Month: October 2019

Review: Parasite

The movie you may think you’re about to watch as Parasite gets underway would surely be a lot of fun even if it only played out as you expected—as a lively farce about the eternal class war between the arrogant rich and the scheming poors. That actually could describe this latest film from the (no other word) brilliant South Korean director Bong Joon-ho. It does not, however, come near to describing it in its full, dazzling, hilarious and bloody complexity.

In a scrubby precinct of present-day Seoul, the Kim family—mother, father, daughter, son—lives a life of unquiet desperation. The only money they have coming in is earned folding pizza boxes for a nearby restaurant. In order to deal with a nasty stink-bug problem in their cramped basement apartment, they open the street-level windows whenever a municipal bug-spray truck passes by outside and then gasp and choke as the purging fumes roll into their home. Much of their time is spent scampering around the apartment in search of a free wifi signal

Times are tough for the Kims, but they’re close-knit and affectionately supportive of one another, and they always scrape by. Then the son of the family, Ki-woo (Choi Woo-sik), receives an attractive proposition from a friend, a college student named Min (Park Seo-joon). Min has been making nice money on the side as an English tutor for a rich girl named Park Da-hye (Jung Ziso). But Min is now moving abroad, so he offers this cushy gig to Ki-woo. Ki-woo objects that he lacks the college degree the job requires, but Min says that’s not really a problem, and he’s right—Ki-woo’s endearingly sassy sister, Ki-jung (Park So-dam), employs her digital wizardry to simply run up a fake diploma for him on a computer.

When Ki-woo arrives at the Park family’s home—well, gated compound—he realizes he’s stepped into another world. The lawn is huge; the floors of the knockout house are polished marble and the walls are painted aggressively tasteful shades of beige and grey. The living room could accommodate the Kim family’s entire apartment. Ki-woo realizes he could get used to this.

In the course of tutoring Da-hye, Ki-woo carefully observes the rest of the Parks at close hand. The father, Dong-ik (Lee Sun-kyun), is a coolly prosperous tech-something or other who spends quite a bit of every day being chauffeured around in his gleaming Mercedes and wrinkling his nose at any poor people he might encounter (he dislikes the smell of poverty). His sweetly flustered wife, Yeon-kyo (Jo Yeo-jeong), has too much time on her hands and uses most of it to obsess about status signaling and the material superiority of all things Western. (For no reason at all, she has decided to call Ki-woo “Kevin.”)

Of most immediate interest to Ki-woo is the Parks’ little boy, Da-song (Jung Hyun-jun). Mrs. Park is convinced Da-song has artistic talent (an “eccentric genius,” she calls him), and Ki-woo, appraising the boy’s sloppy paintings, allows that they might demonstrate an ambiguous “Basquiat sense.” What the boy needs, clearly, is an art tutor—and Ki-woo happens to know one. In no time at all, his sister Ki-jung—a gifted scammer—has arrived at the Parks’ home, trailing clouds of art-speak that she picked up on Google.

The movie is, among several other things, a wild home-invasion thriller. With the Kim kids now gainfully employed in the Park household, the question becomes how to bring their mom (Jang Hye-jin) and dad (Song Kang-ho) aboard this gravy train. It isn’t easy—there are other people in the way. But screw them. By dint of some very clever cons, the entire Kim family is soon reunited inside the plush Park domicile. At this point, you could tack on another half hour or so of amusing antics and have a pretty entertaining movie. But director Bong is only getting started.

I wish I could describe the maniacal twists with which he and cowriter Han Jin Won have salted the story, the ingenious plot surprises they keep rolling out right down to the very last scene. But no. There’s no way to say anything further about this movie—a movie about which so much begs to be said—without spoiling it for anyone who hasn’t seen it. Let me only note that, while Parasite is obviously a work of social observation, it’s not as schematic as Snowpiercer, Bong’s 2013 feature about a long train speeding through the snowy wastes of a ruined world, and the proletarian revolution that spurs oppressed Third Class passengers to battle their way up into the balmy environs of First. Parasite isn’t metaphorical, and no one is lecturing us about the injustices we see, either. But we’re nodding our heads anyway.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3181Imo
via IFTTT

Review: Parasite

The movie you may think you’re about to watch as Parasite gets underway would surely be a lot of fun even if it only played out as you expected—as a lively farce about the eternal class war between the arrogant rich and the scheming poors. That actually could describe this latest film from the (no other word) brilliant South Korean director Bong Joon-ho. It does not, however, come near to describing it in its full, dazzling, hilarious and bloody complexity.

