lol I did it first

WORKING WITH ACTORS

SECRETS AND LIES (1996)

Mike Leigh organised Brenda Blethyn and Marianne Jean-Baptiste to rehearse their first scene improvised on the street, neither knowing who the other character is played by, not knowing exactly who to approach or if any passerbys are involved in the rehearsal. In the context of the film this works very well (Blethyn's character not knowing that her lost daughter, Jean-Baptiste's character is black, having had the wrong image of her all of these years).

Improvisation like this creates deeper character understanding as actors have to consider how their character would react to everything that happens to them or around them. How they would speak, behave, feel...

It meant that the actors could carry these raw emotions with them to the script rehearsals.

AFTERSUN (2022)

Charlotte Wells, working on such a subtle and sensitive piece, knew she needed to give Frankie Corio, first time actress, aged only 11 at the time of shooting, the time and space to learn and make mistakes in order to reach the final product.

She arranged for Paul Mescal, her character's dad, and Corio to hang our for 2 weeks before the shoot so that they had a pre-existing relationship that felt natural and brought the characters' relationship to life.

Wells even made the decision to not give Corio the full script. Corio had little to no idea of Mescal's scenes that her character would not be aware of in the film. This was in order to keep Corio's character's childlike nature alight and not weigh her down in scenes that are supposed to seem light and bright to her whilst the audience understands that the father is struggling.

'It felt spontaeous but not improvised' - Paul Mescal.

IN CLASS EXERCISE

The following week we met the actors that we will be working with this semester. Catriona organised an exercise where she invited two actors onstage, told them their relationship and then what each characters motivation is in this prompt before asking them to improvise a scene. It was really incredibly impressive - they all did a brilliant job and it made me realise how much improvisation can add to both the cast's and crew's understanding of the character. Catriona would call cut, refine the brief, then ask them to go again.

This is definitely an exercise that I will begin incorporating into actor rehearsals. Asking them to improvise a scene not written into the script as their characters. It is of course important to be precise with what you need from them because I feel as though the fun of improvisation could then murky the waters of the initial intention for the character.

We then split off into groups and directed the actors to act out a 4 line scene.

'Have you been waiting long?' - 'Ages' - 'Really?' - 'Yes'

We had so much fun with this exercise. We only had about 30 minutes to get to know each other, plan something, rehearse and record it and everyone was super creative. Below is our attempt at the exercise.

I would like to try an exercise where I would brief both actors on their relationship to each other but told them their character's intentions separately to see how the improvisation would change when they are not completely aware of the stakes of the situation.

hamlet, much ado, CORIOLANUS, henry the fifth (guess which one I had to c&p)

tbh I assumed u were just really really excited abt coriolanus which like. valid and mood

HAMLET: Do you have any specific/creative ideas on staging a production of Hamlet?

oh boy do I........ ok first of all I would def borrow some of the set/lighting stuff from the production that I saw a few months ago (the one with ruth negga as hamlet) bc there was a lot of really really cool stuff w doors and silhouettes that I thought was super effective. also extremely a fan of having hamlet played by a woman or a transmasc actor bc like. ok. I don’t think trans!hamlet was necessarily what that production was going for but that’s how it came across to me, a transmasc person like. I’ve seen hamlet played by women in a way that felt like hamlet’s a woman in that version, regardless of how much or little they change the script/pronouns. the ruth negga version was like. oh. hamlet is trans and also even if that wasn’t what they were going for it’s still the only portrayal of a transmasc character that’s ever resonated with me personally. not to get into gender stuff but I very rarely feel like I recognize myself in fictional depictions of trans people but something abt this specific hamlet just. really vibed w me y’know? something about the mannerisms and the costuming and the way his depression isn’t specifically abt his gender stuff but that sure doesn’t help (all the layers of being referred to/referring to himself as unmanly, talking abt hating femininity contrasted w how much this version of hamlet clearly cared abt ophelia+gertrude, another reason for everyone to disapprove of his relationship, etc)

anyway tl;dr my ideal production would make hamlet trans, also I’ve been kinda vaguely considering what the costuming might look like if u set it further back in history like. more like the time that the sources shakespeare was working on were from bc then I could use the stuff I learned for my dissertation abt early medieval clothing for something

also I hate how every single production I’ve ever seen has done ophelia’s ~madness so I wanna do a version where she’s playing the same game hamlet is of like. pretending to ~go mad~ so that ppl won’t see her as a threat except it doesn’t work bc there’s a moment when she’s like. giving out the flowers and too much of her anger comes through at claudius. when she leaves the stage for the last time claudius gestures for one of his guards to follow her out with the implication that he’s having her killed (later, when gertrude comes back to say that she’s dead, so does that guard and claudius nods like. yeah good job u did the thing). also laertes tries to follow ophelia when she leaves but claudius stops him, I don’t understand why you wouldn’t play it like that he can’t just let her go like that

also also if hamlet doesn’t die in horatio’s arms what’s even the point, from a narrative perspective as well as a homoeroticism perspective. also in general horatio needs to be present throughout and like. important? bc too many production neglect horatio but like. he’s the one who makes ppl care abt hamlet anyway I’m gonna stop now before I go into an entire essay

wait no that reminds me of the actual academic essay I did write abt generational conflict in hamlet and why u gotta cast the parent generation as like. obviously older than hamlet’s generation in order to get that across. also bc lots of productions cast hamlet & gertrude closer in age than hamlet & ophelia which. hmmmm. don’t love that

MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING: Go off about the best female character.

beatrice muchado is a strong contender but also everyone already loves her so I have less to say that hasn’t already been said, I would be tempted to say viola twelfthnight if I weren’t so firmly on team viola/cesario is trans, I love ophelia a lot but I hate the ~madness scenes, most of my favorite women in shakespeare productions I’ve seen have been women playing male roles like please I would love to talk abt the all-female julius caesar where brutus was a butch lesbian, or like. gwendoline christie as titania in midsummer except titania and oberon’s roles were swapped (which I have mixed feelings about bc the oberon/nick bottom stuff is played as a joke which like. to be fair that’s how titania/bottom is usually done and I know the joke isn’t actually just ‘haha they’re gay’ it’s abt the weird magic shit and the fact that puck and titania are messing with them but. y’know. the experience of being in an audience laughing at two dudes kissing did not make me personally feel great. however I fucking loved pretty much everything else about the production so it balances out to still being the best midsummer I’ve ever seen and also one of the best plays I’ve ever seen full stop)

also best is such a vague and subjective thing like. Idk I love a lot of them for different reasons, y’know? I do think beatrice and maybe juliet are the ones I would say are the best written, gertrude is a close third bc it really depends on how she’s played in any given production but one of my favorite parts of hamlet is in the last scene when she drinks the poison if it’s framed as her knowing exactly what’s going on and daring claudius to stop her and admit his own guilt

CORIOLANUS: Which gay pairing has the most evidence? (Conversely, which pairing do you wish had evidence?)

cesario/viola+orsino is canon send tweet. but really like. usually the cross-dressing heroine changes back into women’s clothing at the end to restore heteronormativity or whatever and I know that viola does say “hey I’m gonna go change” but never actually does and orsino still calls them cesario after that in one of his very last lines so like. I’m just sayin

 brutus and cassius’s deaths are basically the same as romeo and juliet’s, and are therefore also a pyramus and thisbe retelling, in this essay I will

HENRY V: What is the best monologue/soliloquy? in general I’m not that into king lear but edmund’s “now gods, stand up for bastards” monologue is extremely good and sexy, somewhere there’s a recording of riz ahmed doing it that’s just. chef’s kiss

as a hamlet stan my favorite hamlet soliloquy is his first one, the one that starts with “oh that this too too sullied flesh would melt,” and ends with “but break my heart for I must hold my tongue” which not to be a basic bitch but that’s one of my favorite lines in anything ever

also antony’s funeral speech for caesar gets me (almost) every goddamn time. the one singular exception to this was the shakespeare in the park production a few years ago where they were trying to do shallow modern political commentary that really didn’t work and actively undermined the themes of the play

He Chose Poorly

Apparently, over the weekend, James Mangold had a complete meltdown on Twatter after someone sh*tted all over his Indiana Jones flick. Dude went real low, attacking dude with juvenile name calling and, apparently, targeting this cat’s girlfriend; Someone who had nothing to do with anything. It’s a real bad look and i imagine the Mouse House got after Manny-boy because all of those Tweets disappeared. Now, before i unpack this, i just want to be clear: I’m not a fan of Indiana Jones. I’ve seen them all but i don’t have a horse in this race. Like, from a critical sense, The Last Crusade is easily the best flick in the franchise by a WIDE berth but my favorite is the one with the aliens. I just really like Cate Blanchett. I wanted to put that out there so you understand that i am coming from a place of indifference about this whole franchise so i have a level of impartiality that most people talking about this sh*tshow, don’t.

I don’t condone what Mangold did. It’s disgusting, petulant, immature, and incredibly problematic. In an age where people are going after Chrissy Teigen for the sh*t she said about Courtney Stodden several years after the fact, this sh*t Mangold did will be a whole f*cking issue going forward for this entire production. Again, not condoning any of this sh*t but i get Mangold’s frustration. People have been dogging his movie since day one for reasons that are literally beyond him. Kathleen Kennedy is the primary Producer on this thing. This women torpedoed Star Wars because of straight up delusion. she thought that her version of Star Wars, all of the Disney sh*t, was going to be received by the fans with open arms, neglecting the fact that they are all sh*t. Her leadership is sh*t. Kennedy is not a creative and she has had a chip on her shoulder for decades because Lucas, and Spielberg to a lesser extent, never paid any attention to her input on their flagship franchises. They were right.

Kennedy is why we never got to see the original three heroes of the Star Wars franchise on screen together in the sequels. Kennedy is the reason why Luke was diminished into a green milk drinking coward. Kennedy is the reason Lord and Miller were canned after completing literally all of Solo. Kennedy is the reason Gina Carano was fired from Mando. Kennedy is the reason why we have that High Republic bullsh*t. Kennedy is the reason the Skywalker saga is not the Palpatine saga. Kennedy is the reason why people hate Star Wars and this is the woman who is in charge of Mangold’s film. I imagine that is a creatively stifling, incredibly frustrating job to do, especially after Kennedy was effectively fired from all Star Wars production. This movie is her last gasp on Hollywood clout, so i imagine she’s going to either f*ck it all up on purpose as a f*ck you to fans or try to used Indy 5 as a vehicle to finally prove that her way is the right way in modern Hollywood. It’s not.

Now, i like a lot of the concept art I've seen from Indy 5. Those leaks point toward a bunch of Nazi Black projects like man-made UFOs and the Die Glocke. I’m a whole ass conspiracy theorist sometimes so i am in a tizzy at the prospect of seeing the Nazi Bell used in a major production. That sh*t is intriguing. I adore James Mangold as a director. He has a legit list of hits under his belt. Girl, Interrupted is a one of my favorite films of all-time and Identity is a whole ass mindf*ck but Mangold gave us Logan, arguably the best Marvel film to date. Dude is bulletproof to me for that. Also, it’s testament to what a creative can deliver when he’s allowed to just create. Mangold is great at his job when he’s allowed to do it. The fact that Phoebe Waller-Bridge is getting a writer’s credit is also something that caught my attention. I genuinely enjoyed her in Fleabag and she was, like, everything for that show. I am, apparently, in the minority about that because, apparently, Phoebe is a feminist and that is, apparently, offensive to people nowadays? I don’t know, man, i just don’t really give a sh*t about identity politics in film as ling as that sh*t is executed properly. From everything I've seen of this production, that looks to be the case. Decent concept, creativity director, excellent writer, and Harrison Ford coming back to don the fedora one last time. The only issue i have is Kennedy because that chick is franchise poison.

The guy who sparked all of this had a whole list of sh*t which made Indy 5 terrible in his eyes. Steven Spielberg is not directing, Kathleen Kennedy is producing, Harrison Ford is seventy-eight years old, and It's written by Jonathan Kasdan, who wrote SOLO. That last bit about Solo, I'm okay with. Upon revisiting that film after all the controversy fell off, it’s the most Star Wars of Disney Star Wars. If that same levity and respect is brought to India in the script, with adjustments made by Waller-Bridge to tighten everything up, i feel like that the page is in good hands. Everything else is a legitimate concern, especially Kennedy, which is how i know Mangold’s meltdown was her fault. Solo is an interesting objection as, aside from Lord and Miller getting canned and Phoebe Waller-Bridge starring as the horribly received robot or whatever, it shows how destructive Kennedy can be on set. As i understand it, Lord and Miller were fired specifically because the character Phoebe be portrayed, that ridiculous caricature of a feminist written to be as absurd as possible, was directly inspired by Kennedy, herself. She did not enjoy the comparison. And guess who has shown up in Indy 5?

Mangold should have never went after that dude the way he did over the weekend. That sh*t was a bad look and this post is, in no way, justifying his actions. It is, however, an attempt to give perspective. Mangold is an artist. He takes the production of his films seriously. He’s credited as both director and writer on a lot of his productions. The man wrote and directed Walk the Line and Logan; Both Oscar caliber films. Dude is proven talent behind the camera so having a meddling egomaniac like Kathleen Kennedy who is known for giving creatives unreasonable ultimatums about their work, f*cking up your vision strictly because she’s a selfish idealouge, might chafe someone who knows what the f*ck they’re doing. Someone who has proven he can deliver top tier quality product. Someone who has consistently delivered Oscar nominations and wins throughout his career. I can see why someone who is as unassailable in their career as Mangold, would become irate when his craft is attacked even before anyone has seen a production still. I also understand how someone could be completely and totally disconnected from the massive potential of this film, after seeing Kennedy’s name attached.

