Quantcast
Channel: Business Insider
Viewing all 101934 articles
Browse latest View live

A kid looking at his phone while Justin Timberlake performed the Super Bowl halftime show next to him spurred hilarious reactions

0
0

kid on phone during Justin Timberlake halftime show

  • Justin Timberlake performed in the Super Bowl halftime show this year, with classics such as "Cry Me A River" and "Rock Your Body." 
  • But an onlooker who appears to casually look at his phone as Justin Timberlake performed next to him stole the show with the Internet. 
  • The kid on his phone is spurring hilarious memes, such as one that speculates he's Googling "who is Justin Timberlake."

 

A kid snapped casually looking at his phone as Justin Timberlake performs next to him is spurring hilarious memes and reactions on Twitter. 

As Timberlake performed hit songs like "Can't Stop The Feeling" and "Rock Your Body," one onlooker seemed nonplussed, staring into his iPhone. 

It didn't take long for the indifferent teen to steal the show. 

Some speculated that the kid didn't know who Timberlake, whose career peaked a decade ago, was: 

Others joked he was playing HQ Trivia: 

He was also compared to Left Shark, who stole the show during Katy Perry's halftime show. 

One person tweeted he could have been experiencing technical difficulties: 

And another person compared him to Kim and Khloe Kardashian: 

Eventually, his indifference dissipated and he took a selfie with Timberlake: 

 

SEE ALSO: All the ads that ran during the Super Bowl so far, in order

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: These exoskeletons are making the world easier to navigate


Verizon came back to the Super Bowl for the first time since 2011 with this incredibly emotional commercial

0
0

 

Screen Shot 2018 02 04 at 9.02.05 PM

  • Verizon returned to the Super Bowl for the first time since 2011 with an emotional ad celebrating first responders.
  • The 60-second commercial titled "Answering the Call" captures emotional phone calls between first responders and the real people whose lives they helped save.
  • Apart from Verizon, Budweiser also used the Super Bowl stage to highlight its community service efforts.


Verizon made a Super Bowl comeback for the first time since 2011 with an emotional spot featuring first responders.

The 60-second commercial titled "Answering the Call" captures emotional phone calls between first responders and the real people whose lives they helped save.

The ad aired immediately after Justin Timberlake's halftime show performance. He too asked viewers to share their appreciation with first responders in their local communities and donate at AllOurThanks.com in a 10-second "thank you" voice-over.

Ad agency McCann WorldGroup created the films and collaborated with R/GA to create digital versions appearing online and across Verizon's social channels.

Verizon partnered with Emmy-award winning director Amir Bar-Lev to bring the emotional reunions to life in the ad, and enlisted actual researchers to scour news articles and footage spanning first responder rescues over the past 30 years.

The telecommunications company is seeking to highlight its long-standing history of commitment to first responders and relief organizations with this ad. The brand donated more than $20 million donated to disaster relief in 2017.

Apart from Verizon, Budweiser also used the Super Bowl stage to highlight its community service efforts during the hurricanes that hit the southern US in 2016.

Watch the emotional ads below:

SEE ALSO: Crock-Pot is winning the Super Bowl without even having a commercial

DON'T MISS: This year's Super Bowl commercials are more expensive than ever — here's your complete guide to all the ads that will air

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What happens to your body when you start exercising regularly

People thought NSYNC was about to perform at the Super Bowl halftime show — but it turned out to just be 4 random dudes

0
0

justin timberlake dancers super bowl halftime show

  • Before Justin Timberlake performed in the Super Bowl halftime show, there was rampant speculation that boy band NSYNC would reunite on stage. 
  • For a brief moment, Timberlake was surrounded by four dancers who bore some resemblance to his former bandmates. 
  • They turned out to just be random dancers, leading to an overall feeling of disappointment about Timberlake's halftime performance. 
  • Destiny's Child reunited in a past Super Bowl halftime performance by Beyoncé. 

 

Viewers of Justin Timberlake's Super Bowl halftime show were disappointed that NSYNC didn't join him on stage. 

Many speculated before the show that Timberlake would be joined by his former NSYNC bandmates. After all, Beyoncé was joined by the other members of Destiny's Child during her halftime performance. 

For a brief moment, it appeared Timberlake was surrounded by the other NSYNC band members, notes San Francisco Chronicle pop culture critic Peter Hartlaub. 

After his tweet, others weighed in to say they had similar moments at their Super Bowl parties. 

Many viewers had hoped that Timberlake would bring back NSYNC, the boy band that established his career, for his halftime performance.

Others hoped he would perform with Janet Jackson, whom he infamously performed with during the "Nipplegate" performance in 2004. 

Instead, Timberlake performed on his own, breaking from his own work to perform an ill-received tribute to Prince in the singer's hometown of Minneapolis. 

SEE ALSO: All of the Super Bowl ads, in order

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why most scientists don't care about these incredible UFO videos

Only people in DC got to see a bizarre Super Bowl commercial with a Trump impersonator and the Redskins' quarterback

0
0

Funniest_Local_Commercial_With_Kirk_Cousins___Fake_Donald_Trump_ _YouTube

  • Super Bowl viewers in the Washington, DC area saw a bizarre commercial with an impersonator of President Donald Trump.
  • Kirk Cousins, quarterback for the Washington Redskins, co-starred in the spot.
  • It's the second year the company, Cyprus Air Fireplace Systems, aired a regional commercial featuring "Trump."


Viewers in the DC area were treated to a bizarre local Super Bowl commercial with an impersonator of President Donald Trump and the quarterback for the Washington Redskins selling fireplaces.

The company, Cyprus Air Fireplace Systems, aired a similar spot with impersonator John Di Domenico last year, calling both the "funniest local commercial."

The company's Twitter account was teasing this year's ad all week. "Have you seen our ad from last year with @Johnnyd23?" the account tweeted on Friday. "We promise this year's is even better."

We first saw the ad on reporter Brian McNally's Twitter feed, and it immediately lit up social media.

Quarterback Kirk Cousins also tweeted his thanks to Cyprus Air, with a link to the full commercial.

