Marques Brownlee is a 20-year-old college student who's been hailed "the best technology reviewer on the planet right now" by former Google VP Vic Gundotra. With nearly 2 million subscribers on his YouTube channel, Brownlee has become a supremely influential personality in the tech and gadget space. He tells us how he got to where he is at such a young age.
Produced by Will Wei
Follow BI Video: On Facebook
Join the conversation about this story »
If you can make it onto ABC's hit show "Shark Tank," you'll have an audience of about 10 million people to show your product. It's why even entrepreneurs who lose out on a deal often report a notable uptick in sales following their appearance on the show, which portrays negotiations between small-business owners and a panel of potential investors dubbed "Sharks."
But for those who do get a deal, "Shark Tank" can change the trajectory of their business, turning a fledgling company into a national brand.
We asked Carolyn Baumgarten, a writer for Andrew Figgins' fan blog In the Shark Tank, to identify the show's greatest success stories based on sales after their "Shark Tank" appearances.
The following entrepreneurs took a successful pitch and maximized the potential of the Shark they partnered with through focus and determination.
Danielle Vilagie and Tracey Noonan are a mother-daughter duo from Boston with a company that makes cupcakes in a jar. In season 4, they made a deal with Kevin O'Leary in which he invested $75,000 for royalties instead of equity. He made $1 from every cupcake sold until he made his money back, and then began receiving 50 cents per cupcake sold.
Since its appearance on the show, Wicked Good Cupcakes has expanded to a new production facility and a couple of new locations, and it is planning to bring in $3 million in sales by the end of this year, WCVB Boston reports.
Husband and wife entrepreneurs Mark and Hanna Lim created the Lollacup as an improvement on the standard sippy cup for toddlers. Their product is BPA-free and spill-proof, and its straw is designed to catch every last drop of a drink. In season 3, the Lims partnered with both Mark Cuban and Robert Herjavec for a $100,000 deal in exchange for 40% equity.
The Lims have brought in almost $1 million in sales, making the Lollacup the most successful children's product to come out of "Shark Tank."
Lani Lazzari was just 18 years old when she entered the tank in season 4 to pitch her skincare company Simple Sugars. She ended up making a deal with Cuban for $100,000 in return for 33% equity.
Within just 24 hours of her episode's premiere, Lazzari's sales jumped to $220,000 from $50,000, and she hit $1 million six weeks later. Today Simple Sugars products are in more than 700 retail locations and ship internationally. This year, the company has already brought in over $3 million in revenue.
Television personality Mike Rowe, probably most recognizable in his trademark rugged baseball cap, has traveled the US trying his hand at the least enjoyable blue-collar occupations.
In eight seasons of "Dirty Jobs" on the Discovery Channel and now in his new CNN show "Somebody's Gotta Do It," Rowe has spent time as an owl vomit collector, a coal miner, and a cloth diaper cleaner. But there's one job that he is certain took the most out of him.
Rowe revealed in a new Reddit Ask Me Anything (AMA) that of all these jobs, the hardest was being a concrete chipper. He explains:
In general, any day that begins with a man handing you a sledgehammer and concludes with the same man taking the sledgehammer away 12 hours later is going to be a difficult day.
Toward that end, I could tell you stories about railroad workers, gandy-dancers, marble miners, or a variety of specialized construction jobs.
However, the absolute worst in terms of physical discomfort combined with soul-deadening ennui involves the cleaning of the drum on a cement mixer.
No one really thinks about it, but these trucks are in constant use.
And every time the drum spins, a thin layer of cement hardens in the interior. So by the end of the day, the inside of the drum on a cement mixer is essentially solid.
So the job in question requires a man to wedge himself inside with a pneumatic jackhammer.
Yeah.
The sound is indescribable. And the claustrophobia is off the charts.
Essentially, you lay there on your back directing the jackhammer over your head and all around you. You wear ear protection, a respirator, and goggles.
But NONE of it makes a damn bit of difference.
Because that job hurts on every level.
According to the Electronic Library of Construction Occupation, the job is — surprise — incredibly dangerous. For example, airborne silica inside the mixer can cause fatal lung disease, and sound reverberating from the jackhammer can cause permanent hearing loss.
Here's Rowe in "Dirty Jobs" jumping into a concrete mixer:
And here he is chipping away:
Rowe discusses other terrible jobs, his new CNN show, and how he sees his shows as a way to impart more appreciation for skilled professions in the AMA over on Reddit.
SEE ALSO: The 10 Best Jobs For 2015
Join the conversation about this story »
For most of the past 15 years, Jon Stewart has been at the helm of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show."
The satirical news program with occasional glimpses of brilliance was at its best during the Bush years, when Stewart became more than a comedian and was seen as a trusted news source for the American public.
He got a taste of what life would be like post-"Daily Show" when he took three months off to shoot his directorial debut "Rosewater" about a journalist who was jailed by the Iranian government.