I don’t think Mangold is going to last in the big chair. I imagine he took this job as an opportunity to do something great with a franchise he loved. I think he felt that, after rehabilitating Fox’s Wolverine franchise after X-Men Origin with The Wolverine and Logan, that he could handle a fervent fan base and prove his mettle yet again. I know he grossly underestimated how “hands-on” Kennedy was going to be and how much the fandom hates that chick. Mangold was under the gun the second he inked that contract and, i imagine, it got worse after Kennedy was effectively fired from all Star Wars content and Favreu put in charge of Lucasfilm for the time being. I am certain, considering that Indy 5 is the only thing she is contractually obligated to oversee at this point, that Kennedy is going to do everything in her power to make “her own” to the detriment of Mangold’s talent. I know that. The fandom knows that. Everyone knows that and they’re irate about it. Again, not condoning what Mangold did over the weekend, i cannot stress that enough, i just wanted to add perspective as to why he might have lashed out in that way.

Dude signed up for a dream opportunity, a chance to create the Indy film he always wanted to see, only to get kneecapped by a wounded Kennedy who only has all the power over his specific project. Considering her history with Star Wars, she’s definitely f*cking with Mangold to the umpteenth degree. That, coupled with being written off based on sh*t he has no control over, in direct contrast to his record as a quality filmmaker, would be infuriating. I imagine it would probably make anyone enraged.

Thoughts on biopics

I think I’m getting closer to figuring out why biopics grind my gears.

Originally, I thought that memoirs and biopics annoyed me because I didn’t believe that any one person would have a story that would be more interesting than the culmination of many different people’s contributions towards a single thing or event. In other words, I felt that I enjoyed stories about events more than I enjoyed stories that were centered on one person. Perhaps it’s because I thought it was kind of egotistical. 

Real events as entertainment

Today, the thought came to me that we are now consuming the truth as entertainment.

Documentaries are becoming more mainstream, especially on Youtube, where anybody can put together a set of facts or opinions and present them as truth, and audiences will accept them without question (Myself included. In the modern age of convenience, despite acknowledging the importance of checking sources, I often do not when consuming these documentary pieces in large quantities.).

In addition, politics has turned into another form of entertainment. Politicians are turning into celebrities, and it kind of feels like political debates are turning into dramatized versions of themselves. 

Publishing

Before I go on about biopics, let me first talk about memoirs and other similar mainstream non-fiction books. In recent years, a lot of celebrities and widely adored public figures have started publishing their own memoirs. I assume there is demand for this kind of literature, firstly fueled by fans of those figures. However, the act of publishing literature for these mainstream audiences in itself lends to the fact that the literature itself must be entertaining.

In theory, non-fiction should be true first and foremost. Any other qualities of that literature should come secondary to the truth. Perhaps there is no demand for that kind of reading other than by archivists and record keepers, people whose aim is to preserve the truth.

As for memoirs, there are some people who have very unique life experiences and so there is merit to them sharing them because there are commoners like me who would never be able to dream of them, whether it’s something traumatic, or a rags to riches story. I acknowledge this. 

However, there are also cases of people who don’t have lives that are that different from many people’s, and I would think that those people have pressure to spice up their autobiographies to be more entertaining.  

An author would write about things that happened in their life as they were. However, an editor would review the work. If the editor asked them to omit some things, or expand on others, I would consider that still to be within the realm of truth. However, if the editor asked the author to exaggerate or to change details, that is already on the path of distorting the truth. And the editor technically is doing their job. They are trying to help the author write a book that well be interesting to the masses, not an encyclopedic record of events. I was surprised to find Wikipedia had a page on fake memoirs but it goes to show that some people are not above altering the truth to sell a book. 

That being said, biographies and accounts of events written by an “independent” party are not free from bias. It’s just that it’s harder to challenge the lens that those authors are looking through. Since those authors are not the first-hand resources for the content they are writing about, the quality of their research is also a factor, and can also be used as a shield when accused of incorrect facts (though likely not a very strong one).

Controlling your own voice

Recently, I was listening to a segment on The Green Room podcast, which is the podcast hosted by Danny Green from the Toronto Raptors. The guest on that day was Jeremy Lin, who has a production company. What he said really interested me. He realized that if he didn’t use his own voice, someone else would make one for him (relating a lot to him being one a trailblazer as an Asian-American in the NBA). That really sat with me for a while because nowadays, everything is about marketing, or an image, or a brand. There’s no such thing as a completely blank state because apparently everyone has an image or a reputation, regardless of whether it’s one that they created for themselves or one that was imposed on them. 

Biopics

Now back to biopics. I do think that my initial thought stands, that no one person’s story is as interesting as seeing how many people have an effect on a particular event. I always find myself more invested in a story than I do in a main character, so I will stand by that. 

I do think there is a difference between biopics about historical figures who died long ago, and biopics about people who are still alive or only recently died. Let’s say someone like Julius Caesar. If someone were to make a movie about him, I think there would be more acceptance and acknowledgment that the movie would be an interpretation of him, rather than historical fact. As well, there are enough historians who’d be quick to point out inaccuracies, I would think.

The first film based on true events that really made me think was the Social Network. As a movie, it’s entertaining enough. However, every single character in the film is a real person who is alive today. I don’t know how happy they are with the script or the actors that played them. I also don’t know the legalities of doing this, and I have to wonder whether all of them agreed to have themselves portrayed in a film like this. I know that the truth is the ultimate defense to libel or slander lawsuits, but how do you draw the line when it comes to things like movies, where it is supposed to be an entertaining dramatization of true events, but many don’t consider that and take it as fact. 

Now, when we consider writing about people in a “non-fiction” book, the author is sort of taking away the person’s voice from them, adding to their reputation, whether it’s positive or negative. When it comes to biopics, not only does the movie take away the real person’s voice, but also their appearance. I guess it’s stripping someone of their identity in more ways than one. It’s a little disturbing I guess.

Glorification or villainizing

Recently there was debate about the upcoming Ted B*ndy film (I don’t want this post to show up in that tag). It is a movie based on the memoir written by B*ndy’s girlfriend at the time. Of course, it is a very strange and probably frightening experience and I understand why this memoir can both be true and be interesting to some. But for those who read it, I imagine it is important that they first acknowledge that it is truth, before they decide to judge it based on entertainment value (provided that of course the memoir is accurate).

There were concerns that they were casting a good looking actor and glorifying the killer. That is a side effect of the memoir, which was supposed to be an account of true events, being turned into a movie (not a documentary) for mainstream audiences. The reason a good-looking person was cast as this terrible serial killer is because good-looking people are what sell in the entertainment industry. I’m not sure what the producers’ reasons were for turning this memoir into a movie, but that is my comment on the reactions I’ve heard.

Ending

I know I’ve kind of been all over the place here, but this has been nagging at me for a while. 

I usually avoid biopics because I just find a lot of them uninteresting. For a lot of the biopics I’ve watched, the tone is positive, and I suppose that annoyed me because no one in real life is perfect that way. If it was a fictional character being portrayed as perfect, I could live with that and maybe even enjoy it because that is a fictional character. But a lot of biopics might either omit negative information or glorify it.

I admit I’ve never liked reading memoirs, autobiographies, or biographies. One of my favourite podcasters recently released a memoir and despite me being a big fan, I have no interest in reading or buying it. It all comes down to authenticity I suppose. I feel like the book is a packaged version of who he is, whereas the podcast is a more authentic version of the kind of person he is.

I guess that’s a way I could put it. I like authenticity and fiction separate, and dramatized versions of real events toe the line way too much for my comfort, without acknowledging that they do. For example, a lot of movies might say “based on the true story” or “based on the real events.” Many people will assume that means it’s mostly true but literally all it means is that the screenwriters were inspired by something that happened in real life and wrote a story; they didn’t set out to record what happened in real life, they set out to write an entertaining story that just happened to be kickstarted by a spark that the screenwriters got that came from real life. Is that convoluted? I hope not.

Anyway, it’s late, but I just wanted to get this all out. 

When David Henry Hwang was first starting out as a dramatist, there was an “indivisible wall” between theater and television. Forty years later, “playwrights have become very popular in television now,” he tells Hillary Miller in “Playwrights on Television: Conversations with Dramatists (Routledge, 273 pages.) Hwang, who has been a writer on the Showtime cable TV series “The Affair” since 2015, is the most prominent (and probably the oldest) of the 18 writers interviewed in the book – not just a prolific Tony-winning playwright and musical librettist, but chair of the board of the American Theatre Wing and director of the playwriting program at Columbia University School of the Arts. His conversation with Miller happens also to feature the most relevant comments for what is suddenly a drastically changed landscape for theater, as well as for television (and for nearly everything else.) The definitions of both theater and TV were already being expanded, reconsidered, but if the wall between stage and screen was becoming more permeable, it’s easy to argue that the pandemic has caused it abruptly (at least temporarily) to collapse. Hwang mentions to Miller how both his second and his 19th play (“Dance and the Railroad” and “Yellow Face”) were made into videos, one shown on the Cable TV channel A&E, the other on YouTube. “All this stuff that gets captured and distributed on the Web, it feels to me that this is good for the theater,” he observes. “And if I was the person who could make any decisions, I would feel that we should not restrict people from recording performances on their phones.” Yet he also says, “the live experience is still inherently different than watching something digitally.” Will that attitude change? Has it already? Curious, I contacted Hwang. “I stand by these comments,” he replied, but added: “I feel efforts and experiments in ‘online theatre’ may provide techniques and approaches which will further enhance the live experience when the latter is once again possible.” Miller, an assistant professor of theater at Queens College, City University of New York, has put together 18 Q and A transcripts, arranged alphabetically, from interviews she conducted between October 2018 and April 2019. The writers she selected reflect “a broad definition of diversity” – including in the balance between their onstage and onscreen experiences and identity, from Madeleine George, who at the time of Miller’s interview with her in December 2018 had been a playwright for 25 years ( The Curious Case of the Watson Intelligence, Hurricane Diane), and a TV writer for ten weeks, to Tanya Saracho, showrunner for Starz TV series “Vida,” who tells Miller “ I have left the theater, consciously” (or Tanya Barfield, who tells Miller: “Maybe after my kids go to college, I’ll go back to playwriting. That’s a while off.”) Surely, a few of them would have something to say about our sudden era of online theater.