Funniest Local_Commercial_With_Kirk_Cousins___Fake_Donald_Trump_ _YouTube

Cousins encounters a disgruntled Trump walking away from the White House while tweeting about coal fireplaces, and immediately comes to the rescue to get the president a gas version — hilarity ensues.

While Di Domenico's vocal impersonation of Trump is close to the president's cadence, he's much shorter than Trump's 6-foot-3-inch frame.

Cyprus Air took a risk that seemed to pay off.

The ad that aired encouraged viewers to head to their website to see the whole commercial. Less than an hour after airing, the video already had over 31,000 views:

SEE ALSO: This year's Super Bowl commercials are more expensive than ever — here's your complete guide to all the ads that will air

DON'T MISS: Trump takes a thinly veiled shot at NFL protests in presidential message prior to Super Bowl — and none of the players knelt

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why most scientists don't care about these incredible UFO videos

The best and worst Super Bowl 2018 commercials

0
0

Super Bowl

Advertisers shelled out at least $5 million for 30 seconds of screentime time during this year’s Super Bowl.

But official sponsors weren’t the only ones that won: One of the biggest brand winners was Crock-Pot, which didn't even have a commercial of its own. 

Here are our picks for winners and losers of Super Bowl 52.

Winner: PepsiCo.

After a disastrous 2017 — remember the tone-deaf Kendall Jenner ad? — Pepsi made a strong comeback with a joint ad for Mountain Dew and Doritos and another one for Pepsi.

Its 30-second commercial brought together stars from across generations, including Cindy Crawford, Britney Spears, and Michael Jackson, taking viewers on a nostalgia trip. 

On the other hand, Peter Dinklage and Busta Rhymes teamed up to take on Morgan Freeman and Missy Elliot in this epic showdown between fiery Doritos Blaze and Mountain Dew Ice.

The ads clearly touched a chord, for Pepsi already had over 36,000 tweets engaging with the brand by the first half. The combo ad had over 68 million social impressions, according to iSpot.



Winner: Budweiser

Budweiser followed its powerful "Born The Hard Way" spot from last year with a philanthropic bet this year. 

In this year's Super Bowl ad, the brand is highlighting its charitable side, and how it has donated 79 million cans of water to disaster relief since 1988. 

The effort seems to have paid off, with the brand scoring over 4.1 million impressions, according to iSpot. 

 

 



Winner: Crock-Pot

Crock-Pot went on the defensive after a Jan. 23 "This is Us" episode, when it was revealed that the cause of the house fire was a faulty slow cooker.

But then it got support from the NBC show itself, with a hilarious new ad for the show featuring Milo Ventimiglia eating some chili made in — you guessed it — a Crock-Pot.

This way, Crock-Pot won the Super Bowl without spending a single dollar. Digital content engagement around Crock-Pot increased by 84% after the ad supporting the slow cooker was released, according to data crunched by Amobee.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Trump spent Super Bowl Sunday with cheerleaders at his exclusive Mar-a-Lago resort — and left the lavish party early

0
0

donald trump super bowl cheerleaders women

President Donald Trump spent his second Super Bowl in office at his exclusive Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida.

Just like last year, he and first lady Melania Trump hosted a lavish party at the private club, where cheerleaders and a marching band livened up the festivities.

But the first couple left the party early. Here's how they spent Super Bowl Sunday:

SEE ALSO: Only people in DC got to see a bizarre Super Bowl commercial with a Trump impersonator and the Redskins' quarterback

DON'T MISS: See the party where Trump watched the Super Bowl last year

The Florida Atlantic University Marching Band came to Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida. They performed "Hail to the Chief," "Boogie Wonderland," and "Shut Up and Dance."

Source: White House pool report



The school's cheerleaders were there, too.



Before the game started, Trump opted out of the traditional presidential interview and instead released a statement honoring members of the armed forces. "We hold them in our hearts and thank them for our freedom as we proudly stand for the national anthem," he said, in a thinly veiled shot at NFL players kneeling during the national anthem.

Source: Business Insider



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

15 hilariously scathing reviews of movies that won the Oscar for best picture

0
0

argo

Not all best-picture winners are loved by critics.

In the eyes of some critics, the Academy has made some poor decisions throughout the ceremony's history — to put it lightly.

For a fun trip down memory lane, we collected the most scathing reviews of movies that won best picture throughout the years. And they are pretty amazing.

While not all of the movies listed are "bad" best picture winners (in our minds), some critics thought they were either terrible, just mediocre, or in some way undeserving of such a high honor.

For some films — like 2015 winner "Birdman," and 2005 winner "Crash" — it was hard to choose which horrible review to feature. For others, like 2009 winner "Slumdog Millionaire," most reviews were positive, but one bad review stood out.

Here are the most scathing reviews of best picture winners:

SEE ALSO: Here are the 17 biggest Oscar snubs of 2018

"Grievously doting and squeamishly evasive."

The Washington Post on "Gandhi," the 1983 best-picture winner. 



"Not a great film by any standard, this is a western for people who are completely ignorant about the genre."

TV Guide on "Dances With Wolves," the 1991 best-picture winner. 



"So afraid to dredge up debate that when Forrest is handed a mic at an antiwar rally, someone unplugs the speakers so we can't hear him - fitting for a movie with nothing to say."

LA Weekly on "Forrest Gump," the 1995 best-picture winner. 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

'Shark Tank' investor Daymond John says this daily ritual changed his life

0
0

daymond john

  • Daymond John has regularly read Napoleon Hill's book "Think and Grow Rich" since he was 14.
  • It inspired him to start setting goals as specifically as possible and tracking his progress.
  • He has a ritual where he writes his goals down with expiration dates, often holding seven goals at a time.


When Daymond John was 14 years old, his dyslexia had yet to be diagnosed, and he only knew that he struggled with reading. But there was one book, Napoleon Hill's 1937 inspirational classic "Think and Grow Rich," that he not only happily read, but decided to re-read every year.