Stewart recently spoke with NPR's Terry Gross about what he's been wrestling with as a performer who loves the job that made him famous but has a desire for something more:
You know, it's always difficult. I do feel like I don't know that there will ever be anything that I will ever be as well suited for as this show. That being said, I think there are moments when you realize that that's not enough anymore, or that maybe it's time for some discomfort.
... I think there's a tendency when something's been on the air for a really long time to dismiss it only because of its familiarity. And it's hard to retain that first blush of love that you have when you first find something that takes you, whether it be, you know, artistic, material or music or other things. But I'm still really proud of the work we do day in and day out and hold up some of the bits that we've done recently to anything that we have done in the history of the program.
And so that is the difficulty — when do you decide that even though it's this place of great comfort and you feel like you're plugged into it like you've never been plugged into anything else that you've ever done, you know ... there are other considerations of family or even in the sense of just not wanting to be on television all the time. You know, you can't just stay in the same place because it feels like you've built a nice house there. And that's really the thing that I struggle with. And it is unclear to me.
Stewart says, however, that when he finally decides that he is going to quit, he's not going to regret his decision and come back for more. He likened the situation to the "Seinfeld" scene where George Costanza won back his ex-girlfriend Susan and the two got engaged:
And he was all excited, and he did it, and she took him back. And there's that scene of him walking up the stairs with her to the apartment, and the minute he starts walking up the stairs he goes, "What have I done? This is the worst thing I've ever done. I've got to get out of this relationship."
At least for the foreseeable future, Stewart seems fulfilled behind his "Daily Show" desk as "Rosewater" plays in theaters, but he brings up an important point about a common crossroads many professionals face: How do you know when it's time to move on?
You can listen to his full interview with Gross at NPR.
SEE ALSO: Jerry Seinfeld Explains How He's Remained Consistently Successful
Join the conversation about this story »
"The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part I" is in theaters this weekend, and while the majority of reviews agree the latest installment of the best-selling young adult series is the darkest film yet, critics have one other consensus on the film: "Mockingjay" is basically a two-hour trailer for "The Hunger Games" finale due in theaters next fall.
It's the latest franchise after the "Twilight" and "Harry Potter" series to stretch its final film across two movies.
Nearly every review points this out, with some accusing film distributor Lionsgate of making a break for a fast cash grab. For reference, the first two "Hunger Games" movies have made over $1.5 billion worldwide combined.
"This is the future of big-budget filmmaking, a Hollywood hustle to turn profitable source material into multi-movie investments. It’s good for business but bad for drama, and the inelegantly titled Mockingjay—Part 1 suffers from an unavoidable sense of anticlimax. It doesn’t build to an ending so much as just eventually grind to a halt, like a video game demanding more quarters to continue playing."
"In its best moments, the movie has a tense, night before the battle feel. Only the battle is still a year away. … It does not seem to be the type of movie that fans will revisit on its own. This half is part of a whole in the most cynical way."
“It’s a pretty cynical business plan, and it's led to a film that feels needlessly padded. Mockingjay—Part 1 is like a term paper with the margins enlarged and the font size jacked up to reach the assigned number of pages.
… when the story finally does manage to get interesting toward the end, it just screeches to a halt and cuts off, leaving fans wriggling on the hook for a finale they won't get to see for another 12 months. That's not a cliff-hanger, that's just a tease.”
“The film ends at the apex of anguish: Thanks, Lionsgate, for cleaving Suzanne Collins’s third book in twain to maximize your already staggering profits.”
Time:
"In the greed-is-good tradition of the Harry Potter and Twilight movie franchises, the overseers of The Hunger Games have split the last book into two films. You may recall that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 was the only lame episode in the entire canon and that Mary Pols titled her TIME review of the penultimate Twilight film “Breaking Yawn Part 1.” Expectations for the artistic and entertainment possibilities of this half-Mockingjay should be at least as low, though it’s likely to be the top-grossing movie of 2014."
"Like an overgrown and bloated trailer for a film yet to come, Francis Lawrence's The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 1 spreads perhaps 45 minutes of dramatic material across two far-too-leisurely hours. … But far more than with Harry Potter and about the same as with Twilight, this doubling-the-profit gambit feels like a gaming-the-public ploy."
The New York Post is the least forgiving:
"'The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 1' … thinly spreads a half-hour’s worth of plot over two plodding hours. Like the next-to-last episodes of the Harry Potter and Twilight franchises, this snoozy slog arbitrarily cuts the third book in Suzanne Collins’ trilogy in half for no good reason other than cleaning up at the box office one more time."
These critiques don't mean the film isn't any good.
The acting chops of Jennifer Lawrence, Philip Seymour Hoffman in his last starring role, Donald Sutherland, and supporting performances of Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks, are the saving grace of the sometimes slow third installment.
