with zero regrets under twisted mantras that state “people have to do shitty things in the service of the great good.” That’s the slime of supposed dignity they wash their hands through and shine their smiles with. If you don’t know the type, you’re falling for the fake shine.

The post-election hangover of Donald Trump’s historic Presidential victory has left the Democratic pusher Gary crushed and desperate to expand the base of the party so lacking in rural American support. When a low-ranking staffer shows Zimmer a viral video of a former Gulf War Marine Colonel named Jack Hastings (Academy Award winner Chris Cooper) standing before a city council meeting speechifying needed support for welfare programs in the small (and fictitious) town of Deerlaken, Wisconsin, his eyes light up. He sees “a Democrat that just doesn’t know it yet,” “Bill Clinton with impulse control” and “Bernie Sanders with bone density.”

Gary is so convinced he can make something of this utilitarian unicorn he travels to the swinging Badger State to turn him into a mayoral candidate. The completely city-slicking 2%-er who is used to getting his ass kissed and avoiding carbs jumps right into his awkward elbow-rubbing in the land of beer, streusel, cheese curds, and Carthartt. After coaxing Jack to challenge the incumbent Mayor Braun (veteran character actor Brent Sexton), word travels faster than the town’s dialup internet among the kindly denizens and a race is on.

LESSON #2: DOES EACH PARTY HAVE A TYPE?-- Here come the warped “liberal” and “conservative” labeling assignments that demand side-choosing. Why? That’s because a duel between analytics and polling (personified by smarmy supporting turns from Topher Grace and Natasha Lyonne that could fill their own spinoff movie of competitive banter) reveal an alarming amount of trends and descriptors in every person. Chris Cooper, with his silvered mop and down-home cadence, is perfectly cast to be a principled fellow not bound by any porch-rocking. Anchored by his astute daughter and unofficial public barometer Diana (Mackenzie Davis), his character is fluffed up to become someone and something he is not purely for the sake of appearances. That created image moves needles, television graphics, and checkbook covers. 

The full orchestra of Gary’s war drums draws national media attention to this humble hamlet as well sparks the invading arrival of the vapid bitch Faith to back Mayor Braun. Armed with their micromanaged minions, mucky millions, and salacious scalpels for scandal, the two rivals thrown down an oral sex wager to whomever’s candidate can win this parliamentary pissing contest. Let the zany pandering and placating begin.

LESSON #3: PATRONIZING IS A TWO-WAY STREET-- Echoing Lesson #1, Gary and Faith’s professions are that of micromanaging shit shows. Inconsequential things are inflated to manufactured influences. The strategists do not care to connect unless there is an angle of personal or professional gain. The by-products of the wannabe geniuses thinking they are above their targets are perverted presumptions and massive condescension, with an emphasis on the “con” prefix. Not every hayseed is a mark. Plenty of fat cats are as well. 

LESSON #4: THE INSANITY OF THE MONEY IN POLITICS-- With the one-upmanship of “spend to start” and “spend to stop them,” the rinky dink stuff is soon over. Framed in comedic setups and montages, frivolous millions are poured into Deerlaken and the PAC influences crop up next. At a fancy fundraising party in New York, the out-of-his-element Jack mildly unloads on how stupid the preening glad-handing stage is. Even that emboldened and honest truth doesn’t change the deep-pocketed donors. No one bats an eye and that’s not good. The course of all this is a financial food chain all its own, one where, during the very telling end credits of Irresistible, a research subject poeticizes “money lived happily ever after reveling in its influence in politics.” The real question should be what shady sunset does the money ride off into. 

LESSON #5: COMPARING THE END RESULT TO THE PROCESS-- On the eve of the climactic election, Zimmer comes right to Hastings telling him his chase is about extremely simple math behind all the streamers, fireworks, and media mound. The goal is to outvote the other person by merely one vote. Screw all the analytics and polling when the ballots open. In his experience, the tawdry theatrics are forgotten when there’s a winner to celebrate. That is all the more reason why the perceived importance of the result, even for a small-town mayoral election, is maddeningly worth the quality of the chase.

LESSON #6: WHERE IS THE BLAME?-- The cog of the dramatized machine in Irresistible that comes out the cleanest and most dutiful is John Q. Voter. The “fickle mob” public are the ones who must be discerning enough not to snort the spin or guzzle the cable TV conjecture. It would be easy just to slap a “satire” label on this movie and take none of it seriously. That would be a mistake. Stewart and company play us all because we, the people, deserve to be played. Yet, it still has a stance begging whoever is watching not be a part of any future blame. Color that as hope out of the shocking sarcasm. 

There are places in Irresistible where the mockery is as thin as a pesky mosquito’s wings as it draws patriotic blood and passes on diseased ideas. Other spots are as thick as quicksand made with indomitable behaviors that seem insurmountable to rescue if this was the real thing. Preposterous is the point. If you think you have the movie all figured out when it debuts on streaming platforms on June 26th, you have another thing coming. 

Bring it all back to Seger. The grand game is exposing the hypocrisy and Irresistible builds to the swindle of swindles to make this very valuable point, one prominently placed now in an election year. If you have an open mind, which can be a challenge for far too many folks on the swinging national pendulum of personal politics, you may come to enjoy the razor sharp cut of your Stewart’s biting jib. Irresistible becomes an immediate pre-election time capsule and a deserving place for rubbing our nose in our own shit, forcing us to see our gullibility, inaction, and ignored responsibilities before history repeats itself... again.

LOGO DESIGNED BY MEENTS ILLUSTRATED (#891)

Permalink

from REVIEW BLOG - Every Movie Has a Lesson https://ift.tt/318lnXi

Share:

Read More