The main takeaway he had as a kid, the "Shark Tank" investor wrote in his book, "The Power of Broke," was to stop telling himself everything he didn't want to be, and instead focus on what he did want. He sustained this mindset through the practice of regularly writing down and reviewing his goals.

It was simple but profound, John says, and helped give him the drive in his early 20s to turn FUBU from a project with friends into a multimillion-dollar business. "I would write something down, think about it, visualize it, and work my way toward it."

In a recent interview for Business Insider's podcast "Success! How I Did It," we asked John about his habit and he said, "I don't want to paint this picture of, 'Set a goal and all of a sudden you're going to get this magic-carpet ride.'"

You can listen to the full episode here:

He explained that as a teenager, he would envision himself in a board room of powerful people — he didn't know exactly what he wanted to do, but he wanted to have wealth and influence. In his early 20s, he said he hit a dark period where he was unhealthy and aimless, working odd jobs just to get by. But because he kept reminding himself of his goal to make a name for himself, he was able to overcome this block, and that's when he decided to work nonstop on his clothing brand, FUBU.

After years of working relentlessly on it, FUBU was bringing in $350 million in annual sales and it was time to set a new goal.

John explained his goal-setting ritual in detail in "The power of Broke." He does it five days a week:

  • John keeps a running list of about seven goals at a time, which he writes on a piece of paper. Each goal has an expiration date and a couple lines detailing how he'll achieve the goal.
  • They will always include a health goal, family goal, business goal, relationship goal, and philanthropy goal. The other two often involve another business project or his personal finances.
  • Each goal is specific and worded in positive language. For example, John writes that he currently has a goal of getting down to 170 pounds by July 4; rather than add that he will do this by avoiding fried foods, meat, and alcohol, he adds that he will be doing this by regularly eating fish, drinking eight glasses of water each day, and exercising twice daily.
  • John reads through his list when he wakes up and before he goes to sleep so that his goals are the first and last things he thinks about.
  • He reads his goals an average of five days a week, giving himself some time to step back.

"When you've got a tangible, accessible goal, you've put it within reach," John wrote.

This is an updated version of a story that originally ran on Feb. 1, 2016.

SEE ALSO: Before Daymond John became a millionaire investor on 'Shark Tank,' he was waiting tables at Red Lobster and talking his way onto LL Cool J's music video sets

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 'Shark Tank' star Daymond John reveals the advantages of being broke


Jimmy Fallon channeled Bob Dylan in a live 'Tonight Show' to criticize Trump

0
0

jimmy fallon

  • Jimmy Fallon recreated Bob Dylan's 1964 classic "Times They Are a-Changin'" to criticize Trump on a live broadcast of "The Tonight Show" Sunday night.
  • Fallon's rendition of the song also touched on the #MeToo movement and the NFL players' movement to protest the national anthem. 

 

Jimmy Fallon's "Tonight Show" followed the Super Bowl in a live broadcast on Sunday, and the host used the occasion to perform a new version of Bob Dylan's 1964 song "Times They Are a-Changin'," inspired, in part, by President Trump.

"Come gather 'round people wherever you roam / And admit that our country don't feel like our home," Fallon sang in grainy, black-and-white footage, accurately recreating Dylan's gruff voice.

Fallon's rendition touched on the #MeToo movement ("Come women and men who hashtag #MeToo / And believe me when I say that we believe you"), NFL players kneeling in protest of the national anthem, and Michael Wolff's controversial book "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House" — with several jabs at Trump thrown in.

"Look past what he says and look at how he acts / The 'Fire and Fury' is raging / For his words can hurt, but your words can fight back / New York Times, they aren't a-failing," Fallon sang.

Watch the clip below:

SEE ALSO: The 50 best TV show seasons of all time, according to critics

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un is 34 — here's how he became one of the world's scariest dictators

Hollywood stars slam Quentin Tarantino after Uma Thurman's account of mistreatment on the set of 'Kill Bill'

0
0

Uma Thurman

  • In an interview with The New York Times, actress Uma Thurman said Quentin Tarantino, who directed her in "Kill Bill," made her do a stunt she wasn't comfortable performing.
  • The stunt resulted in a car crash, and Thurman suffered injuries from it. 
  • Thurman also said Tarantino spat on her and choked her in order to get a better performance.
  • Women in Hollywood and other celebrities have come forward in her support, criticizing Tarantino for his techniques. 

 

Over the weekend, Uma Thurman accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault. She also said that Quentin Tarantino, who directed her in "Pulp Fiction" and "Kill Bill" (both produced by Weinstein), mistreated her on set.

Thurman's story inspired celebrities to criticize Tarantino for his tactics, including actress Jessica Chastain who wrote on Twitter, "How many images of women in media do we celebrate that showcase abuse? When did this become normalized 'entertainment'?"

In an interview with The New York Times, Thurman shared a video of a car stunt on the set of "Kill Bill" that she said Tarantino pressured her to do. Thurman said the stunt resulted in a concussion and injured knees for her, because the car crashed. Thurman provided a video of the crash to the Times.

Thurman also said that during shooting Tarantino spat in her face and strangled her with chains to get the performance he wanted out of her. 

(Tarantino did not respond to requests for comment from the Times, and has not publicly commented since.)

After the interview was published, Hollywood stars shared their thoughts on Tarantino's tactics:

SEE ALSO: Uma Thurman finally unloads on Harvey Weinstein and Quentin Tarantino in a harrowing account

Jessica Chastain

 



Reese Witherspoon

 



Judd Apatow

 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

After fan backlash, Justin Timberlake explained his decision to perform with a projection of Prince at the Super Bowl

0
0

justin timberlake

  • Justin Timberlake explained his controversial decision to perform with a projection of Prince at the Super Bowl halftime show, during a live broadcast of "The Tonight Show" on Sunday.
  • Prince fans reacted negatively to the tribute because the late artist once described similar digital editing as "the most demonic thing imaginable."

 

Justin Timberlake appeared on a live broadcast of "The Tonight Show," after his Super Bowl halftime show performance Sunday night, and explained his controversial decision to perform a Prince tribute at the show. 