Still, the film currently has worse reviews than the previous two "Hunger Games" installments. The first and second films sit at 84% and 89%, respectively, on critique aggregator Rotten Tomatoes. Reviews for "Mockingjay" are more polarizing with 69% positive.
You can read our review, here.
SEE ALSO: "Mockingjay" should easily have the biggest box-office opening of 2014
AND: Read the letter that landed Donald Sutherland his role in "The Hunger Games"
Join the conversation about this story »
Anyone who has seen an episode of "Restaurant: Impossible" on the Food Network knows that restaurants need much more than mom's classic recipes to survive.
According to a frequently cited study by Ohio State University on failed restaurants, 60% do not make it past the first year, and 80% go under in five years.
Why is the restaurant business so tough? We reached out to celebrity chef Robert Irvine, the host of business make-over show "Restaurant: Impossible," to find out. Here are Irvine's top five reasons restaurants fail, in his words:
"So many of the restaurants that I save on 'Restaurant: Impossible' are in their current situation because of inexperienced, but well-meaning, owners," says Irvine. "Potential restaurateurs do not realize or appreciate the specific set of demands that come along with owning and running a restaurant. Once realized, it is often way too late."
"The issue is further compounded," he continues, "by trying to fix this situation by bringing in someone with experience to save the sinking ship and ebb the money loss. This can be effective, but it also adds more of a financial burden to the bottom line by bringing in someone who expects to be paid relative to their experience."
"Unlike other businesses where you may find yourself managing just one group of people with one specific skill set, restaurants have a ton of moving parts requiring a diverse group of people with varying skills sets, talents, and personalities," Irvine says. "I have always found that the best managers are the ones who have worked their way up the chain of command and started at the bottom (again, going back to the experience factor)."
"Managers who have walked a mile in the shoes of the people they are overseeing are more understanding, compassionate, and seek like-mindedness while providing insight into how best to relate to, approach, and motivate each member of their team."
"So many times on the show — when asked about food cost, labor, and P&Ls [income statements] — the owners just look at me dumbfounded," he says. "But you have to go further by not just knowing proper restaurant accounting procedures but to also maintain and check the numbers you are generating to ensure they are up to date."
"One particular owner was so proud of himself for being able to report a 33% food cost until I dug a little deeper to see that his costs were based on old figures and that the cost of ingredients had risen significantly since he last did his calculations."
"I don't typically give restaurants a second chance if I'm not given a great experience the first time around," says Irvine. "I feel that most people are very much like me in that first impressions determine repeat customership. The way you handle your customers along every step of their dining experience (from being greeted at the door to paying the check) determines whether you will retain that customer, and it is a well-known fact of business that customer retention is much more cost-effective than customer acquisition."
"Furthermore, with the proliferation of user-review sites like Yelp and Urbanspoon, having customers leave with a glowing experience is more important than ever," he says. "As the digital era continues to grow and expand, review sites will, more and more, become the gatekeepers to customer acquisition. The best way to maintain a positive reputation is to ensure flawless customer service and experience."
"As it is the cornerstone of your entire existence, it seems so simple that the execution of your food would be your top priority, but so often restaurant owners just do not realize that they are serving sub-par fare," Irvine says. "It's not from lack of personal taste or quality. More often it's because of a breakdown in the chain of command and quality control. Day-in and day-out food preparation and presentation becomes routine — sometimes almost a factory-like motion — and can lead to steps being skipped and key ingredients missed over a period of time."
"It's like de-evolution," he explains. "Very slowly your most popular dish can start to veer off its intended flavor profile and your cherished execution can stray from what is best for the end product. It's key to consistently re-evaluate dishes and the quality control measures that were set into place. I also insist on regular tastings before service to make sure that the quality of the product is top notch!"
SEE ALSO: The CEO Of 'Wichcraft Only Hires People Who Are Willing To Take Out The Trash
Join the conversation about this story »
Even after racking up 1 million followers on YouTube, Chris and Crawford Collins claim they're still stunned when people see them while they're out at the mall or a gas station or grabbing a bite to eat.
The Collins brothers are a part of the newest breed of YouTube superstars. They rack up millions and millions of views every month from mostly teen girls.They are even represented by a YouTube talent management company called Fullscreen.
The Collins brothers headlined an event we attended earlier this year. There were thousands of screaming teenagers.
Yesterday, I had the opportunity to have brunch with a bunch of YouTubers, including the Collins brothers. I asked all of them a lot of the same questions. I wanted to know what makes them successful ("being real" was the overwhelming and seemingly scripted answer), and I wanted to know about experiences with fans.
Here's why! It's pretty amazing that we have a new kind of celebrity culture for a very niche but important audience: young and impressionable girls.
While a bonafide celebrity like Taylor Swift or Beyonce could never go anywhere in the world and remain unnoticed, many of these YouTube stars can walk the streets of New York City or Los Angeles or Anywhere, USA, and blend right in. Security detail would feel ridiculously unnecessary.
