I'm not a Cruise fan really, but I liked this one.
In the Hive was remarkable, i can't stop talking about it. How can i get the movie. Is it on DVd?
buena. buena. buena
Love this FILM!!! I'm bringing my Family to the March 31st Screening!
Queen of the Lot is set in modern-day Hollywood and stars Tanna Frederick, Noah Wyle and Christopher Rydell. In this sequel to Hollywood Dreams, Margie Chizek has achieved B movie success with her action hero films under her new name, Maggie Chase. But she's also gotten into trouble having had a few DUIs and now she's under house arrest - ankle bracelet and all. She's driven in her quest for A-list fame as evidenced by her obsession with her Google points. She's got more points than her home state of Iowa but far less than Angelina Jolie and that's got to change. She has to be Queen of the Lot - just like Norma Shearer.
Zack Norman and David Proval reprise their Hollywood Dreams roles as Kaz and Caesar, the hotshot gay Hollywood producers who discovered Maggie. They are still "married" (to each other) and funnier than ever. Maggie asks them if she can stay at their mansion for a while because she can't stand being stuck in her apartment on house arrest with the press dogging her. They agree and she gets police permission to stay with them.
Maggie asks Kaz and Caesar if her boyfriend (an already established star) Dov Lambert (Christopher Rydell), can stay, too. Dov is a half-wit who hails from Hollywood royalty. Enter Aaron Lambert (Noah Wyle), Dov's brother, a failed writer and black sheep of the family, who is sent to fetch Dov to help with a family crisis.
Is there really such a thing as a functional family? I don't think I've ever met one. Dov takes Maggie home to meet the family, headed by charismatic patriarch Louis Lambert (played with great depth by Jack Heller). At dinner, Dov introduces Maggie to everyone, including his sort-of estranged wife (Daisy White). What happens at large dysfunctional family dinners (as in Jaglom's Last Summer in the Hamptons)? Fur flies between various factions and, of course, Margie is right in there trying to fit in and help out and maybe make a connection that will propel her to megastardom. Aaron is in the fray maintaining his role as the family scapegoat and helping Maggie feel comfortable amidst the family bickering while Dov plays with his wife and other more important things - like his poker buddies. Maggie and Aaron reluctantly fall for each other and the way their relationship develops is one of the most irresistible aspects of the film.
Frederick and Wyle together make the silver screen simmer with vintage Tinseltown charm reminiscent of Tracy and Hepburn. Frederick plays Maggie Chase as down-to-earth, believable and loveable. Maggie is driven, insecure, and slightly conniving but she's also smart, forceful and can take care of business. This is Frederick’s best performance as she infuses Maggie with her uncanny combination of star and girl-next-door. Wyle is at the top of his game as Aaron, an insecure good guy whose wife has just left him. He's a wreck but his inner strength comes through in emergencies.
As often occurs in Jaglom films, his brother Michael Emil appears, this time as a curmudgeonly interloper in a therapy group. Jaglom's daughter Sabrina is absolutely stunning. Remember her as Zoe Lambert, the young filmmaker in Hollywood Dreams who rejects Margie Chizek? Well, Zoe's turned into quite a formidable, sometimes calculating young woman. Simon Orson Jaglom, is just adorable as Michael Lambert. Love him!
There is an outstanding supporting cast including great performances by Kelly DeSarla, Ron Vignone and Diane Salinger as Maggie's "handlers." Salinger is frighteningly believable as Maggie's "life coach." Mary Crosby, Peter Bogdanovich, Dennis Christopher, Paul Sand and Beege Barkette shine as various family members and associates. Tommy Garrett is delightful as a reporter who empathizes with Maggie's quest for fame and the fact that she only gets attention from the press when she’s been bad.
You’ve got to see this movie. There are some very funny lines and Queen of the Lot has heart and soul. When I saw Jaglom’s Hollywood Dreams I thought, "This is the REAL Hollywood." Queen of the Lot has reinforced that. I'd like to poll some Hollywood types to see if they agree. In any event, I am confident that Tanna Frederick is going to achieve her dreams in Hollywood and if there were still a lot, she would be queen of it!
Saw the movie today and was very impressed. Stallone at his best. The young Creed (Michael B. Jordan) was excellent in his role also, and the movie was relatively devoid of gratuitous sex and bad language.
What a great movie about women taking their lives back. Congrats Noami for such a fabulous film.
One can clearly see that film reviewing is a corrupt industry. Just like the film and publishing industry. They go hand and hand with all these lies. http://timothybtyson.com/page0.html
ArlingtonPop, not if you take Trump at his word.
Thanks Kevin, good reading and a noteworthy and accurate account of the continued problems of race relations in this country.
Peaceful transitions of power after elections, as the Constitution requires, are not normal?
Bravo! Thank you Congressman for standing with Mr. Lewis and others who proclaim: This is not normal.
Let's not forget the very beginning of how we got Trump.
Jeb Bush ran an attempt to become Bush III, and crush all opposition that operated by traditional means. He was very much a "NEVER" candidate for the Left and moderates within the Republican Party. No traditional Republican could stand in his path.
Republicans shouted "GIVE US THE TRUMP!" with the same nihilistic venom normally associated with the phrase "GIVE US BARABBAS!". They knew full well they were throwing their party's chances of success down a ravine, but preferred another 4 years of democratic presidency than Jeb.