David Henry Hwang

Jocelyn Bioh

Sheila Callaghan

Kristoffer Diaz

Bash Doran

Laura Eason

Madeleine George

Jason Grote

Jordan Harrison

MJ Kaufman

Itamar Moses

Janine Nabers

Christopher Oscar Pena

Adam Rapp

Diana Son

Tanya Saracho

Tracey Scott Wilson

In one way, then, Miller’s book is the victim of unlucky timing. But in another way, some of the issues that the author does explore are as good a prompt as any to thinking about the current crossbreeding of media and what may be in store. Her well-organized and insightful introduction, for example, begins with the information that Shakespeare’s contemporary Ben Jonson coined the term “playwright” and meant it as a slur – a craftsman, like a shipwright, rather than an artist, and used it not just to insult a rival, but to express his ambiguity about his own playwriting. Writers, in other words, long have felt the tension of straddling between two aspirations — struggling to reconcile the contrast “between art and entertainment, independent and commercial,” “ordinary” and elitist. Miller tells us television’s first Golden Age relied on plays and playwrights, the budding industry seeing theatrical adaptation as a good fit for the medium. Noël Coward’s Blithe Spirit was among the first plays to be broadcast, airing on NBC Television Theatre, in May 1946 to critical acclaim, just three years after the end of its Broadway run. Now playwrights are abundant once again in what for the past two decades has been a third Golden Age of Television, Miller says (arguing unpersuasively that there was a Second Golden Age in the 1980s.) “The Sopranos wasn’t written by playwrights, but The Sopranos [1999-2007] and Six Feet Under [2001-2005] began to create this sort of television you didn’t have to be ashamed of having written for if you were a playwright, and then Six Feet Under, half that staff was playwrights,” Itamar Moses, the Tony-winning book writer for The Band’s Visit, whose four TV gigs include Boardwalk Empire, says in his interview in the book. “So I think there was a ripple out from that, and people in L.A. gradually began to start to see playwrights as a talent pool that they should specifically go after.” “Six Feet Under was the first time I think I understood television as an art form,” Bash Doran, showrunner for HBO’s Demimonde, tells Miller. In his interview with Miller, Hwang offers three reasons why TV has been seeking out writers with a background in theater. Oddly, the first two reasons focus on why TV prefers playwrights to screenwriters: Like television, but unlike film, plays rely on dialogue; like television writers but unlike screenwriters, playwrights are much more comfortable with the collaborative give and take of putting together a production. But his third reason rings the truest: Given the current proliferation of platforms and channels, there are now more than 400 scripted shows on television; in order to stand out, it helps for the writers to have passion and vision. Playwrights are “used to having our own vision of what something should be, and I think that that carries a lot of currency now, where it didn’t as much before.” Sheila Callaghan, co-founder of The Kilroys and longtime producer-writer for Showtime’s Shameless, offers a fourth explanation: “The reason why playwrights are often a safe bet is, they’re cheap, first. They’re cheap until they make a career out of it.” Miller has a few set questions for the interviews, finding out from each and every playwright their childhood TV viewing habits, and how they first got involved in theater. There is extensive questioning about issues of diversity and representation in both theater and television. She also solicits details about career steps that would surely most interest those readers looking for similar careers. Many of the playwrights in the book describe their sharp adjustment to television, but some seem to see it as primarily a difference in process rather than content. There is much talk of the dynamics of the collective writing (the writers room) and often the hierarchy (“Someone else is Santa,” says Moses, “and you’re one of the elves.”) Kristoffer Diaz, who has written about wrestling in his play “The Elaborate Entrance of Chad Diety” and as a writer on the first season of the Netflix series GLOW, sees pitching an idea “one hundred percent the opposite” of playwriting. “I have a commission from the Oregon Shakespeare Festival now. I want to write a play about the basketball players Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain. What about them? I don’t know. Great, you’re commissioned! [Laughs] But television is, ‘Tell us who it’s about, tell us what they’re going to do for five years, tell us who else is going to be in it, tell us who might be able to play those roles, how is this show going to be exactly the same each week but completely different each week, how’s it going to feel, what’s the tone?’ Even simple questions, like, ‘Is it a half hour or an hour?’ ‘Is it on cable or network?’ ‘Which network?’” Such advance planning would be antithetical to Madeleine George’s approach to writing; “for me playwriting is all basically incense and crying and endless drafts, I don’t know how I write a play. It takes me forever.” Playwriting for her is “about addressing whatever I can’t understand at the moment.” The quick pace and hectic schedule of a TV writers room, says Itamar Moses, “taught me I think to be a little bit less precious about my art. Just start, you know? “ Jordan Harrison, whose plays include “Marjorie Prime” and “Maple and Vine,”  sees his experience as writer-producer for three seasons of Netflix’s Orange Is the New Black, as influencing his theatrical writing, but only in an indirect way. “In some ways it’s actually made my theater writing stranger,” Harrison tells Miller. “Because you’ve been working in a certain mode in a writers’ room—it’s got to be sixty-two pages, it’s got to have five acts, whatever the restrictions are—so then when you emerge from the tunnel of your TV season and there’s no one but you in an empty room, you want the play you make to be something that could only be a play. Or I do.” He illustrates his point by talking about his play The Amateurs, about a 14th century traveling theater troupe trying to survive the Plague, a play I happened to see.  It struck me that The Amateurs was one of the very few plays – or for that matter, television shows or episodes – that are described at all in Miller’s book, not even in a phrase. When there is some description, it comes from a playwright. The nadir for me may have been when Miller launches into a discussion with Tanya Barfield about an episode on The Americans that she wrote, and doesn’t tell us what it’s about – referring to it as “Travel Agents, Season 4, Episode 7.” Now, I watched that TV series religiously, but I’m not a savant. This stinginess extends to some basic information about the writers. Each interview is prefaced by a brief and largely unhelpful biography that’s indistinguishable from a resumé. Minor pieces of information go missing, which is sometimes exasperating. We don’t learn the age of some of the playwrights who talk about their generation or how their attitudes have changed since they were in their 20s (Was that ten years ago or 30 years ago? Is there a reason why we have to guess?) We don’t learn what TV show Madeleine George was working on. In her conversation with Tanya Saracho, Miller mentions her play “Fade,” but misses the opportunity to point out that it got a fairly high-profile production Off-Broadway in 2017, and that its autobiographical plot paints a severely negative view of both the television industry and of the television writer herself, a clear stand-in for Saracho. Still, if “Playwrights on Television” doesn’t fill in all the blanks I would have liked, it’s often a pleasure and even a revelation to visit with such thoughtful and creative writers. This seems especially true if you have an interest in the specific playwrights interviewed, or are fans of some of the shows for which they’ve written, or if the effect of television on theater, and theater on television, has been an issue that has engaged you — as it has me. In 2013, I wrote an article for HowlRound entitled 8 Ways Television Is Influencing Theater. The eighth way I labeled Theatre as Anti-Television, and explained that the greatest influence that television has had on theatre may be “the push it has given theatre artists to create something that will drag TV watchers out of their home and turn them into theatregoers.” Miller cites that article in a footnote in Playwrights on Television, and reduces my 2,500 words to a single sentence reference: “Jason Grote, one of the writers interviewed in this book, questioned the puzzling tendency of some theater artists to try to compete: ‘When we’re competing with movies and TV, we’ve already lost. Yet many critics continue to pit live performance against television, or, as one critic put it, “Theatre as Anti-Television.” Is “many critics” a typo? It’s not critics (at least not this critic) who did the pitting; I quoted three playwrights – Theresa Rebeck, Ann Washburn and Itamar Moses — as making the point. What Moses told me: “How good TV has become at doing a certain kind of character-driven long-form storytelling really throws down a gauntlet for playwrights, and challenges them to answer the question, with their work: What can only theatre do? What can’t we get anywhere else? And there’s no one answer to that, but it challenges every playwright to try to come up with theirs.” What would Itamar Moses say now? There is a hint In his interview in Playwrights on Television, when he talks about  “the fragmentation of the market,” pointing out that no show has the reach that network television used to have, “so the new model is to try to hyperspecifically reach every niche.” But I wanted to know directly. So I contacted him, read him his quote from 2013, and asked whether the current era of lockdown and exclusively online theater will have any lasting effect on the theater, and on the relationship between theater and television. “Will the ‘merging’ (if that’s the right word) continue after the world-wide crisis is over?” Here’s what he said: “I think the long term effects of this period on theatre are very very hard to predict and that many of those effects will be on the institutional side or business side of theatre. But to the extent that it can affect the art-making side I think it’s important to clarify that what’s happening right now isn’t truly a “merging” of theatre and television so much as it’s an expansion of the definition of theatre. Sure, people are trying to figure out ways of presenting theatre, remotely, over screens right now, but it isn’t the absence of a screen that makes something theatre. “Theatre is when something is performed, in real time, for an audience that is also watching it in real time, while gathered in the same space — and all that’s really happening right now is an expansion of the definition of what we mean by “space” to include virtual space. “Which is to say that even live television — SNL, say, or those musicals they’ve been doing lately — are only theatre for the people in the room where it’s happening, not for the home audience, because we’re not in the same space. But they would become theatre — virtual theatre — if all those watching entered the same virtual space as the performers while it was going on. It’s our awareness of the aliveness and presence of the actors and our fellow audience members that makes something theatre and if being present together in a virtual space is the form this moment demands then we will, by necessity, develop techniques for maximizing the power of that form, maybe allowing it to become a legitimate off-shoot of theatre in its own right. (And of course this will in turn affect the institutional side of things as well, because it’s so much more efficient and cheaper.)”

  Playwrights on Television: Conversations with Dramatists When David Henry Hwang was first starting out as a dramatist, there was an “indivisible wall” between theater and television.

How To Sell Millions Without Ever Opening Your Mouth! Copywriting Secrets Simple 7-Step Formula Pt.1

Is it possible to sell millions of dollars without opening your mouth, well is he by the end of this, video I’m going to prove to you, yes is very, possible today we are going to talk about cooperating, secrets I have gave joining me, am I, cole director of social media, and gave manages all might, all my social media especially YouTube, so if you see that how I’m blowing up on YouTube how we went from, in the beginning of this year, with 100000 subscribers now almost the end, office year we’re going to hit a million Subs, subscribers, 10 x growth, is because, the gates help, okay so, he is going to act as almost as an audience or entering me on Sundays covered in question, i’ve been doing this for a long long time so sometimes the concepts, the preceptor I know that it’s, soul, so be with me for so long as I can conscious competent but maybe gave for him it’s a, Copper dick is a new thing for you right, is a new world, he will almost asked questions on your, behalf, now before I go into the, 7 step, on how to create, gray coffee, let’s just defy what cop rating, because I believe most people they could confuse what comprehend, you think copywriting, he’s about, writing, right and we hear I hear this a lot, odana I’m not a writer, my English is not, or I am not very, creative, what is not a, copywriting, what about closing, the way I Define carpeting is, closing in, print, okay closing in print or, closing the introvert right you can close using instead of using your, spoken words, you’re using your written words, imprint, to persuade convince and employing someone, want to make a Vine perch, do do a move to to do a make a decision whatever it might be what a goal that you might have, That’s all that all cooperating is, so if it’s closing you means it is about communication, it’s not about writing, right it’s not about, so don’t be intimidated by the whole concept of, writing cuz I flunked English twice when I was, in high school, but it doesn’t stop me from creating coffee, does May, millions and millions of dollars, deep Eddy questions, so I would say I see a lot in the YouTube comment where people they don’t really, noah copywriting is and how to, pi, and how, actually the origins of copywriting how, for any design or anything part of the business at all goes down to, word of mouth and being spoken and being read, correct, so how would someone I would, say how would they, Shift their thinking to start from a.

Perspective of their user, and the person you’re trying to reach through, i want you to think about cooperating good sometimes people might think it does that mean it is, that words are on the web page, it’s not that, every email that you sent out, is copywriting, are free, what pace are you create that’s corporate, baby social media post, cooperating, are free, even a video, write a video script a video, absl like a video sales letter, operating, infomercial that you, you see that’s copyrighted, so is everything that’s involved with, closing on a very massive, scale, on a mass scale to be. Copper, so you think about, a lot of entrepreneurs and business owners about that, you can hide copyright or you can also ask operator, but the biggest sin when it comes to businesses, you don’t have any understanding of what corporate is, Because that’s what most profit, this one sells appliance service, you can have exactly the same product, but the way that you write you communicate your tickling your marketing message, one, one message could produce $10,000, the exact same, product with a different message, you could create a million-dollar, i always think of this I will let me give you a metaphor, think of it as a, us, dollar bill, okay a dollar bill, the difference between a $1 bill, and $100 bill value, is the message that’s on, the piece of paper, well I want you to do in life, just why sometimes when you understand copywriting I’m not saying you have to be a master copywriter but by having some basic understanding, you can make some small changes may be the subject line, maybe the headline maybe to call to action, with a c LaMotta effort to see my money the same amount of traffic, Southern me now you getting to three times more results, we see this a lot of social media with everything, we were the same thing but we change the message we change the subject line, some minor tweaks, dollywood getting way more results right I wouldn’t be scared to, testing because we do that a lot. Encourages 100% and don’t be afraid to test, 100% guys test, and it is not about, the eagle where I know what works best if you don’t know I still don’t know, right just because I’ve experienced but sometimes you also make certain assumptions about certain things, and that’s a great thing now about the internet, doctor when I was doing carburetor, what do we like to recommend, right licking the envelope putting the stand, so we will send all this say, to a list, a5000 Direct Mail, Letters, good old like paper and print, and then 5002 this list, 5002 Dallas, and we’ll see what kind of response we get, it would take like weeks and months before we know the results, but now it’s internet, with tracking with software, you know exactly what’s happening so much, easier, so, pod up, being a good, copyright, it’s snowing., you and I will not the marketing genius, customer, let them, how you, if the offer, one good thing that I’ve learned from you see who is sometimes we look at what, even you guys Post in the comment and will reverse-engineer that, intoarce, girls page into, if you are not so sure about how how do I get started with this Incorporated, into my business, i’ll give you a very powerful but simple strategy, set up a time to talk to some of your best, okay and you actually talk to them, You can get them a little smoke if it’s a.

I’m just doing some research about my company, i want to do some marketing can pay you your my best and most loyal customer, can I have, 30 minutes, and if they do you can get them some morphe, certificate, starbucks whatever it is doesn’t matter what it is, and you talk, and you ask him questions like hey, you look before you, you do business with, company, what was your problem, right why did you choose us, and why do you stay with, they would tell you all these things, and which one of you want to record it ask for the commission you record it, and this is so easy, you take what they say, and you turn it into, coffee, so let’s say, give me example give me an example of something that people, alternate so let’s say, Yeah like, i can’t find any leads to my clients, and I’m really struggling finding leads and customers I go to these conference, and I talk to other people but none of them that really follow, oh okay so, leads all that so exactly that’s a pain that they have less a yellow product to solve their problem, easley, he’s the light. Could be a potential hotline, it could you want to call I get one of those, benefits team in a bullet point, how to quickly and easily generate more leads for your business without going to these, networking, boom right there you have, how to cook a medium talking about exactly what they say and it turned it into your copy, you do that for a number of customers song you are good, to go, see how easy this is not as complex as you think, right they would tell you your, Your customers they want to buy from you, but what do you want to know is the assurance that you know what, are going through, they want the shoes that, you’ll probably service can help himself., number one, look at 3 I want to teach you, 7 steps that you can take, every single time you buy coffee, you go through these steps, i Promise You by the end of the seven steps, you’ll coffee would be so much more powerful so much more compelling, . one and that is, identify your ideal, this is the most important part, because most people when did Duke operating I used to make this mistake, you so excited, you get you could tell it on the computer and you stopped typing, no you do not do that, you need to First understand truly understand, who your ideal customers, now that the way that is fine I do customers, Is three things, number one your ideal customer, they have a need, volume, so if I am a vegan, if you try to sell me steaks, we got a problem here right, you got to sell stick to a stick lighter so I should have a meeting at 1 for your part at this number one, number 2 is IHOP the ability, biopod, so I want it but also I could pay for, and number three if I have the authority, dubai Abaya service, so if, i am selling something to this a husband and wife, and I’m only talking to husband but we leased a wife that makes it, decision, that is not good, so it’s, they have their Nita want they have their building at the store if that’s the ideal customer, now once you know this, who do custom is even Facebook, This so much.

Targeting that we can do nowadays, with, he could be your interest it could be, gucci belong to it could be your age, ditto, hundreds of variations hundreds of, reference point hundred things you can do to Target, what you know exactly who you talkin bout that is, now you go, talk to them in your copy, one-on-one like this, and that’s what you do, i believe, good copy, 80% of research, and 20% lighting, so if Andrea Spinelli a month, sometimes sometimes 3 weeks a month, working on, coffee walk away campaign, you should spend like 2-3 weeks just in, before you write a single, you should have a very clear idea, exactly what the offer is, all these things, before you, i think another helpful tip, tipsy food that you gave the other day was, you really want to think about, who that ideal customer is in that, Customer profile and really Envision you talking to them one-on-one, like if you were just sitting down talking to them casual, don’t try to use very big mumbo jumbo, words just casual conversation as if, if you’re really trying, talk with them you want to talk to him on a one-on-one basis right you don’t want to be like right now I’m communicating with, with you, at any given time, your reader, audience, oil plus, they are, reading your coffee, the off, watching a video, by themselves, usual Toyota 101 connection, so I’m talking to you, i’m not talking like, speaking to a thousand a million people I’m not talking to groups, that public speaking is, completely different, what way comes to coffee, you want to be very personal I want to be like, one on one, assuming now you know your customer and I could tell you the amount of money you make is indirect, Proportion to how well you understand your car, i’ll say that one more time, the amount of money you make, it indirect proportion, 2 how well you understand, you know this business to fail, that, be entrepreneurs the business owner if they have this idea, on this widget I have this adventure time I am so excited about it, they go they take it to the market place nobody gets, because they don’t understand their, ideal, costume, it’s not enough to say hey my mom likes it my wife likes, did you say, when people typically say while everybody is my ideal cussed, i want to sell to every the white there is a bigamist, he kanaka even company ice Vegas Apple, even a couple days because she likes a Walmart that serves, everyone is my costume, no, yep Walmart, right you have so many your target, They all have different demographics so you know one could say that everyone is, especially for like small business are you mija medium-sized business you got to think you got to narrow it down, very much narrow down because the more you can narrow down the more personal, you can make it message, in Dominion, one of the best reactions you could get and I love this one man to Allen, he said let’s say you have an idea you can offer you want to test it out is that it is, you hang out with your target market, can you bring your offer and you show it to them, do you know what checkout is at 4, right, and if they say if they read the ad and they say to you, this is just as good as pretty good, your ex sucks, images no good, okay, i think if you have this out, No that’s no good.