But then there are some places where their fame is unavoidable.
Like at a One Direction concert.
Here's the story Chris and Crawford Collins told me yesterday at brunch:
The brothers had gotten tickets to see One Direction (1D), whose fan base is bigger but identical to theirs: teen girls. A band called 5SOS (5 Seconds Of Summer) opened for 1D.
"Between 5SOS and 1D," Crawford explained to me, "there was like an hour. No one was doing anything or had anything to pay attention to."
That was when a young girl noticed the brothers and recognized them immediately. She screamed and alerted her friends and anyone within earshot. Within seconds, Chris remembers tons of girls swarming them with their iPhones, screaming and pulling on the brothers' tee-shirts.
"It was literally insane," Chris said. "It was the craziest thing."
Crawford remembers the entire stadium of concert-goers had their eyes on the mob that was happening around them on the ground. Police or security guards ("like, 4 of them" but the boys can't remember which) eventually had to rescue the brothers and escort them to a separate part of the stadium where they wouldn't be bothered. And of course, "like anyone else over 25," Crawford explains, the security guards had no idea who the brothers were or why the mob was happening.
When the brothers did an event for Kohl's, the only warning fans had prior to the event was a tweet from the brothers a day before. Chris and Crawford assumed some fans would show up — "maybe a few hundred" — but when they got to the store the next day, there were 5,000 girls lining up around the building, hoping for a chance to meet the teenage superstars.
"It's always really cool," Crawford says, and his brother agrees. "We are always surprised by it, but we always appreciate it."
Join the conversation about this story »
Yahoo Movies has premiered the trailer for George Lucas's first animated movie, "Strange Magic."
Disney unexpectedly announced the Lucasfilm musical, written by Lucas, earlier this month only two months ahead of the film's January 23 release.
It looks like we may know why.
The film doesn't look like a must-see from the initial trailer.
That may explain why Disney is letting Touchstone Pictures release the movie about goblins, elves, and fairies who are battling for control over a powerful potion. (Remember, Disney purchased Lucasfilm Ltd. for $4 billion in 2012.) Otherwise, why wouldn't the Mouse House want to align itself with Lucas's first post-"Star Wars" movie more closely?
That's kind of a bummer. It sounds like "Strange Magic" has been a big passion project for Lucas. A Lucasfilm employee tells Yahoo Movies he has been working on it for years.
Check out the trailer:
So far, fan reactions haven't been great either.
Click here to see the story >
I can see why Disney/Lucasfilm decided to release "Strange Magic" in January. Looks like a dump month movie. https://t.co/h1jWluzB16
— Thomas A. Dreyfuss (@Thomas_Dreyfuss) November 21, 2014To say I'm excited about this would be an incredible understatement - #StrangeMagic trailer: https://t.co/8A9xUt6Llb
— Tracy Cannobbio (@Tcann13) November 21, 2014I'm a little disappointed with the Strange Magic trailer. I was hoping it would be dark and mysterious rather than a comedy.
— Josie (@Josephina_P) November 21, 2014#StrangeMagic was Lucasfilm's way of breaking back into the game and making new, original content. Too bad it looks like garbage
— James Garcia (@thereeljames) November 21, 2014SEE ALSO: George Lucas has been working on a secret animated musical for Disney
Join the conversation about this story »
Some photos from “Star Wars: Episode VII” may have leaked online from fans and TMZ, but don’t expect to see any from the cast or crew make their way to the internet.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, any crew members entering the set at Pinewood Studios in England had to cover the lens of their phone with a sticker to prevent them from taking photos.
The sticker couldn’t be removed until they were off the set.
Producers even required that a sticker be applied over the lens of every cellphone that entered the perimeter of Pinewood Studios outside London and removed upon departure. Once taken off, the sticker could not be reused, so visitors couldn't sneak a photo and reapply it.
THR highlights a few other measures Disney took to make sure "Star Wars" was kept underwraps.
As production continued, director J.J. Abrams reportedly had anti-spoiler posters with the phrase "Loose Lips Bring Down Starships." put up all over Pinewood Studios to discourage cast and crew from spreading rumors off set.
Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy's husband, Frank Marshall, tweeted out the following photo of the poster during a set visit:
"Star Wars: Episode VII" will be released December 18, 2015.
SEE ALSO: How Marvel prevents footage from leaking at New York Comic Con
Join the conversation about this story »
Tina Fey's newest show has a new home before it even aired. "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt" was set to air on NBC in as a midseason show but has been sold to Netflix, according to Deadline.
In an unprecedented move, the streaming service picked up the series for two seasons.
The comedy will debut in March on Netflix, which is around the same time it was supposed to air on NBC.