Hillary would have stomped the brakes off Jeb, and would had a close run against Kasich.
Hillary used the exact same techniques Jeb used against Trump in the Primary, but the Ron Paul Revolution hadn't occurred in the Democratic Primary yet and Hillary was allowed to successfully manipulate the primary, which in the good old days would have been considered a display of political acumen.
But not in the post Ron Paul era. Ron Paul could have beaten Obama, and the backlash of Primary reform in the wake of the Obama victory made Trump unstoppable. The Democrats should have learned their lesson the easy way and enacted their own post Ron Paul Revolution reforms....
But they didn't, because Hillary had been waiting her turn after giving Obama a pass, and she needed the game to remain playable so she could play it.
At this point the "GIVE US BARABBAS!" argument of nihilistic rejection of the political process had gained more strength, not lost it. The average voter was tired of having their options dictated from above, and only given blue and red options for two basically identical candidates. The age of the classical logical fallacy of the false dilemma was over.
The information age is an age of transparency. We no longer falsely assume politician's are clean because they successfully do their dirt in secret. This is why no amount of scandal will shake the Trump presidency. We're numb to it.
The Republicans know what the Democrats need to learn; the other foot connected to the one on the back of your neck will be firmly planted in local soil. Success at the state and local level has all the real reigns of control over society. The Federal Government is a policing agency for local government, and every body hates being told what to do. Putting an idiot in the white house makes perfect sense when you realize president is a sheriff, and most people are outlaws.
I don't understand this "slots" thing.
Cops have been running buskers out of downtown for "Not properly portraying the blues tradition" since at least the 70's.
This is why we don't have buskers. Not because people don't want to busk, but that they don't want to risk being hassled by the cops for the small money busking provides.
Which raises the question of what these "slots" are about. If busking were legal, there would no apportionment of busking licenses, and then nu-speaking the word "slots" to hide the fact that somehow busking had been made illegal by oppressive unnecessary policies.
Why are there only 50 slots? Who decides who gets a slot, and who doesn't? Will the slots be filled by people who actually plan on subsisting off money earned from busking, or from musicians from other places trying to earn their Memphis merit badge?
Why can't people from the city that invented Rock and Roll play their music in the the street as loud as they want to? Any body who complains about music has no business living in Memphis to begin with.
I find Harold Junior's point of view refreshing at worst and tremendously encouraging at best. I watch him primarily on "Morning Joe", and would not describe his outlook there as consistently conservative. He seems to be as neutral as the rest of us, when it comes to making such judgments. Those folks for whom every utterance, every speculation has to be couched in liberal or conservative terms or its validity is suspect are curious folks indeed. They could live in my neighborhood, but I doubt that anyone would pay attention to them. Carry on, Junior! You can carry my petard into any fray without declaring your allegiance... RobtheElder
Toby, Thanks for the great article. I do hate to say that your headline is wrong- the Zoo's new lot (if they use 10'x20' spaces) will be about 11.4 acres. and 1.14 acres of that are specifically due to the over-sized parking spaces.
I agree with Eric Gottleib's corrections, and I ask that the Flyer publish them, and also to make sure that the online version is correct. I do want to add this detail- the 415 additional spaces add 3.32 acres to the parking lot (if the spaces were to remain 9'x19').
Regarding the Zoo and the OPC "splitting the cost evenly", again the article was incorrect, and Eric was correct. The Zoo and OPC agreed to split the cost, but no specific percentage was agreed to. I note however that the Zoo is almost 20 tomes larger than the OPC (based on budget size, number of employees, and dollars received in fund-raising). It would be very unreasonable to expect the OPC to contribute any amount close to what the Zoo could contribute. Also note that the OPC will be "contributing" land to the Zoo's parking lot, and the value of that land should be included in the OPC's "contribution" amount.
Regarding Tina Sullivan's statement that she would be willing to push the project's completion date, and what she was told that "shrinking the space sizes would require another vote by the council, a process that would take a least six weeks". I note that the July 19 resolution was written and passed on the same day, and in fact the 10'x20' requirement was added to the resolution in the Council's Executive Session at the very last moment before the resolution was approved in that session. So obviously, the Council could do it in one day if they wanted to, and certainly the details point to the fact that making the change is well justified.
Regarding the comment that "changing the plan at this point would probably add cost to the project", Eric Gottleib again made useful comments- 1) grading and paving the additional land required by the 10'x20' spaces would be much more than the additional planning cost, and 2) the larger land space of a lot with 10'x20' spaces would increase stormwater runoff with the associated costs to the neighborhood and Lick Creek.
I repeat Scott Banbury's comment, that my detailed analysis which Toby referred to can be found at- http://bit.ly/2i2s3M4
Thanks to all for their comments- I'm always impressed when people can pay attention to so many information sources. The Flyer I think is the best local "traditional media" source, but we can excuse them for their minor errors, especially if they correct them.
25! Of course I've never been to Jack London Square sober.
@CL - According to the article, they were sidestepping the freight, and didn't look for the Amtrak coming on an opposing, separate track at about 25 MPH. Even at 25 though, a train hits you, you are gonna feel it. Hope they recover fully. Though at his age, Yoshi's may be the last gig he plays.
As I remember, trains travel about 5 mph past Yoshis and thru Jack London Square so.... I think they may have been doing what musicians stepping outside of clubs have been doing for generations.
But still dammit.
By Chris Shaw
download this issue
click here to see more »