Do you actually want is they read at, how can I buy some, is my credit card I want to buy some that’s when you know you got something, okay you need the real reaction because people vote with their wallet, don’t listen to Just what they say watch what they do they vote with a wallet, when did minute they put some money online okay I’ve got something, before that is all just like lips, so that’s number one research, knowing identifying do I do, step number, q and that is create an accessible offer, a compelling offer, this is probably the one of the most important steps Indian, higher formula, because you look at most businesses, the biggest challenges, they sound the same as everybody, the office not very compelling, oh you know what, this is my glock my competitors, And didn’t cuddle with you as well, maybe I’m a little bit better and maybe a little bit cheaper, what day is not, huge differentiator, so with what you do not think about how could you make, your offer as compelling as pause, i was talking with, one of a copywriter, and he was asking me well then do you believe, what is Montour, the audience, all the message, i say without a doubt, the market, i could have the greatest message, what I said the wrong people, what is distribution, we will just like yesterday last night we having dinner right, love’s like Rhett meet and all that doesn’t like Steve has so much, so I could have the great like lobster and crab and a great message this is awesome man, i don’t know it’s the right message, but wrong Market, play doesn’t work, so when it comes to offer you have to think about, What is it that your audience truly wants, right what is it that they did cleaning, what more what pain, what frustrations that they have they they just they’re sick and tired of that, so when you can come up with an offer this so irresistible, is easy to sell, in fact a great, offer, you can see, less, anyone still sell, you’ll need to use as many words, let me give you perfect, let’s say it’s a gate he has $100 bill, okay, can you give me $10 in exchange of $100, give me ten bucks I’ll give you $100 right now, that isn’t resistible, right there, what am I doing there is called selling money at a disco, so if you’re selling any kind of, business Improvement, offer or any offer that helps people to make money save money on investment, the concept, money saving money at a discount, Spandex with me, i’m going to teach you how to make, why, right, essay example people who teaches real estate investing, hey spend $5,000 on Discord, i’m going to teach you how to generate you know, 10000 a month in rental income, oh wow that’s a no-brainer, that’s only money at a discount, that’s an irresistible offer, maybe you’re not in the education space maybe you have, do some physical product how do you do this, in so many ways, maybe your irresistible offer is, a free 30-day trial, okay if you have seen those infomercials, where they have those are, skin care, the trifle 30 they see how you like it, example, or a strong guarantee, irresistible, add certain bonuses, jamaican resistant material quick story, the one time many years ago I was late night watching TV, that’s all this, eva Marcille just popped up my loved ones, And this this guy is demonstrating he has a pair of shoes on the desk and his.

Cutting it with a knife, and I’m like, this is cool, what is this is a was talking about house shopping Ibis, is it yeah that’s cool, okay I got the knife and then he cut actually a can, with with a knife, holy s*** this is cool, not going to use it but it’s cool right, so I was watching a commercial and then people like and then he has a lot of, people coming onto the TV talk with a testimonial, using this naive housewife, like people do any kind all kinds of, background that uses knife, and he said well you know what, can you buy today, you don’t just get one night, you get to knife, homelite holyfuck, this is awesome and then he goes on, this is the big knife, But what about All the Small Things, and then you get this knife, and then you get this knife, and then you get this knife, and then before you know what he’s talking about like, twenty f****** divinized, i don’t like this is crazy, this is awesome before the infomercial I don’t need a knife, i don’t need a knife, but offered it is so dramatic and so cool, and then he just dropped the mic and see if you order within the next 5 minutes, you don’t get, these 29th, we going to send you two sets of knives, that’s it I’m done right call number call immediately and by that is, list of offer it when did it the office so irresistible, logic goes out the window, outside bought to set up nice actually the lady cuz I’m like, what the f*** I need like 40 pairs of nice voices stupid I just dumb, It was at that moment it was so compelling, so think about how you could use that, maybe sometimes it’s, faster shipping Amazon that’s good Amazon, proserpine you get a fast, i don’t want to wait when I could also speak about how, you were saying how Amazon offers that fit did you pay them Accenture, that’s right cuz Amazon if you have Prime Membership Eva Prime member, hello, NC, that, with fine what they’re doing is essentially they’re charging you for membership fee, so they can buy more, applicants applying to get your product faster, so think about what Amazon does, and how they encourage you, a simple thing in your system, and it’s not like a hundred bucks or so right they raise the price people, put up a hole stink but everybody’s, bill pay the higher, i have seen people like us now, Amazon, hundred, housing people that you would think Prime is like, it’s a, luxury, everything nice and membership it’s not like a, necessity you’re paying, a hundred bucks you get some benefit in Amazon and, ended a video and entertainment, william painter sponsorship, so you’re paying them so I can buy more stuff, you got understand, i don’t know people, who are like, literally you would think like lower-income, the living in like, trailer park and stuff like that, neither would not think they would spend money on Amazon and yet their Prime members, it’s the last thing you think about, but to them, destify member, and I like you spend $100 a year, but to be a Prime member, is Solaris, it’s like a no-brainer, when you are a Prime member you thinking while you know, i’m going to pay for the shipping anyway, but I’m going to get my stuff faster, Plus you’re not getting all these other benefits I get Amazon need a video I can.

Music, and you may watch email watch it but you like the fact that, you have access, right, that’s irresistible,

from WordPress https://top1course.com/how-to-sell-millions-without-ever-opening-your-mouth-copywriting-secrets-simple-7-step-formula-pt-1/

Usability Testing

I will look into how I can create my brand around this project and implement it into an app.

Books to read about usability- dont make me think (revisited), eyetracking web usability and design think make break repeat are the bookks I should definitely take a look at.

Nielsen Norman group has all of its content UX-related thus it could be excellent for my project research.

"Dont make me think!" Everything should be visible, because where you have to think you say why is this there, why nav here, what should i click? Making for a less enjoyable journey.

Things that make us think include naming conventions, unfamiliar technical names and other such topics.

I want the users to not have to think about things such as buttons only because they for example say "Joborama" instead of "job", because that only uses more time within an already-busy day.

What happens when eyes look at words- the eyes will first look at the first and last words and only thereafter try to make sense of it. The ability to extract visual meaning is therefore important.

Pixelation is when the eye focuses on something such as a word and this process happens when the person reads two characters, moving the eyes fast so much that the words are blurred. For this reason it is important to look at Eye Fixation and eye tracking because through such research I found that people read 28% of content from website, and people read most information in an "F" format when it comes to western culture.

It is important to use words that people recognise- words which are skipped because people remember them because this is not dumbing down but opening up. I will think about words that young children will understand and are most likely to resonate with them as easy.

Low frequency words take longer to read as they are not so common.

Return path reading- if the measure of a sentence is too large then people have to read the first sentence again, for this reason each individual word cant be too short or too wide apart.

I will need to look at how to ensure that I dont force readers to work my way but instead make the content work their way. Eg. more primary colours, easier to understand interactivity.

Beginners guide to usability testing

Testing one user is better than testing none...

The importance of recruiting representative users is overrated because the point of testing is not to prove or disprove something, its to inform our judgement.

Testing is an iterative process- it should be done from start to finish.

5 Users should be tested as this was found to be the best in results- companies generally find 80% of the problems with these 5 users.

It doesnt matter who is testing as long as there are 5 users, its not a good idea to design only for the target audience but instead the project should work for all users.

Exceptions

Some things will only be used by certain people for example new employee's at a power plant, because such a project would not be used outside that company.

Usability testing can be done anywhere however its better where no one else can see so to not embarrass the user, a screen and audio recorder should be used for this process. In a test there will usually be a participant, facilitator and observer.

What do you test and when? It is never too early and it should be done at every step of the project. Research on other projects like this can also be done through usability test on other designers' apps/websites to get a feel for possible changes and new or useless features.

Two types of usability testing

The think aloud protocol includes the learning and listerning to users' thoughts, this process can also be done after the test. It is an opinion about the product after it has been used, this process will be done on memory however it will also result in less accurate feedback and therefore it is better to get them to think and say while using a product/service. To do this test I would begin with a prototype, encourage users to keep talking, create a scenario eg. want to buy space for company and mentiom that I am not testing them but the project.

Standard usability test is done by identifying design flaws by testing early and often. On this test we look at efficiency- the time taken to complete task, effectiveness and satisfaction. Therefore we ask how the usef felt when using the product, was typography legible etc. I will need to identify 3 or more tasks- tell the brand name of tge project and ask questions such as "can you identify boiling temp of boron?" I will prepare pre-test and post test interview questions- name, age, education, experience of using apps (system usability scale for post test). It will be important to explain the product and purpose of the test. I will also give written instructions and record observations as well as preparing a report after post test questions.

People need to know that if something doesnt work it is not their fault but the designers. I will have a test script where all users have the same tests thus results will be more reliable and consistent.

There are two types of tests I can choose from- get it test: "what do you think of this" and key task test: asking users to do something then watching them how well they do it.

I will write the tasks like scenarios- letting users step back and make sense of the inital screen. Tasks can include eg. an accommodation deal, want to stay in London- specific resort has deal can you find it?

SUS- is a post test called the System Usability Scale, tries to get to know strengths and weaknesses.

Using SUS is most reliable even with small amounts of testers as it is valid & can be scaled to administrators and users. It has been found that even when an SUS is given months after the test, the results will still stay the same.

SUS can also be used to test 2 user groups and with each group the website or project can be different- eg. colour is red instead of green and interactivity is different.

After the test I should look at: efficiency, effectiveness and satisfaction (SUS) and this then leads to looking at what went wrong and finding prooblem solving solutions.

Typical problems include: users unclear of a concept, words they are looking for arent there or theres too much going on.

Ignore kayaks: users will lose track of where they are and then go back to the main task, therefore I should resist the impulse to add: when users arent getting something it is common for us as designers to add more information instead of making something clearer or removing things afterwards. I should however take "new feature" requests with a grain of salt and instead grab the low hanging fruit: things that are so apparent we dont see them until we test.

Reservoir of goodwill- each problem we encounter lowers the users reservoir thus increasing their chances of leaving, they will want to use website/app however with issues their will to do the task decreases.

What diminishes godwill: things that want to be done arent clearly visible, save steps when possible to get to the goal, not telling the user what they want to know is another mistake and not putting effort into it.

Increase goodwill by: having a nice 404 page, know what questions are likely and answer them, make it easy to recover from issues, when in doubt apologise.