Timberlake drew criticism for playing Prince's "I Would Die 4 U" with a projection of the late artist on a towering sheet behind him. Though the tribute wasn't exactly the same as a reported plan for a "Prince hologram," it didn't sit well with Prince fans

Displeased fans cited a 1998 interview Prince gave with Guitar World, in which Prince explicitly opposed using digital editing to bring a deceased artist into a performance, calling it "the most demonic thing imaginable."

justin timberlakeIn an interview with Jimmy Fallon following the performance, Timberlake explained his Prince tribute by saying that the late artist was "the pinnacle of musicianship," and that doing the tribute in Prince's hometown of Minneapolis was "a moment" for him.

"When we decided that the serendipity and synergy that we would be in Minneapolis and that, you know, he's such a special thing here, aside from what he is all over the world, I just felt like I wanted to do something for this city and something for him that would be the ultimate homage to what I consider the G.O.A.T. [Greatest of All Time] of musicians," Timberlake said.

Timberlake then turned to Questlove, the leader of The Roots and the "Tonight Show" band, calling the drummer "a gatekeeper on Prince" and seeking a "thumbs up" for the performance. Questlove responded, simply, "It was dope."

Timberlake went on to describe the process of putting the tribute together: "We got the actual vocal stems from 'I Would Die 4 U,' the actual recordings, and then we got uncut footage from his performance of it in 'Purple Rain.' Somehow, some way, by the grace of probably Prince looking down on us, it synced up. It was like this crazy serendipitous moment. I just wanted to use that opportunity to do something special for this city, but most of all, for my favorite musician of all time."

Watch the interview below: 

SEE ALSO: Justin Timberlake used a projection of Prince for his Super Bowl halftime show — and people are furious

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A Georgetown professor explains how Martin Luther King Jr. 'has been severely whitewashed'

Nintendo is at the top of its game — here are 11 reasons you should be excited for the coming year

0
0

Super Mario

Nintendo is on a serious roll.

The company's latest console, the Switch, is a major hit. The two biggest games for Switch are massively popular entries in the long-running "Super Mario" and "Legend of Zelda" franchises.

And the future looks as big — or maybe even bigger— for the Japanese gaming giant. How does a new Pokémon game for the Nintendo Switch sound to you? That's just the beginning.

SEE ALSO: Nintendo is doing really, really well — here are the 6 craziest stats that highlight the company's return to dominance

1. Everything old is new again.

In 2017, Nintendo rereleased "Mario Kart 8" on the Switch. The game previously arrived on the Wii U, the console that Nintendo sunset in favor of the Switch.

In 2018, Nintendo plans to rerelease "Bayonetta 2," another game that launched exclusively on the Wii U. The game even comes with a copy of the first "Bayonetta." This is part of Nintendo's ongoing strategy to bring back the best games from the Wii U era — games the company views as underplayed because of how few people bought a Wii U.

"Given the install base of Wii U, there was some fantastic content that consumers did not get to play," Nintendo of America's president, Reggie Fils-Aimé, told Vice last year. "So that creates certainly a business opportunity."

Beyond "Bayonetta" and "Bayonetta 2," it seems likely we'll see some of the Wii U's other best stuff head to the Switch. Games like "Super Smash Bros." and "Super Mario Maker" come to mind immediately, though there are opportunities to bring over other great stuff (like "Super Mario 3D World" and "Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker").



2. Nintendo's online service is finally going to light up in September.

The Nintendo Switch Online service is scheduled to launch in September at a price of $20 a year. For that price, you'll get instant access to a classic game library and the ability to play games online.

You read that correctly: Nintendo is going to gate access to online gameplay.

After this service launches, you'll need to fork over a subscription fee to play online games on the Nintendo Switch. For the $20 price of entry, though, you'll also gain access to a library of classic games. The only three games announced thus far are "Super Mario Bros. 3," "Dr. Mario," and "Balloon Fight," which are all classic Nintendo Entertainment System games. 

It's unclear whether Nintendo will have a separate Virtual Console-like service, as it has in the past — such a service has traditionally offered a paid library of à la carte classic games. That could very well also be coming in 2018, but we just don't know.



3. A "core" Pokémon game is being made for Nintendo's Switch, and it could arrive as early as 2018.

A new entry in the "Pokémon" series is coming to the Switch, and it's not a spin-off. We're talking about a "core RPG Pokémon title," according to Tsunekazu Ishihara, the president of The Pokémon Company.

That's a huge deal. Main-series "Pokémon" games have only ever come to Nintendo's handheld game consoles. But with the Switch, Nintendo's main game console is also its main handheld console. And that means there's only one place for Pokémon to go: the Switch!

In fairness, the game may not arrive in 2018. 

Youtube Embed:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/9oA4bpmbbaI
Width: 800px
Height: 450px

When the project was announced, it was said to be "more than a year out." That was back in June 2017, so it's possible this game isn't anywhere close to completion. That said, it was also unlikely that Nintendo would launch major "Super Mario" and "Legend of Zelda" games in the same year, but that was exactly what Nintendo did in 2017.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Netflix surprised everyone by releasing the 3rd 'Cloverfield' movie right after the Super Bowl — but it's getting torn apart by critics

0
0

The Cloverfield Paradox

  • Netflix released "The Cloverfield Paradox" right after the Super Bowl.
  • Critics are calling it a "trainwreck," and it has a 16% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.
  • This is a surprise, since the other two movies in the franchise were well-received by critics, especially 2016's "10 Cloverfield Lane."

 

Netflix released a trailer for "The Cloverfield Paradox," the highly anticipated third movie in the "Cloverfield" franchise, during the Super Bowl on Sunday night. And then it released the movie on Netflix right after the game. This was shocking given that, as of early January, Paramount was set to release the movie in theaters in April.

The reveal stunt was great, but unfortunately critics hate the movie. Right now, it has a 16% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. The first movie, "Cloverfield" (2008), has a 77% rating, and the second movie, "10 Cloverfield Lane," has an impressive 90%.