In a scrubby precinct of present-day Seoul, the Kim family—mother, father, daughter, son—lives a life of unquiet desperation. The only money they have coming in is earned folding pizza boxes for a nearby restaurant. In order to deal with a nasty stink-bug problem in their cramped basement apartment, they open the street-level windows whenever a municipal bug-spray truck passes by outside and then gasp and choke as the purging fumes roll into their home. Much of their time is spent scampering around the apartment in search of a free wifi signal

Times are tough for the Kims, but they’re close-knit and affectionately supportive of one another, and they always scrape by. Then the son of the family, Ki-woo (Choi Woo-sik), receives an attractive proposition from a friend, a college student named Min (Park Seo-joon). Min has been making nice money on the side as an English tutor for a rich girl named Park Da-hye (Jung Ziso). But Min is now moving abroad, so he offers this cushy gig to Ki-woo. Ki-woo objects that he lacks the college degree the job requires, but Min says that’s not really a problem, and he’s right—Ki-woo’s endearingly sassy sister, Ki-jung (Park So-dam), employs her digital wizardry to simply run up a fake diploma for him on a computer.

When Ki-woo arrives at the Park family’s home—well, gated compound—he realizes he’s stepped into another world. The lawn is huge; the floors of the knockout house are polished marble and the walls are painted aggressively tasteful shades of beige and grey. The living room could accommodate the Kim family’s entire apartment. Ki-woo realizes he could get used to this.

In the course of tutoring Da-hye, Ki-woo carefully observes the rest of the Parks at close hand. The father, Dong-ik (Lee Sun-kyun), is a coolly prosperous tech-something or other who spends quite a bit of every day being chauffeured around in his gleaming Mercedes and wrinkling his nose at any poor people he might encounter (he dislikes the smell of poverty). His sweetly flustered wife, Yeon-kyo (Jo Yeo-jeong), has too much time on her hands and uses most of it to obsess about status signaling and the material superiority of all things Western. (For no reason at all, she has decided to call Ki-woo “Kevin.”)

Of most immediate interest to Ki-woo is the Parks’ little boy, Da-song (Jung Hyun-jun). Mrs. Park is convinced Da-song has artistic talent (an “eccentric genius,” she calls him), and Ki-woo, appraising the boy’s sloppy paintings, allows that they might demonstrate an ambiguous “Basquiat sense.” What the boy needs, clearly, is an art tutor—and Ki-woo happens to know one. In no time at all, his sister Ki-jung—a gifted scammer—has arrived at the Parks’ home, trailing clouds of art-speak that she picked up on Google.

The movie is, among several other things, a wild home-invasion thriller. With the Kim kids now gainfully employed in the Park household, the question becomes how to bring their mom (Jang Hye-jin) and dad (Song Kang-ho) aboard this gravy train. It isn’t easy—there are other people in the way. But screw them. By dint of some very clever cons, the entire Kim family is soon reunited inside the plush Park domicile. At this point, you could tack on another half hour or so of amusing antics and have a pretty entertaining movie. But director Bong is only getting started.

I wish I could describe the maniacal twists with which he and cowriter Han Jin Won have salted the story, the ingenious plot surprises they keep rolling out right down to the very last scene. But no. There’s no way to say anything further about this movie—a movie about which so much begs to be said—without spoiling it for anyone who hasn’t seen it. Let me only note that, while Parasite is obviously a work of social observation, it’s not as schematic as Snowpiercer, Bong’s 2013 feature about a long train speeding through the snowy wastes of a ruined world, and the proletarian revolution that spurs oppressed Third Class passengers to battle their way up into the balmy environs of First. Parasite isn’t metaphorical, and no one is lecturing us about the injustices we see, either. But we’re nodding our heads anyway.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3181Imo
via IFTTT

Pound Climbs As Top EU Official Says Brexit Deal Looks “Promising”

Pound Climbs As Top EU Official Says Brexit Deal Looks “Promising”

The pound extended its Thursday-evening gains on Friday after EU Council President Donald Tusk said he had seen “promising signals” from UK PM Boris Johnson’s Thursday meeting with Irish PM Leo Varadkar, according to the FT.