We had been working to create podcasts as a hobby and side hustle for about a year and a half before we came up with the idea to brand ourselves as a single company (or duo) creating multiple shows. As we create more shows, we established Fool & Scholar Productions as a way to organize our works and establish brand recognition.It was a gradual decision to start our own company. We saw that, over time, the podcasting space was becoming more prevalent in our lives and amounting to more of our income, so we sat down, worked out the numbers, and set about starting the company and solidifying our lives as entertainers. By the time we started Season Two of The White Vault, we knew we were in for the long haul.How did you get your first hundred listeners?Travis: We surprised ourselves quite honestly. It was a mix of good timing, word of mouth, advertising at live events, and marketing on social media. I feel like if there’s a particular event that got us over the 100 listener mark it was maybe a particularly successful Imgur post that Kaitlin put together showcasing Modern Audio Drama. The post reached the front page of Imgur overnight, and got a spike in listeners for almost every show on the list.Kaitlin: We tried a lot of different things in the beginning, from normal social media marketing, to spending hours making curated lists of shows to help establish ourselves as quality listeners and creators. There are a lot of shows out there, so when you say ‘Hey, I make a show you may enjoy’, people need to trust you enough to believe you. We work on Twitter to discuss our favorite shows, we started talking to others about how we wrote/designed/edits our works, and we built from the (digital) ground up. Our first 100 listeners seems to materialize rather quickly, and after that, everything kept growing.How did you validate the idea?Travis: Podcasting is still a new and growing medium, with only about 70% of Americans even knowing what a podcast is, so the metrics by which creators in our space can validate their work is ever shifting, based on the growth of the industry.Our original lofty goal of 100 listeners has long since been surpassed. We’ve won awards. We’ve far exceeded the dream of getting ‘1 million downloads’, and we’ve done the impossible in making podcasting a full time career. Those were our goals. There are many sources of validation both internal (lines in the sand or cool factor variables) and external (awards and download numbers), and we’re still struggling to find what we feel is valuable validation.What are the keys to a good podcast?Kaitlin: ‘Quality, character, and consistency’ is my go-to mantra for creating a good podcast. Without quality, anyone who listens will turn away after the first few minutes. Without characters that attracts emotion and connection, be it in a podcast host or in a story, listeners won’t have a string tying them to your creations. Without consistency listeners would never know when to expect your work, or when to return, and this is breaking the trust podcasters try to establish with their listeners.How many listeners do you need to start making money from podcasting?Travis: This is a tricky question, because if you don’t spend anything creating your podcast then your first dollar is considered income.Because every podcast is different, I’ll answer the next best question and you can reverse engineer the math to suit your personal goals. Expect to only see about 1% of your listeners support your show through merch sales or crowdsourcing with any regularity (assuming that you are offering something of value). If you are able to get a sponsor, assume that you will see between $20-$50 per thousand listeners, per sponsorship.Did you have any experience/expertise in the area?Kaitlin: Podcasting? No.Writing? Does a thesis count?Marketing? I wish.When we started creating our first show, it was the first time I had written anything for entertainment purposes in… years. I was still at university studying Archaeological Sciences and drowning under the amount of work Oxford could pour over me in a single week. My only free time I spent writing, and I’ve written nearly every day since. Now, I have the experience and I try to encourage others to pursue creative endeavors, even when they don’t have the training for it. I’m proof that this can be done without a professional background in creative writing, marketing, or media.Have you raised any money? How much?Travis: We actually did this backwards, creating multiple seasons of free content, then realizing afterwards that we might be able to break even if we asked listeners to join our Patreon. To date, we still haven’t done any type of project-based fundraising in podcasting, but our Patreon has grown to 500+ active members.Who is your target demographic?Travis: Our listeners are comprised largely of women and men between the ages of 24-34 who speak English or are learning to speak English. We have listeners in over 80 countries and from all walks of life. Most of our listeners are in the US, Canada, and UK, but we have a growing number of fans from Australia.How do you attract listeners now?Travis: I spend a lot of time on social media, using new hashtags, promoting our works, and adding meaningful dialogue to places where people talk about fiction podcasts. Kaitlin does 10x what I do and spends a great deal of time marketing.What is the funniest/most strange request you have received from a listener?We don’t get many random requests, but one fan has a tattoo from one of our shows.How did you fund the idea initially?Travis: The initial seasons were done on almost no budget. We did everything in our spare time. The sound effects at our disposal were whatever we could record in our Oxford flat, and all of our actors were friends and family. It was only after we expanded our resources and tried to improve upon our shows that we found we needed funding. At that point we turned to our listeners for support to offset the costs of these improvements. They really have allowed us to get where we are and realize the growth we’ve seen.Any tips for finding first employees?Kaitlin: Think about the people you trust in your field. Ask them to recommend someone, rather than putting out a call or a listing. If you trust someone, trust the quality of their work, then the odds are they’ll be able to recommend someone who would easily fit into your workflow.Did you run any companies prior?Travis: I’ve had some experience in the corporate world as the president of a collection agency, the managing partner of a property management company, and the creator/president of a small publishing company. I’m still involved in all of those businesses.Kaitlin: No, I was still a graduate student when I started podcasting.What were your family and friends first thoughts you creating your own your company?Kaitlin: By the time I had decided to make podcasting my full time job, we were already doing very well within the podcasting community. When we established the company, it was something my family supported because they saw it as a way to legitimize the time, effort, and money I put into creating my future career. Nowadays, my family and friends come to see me talk, or to our live performances, and they listen to most of our podcasts. My father is actually my script editor for most of our shows, so he’s very supportive and enjoys having an inside scoop on the shows before their public release.Travis: When he was alive, my father didn’t understand podcasting and couldn’t grasp the crowdsourcing side of it. My mother has been extremely supportive from day one and said that this is exactly what I need to be doing. We moved across the country a year ago, so I haven’t really told most of my friends from Florida as it doesn’t organically come up in conversations.What motivates you when things go wrong?Travis: At first it was the finished product in and of itself. I was fascinated by the process of bringing a story to life, hearing the voices read the words on the page, and the soundscape bringing us to new places. While this is still true, a bigger motivator for me of late has been the enthusiasm of our listeners. I take a particular delight in considering how they will experience the show, and working to make that experience memorable, even as things sometimes go horribly wrong during production.Do you have any advice for someone just starting out?Kaitlin: Podcasting is still new, still growing, and still expanding. Even if you already have a business and just want to start, say, a real estate podcast to better reach your potential clients, then just start. Look up how to do it, look up how it works; the recording, editing, uploading, marketing, and more. And then do it. The most difficult hurdle for me has always been my own mindset.‘It looks so complicated, I couldn’t possibly do that.’ Well, now I am, and it doesn’t seem impossible from the inside.Travis: I’d also add that if you’re already podcasting or innovating, focus on creating more new and meaningful content regularly. The more you make, the better you’ll get.What is stopping you from being 3x the size you are now?Kaitlin: Time. Travis and I are the core of Fool & Scholar Productions. We are the dynamic duo. People trust my writing and his sound design; they know our names and our works. So, to triple our reach and our audience we would need to create more shows and work even more diligently at getting out work out there. Problem being, we are booked-up already as it is. Even with new ideas stacked up like blocks on my desk, I don’t have time to write new stories given that I’m still actively writing our core shows. And even if I did, Travis would not have time to give them life as producer and sound-designer. So, time is our limiting factor, because we certainly have no shortage of ideas.What apps could your business not run without?Kaitlin: Creating podcasts is all well and good, but without marketing the shows we would have a difficult time building or engaging our audience. Even though our shows are audio based, much of social media relies on visual marketing. For crafting visuals, both at home and on the go, I use Canva religiously.Travis: We rely heavily on Dropbox to share files across our devices and with our teams. I also couldn’t function without Mixcraft, which is my Digital Audio Workspace (the program I edit in). I’m working in Mixcraft every day and it’s both affordable and reliable. Another very important tool is Microsoft Excel, which we use to track download numbers, growth, sales, and expenses. Beyond the accounting benefits, it shows us what was effective in helping us grow by creating a timeline with a perspective.Are there any new podcasts you’re working on?Travis: We just returned with Season 3 of The White Vault. I cannot recommend the show enough if you’re a fan of horror, or just value hearing voices and languages from around the world showcased.Would you ever sell the company?T&K: Fool & Scholar Productions is so tied to our identities that the brand is somewhat useless without us. We are able to build ourselves as a company because of community trust in who we are; if we were to remove the Fool and Scholar from Fool & Scholar Productions, we would have doubts that our community of supporters and fans would stay loyal to just the name alone.If you enjoyed this interview, the original is here.

Unbroken: Path to Redemption: A Brief History of Louis Zamperini’s Journey

UNBROKEN: Path to Redemption: A Brief History of Louis Zamperini’s Journey

UnbrokenFilm.com Running Time: 98 minutes Rating: PG-13 #UnbrokenFilm

“I’d made it this far and refused to give up because, all my life, I had always finished the race.” —Louie Zamperini

When he passed away on July 2, 2014 at the age of 97, Louie Zamperini was victoriously celebrated as a true American hero. This former Olympian, whose long, incredible and inspiring life has been described as one of the greatest stories of triumph in the 20 th century, lived through and beyond what most could comprehend. His tale of crippling despair trumped by indomitable will and redemption continues to serve as a message of hope for the millions who have been affected and inspired by his journey.

And it all began more than a century ago. As a youth in Torrance, California, the youngest son of Italian immigrants, Louie was an incorrigible delinquent, breaking into homes, stealing from shops and brawling with anyone who dared challenge this untamable boy. As a teenager, with the persistent encouragement of his older brother, Pete, Louie turned his life around by channeling defiant energy into a shocking talent for running. Breaking record after record across the nation, the 19-year-old “Torrance Tornado” qualified for the 1936 Berlin Olympics and surprised everyone whom he encountered—from his famous teammate Jesse Owens to the man who almost veered mankind toward global destruction: Adolf Hitler.

Like most young people of his generation, when World War II broke out, the young student from University of Southern California, who had come within seconds of breaking the four-minute mile, put his dreams on hold and enlisted in the service. His military career would lead him to become an Army Air Corps bombardier, in which 2 nd Lt. Zamperini embarked upon numerous missions across the Pacific—a daunting profession where approximately 50 percent of his fellow airmen wouldn’t make it through the war. In April 1943, Louie’s defective B-24 Liberator, the Green Hornet, on a rescue mission in the South Pacific, suffered engine failure and crashed into the sea, killing eight of the 11 crew members upon impact.

Louie and his Green Hornet’s two fellow survivors—Russell Allen “Phil” Phillips, the craft’s captain, and Sgt. Francis “Mac” McNamara, its tail gunner—drifted in a six-feet-long by two-feet-wide raft in the open Pacific for many weeks. Mac managed to hang on for 33 days—surviving seven rounds of strafing by a Japanese bomber and the omnipresent sharks that circled their vessel—before he tragically succumbed to his hunger, dehydration and exhaustion. Louie and Phil lasted for a total of 47 days, a

record in the annals of history for survivors on a raft, and ultimately drifted 2,000 miles to an atoll in the Marshall Islands, with the remnants of a typhoon carrying them to shore.

Just as they saw land and were beginning to float toward it, they were captured by the Japanese navy and imprisoned in the first of what would be several POW camps. During more than two years of torturous captivity, Louie—alongside his fellow prisoners—was starved, not to mention mentally and physically abused beyond comprehension. Louie was singled out by a prison commander named Mutsuhiro Watanabe, known to the men as “The Bird,” for particularly sadistic acts of mind games and deplorable brutality.

Louie survived these inhumane ordeals across the most severe regions of war-torn Japan before he learned, on August 20, 1945, (two weeks after the 9,000-pound bomb called Little Boy annihilated Hiroshima), that the Allied prisoners were free men and that the war was over. As Laura Hillenbrand writes in the definitive Louie Zamperini biography, Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption: “In the midst of running, celebrating men, Louie stood on wavering legs, emaciated, sick and dripping wet. In his tired mind, two words were repeating themselves over and over: ‘I’m free! I’m free! I’m free!’”

The veteran who had survived so much returned home to Southern California, but his life was forever changed. Louie was plagued by nightmares and a crippling mental disorder that would not be classified as such until decades later: post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Like the countless heroes who returned from the far reaches of these cruel detention camps, Louie found post-war life a monumental struggle. For four years after his internment, he battled crippling anxiety, alcohol abuse and demons that visited him every time he went to sleep.

Only after Louie and his new bride, Cynthia, heard a young preacher by the name of Reverend Billy Graham speak in September 1949 would he understand his need to be forgiven and to forgive others. Embracing his new-found Christian faith, Louie’s life turned completely around. In subsequent years, Louie devoted himself to spreading a message of faith, fortitude and forgiveness…going so far as to travel back to Japan and offering forgiveness to the prison guards who had starved him and beat him senseless. Only “The Bird” refused to meet with him.

Louie’s story had all the makings of an unforgettable film. In fact, Universal Pictures had long been interested in his life. In 1957, the studio acquired the rights to Louie’s book Devil at My Heels. Back then it was planned as a vehicle for Tony Curtis, but the project was shelved before a script was drafted. In 1998, a CBS Sports documentary on Louie’s life aired on the network and breathed life back into the project. When producer Matthew Baer watched the piece, he was tremendously affected by what he saw, unknowingly embarking upon what would be a 16-year quest to get a film made. He met with Louie and his family, then brought Louie’s story back to Universal Pictures, as the studio remained tied to the rights. The studio was once again interested in bringing this epic saga to the screen. Although several screenplays were commissioned at the time, no director signed on to the project.

In 2002, however, a turn of events changed everything. Louie Zamperini and best-selling author Laura Hillenbrand’s eight-year journey together began just as the author finished Seabiscuit: An American Legend. During her research for her first book, she kept coming across another famous Californian who was discussed as the only one who could give Seabiscuit a run for his money. She thought: “Someday, I’m going to look into this guy.” She wrote Louie a letter, and he wrote back.

The more they communicated, the more Hillenbrand was fascinated by what she learned about the man and asked if she could write her next book about him. Louie agreed, even though he had written his own story years before. His life dedicated to service, he wanted to spread the word of reconciliation as far as he could.

During their collaboration, which ultimately spanned more than 75 phone interviews and exhaustive globe-spanning research supported by approximately 400 endnotes, Hillenbrand and Zamperini agreed not to meet in person until the book was published. The author needed to envision Louie as the young troublemaker whose spirit would transform him into a hero for the ages…and the subject was busy enough with a charitable schedule and speaking engagements that seemed impossible for men half his age.

Published in 2010, Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption became a runaway bestseller, spending more than 185 weeks (15 of those in the top position) on The New York Times hardcover bestseller list. Among its many accolades, Unbroken was awarded Best Nonfiction Book of the Year by Time magazine and won the Los Angeles Times Book of the Year Award for Biography.

After years of having Louie’s amazing story turned down by other financiers, Baer, buoyed by the public’s embrace of Hillenbrand’s book, brought Unbroken back to Universal for consideration. The studio acquired the book in December 2010, and its success lifted plans for the project to head toward production. In 2014, UNBROKEN was released, earning $163 million worldwide at the box office.

About This Production Pure Flix, The WTA Group and Universal 1440 Entertainment present a Matt Baer Films production: UNBROKEN: PATH TO REDEMPTION, starring Samuel Hunt and Merritt Patterson. The casting is by Nancy Nayor, CSA, and the music is by Brandon Roberts. UNBROKEN: PATH TO REDEMPTION’s costume designer is Diane Crooke, and the film’s editor is Amy P. McGrath. Its production designer is Mayne Berke, and its director of photography is Zoran Popovic. The drama’s executive producers are Bill Reeves, Erik Weir, Michael Scott, Dave Mechem, Cynthia Garris and Luke Zamperini, and it is produced by Matthew Baer, p.g.a., and Mike Elliott. UNBROKEN: PATH TO REDEMPTION is based on the book by Laura Hillenbrand. The screenplay is by Richard Friedenberg and Ken Hixon. The film is directed by Harold Cronk.