So why is "The Cloverfield Paradox" so bad? We collected some of the rotten reviews from critics to give you an idea.

You can watch the trailer below, and you can watch "The Cloverfield Paradox" on Netflix right now. 

 

SEE ALSO: Danny McBride told us how he got involved in that fake 'Crocodile Dundee' movie, which was actually a $27 million ad campaign for Australian tourism

"A trainwreck of a sci-fi flick bent on extending a franchise that should have died a peaceful death almost exactly one decade ago."

The Hollywood Reporter



"Perhaps what makes The Cloverfield Paradox so frustrating is that it squanders the gifts it has been given."

Slashfilm



"The true paradox of this movie is that those enjoyably wild twists alone would've made this film a whole lot of fun to watch with a big multiplex audience, even as inconsistent and ultimately illogical it turns out to be."

The Playlist 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Uma Thurman's brutal injury on the 'Kill Bill' set shows what happens when a director's power goes too far, according to a producer

0
0

kill bill uma thurman

  • Uma Thurman told The New York Times she was injured on the set of "Kill Bill" after director Quentin Tarantino allegedly made her do a car stunt.
  • The actress provided video to the Times of her crashing into a tree, which led to her injuring her knees and suffering a concussion, she said.
  • Producer Rebecca Green told Business Insider the accident would never have happened if the movie's producer had stepped up and stopped Thurman from driving the car.


On Saturday, The New York Times published a piece in which Uma Thurman alleged that Harvey Weinstein sexually assaulted her, adding her voice to the #MeToo movement.

But Thurman didn't just call out Weinstein. In a shocking twist, she also spoke out against the director she'll be forever linked to: Quentin Tarantino.

Halfway through the Times story, the narrative shifts from Weinstein to Tarantino, and how the director — who made Thurman a star in his movie, "Pulp Fiction" — allegedly forced her, on the set of "Kill Bill," to do a scene she wanted a stunt driver to do instead. It led to the actress being injured.

Business Insider spoke to producers in the industry who said what Thurman suffered could (and should) have been stopped.

Thurman thought Tarantino 'tried to kill me'

In a shot that appears towards the end of "Kill Bill," The Bride (Thurman) speeds down a dirt road on her way to kill Bill (David Carradine). The shot is taken from the back of the car, so you see the back of The Bride's head driving the convertible.

According to the Times story, Thurman insisted that a stunt driver do the shot, as she didn't feel comfortable driving.

“Quentin came in my trailer and didn’t like to hear 'no,' like any director,” Thurman said in the story. “He was furious because I’d cost them a lot of time. But I was scared. He said: ‘I promise you the car is fine. It’s a straight piece of road ... Hit 40 miles per hour or your hair won’t blow the right way and I’ll make you do it again.’ But that was a deathbox that I was in. The seat wasn’t screwed down properly. It was a sand road and it was not a straight road.” 

Uma Kill Bill New York Times final

Thurman provided the Times with video from the set of her driving the car. It shows her losing control of the car at one point and crashing into a tree. Her body is thrown violently and she sits there in a daze until the crew, including Tarantino, show up moments later. After getting out of the car and standing on her own, she is carried by a man off camera as she holds her head.

“The steering wheel was at my belly and my legs were jammed under me,” Thurman told the Times. “I felt this searing pain and thought, ‘Oh my God, I’m never going to walk again,’” she said. “When I came back from the hospital in a neck brace with my knees damaged and a large massive egg on my head and a concussion, I wanted to see the car and I was very upset. Quentin and I had an enormous fight, and I accused him of trying to kill me. And he was very angry at that, I guess understandably, because he didn’t feel he had tried to kill me.” 

The accident could have been avoided if the producer stepped up

According to numerous producers Business Insider spoke to after the Times ran the Thurman story, this incident could have been avoided, and directors often have to be convinced to rethink their vision for the sake of the health and wellbeing of the cast and crew.

When a director is blinded by his or her vision, it's the responsibility of the producer, in this case Lawrence Bender (who has produced all of Tarantino's films), the first assistant director (on this movie it was William Paul Clark), or the stunt coordinator (Keith Adams), to make sure what goes forward is done in a safe manner.  

“At some point it became acceptable for directors to push the safety boundaries on set in order to achieve their vision and I believe it's the producer’s responsibility to intervene when this happens to ensure the safety of all involved,” producer Rebecca Green ("It Follows," "I'll See You in My Dreams") told Business Insider.

Quentin Tarantino Uma Thurman Cannes AP

“Of course telling your director they can’t have what they want often results in he or she being pissed off at you, but if you can’t tolerate an angry director for the sake of your crew’s safety, then you shouldn’t be producing. What’s more frustrating is that unlike most of us, Tarantino had a budget that afforded him stunt doubles, so there was no reason to pressure Uma into driving the car herself. And what’s even more ridiculous is that the shot was of the back of her head so did she really need to drive the car herself?”

According to entertainment lawyer Domenic Romano, founder and managing attorney of Romano Law, the statute of limitations has likely expired on Thurman taking any action against Tarantino, Bender, or Miramax for the injuries she sustained on set. However, this shocking revelation may hurt Tarantino's reputation in Hollywood.

"This might make people think twice about working with him," Romano told Business Insider.

Though directors have always been seen as the dictators on set, whose word is law, Thurman's revelation has shown that sometimes someone has to step in to be the voice of reason, and not be afraid of upsetting the almighty director.

"The question to ask is, where was Lawrence Bender?" Green said. "On my sets, the assistant director knows that the camera can’t roll on a stunt unless a producer is on set, and had I known Uma was not comfortable doing the stunt herself, I would have stepped in and said 'no means no,' and the stunt double would have been used. Either Lawrence Bender wasn’t there, he didn't care how Uma felt, or he was too worried about pissing off Tarantino.”

On Monday, Thurman posted a portion of the footage she gave the Times on Instagram and included in the caption that "Quentin Tarantino was deeply regretful and remains remorseful about this sorry event, and gave me the footage years later so I could expose it and let it see the light of day."

However, she did blame some, including Bender. 