With these remarks, Brexit optimism, which has been slowly simmering all week, is cresting heading into the weekend after Varadkar said he could see a “pathway” to a deal. In one week, the UK and its EU partners will meet in Brussels at a EU Council meeting where Johnson hopes a final deal can be hammered out. Of course, he then would have to sell the deal to Congress.

Tusk said Friday during a speech in Brussels that “I have received promising signals from the Taoiseach [Varadkar] that a deal is still possible. Technical talks are taking place in Brussels as we speak. Of course, there is no guarantee of success and the time is practically up. But even the slightest chance must be used.”

However, Tusk cautioned that the UK still hasn’t come forward with a “workable, realistic proposal.” Varadkar has said he thinks a deal can be secured by the end of the month, but Johnson wants to nail down an agreement before the start of the EU Council meeting next weekend.

As we noted yesterday, Johnson and his team of negotiators believe winning over Varadkar is their best hope for a deal. After trying to negotiate with Michel Barnier, the EU27’s appointed lead negotiator, the UK believes Barnier is too intransigent in his positions, and can’t be trusted to meet the UK halfway, even after No. 10 has made meaningful concessions. Still, Johnson’s Brexit Secretary Steven Barclay met with Michel Barnier on Friday to work out the technical details of a “consent mechanism” and new customs arrangements for Northern Ireland. A spokesman for the European Commission later described Barnier’s meeting with Barclay as “constructive,” sending cable even higher. Whatever happens, Johnson and his team must ensure that a new deal can make it through parliament.

Even Julian Smith, secretary of Northern Ireland, said there was now a “distinct possibility” of a deal. According to the FT, details of a “compromise” deal could start leaking as early as Friday afternoon.

Most investment banks (including Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank) still believe the UK will leave the EU with a deal. But this wouldn’t be the first time that both sides have sent out signals that a deal is imminent, only for nothing to materialize.


Tyler Durden

Fri, 10/11/2019 – 06:18

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/327cfzB Tyler Durden

The Boys

The Boys, an Amazon original series based on the comic book written by Garth Ennis, asks a simple question: What if the superheroes everyone loved and looked up to were actually awful people?

Ennis’ original work was an inside-baseball satire of the comic industry, with characters meant to stand in for both fictional heroes and figures from the real-life world of comics. The series’ target is the better-known world of culturally dominant superhero movies—and contemporary politics as well.

The series centers on a corporate-owned superhero team, The Seven, a sort of ripoff Justice League made up of familiar super-types—including the Superman-like Homelander, the Flash manque A-Train, the Wonder Woman–esque Queen Maeve, and the Aquaman-ish The Deep.

Publicly, The Seven are well-loved American icons who appear in commercials, sponsor running shoes, and play sanitized versions of themselves on corporate-branded reality TV. Occasionally they even save innocent people from harm. But behind the scenes, these heroes are petty narcissists, sexual predators, super-serum-addicted junkies, and even, when it’s convenient, mass murderers. They’re out to dominate the world, not save it.

That means attempting to manipulate Congress into voting for a bill that would allow them to become Defense Department contractors, scoring tens of billions in federal funding in the process. And the best way to drum up demand for their services, it turns out, is to play up their own pretend patriotism while amplifying the threat of anti-American super-terrorists who can’t be stopped by conventional means.

It’s a sordid story of malfeasance in which the heroes are crony capitalists and war-on-terror profiteers, not to mention pathetic jerks. The Boys is a show that assumes all power corrupts, and superpowers corrupt absolutely.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/317xhNp
via IFTTT

The Boys

The Boys, an Amazon original series based on the comic book written by Garth Ennis, asks a simple question: What if the superheroes everyone loved and looked up to were actually awful people?