“The very construct of Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt — its offbeat premise, hilarious and rich characters and serialized storytelling — make it a perfect Netflix comedy series,” Cindy Holland, VP of Original Content at Netflix told Deadline. “Tina and Robert’s unique comic voice and sensibility come through in this series and we could not be more excited to present Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt exclusively to Netflix members around the world.”
Deadline describes the series:
"After living in a cult for fifteen years, Kimmy decides to reclaim her life and start over in New York City. Armed with just a backpack, light-up sneakers, and a couple of way-past-due library books, she’s ready to take on a world she didn’t even think existed anymore. Wide-eyed but resilient, nothing is going to stand in her way. She quickly finds a new job (working for 30 Rock’s Jane Krakowski), a new roommate (Tituss Burgess, 30 Rock), and a new beginning. The cast also includes Lauren Adams, Sara Chase, Sol Miranda and Emmy winner Carol Kane (Taxi, The Princess Bride)."
Tina Fey and Robert Carlock created the series.
Join the conversation about this story »
NEW YORK (AP) — A statement issued Friday by Bill Cosby's lawyer, Martin Singer, in response to allegations of sexual assault against the comic:
"The new, never-before-heard claims from women who have come forward in the past two weeks with unsubstantiated, fantastical stories about things they say occurred 30, 40, or even 50 years ago have escalated far past the point of absurdity.
These brand new claims about alleged decades-old events are becoming increasingly ridiculous, and it is completely illogical that so many people would have said nothing, done nothing, and made no reports to law enforcement or asserted civil claims if they thought they had been assaulted over a span of so many years.
Lawsuits are filed against people in the public eye every day. There has never been a shortage of lawyers willing to represent people with claims against rich, powerful men, so it makes no sense that not one of these new women who just came forward for the first time now ever asserted a legal claim back at the time they allege they had been sexually assaulted.
This situation is an unprecedented example of the media's breakneck rush to run stories without any corroboration or adherence to traditional journalistic standards. Over and over again, we have refuted these new unsubstantiated stories with documentary evidence, only to have a new uncorroborated story crop up out of the woodwork. When will it end?
It is long past time for this media vilification of Mr. Cosby to stop."
Join the conversation about this story »
Warning: There are some minor spoilers ahead.
From the moment Jennifer Lawrence enters on screen as a screaming, trembling, and traumatized Katniss Everdeen, you know you're in for a different “Hunger Games” movie than the previous two installments.
“The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part I” is the darkest and grittiest of the four-part series from best-selling author Suzanne Collins.
Gone are the games that pitted tributes from 12 districts against each other in a battle royale to the death in the first two films.
Death and sacrifice are front and center in the third film as Katniss sets out to lead the people of Panem in a revolution against the country’s capitol and its leader, President Snow, played by the captivating Donald Sutherland.
Since the last movie, Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) has been captured by the Capitol and is being used as a tool by Snow to unnerve Katniss.
There’s not much to be happy about in “Mockingjay,” which shouldn’t come as a surprise if you’ve read the book (it’s pretty depressing).
Much of the film plays out in District 13, a secret underground bunker revealed in last year’s “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire” that’s led by President Coin (Julianne Moore).
Unlike the previous two films, “Mockingjay” doesn’t have a whole lot of action. Katniss fires off only one arrow throughout the film from her now iconic bow.
Readers of the book will anticipate this. Most of the time on screen is spent watching Katniss make propaganda videos as the symbol of the rebellion, The Mockingjay.
Instead, the sequel is a giant exercise in setting up the big finale. It’s something that has become typical of big franchise movies that have their last installments split over the course of two films. In that respect, “Mockingjay - Part I” feels a lot like “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I.”
That’s not to say the film doesn’t do a good job.
Lawrence is the heart and soul of the film. This franchise would be nothing without her domineering presence. Her character goes back and forth between powerful, authoritative, and fearless “girl on fire” one minute to ravaged soul the next as she battles with PTSD from the games. It’s an incredible range to watch on screen.
The other great on screen performance belongs to Sutherland. As the ruthless, conniving head of Panem, he easily steals every scene he’s in. The film’s antagonist at his finest when dishing both advice and warnings to Everdeen in a condescending manner.
Philip Seymour Hoffman also needs to be recognized. The late actor plays off of Lawrence so effortlessly that a wry smile near the film’s beginning comes off as a genuine reaction to the actress’s fiery remarks. One of the few moments of humor in the film occurs between the two as he directs Everdeen in her first piece of propaganda for the rebellion.
However, “Mockingjay" has such a huge cast of characters that many of them are rotated through so quickly that you never get enough screen time with most of them. That goes for Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) and Finnick (Sam Claflin), too.
Elizabeth Banks is one of the film's only bright spots in the form of comic relief. As Katniss’s escort Effie Trinket in the first two films, we’re used to seeing her character adorned in wild wigs and lavish outfits like this:
And this:
Stripped of her lavish lifestyle, we watch as she struggles to settle into life outside the Capitol as a “political refugee,” condemned to a life of jumpsuits. It’s hilarious and refreshing since she’s barely in the final book.