"The cover up after the fact is unforgivable," Thurman wrote in her post. "For this I hold Lawrence Bender, ["Kill Bill" executive producer] E. Bennett Walsh, and the notorious Harvey Weinstein solely responsible."

Business Insider contacted Tarantino, Bender, Clark, Adams, and Walsh for comment but did not receive a response.

See a portion of the footage Thurman posted on Instagram on Monday:

i post this clip to memorialize it’s full exposure in the nyt by Maureen Dowd. the circumstances of this event were negligent to the point of criminality. i do not believe though with malicious intent. Quentin Tarantino, was deeply regretful and remains remorseful about this sorry event, and gave me the footage years later so i could expose it and let it see the light of day, regardless of it most likely being an event for which justice will never be possible. he also did so with full knowledge it could cause him personal harm, and i am proud of him for doing the right thing and for his courage. THE COVER UP after the fact is UNFORGIVABLE. for this i hold Lawrence Bender, E. Bennett Walsh, and the notorious Harvey Weinstein solely responsible. they lied, destroyed evidence, and continue to lie about the permanent harm they caused and then chose to suppress. the cover up did have malicious intent, and shame on these three for all eternity. CAA never sent anyone to Mexico. i hope they look after other clients more respectfully if they in fact want to do the job for which they take money with any decency.

A post shared by Uma Thurman (@ithurman) on Feb 5, 2018 at 10:15am PST on

SEE ALSO: Danny McBride told us how he got involved in that fake "Crocodile Dundee" movie, which was actually a $27 million ad campaign for Australian tourism

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 5 common 'facts' about Earth that everyone gets wrong

'Mario Kart' is finally coming to smartphones — here are 5 things we know (and don't know) about it

0
0

"Mario Kart" has been a big deal for over 25 years. And now — finally— it's coming to smartphones.

Mario Kart Tour

What you see above is the majority of what we know about the upcoming game. We asked Nintendo a bunch of questions, and were told that there's nothing more to say beyond what was recently announced. 

Here's everything we do — and plenty of what we don't — know about "Mario Kart Tour," Nintendo's first ever "Mario Kart" game for smartphones.

SEE ALSO: Nintendo is at the top of its game — here are 11 reasons you should be excited for the coming year

1. "Mario Kart Tour" is a spin-off.

You can tell from the naming convention that "Mario Kart Tour" is its own thing, separate from the main thread of "Mario Kart" games that have come out on Nintendo consoles exclusively. The latest game in that series — "Mario Kart 8 Deluxe" — is the most recent main series entry. "Mario Kart Tour" is a side game, like "Mario Kart Arcade GP."

That's not a bad thing, necessarily. 

Nintendo hasn't made a bad "Mario Kart" game. At worst, some entries in the series have felt obligatory rather than essential. That hasn't been the case in recent years, and there's no reason to suspect that "Mario Kart Tour" will be anything less than good.

That the game isn't a numbered entry isn't the only indication that it's a spin-off  — the fact that it's for a smartphone, not one of Nintendo's own consoles, is another big indicator. Nintendo's approach to smartphone gaming has been focused on crafting its franchises specifically for the platform, rather than trying to force its console games onto a mobile device. This results in spin-off games with controls and gameplay mechanics that only make sense on smartphones and other touch-based devices.



2. Like "Super Mario Run," it's likely that "Mario Kart Tour" will be pared down.

Smartphones are powerful enough to run many console games. In many cases, though, games are built for use with gamepads — smartphones have the horsepower, but not the hardware, for games that require intricate controls.

Thus, in the case of "Mario Kart Tour," it's likely that the game's controls will be pared down significantly from what you do in "Mario Kart 8 Deluxe" on Nintendo Switch. 

The core loop of "Mario Kart" is racing (accelerating, braking, drifting, and jumping) and fighting (using power-ups gathered during the race). It's possible that Nintendo will require players to hold down a virtual button on-screen for gas/brake/etc., but it's more likely that the game handles acceleration while players focus on steering, gathering power-ups, and taking down foes.

There's a good precedent to look at here: Nintendo's "Super Mario Run." The game is still essentially a 2D Mario experience. You're running, jumping, punching question mark blocks and stomping on Goombas. But instead of having to careful maneuver Mario left and right, the game automatically handles Mario's running. It's not a perfect facsimile of traditional Mario, but it's pretty close.



3. The game is slated to launch some time between April 2018 and March 2019.

"Mario Kart Tour" was first revealed during an investor presentation by Nintendo president Tatsumi Kimishima.

Here's the full announcement:

"We plan to release a smart-device application from the 'Mario Kart' franchise, 'Mario Kart Tour,' during the next financial year (from April 2018 to March 2019). We will announce further details at a later date."

Not that thrilling, I know.

Nintendo's American Twitter account had a slightly more exciting take:

"The checkered flag has been raised and the finish line is near. A new mobile application is now in development: Mario Kart Tour! #MarioKartTour Releasing in the fiscal year ending in March 2019."

There was an image of a logo included, and that's it.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

LA Sheriff's Department says it's getting closer to solving actress Natalie Wood's mysterious death, and that what her husband Robert Wagner has said 'doesn't really add up'

0
0

Natalie Wood Robert Wagner

  • The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department said it's getting closer to solving the mysterious 1981 death of Academy Award-nominated actress Natalie Wood.
  • It was revealed last week that Wood's husband, actor Robert Wagner, is a person of interest.
  • The case, originally ruled as an accidental drowning, was reopened in 2011.


At a press conference held at the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department on Monday, Lieutenant John Corina said detectives were getting closer to finding the truth behind Natalie Wood's mysterious death in 1981, according to Deadline.

In November 1981, the Oscar-nominated actress died on a yacht trip off the coast of Catalina Island, California. She was found floating in the water, wearing a red down jacket and a flannel nightgown. 

Wood was with her husband, actor Robert Wagner, captain Dennis Davern, and the actor Christopher Walken. After two weeks of investigation, her death was ruled an accident.