Ennis’ original work was an inside-baseball satire of the comic industry, with characters meant to stand in for both fictional heroes and figures from the real-life world of comics. The series’ target is the better-known world of culturally dominant superhero movies—and contemporary politics as well.

The series centers on a corporate-owned superhero team, The Seven, a sort of ripoff Justice League made up of familiar super-types—including the Superman-like Homelander, the Flash manque A-Train, the Wonder Woman–esque Queen Maeve, and the Aquaman-ish The Deep.

Publicly, The Seven are well-loved American icons who appear in commercials, sponsor running shoes, and play sanitized versions of themselves on corporate-branded reality TV. Occasionally they even save innocent people from harm. But behind the scenes, these heroes are petty narcissists, sexual predators, super-serum-addicted junkies, and even, when it’s convenient, mass murderers. They’re out to dominate the world, not save it.

That means attempting to manipulate Congress into voting for a bill that would allow them to become Defense Department contractors, scoring tens of billions in federal funding in the process. And the best way to drum up demand for their services, it turns out, is to play up their own pretend patriotism while amplifying the threat of anti-American super-terrorists who can’t be stopped by conventional means.

It’s a sordid story of malfeasance in which the heroes are crony capitalists and war-on-terror profiteers, not to mention pathetic jerks. The Boys is a show that assumes all power corrupts, and superpowers corrupt absolutely.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/317xhNp
via IFTTT

Iranian Oil Tanker Struck By 2 Missiles Near Saudi Port

Iranian Oil Tanker Struck By 2 Missiles Near Saudi Port

Many questions remained unanswered early Friday after an attack on an Iranian oil tanker in the Red Sea sent oil prices higher, in the latest attack on energy-industry infrastructure in an increasingly volatile part of the world. According to the New York Times, a fire erupted on an Iranian oil tanker about 60 miles from the Port of Jeddah on Friday after the tanker’s two major tanks were struck by missiles, causing an oil spill.

No crew members were hurt and the ship is reportedly in stable condition, according to Iranian state news media. The National Iranian Oil Company, which owns the tanker, said the ship was struck at 5 am local time and 5:20 am local time. Iranian officials said Friday that the incident was “an act of terrorism”, but they insisted that the ship had suffered minimal damage and that only a small amount of oil had spilled into the ocean. The Iranians also denied that the ship had caught fire, despite photos purportedly depicting the blaze.

Iranian media said “technical experts” are still investigating the cause of the explosion, though Iranian state media initially blamed Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom, meanwhile, denied any responsibility for the attack. However, according to conflicting reports, the National Iranian Oil Company denied that Saudi Arabia, Iran’s archrival in the region, was behind the attack, and instead pointed the finger toward Israel.

Another inconsistency emerged when Iran said a tanker known as the Sabiti had been hit. But the ship-tracking website Marine Traffic shows the vessel hasn’t transmitted any location data since mid-August.

Of course, this isn’t the first attack on an oil tanker in the region this year. Iran has been blamed for torpedoing oil tankers belonging to Japanese and Panamanian shipping companies in an incident that also hasn’t been fully explained. Iran has also been accused of an attack on an Aramco facility inside Saudi territory (that attack was reportedly carried out with drones and cruise missiles). Saudi Arabia has only just restored production to its levels from before the attack. The US Navy said it was “aware” of the attack.

Oil prices jumped on news of the attack. Brent crude futures were up 2% early Friday, sending them back above $60 a barrel. Bunds and Treasuries climbed on a haven bid.

Whatever the details of the attack may be, there’s no questions that the attack marks a major escalation of tensions in the region.


Tyler Durden

Fri, 10/11/2019 – 05:32

Tags
Disaster Accident
Politics

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2M8eI7e Tyler Durden

Who’s Afraid Of Whom?

Who’s Afraid Of Whom?