With the success of UNBROKEN, producer Matthew Baer went to Universal 1440 Entertainment, wanting to tell the post-war aftermath of Louis Zamperini’s remarkable life. “Lou’s story is an embarrassment of cinematic riches, from when he was a young boy until he was 97,” says Baer. “We had tried versions of the first screenplay that included his post-war experience, but the difficulty in making a film version, is once Lou is freed from the Japanese prison camp, it wasn’t possible to have a stronger emotional climax than his return to Torrance. We were not able to make a three-hour version of the film and there was no way to have the female lead, Cynthia, come into the film after two hours. My feeling, and hope, was if UNBROKEN was successful, I’d get the chance the tell Lou’s post-war journey in a way that does it justice.”

The WTA Group was involved with the home entertainment release of UNBROKEN and helped lead the creation of a bonus disc that was included alongside the film to tell the “rest of the story” of Zamperini’s life through archive video footage from the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. Additionally, the company assisted with the development of a special Christian retail edition. That product sold well, confirming that people wanted the rest of the story.

In 2015, The WTA Group executives Bill Reeves and Dave Mechem met with Glenn Ross, General Manager and Executive Vice President of Universal 1440 Entertainment, to encourage the idea of a film that would tell the rest of Hillenbrand’s book.

“We explained that the millions who read Laura Hillenbrand’s bestselling book or saw the first film, UNBROKEN, know and love this next part of Louie’s story,” says Reeves, president of The WTA Group. “For Zamperini fans, UNBROKEN: PATH TO REDEMPTION shares that next chapter of his astonishing life and his inspirational love story.”

Glenn Ross and Universal 1440 Entertainment agreed the story needed to be told, met with Baer, and development on a new screenplay began, along with bringing aboard director Harold Cronk.

“From the overwhelmingly positive and passionate reaction to UNBROKEN, we believed there was an audience out there eager to see Louie and Cynthia fight and overcome an entirely different set of challenging circumstances,” says Ross.

“The hunger for quality films that contain faith has been proven time and again in the past few years,” says Executive Producer Michael Scott, CEO and co-founder Pure Flix. “That audience very much wants to see the redemption story in Louie’s life on screen.”

“The first film was about Lou’s struggle to survive. This chapter is about the battle for his soul and the incredibly powerful message of forgiveness. Once we can accept that we are broken and allow ourselves to receive grace, we are finally free to offer it to others,” says Cronk.

Screenwriter Richard Friedenberg says, “The heroism of Louie Zamperini, his adventure from the downing of his bomber to his rescue from a Japanese P.O.W. camp, is the stuff of a legend. But what comes after, the story of his return, his heartbreaking struggle, his recovery and ultimate redemption is what attracted me to Laura Hillenbrand’s book. We see in Louie’s conflict so many parallels to the soldiers who continue to return from our present wars, and through his pain and strength we understand the sacrifice every one of them has made.”

Screenwriter Ken Hixon shares, “I was attracted to Lou’s story: the power of second chances and the courage it takes to overcome often insurmountable odds. I also wanted to depict how love at first sight can evolve into a durable, long-lived relationship.”

For Will Graham, the grandson of Billy Graham, the film shines a deserved light on the now- famous 1949 Los Angeles Crusade. Will Graham is an evangelist with the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and plays his grandfather in UNBROKEN: PATH TO REDEMPTION.

“It’s hard to overstate how important the 1949 Crusade was to my grandaddy,” Will Graham says. “Of course, it was of eternal significance to Louie and Cynthia Zamperini and thousands more like them who accepted Christ as a result of granddaddy’s preaching. But Billy Graham was an unknown, a nobody before that Crusade. It was the publisher William Randolph Hearst, who, after three weeks of the Crusade generating no interest, told his editors to ‘puff Graham.’ They put him on the front page and the rest of the media followed.”

Design, Locations and Shooting

“Never give up, no matter what. Even if you get to last place, finish.” —Louie Zamperini

Production began on UNBROKEN: PATH TO REDEMPTION on September 5, 2017, at Universal Studios and wrapped on September 29, 2017, after 20 days of filming. Locations included Oxnard Beach, Verdugo High School and Cal Poly Pomona campus, where buildings resembling California in the 1940s were utilized.

“UNBROKEN captured the hearts of moviegoers worldwide and garnered several Oscar® nominations,” Producer Mike Elliott says. “The bar was set high for UNBROKEN: PATH TO REDEMPTION.”

Director Harold Cronk says, “We were able to assemble a team of supremely talented crew members who were committed to telling Louie’s story the right way. Developing and executing a plan to visually communicate Louie’s internal struggles required a tremendous amount of work with the writers. Then came the equally difficult task of finding the actor who was up to the challenge of bringing Louie’s story to life in a way that honored his remarkable journey. Samuel Hunt’s immersive and inspired portrayal of Louie Zamperini does just that.”

Director of Photography Zoran Popovic says, “The biggest challenge of making a period film are the angles on the exterior locations. We had to be very careful where to point the camera. Lots of shots were composed having the CGI enhancement in mind. We added old LA in the background and made Oxnard look like Miami Beach, Florida.”

Costume Designer Diane Crooke adds, “We used actual period costumes of course, so the majority are over 70 years old. Having such affection and respect for the period, special handling and care was required to uphold the integrity of the wardrobe.”

About the Cast “The world, we’d discovered, doesn’t love you like your family loves you.” —Louie Zamperini

Director Cronk and producers Baer, Elliott and Universal 1440 Entertainment were keenly aware of how important the casting choice would be to deliver on Louis and Cynthia’s powerful story for the finished film. Elliott remarks, “Casting was a challenge from the start. We had an entirely new movie but didn’t know how we would replace the original UNBROKEN cast. Would the audience reject new fresh faces? We think we succeeded thanks to an exhaustive nationwide search, and a lot of hard work by our team at Nancy Nayor Casting. We sincerely believe the new cast members are going to steal some hearts.”

Samuel Hunt as Louis Zamperini Samuel Hunt can be seen now as Craig Gurwitch, the former Army Ranger and computer specialist nicknamed ‘Mouse’ on NBC’s Chicago P.D. in addition to several cross-over episodes of Chicago Fire as the same character. Prior to landing his role in the hit Dick Wolf franchise, Samuel was in a number of independent features, appeared regularly on Days of Our Lives, and made waves on the FOX hit series Empire. To know Samuel is to know his impressive rock climbing skills, his solid theater experience and his serious passion as an outdoorsman.

Merritt Patterson as Cynthia Zamperini Merritt Patterson starred as Ophelia Pryce in the first season of E!’s hit series The Royals and as Olivia Matheson in ABC Family’s Ravenswood. She has guest-starred in episodes of numerous series, including Sony/Crackle’s Art of More; the CW’s Life Unexpected and Supernatural; and ABC Family’s Kyle XY, among others. Merritt’s numerous made-for-television credits include Hallmark’s A Christmas Cottage and A Winter Prince; The Pregnancy Project; Radio Rebel; and Iron Golem. She appeared on the big screen in Fox’s PERCY JACKSON & THE OLYMPIANS: THE LIGHTNING THIEF and in the independent features WOLVES, PRIMARY, RUFUS and THE HOLE.

Vanessa Bell Calloway as Lila Cleveland native Vanessa Bell Calloway is an actress and director, known for COMING TO AMERICA, DAYLIGHT and CHEAPER BY THE DOZEN, among many other film roles. TV credits include recurring roles in Shameless and Hawthorne. An eight-time NAACP Image Award nominee, she and her husband, Dr. Anthony Calloway, have two children.

Will Graham as Billy Graham Vice President and Associate Evangelist, BGEA William Franklin Graham IV (Will) is the third generation of Grahams to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ under the banner of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. Will is the grandson of Billy Graham and the oldest son of Franklin Graham. Participating in crusade-style events—called Celebrations—since 2006, he has held evangelistic outreaches on six continents around the world. Will also serves as Vice President of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and as Executive Director of the Billy Graham Training Center at The Cove in Asheville, N.C. In November, Will’s first book—a devotional titled Redeemed: Devotions for a Longing Soul—will be published by Thomas Nelson, featuring stories centered on the life-changing power of a relationship with God. A graduate of Liberty University and Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Will and his wife, Kendra, have two daughters and a son.

Bobby Campo as Pete Zamperini Just 15 months after his mother suggested acting lessons, Bobby Campo had moved to Los Angeles and landed the first in a variety of television credits including a recurring role on Freeform’s hit series Greek; Law & Order: SVU; and CSI: Miami. Bobby was then cast as the lead in New Line Cinema’s THE FINAL DESTINATION, the fourth installment of the studio’s most successful horror franchise. Bobby began working steadily in independent film and earning series regular roles on Syfy’s Being Human and MTV’s Scream, and acclaimed guest star and recurring roles including ABC’s Grey’s Anatomy and FX’s Justified.

Andrew Caldwell as Harry Read Andrew Caldwell is known for the fan-favorite recurring role of Harley Johns in Season 3 of The CW’s iZombie. Other television credits include Netflix’s American Vandal, YouTube Red’s Ryan Hansen Solves Crimes on TV, TNT’s The Librarians , How I Met Your Mother, Hannah Montana and a voice roll on Disney XD’s hit animated series Randy Cunningham: 9 th Grade Ninja. Feature film credits include TRANSFORMERS, TENACIOUS D IN THE PICK OF DESTINY, ALL ABOUT STEVE and MY BEST FRIEND’S GIRL.

Gary Cole as Dr. Bailey Veteran of stage and screen, Gary Cole received an Emmy nomination for HBO’s Veep. He recently appeared in BLOCKERS, the PBS mini-series Mercy Street and Small Crimes opposite Nikolaj Coster- Waldau. Gary is best known for roles in classic cult comedies such as OFFICE SPACE, TALLADEGA NIGHTS: THE BALLAD OF RICKY BOBBY and DODGEBALL: A TRUE UNDERDOG STORY. As an

ensemble member of the famed Steppenwolf Theater Company, Gary’s theater credits include August: Osage County; Speed the Plow; American Buffalo; and Balm in Gilead. Additional film credits include: THE GIFT, A SIMPLE PLAN and Clint Eastwood’s IN THE LINE OF FIRE. Television credits include: American Gothic, The West Wing, Arrested Development, Desperate Housewives, Chuck, The Good Wife, The Good Guys, Suits and Hart of Dixie.

David Sakurai as The Bird Born in Copenhagen, David Sakurai moved to Japan at age 18 where he received theatrical training and honed his skills in Tokyo’s indie film scene. Returning to Denmark in 2008, David earned a variety of drama, comedy and action roles including the lead in the post-apocalyptic action drama EASTERN ARMY (2010), which earned him a Best Actor Award at the Danish Movie Battle Festival. Known for IN ORDER OF DISAPPEARANCE, LIZA, THE FOX-FAIRY and ECHOES OF A RONIN, David’s recent work includes Lilyhammer, Luke Cage and HOUSEWIFE.

Bob Gunton as Major Zeigler Acclaimed films in Bob Gunton’s distinguished career include Oliver Stone’s JFK and BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, GLORY, BROKEN ARROW, Ben Affleck’s ARGO and as the Warden in Frank Darabont’s THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION. Just a sampling of Bob’s other film credits includes PATCH ADAMS, DOLORES CLAIBORNE, THE PERFECT STORM and LINCOLN LAWYER. On Broadway, Bob received Tony ® and Drama Desk ® Award nominations for his performance in the title role of the musical Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street and earned a Tony nomination and won a Drama Desk Award for his performance as President Juan Peron in Evita. Among his myriad TV credits, he had a regular role on the hit series 24 and played Franklin D. Roosevelt in the miniseries World War II: Behind Closed Doors. A Vietnam veteran, Bob was awarded a Bronze Star for Valor.

Vincenzo Amato as Anthony Zamperini Vincenzo Amato is an actor and iron sculptor born in Sicily, Italy, and fluent in five languages. Film credits include Angelina Jolie’s UNBROKEN, WAR STORY with Ben Kingsley and Catherine Keener, Jeremy Leven’s GIRL ON A BICYCLE, DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THE MORGANS, Miramax’s PINOCCHIO, and the award-winning LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL. In 2007, he was nominated for the prestigious David di Donatello Award ® for Best Actor in the Miramax film GOLDEN DOOR opposite Charlotte Gainsbourg. Television credits include Madam Secretary, The Blacklist, Elementary, Boardwalk Empire, The Good Wife, Damages, Gossip Girl and Pan Am.

About the Filmmakers

“I think the hardest thing in life is to forgive. Hate is self-destructive. If you hate someone, you’re not hurting the person you hate, you’re hurting yourself. True forgiveness is complete and total.” —Louie Zamperini

Harold Cronk Director Harold Cronk has directed numerous films including GOD’S NOT DEAD, which earned over $62 million at the box office and won the GMA Dove ® Awards for Inspirational Film of the Year. He’s the founding partner in 10 West Studios and EMC Productions. Cronk won the Best Director Award at the Beverly Hills International Film Festival in 2006 for his film WAR PRAYER. He wrote and directed the films JERUSALEM COUNTDOWN and MICKEY MATSON AND THE COPPERHEAD CONSPIRACY. He also has extensive theatrical film credits in art direction and set design.

Richard Friedenberg Writer Richard Friedenberg is best known for writing the film A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT, which starred Brad Pitt and was directed by Robert Redford, who was nominated for an Academy Award ® . He also wrote the screenplay for the Hallmark Hall of Fame television film Promise (1986), starring James Garner and James Woods, for which he won an Emmy Award ® . Furthermore, he wrote the screenplay for DYING YOUNG starring Julia Roberts and wrote and directed THE EDUCATION OF LITTLE TREE.

Ken Hixon Writer Ken Hixon is best known for writing the film INVENTING THE ABBOTTS, which starred Jennifer Connelly, Liv Tyler and Joaquin Phoenix. Hixon’s other films include WELCOME TO THE RILEYS, CITY BY THE SEA, INCIDENT AT DECEPTION RIDGE, MORGAN STEWART’S COMING HOME and GRANDVIEW, U.S.A. Two of his television films, Secret Sins of the Father and Caught in the Act, were nominated for the Edgar Allan Poe Award by the Mystery Writers of America.