Last week it was revealed that Wagner the last person to see Wood alive — was a person of interest in the case. According to witnesses and Wagner's 2008 memoir, he and Wood had a fight the night before she was found dead.

“We have a better understanding now of what happened,” Corina said. New witness statements have given detectives a clearer timeline of events that night, which differ from statements given immediately following Wood's death in 1981, Corina said. There is not enough evidence to make arrests at this time, however.

Corina said that once they determine how Wood got in the water, they can determine whether it was an accident or if it was a murder. “Was she placed in the water? Was she unconscious and then placed in the water? Was she put in the water by somebody? Or did she accidentally fall into the water and nobody helped her?”

“We’d love to hear from Robert Wagner," Corina added. "What he said doesn’t really add up to what we found and what we’ve heard." Corina also said that Wagner is a person of interest, not a suspect.

In 2011, Wood's case was reopened. In 2012, the Los Angeles Coroner's Office amended Wood's death certificate, changing her cause of death from accidental drowning to "drowning and other undetermined factors."

SEE ALSO: Uma Thurman's brutal injury on the 'Kill Bill' set shows what happens when a director's power goes too far, according to a producer

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's what might happen if North Korea launched a nuclear weapon

Best Buy is pulling CDs from its stores — and people are freaking out

0
0

best buy

  • Best Buy recently announced that it will be pulling CDs from its stores due to an overwhelming drop in sales.
  • Target is expected to follow suit.
  • Despite the fact that more and more people are resorting to streaming services and vinyl to get their music, many were shocked and upset by Best Buy's decision to pull CDs from its stores.

 

Best Buy, formerly one of the biggest music merchandisers in the United States, has plans to pull CDs from all of its stores by July 1, Billboard reported.

Target could be the next retailer to do so, as it's now demanding that music suppliers sell them inventory on a consignment basis and pay for unsold inventory. One music manufacturer is leaning towards saying no to this deal, according to Billboard. 

This should come as no big surprise — between streaming services like Apple Music and Spotify taking over and vinyl returning to popularity, there doesn't seem to be much of a place for CDs anymore. Over 800 million CDs were sold in the United States in 2001, but that number has since dropped down to 89 million, according to Consequence of Sound.  

Despite the fact that CD sales have been dropping rapidly for years, people seem to be shocked and upset with Best Buy's decision to pull them from its shelves. 

Best Buy CDs6Best Buy CDsBest Buy CDs4 Best Buy CDs3Best Buy CDs10Best Buy CDs2Best Buy CDs1

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The healthiest things you can get at McDonald's

Uma Thurman posted footage of the 'Kill Bill' car crash that left her with a concussion to Instagram, and took aim at the producers

0
0

Uma Thurman Kill Bill miramax

  • Uma Thurman posted the footage of her crash on the set of "Kill Bill" to Instagram on Monday.
  • She wanted a stunt driver to do the scene, but director Quentin Tarantino insisted Thurman do it, she told The New York Times.
  • Thurman blamed the producers of the movie for what occurred.


On Monday, Uma Thurman posted to Instagram footage from the "Kill Bill" movie set showing her crashing into a tree while shooting a scene.

A longer version of the footage was included in a New York Times story over the weekend, in which Thurman opened up for the first time about sexual misconduct she allegedly endured from Harvey Weinstein, and the on-set crash she said left her with a concussion and injuries to her knees.

Thurman told the Times that she had wanted a stunt driver to do the scene, but director Quentin Tarantino insisted his star do it.

Thurman wrote in the caption of her Instagram post that "Tarantino was deeply regretful and remains remorseful about this sorry event, and gave me the footage years later so I could expose it and let it see the light of day."

But she didn't forgive everyone.

"The cover up after the fact is unforgivable," Thurman wrote. "For this I hold Lawrence Bender, ["Kill Bill" executive producer] E. Bennett Walsh, and the notorious Harvey Weinstein solely responsible."

Numerous producers who spoke to Business Insider after the Times story came out also put the blame on Bender, and said it was the producer who should have made the director understand that his vision might be harmful to the cast and crew.

"On my sets, the assistant director knows that the camera can't roll on a stunt unless a producer is on set, and had I known Uma was not comfortable doing the stunt herself, I would have stepped in and said 'no means no,' and the stunt double would have been used," producer Rebecca Green ("It Follows") told Business Insider. "Either Lawrence Bender wasn't there, he didn't care how Uma felt, or he was too worried about pissing off Tarantino."

Tarantino, Bender, Walsh, and Weinstein were not immediately available for comment.

Watch the footage Thurman posted to Instagram below:

i post this clip to memorialize it’s full exposure in the nyt by Maureen Dowd. the circumstances of this event were negligent to the point of criminality. i do not believe though with malicious intent. Quentin Tarantino, was deeply regretful and remains remorseful about this sorry event, and gave me the footage years later so i could expose it and let it see the light of day, regardless of it most likely being an event for which justice will never be possible. he also did so with full knowledge it could cause him personal harm, and i am proud of him for doing the right thing and for his courage. THE COVER UP after the fact is UNFORGIVABLE. for this i hold Lawrence Bender, E. Bennett Walsh, and the notorious Harvey Weinstein solely responsible. they lied, destroyed evidence, and continue to lie about the permanent harm they caused and then chose to suppress. the cover up did have malicious intent, and shame on these three for all eternity. CAA never sent anyone to Mexico. i hope they look after other clients more respectfully if they in fact want to do the job for which they take money with any decency.

A post shared by Uma Thurman (@ithurman) on Feb 5, 2018 at 10:15am PST on

SEE ALSO: Uma Thurman's brutal injury on the "Kill Bill" set shows what happens when a director's power goes too far, according to a producer

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's what might happen if North Korea launched a nuclear weapon

No one wants to host the Olympics anymore — will they go away?

0
0

It's no secret that it's a pricey pain to host the Olympic Games, running billions of dollars above the estimated budget. As the International Olympic Committee receives fewer bids with each problematic games, the future of the tradition is looking unsure. We spoke with Andrew Zimbalist, a professor of economics at Smith College, on the matter. He has written about the Olympic issues in the books "Circus Maximus," "No Boston Olympics," and "Rio 2016."