And this is one of the reasons “The Hunger Games” is probably one of the best book adaptations to screen. It dares to stray from the story in a way that expands upon its source material. The three novels are only given to readers from Katniss’s perspective. In “Mockingjay,” we see firsthand how other districts deal in their own ways with the rebellion. We see how President Snow interacts with members of the Capitol and with Katniss. It all makes for a more engaging film than what many refer to as the worstbook in the series.
A few scenes that stick out include Katniss’s heartbreaking return to her home and a rising from a group of singing rebels fighting for freedom.
However, the best part of the two-hour movie doesn’t come until the very end, after a wanna-be slightly cheesy “Mission Impossible”-like operation takes place *spoiler* to save Peeta and other victors including last year’s fan favorite Johanna (Jena Malone). (You’ll remember her as the actress who stripped naked in the elevator in “Catching Fire.”) *spoiler*
A huge twist, that I won’t spoil here, lays the foundation for what will play a dire role in next fall’s big finale. Fans of the series know the twist. They’ve been waiting years to see it on screen. However, they’ll be upset the film cuts to black right when it starts to get really juicy, leaving viewers wanting more.
For the record, the film does split the 398-page “Mockingjay” book in half pretty evenly. Since the film moves pretty slowly, that was one of our main concerns. We were then reminded afterward that the first half of all “The Hunger Games” books are pure set up.
And at the end of the day, that’s what “Mockingjay - Part 1” is, a total teaser for the final installment due out next year. It will make tons of money for Lionsgate, probably break a few box-office records, and will undoubtedly be one of the years highest-grossing films, if not the highest-grossing of 2014 (it has to beat out Michael Bay’s $1 billion “Transformers”).
Stick around through some of the credits, not for an additional scene, but Lorde’s music which is one of the best parts of the movie. You wish there was more of it throughout the film.
"The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part I" is in theaters Friday, Nov. 21.
Watch the trailer:
SEE ALSO: Read the letter that landed Donald Sutherland his role in "The Hunger Games"
AND: "Mockingjay" should have the largest box-office opening of 2014
Join the conversation about this story »
Chris Rock recently opened up to "CBS This Morning" host Charlie Rose about how being black and famous in Hollywood is very different from being white and famous.
"Being famous as a black guy is a little different than being famous as a white guy. Tom Hanks is an amazing actor, but Denzel Washington is a god to his people," the comedian told Rose, not in jest. "Denzel Washington has a responsibility to his people that Tom Cruise, Liam Neeson, all these guys don’t have. They just make their art."
Rock continued: "No one says, 'Hey, Tom Cruise! Stay white! Don't forget your whiteness! Come back and visit white people! What-chu doin' for white people, Tom Cruise?! Yo Stallone, what are you doing for Italians?!'"
Black people "want to know that Denzel loves his people," Rock says. "That’s he doing stuff for his people. They feel his highs and lows more than white people. If Tom Hanks does a bad movie, there’s gonna be another good movie by somebody white next week. If Denzel does a bad movie, I might not see a good black movie for a year. I am really left out here hanging."
Rock acknowledged that he felt the same pressure on himself "a little bit."
In his new directorial feature "Top Five," Rock plays a version of himself who is trying to make it as a serious actor.
"I wanted to do a movie about black fame," he says of the film, in theaters Dec. 12.
He says with this movie, he finally "found a tone that works" for him.
Rock, who has appeared alongside Adam Sandler in the "Grown Ups" franchise and in "The Longest Yard," says that following in Sandler's career footsteps hasn't always been the smartest move for him.
Rock says: "Men always get their fashion sense from whatever friend gets laid the most ... so since Sandler is my biggest movie star friend, I was like, 'OK, I'll just do what he's doing,' but it didn't really fit me. It fits when I'm in a movie with him, but it didn't fit to make a movie with that tone. Or even an Eddie Murphy movie, that wasn't my tone."
But outside of his movie career, Rock says, "standup will always be at the core of my life. I really like it. I kind of love it."
Watch Rock's full interview with Charlie Rose below:
SEE ALSO: Jerry Seinfeld's One Great Trick For 'Talking To Regular People'
Join the conversation about this story »
Earlier this month, the debate on whether musicians benefit from streaming services was revisited after Taylor Swift's record label pulled all of her music from Spotify.
Since then, Spotify and Swift's label have gone back and forth disputing the actual royalties received by the streaming service. (Spotify says Swift's label received $2 million from the artist's streamed songs in the past year. The label says it was actually $500,000.)
If anyone's going to pull their content off of Spotify, it certainly doesn't hurt Swift to do so.
Her latest album "1989" generated more than $10 million in sales in its first week after selling more than 1.2 million copies. She's the only artist whose last three albums have sold more than one million copies in their debut week.