Laura Hillenbrand Author Laura Hillenbrand is the author of the No. 1 New York Times best-sellers Unbroken: A World War II Story of Survival, Resilience, and Redemption and Seabiscuit: An American Legend. The latter was a finalist for the National Book Critics Circle Award, won the Book Sense Book of the Year Award for adult nonfiction and the William Hill Sports Book of the Year Award, landed on more than 15 best-of-the-year lists and inspired the film Seabiscuit, which was nominated for seven Academy Awards ® , including Best Picture.

An essay Hillenbrand wrote for The New Yorker, A Sudden Illness, won a 2004 National Magazine Award. Her work has also appeared in such publications as The New York Times, Vanity Fair, The Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times. Hillenbrand and actor Gary Sinise co-founded Operation International Children, through which American troops provided school supplies and other essential items to children in war-stricken countries.

Matthew Baer Producer Matthew Baer is the producer of UNBROKEN, based on Laura Hillenbrand’s bestselling book, for Universal Pictures. Angelina Jolie directed from a screenplay by Joel and Ethan Coen, William Nicholson and Richard LaGravenese. UNBROKEN earned $163 million worldwide. Baer also produced the character thriller MAGGIE; the indie film, THE BACHELORS, starring J.K. Simmons and Julie Delpy; CITY BY THE SEA with Robert De Niro, Frances McDormand and James Franco; VIEW FROM THE TOP with Gwyneth Paltrow and Mike Myers; JACK FROST with Michael Keaton; and THE REPLACEMENT KILLERS. He is also a producer on the 2018 Tony ® winning revival of Rodgers and Hammerstein’s Carousel.

Mike Elliott Producer Producer Mike Elliott began his career with legendary indie producer Roger Corman, where he eventually became head of motion pictures. Elliott left Corman in 1994 and has since produced more than 100 films and television shows, including several that have appeared in major festivals, such as Sundance, Telluride, New York and Toronto.

Luke Zamperini Executive Producer Luke Zamperini is the only son of Louis and Cynthia Zamperini. As a child, Luke accompanied his father on Victory Boys Camp retreats, giving him the knowledge and wisdom to keep Victory Boys Camp true to its original mission. Luke continues to make himself available for public speaking events where he tells his father’s story and shares his unique perspective on what made Louis the man he was.

Cynthia Zamperini Garris Executive Producer Cynthia Zamperini Garris is the daughter of Louis and Cynthia Zamperini. Cynthia Garris was born in Hollywood. She is an actress, known for CRITTERS 2 (1988), SLEEPWALKERS (1992) and PSYCHO IV: THE BEGINNING (1990). She has been married to Mick Garris since 1982.

Bill Reeves Executive Producer Founder of The WTA Group, Bill Reeves has extensive experience in the Christian product industry in retail roles, and then with Word Entertainment/Warner in distribution, supporting artists such as Amy Grant and Michael W. Smith. At Big Idea Productions, Bill led Christian retail product licensing and distribution for the successful VeggieTales brand, including its theatrical release JONAH: A VEGGIETALES MOVIE. At Thomas Nelson Publishers/HarperCollins he served as executive producer of several childrens video properties, including Max Lucado; Hermie & Friends. As Vice President of marketing for Propeller Consulting, Bill participated in the marketing launches of leading faith-based films such as FIREPROOF, COURAGEOUS and SOUL SURFER and led consumer products campaigns for the Kendrick Brothers; films, including the New York Times No. 1 bestselling book The Love Dare and many other charting books. In 2009, Bill launched The WTA Group, which has led marketing campaigns for such films as 90 MINUTES IN HEAVEN, THE ULTIMATE LIFE and GOD’S NOT DEAD. The agency also steered the release of films such as HEAVEN IS FOR REAL, WAR ROOM and I CAN ONLY IMAGINE.

Michael Scott Executive Producer Michael Scott, CEO and co-founder of faith-film giant Pure Flix, has produced more than 25 films and hundreds of television commercials. Among his many films are the breakout hit GOD’S NOT DEAD, the No. 1 faith film of 2014, earning more than $62 million at the box office; GOD’S NOT DEAD 2; and DO YOU BELIEVE? Michael produced the long-running hit TV series Travel the Road, a groundbreaking Christian reality series following the lives of missionaries Timothy Scott and William Decker, as they journey to the ends of the earth. Now airing on TBN, Daystar, INSP, Netflix and many more, Travel the Road has gained a worldwide audience.

Dave Mechem Executive Producer Dave Mechem has more than 25 years of experience in home entertainment sales and retail marketing and has held key positions with Sony Pictures, Universal Pictures, Turner Broadcasting and Ingram Entertainment. He has worked with key accounts across all channels from mass, club, grocery, e- commerce, rental, distribution and Christian retail. Dave led the home entertainment sales and promotion of AFFIRM Films titles into the general and Christian retail markets and guided the release plans for TO SAVE A LIFE, SOUL SURFER, COURAGEOUS, HEAVEN IS FOR REAL and MOMS’ NIGHT OUT among others. Since joining The WTA Group, Dave has consulted on more than 20 home entertainment releases including GOD’S NOT DEAD, DO YOU BELIEVE?, UNBROKEN and WOODLAWN.

Zoran Popovic Director Of Photography Native of Serbia, Zoran Popovic graduated from the American Film Institute. He has been the director of photography on numerous music videos, commercials and feature films, including WAR INC, a political satire, starring John Cusack and Ben Kingsley; and SIN, starring Gary Oldman, Ving Rhames and Brian Cox. In 2012 Zoran received an Emmy ® for his work on Moments in Time. His recent work includes STANDOFF, starring Thomas Jane and Laurence Fishburne; SUPERCON, starring John Malkovich; UNCHAINED also starring Malkovich, Adrien Brody and Antonio Banderas and directed by Paul Solet; and BREAKTHROUGH, for Fox 2000 to be released in 2019. Mayne Berke

Production Designer Mayne Berke’s credits as a production designer include: S.W.A.T., directed by Clark Johnson, starring Colin Farrell and Samuel L. Jackson; THE PRINCESS DIARIES, directed by Garry Marshall, starring Julie Andrews and Anne Hathaway; ROCK STAR directed by Stephen Herek, starring Mark Wahlberg and Jennifer Aniston; 15 MINUTES, directed by John Herzfeld and starring Robert De Niro and Edward Burns; JACK FROST, directed by Troy Miller, starring Michael Keaton; and ROMY AND MICHELLE’S HIGH SCHOOL REUNION, directed by David Mirkin, starring Lisa Kudrow and Mira Sorvino. He also designed the acclaimed HBO original film Don King: Only in America, and the Clio Award-winning Levi’s Elevator Fantasy commercial, Directed by Michael Bay.

Diane Crooke Costume Designer Diane Crooke is a costume designer with extensive experience designing and supervising for film, television, print and web. Crooke’s interest in fashion developed around the age of 10 when her mother and grandmother taught her to sew. Crooke’s career took off when she got the job as costume supervisor for the for the first three seasons of the hit NBC series Friends. After that, she supervised multiple projects including six seasons of Crossing Jordan. As a designer Crooke spent five seasons designing for NBC’s popular dramatic TV Show Parenthood, before designing Scream for MTV. Recently Crooke worked on the Mow Treehouse for Blumhouse directed by James Roday. Crooke has jumped into the feature world, designing CHIPS and ALL STAR WEEKEND directed by Jamie Foxx.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The State of California and the California Film Commission

MPAA Certificate # 51621

COPYRIGHT © 2018 UNIVERSAL STUDIOS. All Rights Reserved.

COPYRIGHT @ 2018 THE WTA GROUP, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Universal Studios is the author of this motion picture for purposes of the Berne Convention and all national laws giving effect thereto.

WHILE THIS PICTURE IS BASED UPON A TRUE STORY, SOME OF THE CHARACTERS HAVE BEEN COMPOSITED OR INVENTED, AND A NUMBER OF INCIDENTS FICTIONALIZED.

THIS MOTION PICTURE IS PROTECTED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES AND OTHER COUNTRIES. UNAUTHORIZED DUPLICATION, DISTRIBUTION OR EXHIBITION MAY RESULT IN CIVIL LIABILITY AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.

IN MEMORY OF BILLY GRAHAM

Unbroken: Path to Redemption: A Brief History of Louis Zamperini’s Journey published first on http://womenoffaith.com

A man, a country and an era came together in Leonard Bernstein, the musician of the American century.

After 150 years of insecurity as this country gazed across the sea at the edifices of European culture, here was the New World finally in command.

Composer, conductor, arranger, pianist, television personality, star, Bernstein — a Jew, crucially, just a few years after the Holocaust — marched Mahler back into Vienna, a second wave of liberation, a musical Marshall Plan.

Bold, maybe a little brash; tender, maybe a little sentimental; difficult to work with yet desperate to please: Bernstein’s qualities were America’s, too.

He was born 100 years ago on Aug. 25, and his centenary is being celebrated as his achievement — and the smilingly confident place and time he symbolized — seems ever more unrepeatable. Who today could write both “West Side Story” and three thorny, searching symphonies? Who could bring together Brahms and the Beatles on national television, and have millions watch? To what maestro’s left-wing political dalliances would New York magazine devote a cover story in 2018?

Yet if there will never be another Bernstein, and if the high culture for which he tirelessly evangelized keeps drifting farther from the mainstream, his legacy is still clear, and secure. When he died, in 1990, he left us a charge to listen to music, of all kinds, with endless enthusiasm; to devote ourselves to both the creation of new work and the revival of old; to make every facet of culture accessible to all.

To mark the anniversary of Bernstein’s birth, writers of The New York Times have come together to focus on key moments in his career, to interview musicians he led from the podium, to praise his feverishly physical conducting style, and to offer suggestions for further listening. We hope to capture just a bit of the energy and influence of one of the most indelible figures in the history of the arts.

— Zachary Woolfe

A Revolutionary Score

It’s more than just “New York, New York.”

“On the Town,” Bernstein’s 1944 foray into Broadway, may be famous for that number, which transcended musical theater to become a city’s anthem. But the rest of his score for this show is so much more important: Its omnivorous musical style embodies the Bernstein ethos at its most daring and youthful, while also laying the groundwork for his later masterpiece, “West Side Story.”

When he wrote “On the Town,” Bernstein was in his mid-20s but rapidly on the rise. He had already made his unexpected debut conducting the New York Philharmonic, filling in for an ailing Bruno Walter, and in January 1944 he had arrived as a composer with the premiere of his First Symphony.

“Fancy Free,” Bernstein’s first ballet — a collaboration with the great Jerome Robbins, who would choreograph “On the Town” and “West Side Story” — came just several months later and couldn’t be more different. Where the symphony was moody and dissonant, and clearly under the influence of Aaron Copland, the ballet score unabashedly embraced popular music and jazz. (It opened with a radio-ready song, “Big Stuff,” which was recorded by Billie Holiday.)

With the ballet, Bernstein was flirting with an artful marriage of classical and popular idioms, of high- and lowbrow culture. This would reach its apotheosis with “On the Town,” whose score is often as revolutionary as the politics of the Broadway production itself.

As Harvard professor Carol J. Oja observed in her 2014 book “Bernstein Meets Broadway,” the musical’s premiere was full of subtle subversions. At the height of World War II, it had cast Japanese-American dancer Sono Osato as Ivy Long. And the opening number, “I Feel Like I’m Not Out of Bed Yet,” with the call-and-response feel of a spiritual, announced the musical’s mixed-race casting and identity in a time when blackness on Broadway most often came in the form of all-black shows like “Cabin in the Sky” and “Porgy and Bess.”

The score is less explicitly political, but consider its brazen blend of genres, pulled off with the success of only someone who had come to Broadway by way of the concert hall. (Other composers in this vein were Gershwin and Weill.) There is a lot of music in “On the Town” — about 30 minutes of which is purely orchestral — and it reads like a panoramic glimpse into Bernstein’s musical mind.

“New York, New York,” is quintessential Bernstein: an exuberant opening with his trademark syncopation. Later orchestral passages, like “Lonely Town Pas de Deux” and “Imaginary Coney Island” have the soaring lyricism and classicism of symphonies, while some songs nod to operetta (in a way, it must be said, that is more fun and less fussy than in his quasi-operetta “Candide”).

But Bernstein could also be a consummate tunesmith: Few Broadway ballads are as memorable as “Lonely Town,” or as quietly heart-rending as “Some Other Time.” And he embraced all-out camp with “Ya Got Me” and “I Can Cook Too,” which is refreshing given how unbearably earnest Bernstein’s later works could be.

The democratic style of “On the Town” proliferated in Broadway’s golden age and continues today, even in the works of Bernstein’s eventual collaborator Stephen Sondheim. It’s also in their “West Side Story,” an indisputable masterpiece, though ultimately more refined and controlled than “On the Town,” which has the youthful élan of its creators: brash energy that sometimes verges on unwieldy recklessness. That spirit may make it a risk for producers today, but it’s also what makes every opportunity to see the musical so electrifying.

— Joshua Barone

Puncturing the Snobbery of the Concert Hall

There were conductors as great as Bernstein — and pianists, and composers, and political activists, and theater artists. But there had never been a communicator about music with anywhere near his brilliance, humor, energy, reach and importance.

From 1958 until 1972, Bernstein turned a series of educational concerts for children into a televised international classroom of unlikely glamour. The roots of the New York Philharmonic’s Young People’s Concerts went back to the 1885-86 season, when Theodore Thomas conducted 24 matinees focused on learning about music.

In Bernstein, the practice was revived by post-World War II mass culture. After becoming the Philharmonic’s music director, he reshaped the concerts, following the model of the Omnibus programs he’d done on CBS, starting in 1954.

