Aurelia Butler

More stories

  • 75 Shares169 Views

    in Movies

    The Etiquette of Touching a Stranger

    A tense exchange between the actor Denzel Washington and a photographer at Cannes is raising questions about laying hands on someone you don’t know.In a tense exchange on the red carpet at the Cannes Film Festival this week, a photographer grabbed the actor Denzel Washington’s arm, apparently seeking another photo.Mr. Washington, perturbed, yanked his arm back, and then repeatedly warned the photographer to stop — a brief squabble between seeming strangers that made headlines, and raised the question: Is it ever OK to touch someone you don’t know?The New York Times reached out to a handful of etiquette experts and therapists who specialize in boundary setting to ask about the rules around making physical contact with a stranger.‘Keep your hands to yourself.’Etiquette, when it comes to spontaneous touching, is nuanced — social rules vary from place to place and culture to culture. Still, the manners experts we spoke with were unanimous: “The hard and fast rule about touching strangers is that you shouldn’t,” said William Hanson, an etiquette coach in Britain and the author of “Just Good Manners.”We ran some scenarios by him. What if you are trying to flag down a server in a restaurant? No, he said. Placing a hand on someone as you are trying to move through a crowd? Nope, he answered. Weave!Others allowed for exceptions. If, say, someone drops a wallet without noticing and doesn’t hear your calls, “you could use touch briefly,” said Juliane T. Shore, a marriage and family therapist in Austin, Texas, and the author of “Setting Boundaries That Stick.” But don’t grab or clasp the person, she said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 125 Shares169 Views

    in Music

    How ‘The Queen of Spades’ Brought Two Tchaikovsky Brothers Together

    The composer’s brother Modest long wanted to collaborate. They eventually got their chance, to bring Pushkin to the opera stage.In 1888, Modest Tchaikovsky wrote a letter to his brother Pyotr, the composer. Modest, a former law student and budding dramatist and critic, had recently been commissioned by the Imperial Theaters in St. Petersburg, Russia, to write his first opera libretto: an adaptation of Pushkin’s “The Queen of Spades.”Modest revered his older brother’s talent and international renown. He had already proposed potential collaborations to Pyotr twice, to no avail. He had a composer lined up for “The Queen of Spades,” Nikolai Klenovsky, but he was disheartened that he and his brother would not be working on it together.Pyotr’s response to the letter was measured but blunt. “Forgive me, Modya, but I do not regret at all that I will not write ‘The Queen of Spades,’” adding: “I will write an opera only if a plot comes along that can deeply warm me up. A plot like ‘The Queen of Spades’ does not move me, and I could only write mediocrely.”Then Klenovsky dropped “The Queen of Spades.” Ivan Vsevolozhsky, the director of the imperial theaters, asked Pyotr to take over. He agreed.And so “The Queen of Spades,” which returns to the Metropolitan Opera on Friday, became the first collaboration between the two Tchaikovsky brothers, men of different disciplines and artistic abilities, despite their closeness. This work was the culmination of nearly 40 years of Modest’s attempt to escape the cool of Pyotr’s shadow and bask in his light. The result, the musicologist Richard Taruskin wrote, was the “first and probably the greatest masterpiece of musical surrealism.” It’s a testament to their camaraderie and fraternity, as well as their openness and intimacy.When stripped to its thematic core, Pushkin’s “The Queen of Spades,” first published in 1834, has all the makings of spectacle — obsession, greed, madness, phantasmagoria — that you could also find in sentimental Italian operas of the 19th century. Pushkin was not just god of Russian letters, but the god, yet his writing wasn’t easy to adapt into a libretto. His storytelling is anecdotal and ironic, lacking in empathy and tenderness for and between its characters. No one evolves, and there are no changes of heart. And “The Queen of Spades” is short; Taruskin counts the text at “barely 10,000 words.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Movies

    At Cannes, Can You Trust the Length of a Standing Ovation?

    The applause at premieres like “Mission: Impossible” or “The History of Sound” is often timed and reported breathlessly. But there’s more to the story.For decades, the Palme d’Or was the most prestigious award that the Cannes Film Festival could bestow. But there’s a new honor that many films appear to be vying for: Which movie can earn the longest standing ovation?The ovations here have always been supersized, but in recent years, industry outlets like Deadline, Variety and The Hollywood Reporter have turned the duration of the applause into a competitive spectacle. Headlines crow that “The History of Sound” (starring Paul Mescal and Josh O’Connor) earned a nine-minute ovation, “Alpha” (Julia Ducournau’s follow-up to “Titane”) was applauded for 12 minutes, and “Sentimental Value” (from Joachim Trier) earned a stunning 19-minute ovation. A Palme pecking order is then heavily implied.As someone who covers Oscar season, I understand the temptation to turn artistic achievements into a horse race. Still, when it comes to the way these standing ovations are reported, appearances can be deceiving.First, some background. After a film’s closing credits conclude at Cannes, a camera is trained on the cast and director, broadcasting their reactions on the huge screen in the Grand Théâtre Lumière. It’s customary for the camera operator to isolate each actor in close-up for individual moments of applause, meaning that larger ensembles often garner the longest ovations. If the actors are then willing to interact with each other and reshuffle into new pairings, the ovation can be especially prolonged.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 113 Shares189 Views