Over the weekend, during a press day for “Interstellar,” we asked Oscar-winning composer Hans Zimmer his thoughts on the Taylor Swift / Spotify ordeal.
His response included a passionate critique of the music industry, in which he told Business Insider music shouldn’t be free and came to the defense of Taylor Swift and musicians in general.
Zimmer explained to Business Insider:
I think Taylor Swift, and really honestly, I haven’t quite been following it — I've been a little busy — but my point on the whole thing is, you know, it’s very easy to say, ‘Oh, those rich musicians. Their music should be free or whatever.'
It shouldn’t be free. It’s their livelihood. It’s their job. And I’m not talking about the rich musicians. Anybody should have the chance to as their dream say, ‘I want to become a musician and I want to make a living at it.’ You know? And why shouldn’t they be afforded a living? It’s a great big world and if there are millions of people listening to your music and enjoying it and getting something out of it then it’s not a hobby, it’s work.
The composer also explained the importance of original orchestral music:
It’s absolutely ridiculous. Look, one of my big things in life is, I like using real orchestras. I like supporting real orchestras. The way the music industry has run itself into the ground ... you know the last place on Earth that really on a daily basis commissions orchestral music is Hollywood. Whatever horrible things you want to say about Hollywood — which are all true — you can’t take away this idea that it’s the last place on Earth that actually supports orchestral music. And I think, it’s just a thought I have, you know, if we lose the orchestra it’s not just about these musicians and their families and their livelihood. You know the loss of the orchestra would be such a rift in our … such a tear into our culture. We as humanity would lose a lot more.
Join the conversation about this story »
Kim Kardashian's 2003 sex tape with her former boyfriend Ray J is now the biggest-selling sex tape of all time.
The title has been held by Pamela Anderson and Tommy Lee since 1995 for their home video.
Kardashian dethroned Anderson thanks to renewed interest after her nude Paper magazine spread last week.
According to TMZ, her sex tape sales have since increased exponentially.
While the site reports Ray J usually earns $90,000 every three months from his deal with Vivid Entertainment, the 33-year-old will rake in $50,000 from the past week alone.
Vivid Entertainment president Steve Hirsch tells TMZ that those sales pushed the sex tape rankings over the edge for "Kim K: Superstar."
Kardashian reportedly received $5 million from Vivid, giving the company the rights to distribute the sex tape, back in 2007. Today, the 34-year-old reality star is reportedly worth more than $65 million.
Ray J, a rapper-actor-music producer, is worth a reported $6 million.
SEE ALSO: Here's The Ridiculous Amount Of Money 'Kim Kardashian: Hollywood' Actually Made
Join the conversation about this story »
I have a confession to make: I have an embarrassing addiction to a freemium game.
Three years ago, I downloaded "The Simpsons: Tapped Out." One of my favorite shows of all time is “The Simpsons,” and as a proud owner of a new iPhone 4S at the time, I wanted to own this game.
In the end, it ended up owning me.
The gist of the game is that Homer Simpson caused the town of Springfield to blow up, and now you, the "Sky Finger," must recreate the town and bring back all its residents. You make money by collecting rent from buildings and making characters do various jobs, which all take time to complete.
I have witnessed how this game has grown through the years, with the load times and overall quality improving with each new iPhone release. I’ve been there for every new character, new building, holiday and special promotion. My Springfield is immaculate. It's gorgeous. You wish you lived there.
I want to quit. I do. I'm maxed out at Level 47, as high as Electronic Arts will allow me to go, and have all the current characters and buildings you can own through normal gameplay.
But I don't have it all. And I'll never have it all.
That's what makes this a "freemium" game and not a "free" game. (Also why Apple needed to subtly change the App Store recently.)
Getting the premium items requires a special kind of currency, which can only be attained through either time or money. In the case of “The Simpsons: Tapped Out,” donuts are your “premium” currency, which you can collect by leveling up, or simply when the Electronic Arts developers feel charitable.
I've saved — no, hoarded — donuts for years, but my 458 donuts will only get me two or three quality items. I’m not kidding: I can’t even afford all four of these characters.
And there’s the rub: Even after spending three years collecting donuts, I would still have to spend money to achieve “100% completion.”
But in mobile games like “The Simpsons: Tapped Out,” 100% completion doesn’t even exist; EA regularly adds new characters and premium items each month. If you truly want to own everything, you’ll need to shell out money regularly.
The idea that you can get all the items through time and patience is just a red herring.
The freemium model has gained momentum on mobile, thanks to early popular games like “Angry Birds,” but now it’s spreading elsewhere. While watching a review of “LittleBigPlanet 3,” a new game for the PlayStation 4, I learned that in order to collect some really fun costumes for your characters, you need to spend money in addition to the $60-plus you’ve already spent on the game.