That was the series that began unforgettably with Bernstein analyzing the opening of Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony while he and the musicians strolled over a giant reproduction of the first page of the score. “A more perfect unconscious metaphor for his American cockiness,” the critic and historian Joseph Horowitz writes of the moment, “could hardly be invented.”

In the Young People’s Concerts, that cockiness was still there, but also Bernstein’s confident mellowness — his coolness.

“See how simple it is?” he asks after the Philharmonic surges through the opening bars of Mendelssohn’s “Wedding March” at a concert devoted to understanding melody. The audience chuckles — all that? simple? — but Bernstein’s explanations make it so.

He introduced Mahler and Ives; he paid tribute to Hindemith, Stravinsky and sonata form. He demystified living composers by hosting them and showing that they were — shocker — ordinary people. He used slang. He talked about the Beatles and Simon and Garfunkel.

He punctured the snobbery and rituals of the concert hall, and showed music as something that could be gobbled whole, without prissy distinctions between high and low. He was iPod Shuffle half a century before it was invented, a one-man mash-up.

Everything illuminated everything else; everything was interesting; great Elvis was as worthy of enjoyment as great Mozart. That none of this seems at all unfamiliar in 2018 is a testament to his permeating influence.

Bernstein hosted the televised concerts for 15 consecutive seasons, during which time they were dubbed into 12 languages and syndicated in 40 countries. They were referenced in “Peanuts” and, in Hungary, beat “Bonanza” in the ratings. For a few years, they even made it from weekend afternoons to prime time.

He clearly loved doing them, and is said to have written every word of every script. In the 1964-65 season, when he took a composing sabbatical, Bernstein conducted just a single concert (of his own music) — along with four Young People’s Concerts. They were, he said, “among the favorite, most highly prized activities of my life.” When he gave up the Philharmonic’s directorship in the late 1960s, he said he would be happy to continue leading them, and did.

Bernstein’s is the best kind of teaching: even more empowering than informative. Music, in his telling, is about open-ended, never-ending pleasure, about gaining confidence in your own choices and judgments.

“No matter what stories people tell you about what music means,” he said of Rossini’s “William Tell” Overture on the first televised program, “forget them. Stories are not what music means. Music just is.”

— Zachary Woolfe

Shakespearean Depth in a Broadway Musical

The first note of “West Side Story” can’t even wait for the downbeat; it lands one hiccup early. That’s how impatient the show is to get going — and how impatient Bernstein was to bring what he knew about musical theater to Broadway in 1957.

What he knew is just what the opera composers he loved had taught him: Music is character. In “West Side Story” he was writing about gang members hopped up on hatred and hormones during the last days of summer. No wonder he introduces them, in the Prologue, already jumping the gun.

But it’s not just in the Prologue. The score to “West Side Story” is a war zone of impetuous cross-rhythms. That lurching first figure recurs as the engine for “The Jet Song,” in which the melody and the bass line form a complex, interlocking pattern. Moments later, “Something’s Coming” sets a jumpy tune against a monotonous substrate, dramatizing the longings for escape that propel Tony — the Romeo figure in this updated “Romeo and Juliet” — toward his fate.

Of course, Bernstein was working with some of the best lyrics yet written for a Broadway show, by Stephen Sondheim, then in his late 20s. Together they were cannibalizing one of the best scripts, by Arthur Laurents. Compared with other musicals, not much dialogue remained after Bernstein and Sondheim’s raid. To make up for it, the score had to be dense, providing in music the depth of portraiture Shakespeare achieved in verse.

That’s part of why the rhythm of “West Side Story” is so intensely layered. Naturally, Bernstein used Latin dance forms to depict the Puerto Rican characters: an explosive mambo, a delicate cha-cha and, in “America,” a joyful huapango, with its stresses constantly regrouping, two then three, back and forth. More than 30 percussion instruments, including maracas and police whistle, help create and clarify the effects; though many productions make do with one player, Bernstein calls for four or five in his symphonic arrangement of the score’s dances and they are not underworked.

But the manipulation of stress in “West Side Story” cuts the other way as well. Whenever the pure love of Tony and Maria is set to music, the rhythms, as if they were street noise, disperse. “One Hand, One Heart” barely has any notes; Sondheim had to beg Bernstein to toss in a few more so he could fit some proper English onto the melody. And the hymnlike, dreamlike “Somewhere” is entirely square, at least until it wakes up to the rat-a-tat nightmare that is the lovers’ reality. Then it sounds like gunfire.

We think of Bernstein as a melodist, and it’s true that the vocal lines of “West Side Story” are gorgeous, even when they’re spiky. But no one writing a musical has ever used rhythm as effectively as he did, to let us hear the human heart just as it’s leaping forward, just as it’s about to burst.

— Jesse Green

The Maestro Meets the Black Panthers

One January evening in 1970, Bernstein and his wife, Felicia, had about 90 people over for a soiree. The express purpose, according to the invitation, was to “meet and hear from leaders of the Black Panther party and lawyers for the New York Panther 21.” So: a cocktail fundraiser for the Panthers 21 Legal Defense Fund, which would pay for the defense of the men and women accused of a rash of attempted coordinated bombings and armed attacks on government facilities (they were all eventually acquitted).

Anyway, these fundraisers were a thing at the time. And that evening in January, it was the Bernsteins’ turn.

The press hadn’t been invited. But the press was there. The New York Times’ society writer, Charlotte Curtis, whipped up a detailed article that ran a few days after. Six months later, in New York magazine, Tom Wolfe dropped his bomb.

“Radical Chic: That Party at Lenny’s” lasted 25,000 words of withering absurdism that mocked white liberal haute bourgeois virtue. The guests included the likes of Barbara Walters, who at the time hosted “The Today Show,” the filmmaker Otto Preminger, the socialite Jean vanden Heuvel and “the former ‘boy president’ of Sarah Lawrence” (Harold Taylor). Wolfe, less cuttingly, looks askance at the Panthers for, among other things, being the sort of outfit that would need the attention of such people.

But Wolfe keeps making a target of Bernstein, who had just cut back his duties at the New York Philharmonic. He becomes an emblem of do-gooding wishy-washy, optics-obsessed paternalism — and these Panther parties were possibly beside the point of most engaged interracial civil rights struggles. Bernstein seems, in Wolfe’s caricature, grand, withdrawn, contradictory, exasperated, squeezed.

“Lenny couldn’t get over the whole affair,” Wolfe writes. “Earlier in the evening he had talked to a reporter and told him it was ‘nauseating.’ The so-called ‘party’ for the Panthers had not been a party at all. It had been a meeting. There was nothing social about it. As to whether he thought because parties were held in the homes of socially prominent people simply because the living rooms were large and the acoustics were good, he didn’t say. In any case, he and Felicia didn’t give parties, and they didn’t go to parties, and they were certainly not in anybody’s ‘jet set.’ And they were not ‘masochists,’ either.

“So four nights later Lenny, in a tuxedo, and Felicia, in a black dress, walked into a party in the triplex of one of New York’s great hostesses, overlooking the East River, on the street of social dreams, East 52nd, and right off the bat some woman walks right up to him and says, ‘Lenny, I just think you’re a masochist.’ It was unbelievable.”

It was also an impossible position for Bernstein. Obviously, he meant well. But he’d lost control over the interpretation of what he meant. In Wolfe, he was up against someone as superb at his job as Bernstein was at his — one maestro trapped under the thumb of another.

— Wesley Morris

Bigger Than the Beatles

My father took me to see Bernstein conduct a Young People’s Concert when I was 9 years old. I don’t remember what he conducted, but I do remember that he was dressed in a very hip way, he looked really cool, and he talked to me, to us, the audience, and I absolutely loved that.

When Bernstein conducted, he was having so much fun. I had been getting the feeling that classical music was not going to be a lot of fun. And then I saw him, and I said to my dad, “Ah, that’s it! I want to be the conductor.” So Bernstein became my idol from that moment on. I had a poster of him, and a poster of the Beatles on my bedroom wall — the Bernstein poster was bigger!

As I got to know him, and study with him, I discovered many other connecting points: the idea of eliminating boundaries between popular and serious music, the idea that music is fun, that the rules about how people must behave are just dumb constraints that we’ve imposed on classical music and, most importantly, that music speaks to every one of us. And, as I witnessed the kind of a citizen of the world he was, my admiration for him grew exponentially. I really admire people who stand up for what they believe in.

As an American music director, I think my commitment to new music, to living composers, my interest in speaking to audiences, my interest in creating access points for all different segments of our population, all different types of people, throwing the doors of the concert hall open — I think that all of these things were deeply influenced by Leonard Bernstein. These approaches are much more part of the fabric of orchestras as institutions today — because of Bernstein.

Bernstein gave a credibility to American musicianship that hadn’t existed before, easing our sense of inferiority. He came along and did what seemed impossible: bringing Mahler back to Vienna!

He talked a lot about the narrative of the piece. He was an amazing storyteller. I remember watching him, I think it was with the New York Phil once, when he said, “Ugh, do I have to tell you the story of this Haydn symphony?” And all these grown-ups were like, “Yes! Please tell us the story!” He loved storytelling, and music for him was just a vehicle for telling stories. Often his stories had important morals as well: There was always a lesson to be learned. For me that was a big takeaway.

In terms of conducting technique, he would offer tips. He used to say, “Don’t imitate me — but do it like this.” It was very funny. But it was much more about bigger concepts. He was extremely supportive of me personally. He’d say “Come on, show me what you’re feeling!” and then saying “Yes! That’s it!” Giving students the courage and permission to be themselves — this is a beautiful gift.

I think in many ways he was at a unique moment — but he was a uniquely gifted human being. Really the epitome of an American entrepreneur. He was so many things: a great conductor, great composer, great pianist. But he was also a TV star, he was a thinker, he was a philosopher, he was a political activist. How many people could wear all of those hats at once? It’s a rare thing.

— Marin Alsop, Music Director of The Baltimore Symphony Orchestra, as told to Michael Cooper

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

via Nigerian News ➨☆LATEST NIGERIAN NEWS ☆➨GHANA NEWS➨☆ENTERTAINMENT ☆➨Hot Posts ➨☆World News ☆➨News Sp

The Diabetes Manifesto: All the Resolution You Need

New Post has been published on http://type2diabetestreatment.net/diabetes-mellitus/the-diabetes-manifesto-all-the-resolution-you-need/

The Diabetes Manifesto: All the Resolution You Need

In case you're looking for a fresh approach to making diabetes-related New Year's Resolutions for 2011, look no further. A brand new book called "The Diabetes Manifesto" has all the direction you'll need to turn over a new leaf in your diabetes life, in scrupulous step-by-step detail.

The book is written by Lynn Crowe, a lifetime type 1 (diagnosed at age 12), who is a senior product manager at Sanofi-Aventis; and Julie Stachowia, a PhD in public health who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 2004. In 2007, Julie was hired by About.com to write an MS guidebook, eventually called "The Multiple Sclerosis Manifesto." Now she's teamed with Lynn to re-create this "take-charge-of-your-life" methodology for people with diabetes.

The book opens with a chapter titled, "Proceed with Confidence," which promptly lays out the framework for developing your own personal mission statement. To do this, you sit down and try to define yourself, creating a sort of a personal "elevator pitch" on who you are and who you want to be — including what part diabetes plays in your life, of course. To solidify your mission statement, the authors suggest you write it down once a day for a whole week. They guide you through "eliminating self-limiting beliefs" and writing a 30-second speech that you can rattle off at will when others start asking questions.

"Self-efficacy is your best weapon against this disease," the authors write, apparently the mantra of this book.

But let me be clear: the The Diabetes Manifesto offers far more concrete value than some self-helpy take-off of The Secret for diabetes.

In a total of 10 chapters, the authors lay out pretty much everything you need to know — in a concise and very readable format — about:

- becoming a diabetes expert (what and how to learn)

- tackling complications

- getting the most out of working with your doctor

- understanding drug options and being as "adherent" as you can

- things you can do to improve your emotional, social, and physical health

- "re-forming relationships on your terms"

- recognizing, accepting, and working with your own emotions

- engaging with the D-community*, and

- becoming an advocate

(*even if the section on online resources leaves much to be desired)

Each chapter is peppered with pop-out boxes with headers like "Do Your Best," "Know Your Stuff," "Make It Better," and "The Real World" — the latter being my favorite since it lays the some of the inalienable truths of life with diabetes on the table. One quote, for example, states:

"You can't control how people will react to your diabetes, but you can control how and what you tell them. Be thoughtful and goal-driven when talking about your diabetes."

Overall, I found the book packed full of great information and recommendations. My only criticism would be that if you set your sights on following all the advice in this book, you would have no other life. Seriously, there are a ton of detailed ideas about keeping records and creating plans and writing up scripts here. The chapter on relationships, for example, suggests that you make a list of the important people in your life and then score them on a 1-10 scale of supportiveness. You're to do this several times, and then brainstorm ideas for ways to engage with these individuals for the best possible outcomes. The chapter on treatments provides detailed instructions on researching drug interactions, including interviewing a pharmacist and insisting on a second opinion in some cases. Lots to do, lots to do.

So here's how I'd use this book:

modularly. Pick one area that you're committed to improving on now, and devote yourself to the ideas in that chapter. No matter which issue of life with diabetes you decide to tackle, The Diabetes Manifesto is sure to have some great suggestions and instructions for making things better.

There's some serious help to be had here for turning vague New Year's Resolutions into "actionable strategies," no doubt!

Demos Medical Publishing, $14.78 on Amazon.com

Disclaimer: Content created by the Diabetes Mine team. For more details click here.

Disclaimer

This content is created for Diabetes Mine, a consumer health blog focused on the diabetes community. The content is not medically reviewed and doesn't adhere to Healthline's editorial guidelines. For more information about Healthline's partnership with Diabetes Mine, please click here.

Type 2 Diabetes Treatment Type 2 Diabetes Diet Diabetes Destroyer Reviews Original Article