    in Movies

    ‘Fountain of Youth’ Review: John Krasinski Goes Continent Hopping

    An adventurer enlists his disapproving sister (Natalie Portman) in this Guy Ritchie movie with a hint of Indiana Jones.The pop-music adage “Don’t bore us, get to the chorus” is often attributed to the Motown founder Berry Gordy. The sentiment, when applied to film, could generally sum up the approach of the director Guy Ritchie.In his new movie, “Fountain of Youth,” Ritchie opens with a furious chase through the alleys, into the video arcades and over the fruit stalls of Bangkok. On a motorcycle is Luke Purdue (John Krasinski), who’s just purloined a priceless work of art — it’s what he does — and in a vehicle with lots of automatic weapons are some very irate and skeevy-looking journeyman villains.Having evaded his pursuers and boarded a train out of Bangkok, Luke figures he can relax, but no. He is confronted by the lovely Esme (Eiza González, now appearing in her second Ritchie picture), who informs Luke, “I recover rare and unique paintings. Sometimes in leather tubes.” Luke laughs her off; he’s hardly going to let her have the goods. Then she warns him: “I am the hand of mercy. My employers are the hand of judgment.”What’s any of this got to do with the title fountain? It’s mildly complicated, involving a message that can only be deciphered by looking at the backs of a particular group of priceless artworks. Luke is compelled to seek the help of his disapproving sister Charlotte (Natalie Portman), a museum curator; the pair are convinced by a dying billionaire named Owen Carver (Domhnall Gleeson) that the fountain can be found, and that they should find it for him. And off they all go, continent hopping. Once they reach their destination, we learn that the fountain not only de-ages you, it makes you look like computer-generated art. So that’s something.The movie acknowledges its many antecedents; it’s mentioned that Luke and Charlotte are “the children of the famed archaeologist Harrison Perdue,” get it? Besides the hint of Indiana Jones, several scenes also bring to mind the “National Treasure” movies, because they’re set in worlds with great libraries and museums and peopled with characters who, under any other circumstances, would never in a million years set foot in them.Having made his career playing perhaps the ultimate beta male on the television series “The Office,” Krasinski has since ardently pursued alpha roles, playing the reluctant C.I.A. man of action Jack Ryan on the Amazon series of the same name. Still, his ready smile tends to make him instantaneously agreeable, a quality you don’t get from other Ritchie leading men such as Henry Cavill and Jason Statham. Here, the quality doesn’t provide much credibility or added value. Instead, it makes you more sympathetic to Charlotte, who’s almost always scowling at her goofball brother. Stanley Tucci turns up in a Vatican-set cameo, which makes you wonder if he just roosted in the Holy City after completing “Conclave.”Fountain of YouthRated PG-13 for some salty language. Running time: 2 hours 5 minutes. Watch on Apple TV+. More

  • 138 Shares109 Views

    in Music

    Kid Cudi Is Expected to Testify in the Sean Combs Trial

    The rapper is scheduled to take the stand on Thursday to describe how his car was “blown up” after a threat by a jealous Mr. Combs.Kid Cudi, the rapper whose brief relationship with Casandra Ventura is said to have led to angry threats by Sean Combs, is expected to take the witness stand on Thursday in the music mogul’s sex-trafficking and racketeering trial.The rapper, whose real name is Scott Mescudi, is part of an important narrative at the heart of the racketeering conspiracy charge against Mr. Combs. The government has accused Mr. Combs of running a criminal enterprise for two decades and said his associates set fire to a rival’s car by slicing open the convertible top and dropping in a Molotov cocktail.In 2023, after Ms. Ventura filed the lawsuit that kicked off Mr. Combs’s legal troubles, Mr. Mescudi confirmed that his car had exploded. But he has yet to speak publicly about the details of his role in the case.Mr. Combs has pleaded not guilty to all charges against him, and his lawyers have said he was “simply not involved” in the allegations of arson put forward by prosecutors.While on the witness stand last week, Ms. Ventura, the singer known as Cassie, recalled the chaotic aftermath once Mr. Combs learned about her budding relationship with Mr. Mescudi in late 2011. She said Mr. Combs made the discovery while looking through her phone at the site of a “freak-off,” the sex marathons with male prostitutes at the center of the case.Ms. Ventura testified that Mr. Combs lunged at her with a wine bottle opener and, later that day, threatened to release sexually explicit videos of her in retaliation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • 100 Shares199 Views

    in Movies

    ‘Bad Shabbos’ Review: Guess Who’s Kvetching About Dinner?