The following is a transcription of the video.

Ah, the Olympics. The glory of our best athletes competing for greatness in shiny new stadiums before viewers around the world.

But recent games are rife with overspending, waste, and controversy. And most viewers don't even see the lasting damage hosting the games does to the host city.

Could we be watching the death of the Olympics?

Well, right now it's hard to tell, but this honored tradition is looking sicker every year.

Hosting is expensive. Every game in the last 50 years has gone over budget. The 2014 Sochi Winter Games went over its $10 billion budget by an additional $41 billion.

No one knows this better than professor Andrew Zimbalist. He's written several books on the Olympics, including "Rio 2016: Olympic Myths, Hard Realities."

"These days they require about 35 different athletic venues, they require an Olympic Village that could cost 1 1/2, 2, 3 billion dollars depending on the circumstance. They require a media and television production facility which could easily go for half a billion to a billion dollars. They require a media village. They require ceremonial space and green space. They require transportation amongst all of it and special lanes for the IOC executives, transportation amongst all of the venues."

Cities used to make a profit from the games, partly, because they collected a lot of revenue in TV rights. But recently the International Olympic Committee has been taking larger percentages. In the '90s, for instance, it took 4% of revenue. Compared that with the 70% it pocketed from the 2016 Rio Games.

The newly built stadia can cost up to $30 million a year to maintain, and they're often on valuable real estate. Most cities don't even know what to use them for after the games.

Those facilities fall into decay if they aren't kept up. And that hurts property value.

"There could also be a lot of environmental destruction. The Winter Olympics they'll be having in Pyeongchang, they destroyed a whole mountainside — trees and animals that are there and some of them close to extinction."

So, who would want to host the Olympics in the first place?

Not many. After each financial failure, fewer cities bid to host the following decade's games.

After all, it takes 10 years of planning just to be in the running to host. Chicago spent an estimated $100 million on the campaign to host in 2016. And they lost!

Boston famously pulled its bid for the 2024 Summer Games, after citizen group No Boston Olympics convinced the city otherwise.

Twelve cities bid for the 2004 games, five for 2020, and just two tried for the 2022 Winter games: China and Kazakhstan.

So is that it? "RIP Olympic Games"?

"It won't end! Thomas Bach, the president of the IOC, for all the criticisms that I have of him, he's a smart guy, and he knows when he's up against the wall, and they've been up against the wall."

In 2014, IOC President Thomas Bach suggested a list of 40 actions the IOC could take to "shape the future of the Olympic Movement."

Among them: Evaluate bid cities by assessing key opportunities and risks, reduce the cost of bidding, and include sustainability in all aspects of the Olympic Games. It sounds good on paper, but time will tell if these actions take root.

"... By doing that, by tweaking the model a little bit and making pronouncements, they reengage cities to participate. And what's generally happened is the model has been slightly reformed — it's a little bit more sensible now than it was before Agenda 2020."

Zimbalist supports a different idea to keep the Olympics alive: Get rid of the bidding system and pick a permanent host. Somewhere that has the built-in facilities, infrastructure, and venues.

"We happen to have such a city for the Summer Olympics: It's Los Angeles. They don't have to do any building, virtually. They've got the infrastructure, transportation infrastructure, because it's the second-largest city and the entertainment capital of the country — they've got all of the professional team from all the leagues."

A permanent city could benefit the Winter Games as well. As the climate changes, less cities that have hosted Winter Games in the past can reliably keep snow.

The IOC isn't a fan of the idea, but as bidding hosts dwindle so do their options.

The future Summer Games are planned out through 2028 and the Winter Games through 2022.

The 2026 Olympics have several cities exploring bids, including two previous hosts: Salt Lake City and Sapporo, Japan.

Germany, Australia, and India have all expressed interest in the 2032 Summer Games.

Despite its flaws, the Olympic Games is still a people-pleaser. The IOC polled candidate host cities for the 2020 Games, and 70% of Tokyo, 76% of Madrid, and 83% of Istanbul were in support.

So, maybe the Olympics aren't dying, but it's certainly up to the International Olympic Committee to keep the games in check. Both on the field and off.

Join the conversation about this story »

The 18 worst Netflix original movies of all time, according to critics

0
0

The Cloverfield Paradox Ending Gugu Mbatha Raw

Netflix's strategy for original content has proven time and again that the streaming service values quantity — sometimes over quality. 

In December, the company released the Will Smith-led movie "Bright" into a critical bloodbath. But Netflix CEO Reed Hastings later brushed off the negative reviews by calling the film a commercial success and critics "disconnected from the mass appeal." 

This week, critics are tearing apart "The Cloverfield Paradox," a sequel to the sci-fi film "Cloverfield" that Netflix bought from Paramount and surprise released following the Super Bowl on Sunday. 

To find out which Netflix original films critics have deemed the worst of the worst, we turned to the reviews aggregator Rotten Tomatoes to rank the movies that received a "Rotten" critical score of less than 60%. We excluded any film that didn't have enough reviews to receive a designation of "Rotten," and we used audience scores to break any ties. 

Here are the 18 worst Netflix original movies, ranked in descending order:

SEE ALSO: All 54 of Netflix's notable original shows, ranked from worst to best

18. “Shimmer Lake” — 57%

Critic score: 57%

Audience score: 59%

Netflix description: "Unfolding in reverse time, this darkly comic crime thriller follows a local sheriff hunting three bank robbery suspects, one of whom is his brother."



17. “War Machine” — 51%

Critic score: 51%

Audience score: 34%

Netflix description: "When a proud general is tasked with winning an unpopular war, he takes the challenge head-on, not knowing that hubris may be his own worst enemy."



16. “Mascots” — 50%

Critic score: 50%

Audience score: 35%

Netflix description: "Eager contestants don big heads and furry suits to vie for the title of World's Best Mascot in this offbeat, comic romp from Christopher Guest."



See the rest of the story at Business Insider
Viewing all 101934 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images