Authored by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,

Man, I want to get away from US (and UK) politics, it’s too depressing and I’ve already covered it so much. But I keep getting drawn back in by the nonsensical propaganda out there. I read a lot of stuff every single day, and every single piece is starting to look like any other. I took the following from the Guardian, but it could have been any MSM outlet really. The whole thing is one big insult to my one remaining brain cell (which I’m trying to kill but can’t find).

First: if you see written or otherwise pronounced anywhere that Donald Trump fears Joe Biden, in elections or anywhere else, you’re reading propaganda. Trump has no reason to be afraid of Biden. Not that he minds the Democrats thinking he is. Second: if you see people claiming that accusations about Biden’s ‘dealings’ in Ukraine are unproven, remember that they’ve never been investigated. Maybe a Special Counsel would be an idea. Say, three years and $40 million? Let’s see after that.

Despite the lack of scrutiny, both from the DOJ and the media, we do know that Hunter Biden was paid $50,000 a month by Ukrainian energy company Burisma for not knowing anything about gas, oil or Ukraine. And we know from a Ukrainian MP that Joe Biden himself was paid $900,000 by Burisma. Those are not unproven allegations, as almost every outlet calls them. And they sure as hell ain’t unfounded.

Plus, Trump has every right to ask questions about this, whether in the US or elsewhere. Where he won’t be able to ask questions, if Pelosi and Schiff have their way, is in the fake impeachment inquiry. There he may not even be able to bring a lawyer. Who’s afraid of whom exactly, and of what? Here’s that Guardian piece:

‘He’s Laughing At Us’: Joe Biden For First Time Calls For Trump To Be Impeached

Joe Biden has for the first time called for Donald Trump to be impeached for abusing the powers of his office to help his own re-election. Delivering a blistering 25-minute speech at a campaign event in New Hampshire on Wednesday, Biden, the former vice-president under Barack Obama, departed from his usual campaign pitch and signalled that he will aggressively confront Trump as the president pushes unfounded accusations that Biden and his son Hunter had nefarious dealings in Ukraine.

Trump is “shooting holes in the constitution”, Biden said, by asking foreign powers to interfere in the 2020 election by pursuing dirt on the Bidens and then refusing to cooperate with a resulting House impeachment inquiry. “This is a president who has decided this nation doesn’t have the tools, the power, the political will” to punish bad behavior, Biden said, cataloguing a litany of Trump’s misdeeds that he said warrant impeachment. “He’s not just testing us,” Biden said. “He’s laughing at us.” Trump retorted via Twitter. “So pathetic,” he wrote.

It is curious. The entire fake impeachment inquiry is based on Trump pursuing dirt on Biden, specifically in his phone call with Ukraine president Zelensky. Something Zelensky himself more than once has squarely denied ever happened. What must he think of the US, when his denials are completely ignored?

What did happen, says John Solomon, is that a DNC contractor solicited Trump dirt in 2016 in Ukraine. Given the above, is it any wonder Zelensky’s said he’d be happy to investigate what happened in Ukraine in 2016? He might take a look at the Biden family while he’s at it.

Nancy Pelosi, the House of Representatives speaker and the most powerful Democrat in Congress, announced an impeachment inquiry against Trump on 24 September after a whistleblower alleged the White House had attempted to cover up a July call between Trump and the Ukrainian president. At issue is the question of whether Trump abused his office by using its power to his own political advantage, by pushing a Ukrainian investigation of Joe Biden and his son Hunter, who was on the board of a Ukrainian energy company.

There is no evidence to support Trump’s claims that Biden exploited his influence as vice-president to aid his son or his business. Biden on Wednesday again condemned Trump’s “lies and smears and distortion” and said the president peddles them because he fears facing Biden in a general election. “He’s trying to create a campaign where truth and facts are irrelevant,” Biden said, adding that the spectacle covers the president’s “manifest incompetence”. “We’re not going to let Donald Trump pick the Democratic nominee for president,” Biden added. “I’m not going to let him get away with it. He’s picked a fight with the wrong guy.”

Joe, Joe, Trump didn’t pick a fight with you. And he’s not scared of you either (but he loves for you to think he is). You’re flattering yourself. And you’re not some tough guy either, you’ve lived on Capitol Hill for too long to be tough.