These gaming companies are smart to implement freemium into their titles: The game teases you with its best rewards, which can only be attained by a spending an inordinate amount of time in the game — each day, and consistently over time — or by spending money. And there are plenty of people who will spend thousands of dollars to progress through their favorite games, just ask the lead singer of the Sex Pistols.
So freemium works out great for these gaming companies. But for the consumer, it’s downright cruel.
And yet, I can’t stop playing.
SEE ALSO: How Flip Phones Could Return In A Big Way
Join the conversation about this story »
Warning: If you haven't seen "Big Hero 6," there are spoilers ahead.
If you've seen Disney's latest animated picture "Big Hero 6," you most likely missed out on one of the best parts of the film without even knowing it.
There's an end-credits scene following the movie featuring a big cameo, but barely anyone seems to know to stick around for it.
By now, Marvel fans know that any of Disney and Marvel's superhero movies have an end-creditsscene hinting at future sequels. But since this was an animated Marvel movie from Disney Animation, it wasn't clear whether or not there would be an additional scene afterward.
If you left the theater early, here's what you missed...
Last chance to head back before spoilers!
Parents may have noticed early on in the film that when Fred (T.J. Miller) walks his friends through his home, he stops at a family portrait showing his parents. Staring us straight in the face is an animated Stan Lee!
That wasn't where the cameo ended.
After the credits, we see Fred return to the portrait, wishing his parents were around more. As he leans on the picture, he reveals a secret passageway. Inside is what looks like a superhero lair filled with costumes and gadgets.
Stan Lee then appears and tells Fred they have a lot to discuss.
The end-credits sequence plays out a lot like the scene from "Spider-Man 2" where Harry Osborn (James Franco) discovers his father (Willem Dafoe) is the Green Goblin.
In "Big Hero 6," it looks like Stan the Man and his son may combine forces to be a superhero team. We'll have to wait and see whether or not that actually happens.
During a panel discussion and screening of the film in Beverly Hills, the directors discussed how only a handful of people knew about the cameo.
“We kept that a secret from everyone involved in the production, except for a very small team sworn to secrecy,” said producer Ray Conli.
Cinemablend has a bit more on how the scene came together from a discussion with co-director Don Hall:
The writers, Dan Gerson and Rob Baird, came to us one day with a pitch about ‘Hey, what if Fred was rich? But nobody knew it.’ You know, he comes off as this kind of slacker dude and his underwear thing and all that. He's kind of this gross guy, but appealing. What if we found out he was super, super rich? We all thought that was a super funny idea. Then it felt like, ‘Oh, what if…’ and then we started from that. It's like, ‘What if his dad closely resembled Stan Lee?’ It felt like we could kind of weave that in there, and get a little humor, a little wink to Stan Lee out of that."
SEE ALSO: Read the letter that landed Donald Sutherland his role in "The Hunger Games"
Join the conversation about this story »
How to cancel cable and stream all your content for a lot less money.
Produced by Matt Johnston
Follow BI Video: On Facebook
Join the conversation about this story »
A former NBC employee and Bill Cosby confidante has claimed to the New York Daily News that he acted as a cover-up for the comedian as he slept with women and paid them off.
Several women have accused Cosby of drugging and sexually assaulting them. Some of the accusations were made years ago, and some are more recent. The accusations have received renewed attention since a comedian called Cosby a rapist during a taped set that went viral.
Frank Scotti, 90, who worked for the studio where "The Cosby Show" was filmed from 1984 to 1992, told the Daily News that he took out money orders in his name to pay women who he suspects Cosby had slept with. Scotti also alleges that he would stand guard at Cosby's dressing room while he met with young models.
Cosby would reportedly claim he was "interviewing" the young models for parts in his show.
He allegedly had a deal with a Manhattan modeling agency that would stop by the set with several girls at once. Cosby would then take his pick, Scotti said.
"The owner [of the agency] just walked right out," Scotti told the Daily News. "She knew exactly what was going to go on. Then he’d tell me, 'Stand outside the door and don’t let anyone in.' Now you put that together and figure [out] why."
Scotti provided signed memorabilia and photographs of himself and Cosby to the Daily News. He also showed receipts for money orders with the names of women on them — at least one of whom recently stepped forward to accuse Cosby of sexual assault.
Cosby's accusers have said that the comedian lured them in with promises of career help and mentorship, then gave them pills to make them immobile so he could assault them. The allegations span decades — some dating back to 1969 and one as recent as 2004.
"The allegations are strung together by perceptible patterns that appear and reappear with remarkable consistency: mostly young, white women without family nearby; drugs offered as palliatives; resistance and pursuit; accusers worrying that no one would believe them; lifelong trauma," according to a comprehensive report from the Washington Post. "There is also a pattern of intense response by Cosby’s team of attorneys and publicists, who have used the media and the courts to attack the credibility of his accusers."
SEE ALSO: The Backstory Behind The Shocking Bill Cosby Rape Allegations
Join the conversation about this story »