    A newly engaged Jew and gentile plan to introduce their parents. But first: There’s a crisis involving a body, a ticking clock and a doorman played by Method Man.Those who have attended a Shabbat dinner — which occurs on Friday and kicks off the Jewish Sabbath — know that the traditional greeting is “good Shabbos.” The ensemble comedy “Bad Shabbos” telegraphs its silliness right from the title.Directed by Daniel Robbins, the movie takes place over a disastrous dinner on the Upper West Side, where David (Jon Bass) and Meg (Meghan Leathers) — a newly engaged Jew and gentile — plan to introduce their parents for the first time. But before they can start, a disturbing prank by David’s brother, Adam (Theo Taplitz), goes awry, causing an emergency that the family must hide from the Midwestern in-laws. The crisis involves a body and a ticking clock, as well as a zany, meddlesome doorman (Method Man, always welcome) added for good measure.“Bad Shabbos” overflows with the kvetching, nagging and nit-picking endemic to the Jewish movie canon. It also contains an overused trope: the domineering Jewish mother harboring animus toward her son’s shiksa fiancée. Despite Meg’s efforts to connect, Ellen (Kyra Sedgwick) repeatedly slights her future daughter-in-law. Ellen’s flat sitcom character finds a match in some of the movie’s aesthetic choices, like the framing and the pizzicato strings making up its score.These style elements can feel grating. But as the jokes continue to land and the wine continues to flow, you grow used to the tone. This is, after all, a situational comedy, in which the laughs spring from reaction shots and line deliveries. Luckily, the actors prove up to the task.Bad ShabbosNot rated. Running time: 1 hour 24 minutes. In theaters. More

  • 150 Shares149 Views

    in Movies

    ‘The Last Rodeo’ Review: One for the Money, Two for the Show

    A family tragedy forces an aging bull rider back into the saddle in this blandly wholesome drama.With jaw set and cowboy hat solidly secured, Neal McDonough strides through “The Last Rodeo” as Joe Wainwright, a former champion bull rider who’s believably broken in body and spirit. Ever since the death of his wife ten years earlier, Joe has retired to his Texas ranch to lick his wounds and nurse his regrets.And he has a lot of both, including the broken neck he sustained while riding drunk, an injury that derailed the life of his daughter (Sarah Jones) as well as his own. So when his young grandson develops a brain tumor, Joe needs a way to pay for the boy’s treatment and make amends for his own indifferent parenting. And, wouldn’t you know it, there’s a bull-riding tournament this very weekend in Tulsa, Okla., with a million dollars in prize money. Can Joe hoist his aching knees and weary butt back in the competitive saddle? Oh you just know he can.Directed by Jon Avnet (who wrote the script with McDonough and Derek Presley), “The Last Rodeo” — the latest Christian-themed film from Angel Studios — proceeds with easeful predictability. The story’s conventional beats (the get-back-in-shape montage, the bad news delivered at a critical moment) cohere into a wholesome journey of long-delayed healing. The inclusion of the wonderful Mykelti Williamson, as Joe’s longtime friend and rodeo partner, injects a buddy-movie vibe that anchors the action in riding bouts that are smoothly thrilling without being punishing.Keeping religious prodding to a minimum — a crucifix here, a mass prayer there — the movie concludes with McDonough’s earnest plea to scan a QR code to purchase tickets for other viewers. The studio used the same gambit with its “King of Kings” a couple of months ago and hey, if it gets more people into actual theaters, I’ll be the last to complain.The Last RodeoRated PG. Running time: 1 hour 58 minutes. In theaters. More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Movies

    Review: ‘Pee-wee as Himself’ Finds the Man Behind the Man-Child

    This fascinating though incomplete documentary tells Paul Reubens’s story despite the subject’s doubts about the project.The title of “Pee-wee as Himself,” the two-part documentary that airs Friday on HBO, is a bit of a ruse, or maybe a riddle.Pee-wee Herman, the manic, bow-tied man-child, was the greatest creation of Paul Reubens, who died in 2023. But Reubens was someone else, a self whose nature was obscured, sometimes by the overshadowing fame of his alter ego, sometimes by his own choice.The question that hangs over this fascinating and tantalizing film is how much Reubens the director, Matt Wolf, will get out of Reubens. Before his death, Reubens cooperated on the documentary — but not without reservations, which he airs from the first moment he appears onscreen.“I could have directed this documentary,” he says, but adds that he was told he would not have the appropriate perspective. In his interviews with Wolf, he still seems not entirely convinced. He wants to tell his story; he is not so sure he wants his story to be told for him. He wants to show us his nature, but it is not simply going to explode out of him as if somebody said the secret word on “Pee-wee’s Playhouse.”What unfolds, over more than three hours, is in part a public story: How Reubens channeled his genius into an anarchic creation that bridged the worlds of alternative art and children’s TV, then had his life derailed by trumped-up scandals that haunted him to the end.It is also partly a spellbinding private story about artistry, ambition, identity and control. What does it mean to become famous as someone else? (The documentary’s title refers to the acting credit in “Pee-wee’s Big Adventure,” as a result of which Reubens remained largely unknown even as his persona became a worldwide star.) And what were the implications of being obscured by his creation, especially for a gay man in a still very homophobic Hollywood?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More