Without evidence, and contrary to the accounts of several Ukrainian officials, Trump has claimed Biden used his role as vice-president to protect his son from corruption investigations when he pressed for the firing of the top Ukrainian prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, during Obama’s second term. Ukrainian officials, including one Shokin successor, have disputed Trump’s claims, and Biden has previously noted that the Obama administration’s position was supported by many other western governments, who saw Shokin as incompetent or corrupt.

Yeah, you know who called Shokin incompetent or corrupt? Victoria Nuland, that’s who. The story was that he wasn’t tough enough on corruption, but in reality he was too tough on corruption involving the US and its friends. For instance, he was investigating Burisma, and Joe Biden didn’t like that one bit. And the ‘many other western governments’ didn’t have enough knowledge to contradict the US in this.

Many of the other 19 Democratic 2020 candidates have long supported the opening of an impeachment inquiry into Trump, following the findings of Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference into the 2016 election and links between the Trump 2016 campaign and Moscow.

This takes the cake. And eats it too. What the Guardian claims here is that the utter failure that was the Mueller probe, which failed to find any dirt on Trump, has been reason for the Democratic candidates to support an impeachment inquiry into Trump over a phone call with Ukraine. How convoluted is that? There were no links between the Trump 2016 campaign and Moscow. Don’t take my word for it, Mueller said so.

“Following the findings of Robert Mueller’s investigation..” Mueller didn’t find anything, remember? The only things left standing in his report were accusations against Julian Assange and a bunch of anonymous Russians, because he knew these were people who couldn’t defend themselves. Because of that, I said back in February that Robert Mueller Is A Coward And A Liar. He is. He is not a stand-up straight shooter.

Biden’s speech on Wednesday came as his campaign continues internal deliberations over the best way to handle Trump’s broadsides and an impeachment inquiry that could last months and potentially never result in the Republican-led Senate removing Trump from office – even if the Democratic-led House impeaches him. “When I announced my candidacy,” Biden recalled,“I said I was running in order to restore the soul of America. That wasn’t hyperbole.”

Ha ha. Could have fooled me there, Joe. Restore the soul of America without hyperbole. Brilliant!

But his advisers also point to the 2016 presidential campaign, when Trump dominated media narratives of the Republican primary and the general election against Hillary Clinton with a barrage of attacks on his opponents that forced them to campaign on his terms. Biden nodded at that reality, as well, and promised he won’t let that get in his way. “I’m not going to be distracted,” he said. “None of these attacks are true, and I’m going to stay focused on your lives. That’s what this election is about,” he continued.

Look, it’s not okay that whistleblower rules are changed in half-secrecy overnight from requiring first-hand to second (or third) hand information. It’s not okay that the Democrats try to start an impeachment inquiry while disregarding the rules that have long existed for such an inquiry. It’s not okay that they do so on the basis of a phone call that the Ukraine president himself says contained none of the ingredients the Dems claim it did.

It’s not okay to try and keep the Republican House minority out of the proceedings, and it might even disqualify those proceedings entirely. If Trump is as bad a person and politician as the Democrats claim, it must be possible to figure that out while at the same time respecting the rules, regulations and the entire political system. Once you deviate from all that, you put the system itself at risk. Is that worth it? There’s an election in just over a year.

The media continues to refer to Trump’s allegations about Biden as unproven, knowing full well they’ve never been investigated. At the exact same time, they also keep bringing up Trump’s alleged ‘nefarious’ dealings with Russia, even though 2+ years of Robert Mueller and an entire platoon of lawyers came up empty on those. A level playing field?

I think I have an idea who’s afraid of whom. And there’s also this creeping/creepy feeling that the impeachment inquiry that isn’t one, is part of the 2020 election cycle. And that isn’t, and should not be, what such inquiries are for. Not even if you’re afraid of losing the election – that’s cheating.

*  *  *

Support The Automatic Earth on Patreon


Tyler Durden

Fri, 10/11/2019 – 05:00

Tags
Politics

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2IGiWRA Tyler Durden