AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyAmber Ruffin to Co-Write Broadway Musical ‘Some Like It Hot’The Emmy-nominated writer and performer will work with Matthew López to adapt the comedy for the stage.Amber Ruffin is getting her first taste of Broadway as a co-writer of the musical “Some Like It Hot.”Credit…Miranda Barnes for The New York TimesPublished More
#masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyBest of Late NightJimmy Kimmel Knows How the Impeachment Sequel Will End“It’s kind of like ‘The Empire Strikes Back,’” Kimmel said. “We already know how it ends, but we’re watching it anyway.” Jimmy Kimmel isn’t expecting many Republican senators to vote against Donald Trump. “But a few of them, who knows? Maybe three ghosts will visit them in the middle of the night tonight.”Credit…ABCFeb. 12, 2021, 2:01 a.m. ETWelcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. We’re all stuck at home at the moment, so here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.Oops, He Did It AgainThe House impeachment managers wrapped up their case against Donald Trump on Thursday, but the late-night hosts weren’t optimistic about the verdict.“It’s kind of like ‘The Empire Strikes Back,’” Jimmy Kimmel said. “We already know how it ends, but we’re watching it anyway.” “Democrats could — at this point, they could produce a video of Trump looking straight into the camera saying ‘I, Donald Trump, hereby incite this insurrection of violence,’ and most of the Republican senators would be like, ‘But where’s the proof? We didn’t see proof.’” — JIMMY KIMMEL“House Democrats today concluded their impeachment case against former President Trump. ‘Well, you’ve given me plenty to not think about,’ said Rand Paul.” — SETH MEYERS“Yep, their presentation was so emotional and compelling that Republicans almost looked up from their phones.” — JIMMY FALLON“Most of them are lost causes. Like Tom Cotton, Bill Hagerty — these guys, they would eat the hair out of Donald Trump’s shower drain. But a few of them, who knows? Maybe three ghosts will visit them in the middle of the night tonight.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“These senators are a jury for a trial of the president, but instead, they’re acting like bored middle schoolers. What do Democrats have to do to make this interesting for them, bring in one of those math teachers who raps everything? ‘My name is Doug and I’m here to say, democracy was threatened in a major way.’” — TREVOR NOAH“Here’s the thing: if Americans cared as much about America as we do about Britney Spears, this would be a really great place to live.” — JIMMY KIMMELThe Punchiest Punchlines (Plead the 45th Edition)“Trump’s argument is basically, ‘Yes, maybe I did shout “fire” in a crowded theater, but the people trampling each other were acting on their own.’ And these people who acted on their own, I wonder if you can use stupidity as a defense? You can plead insanity, why not?” — JIMMY KIMMEL“Essentially they were using Trump’s own words against him. What they are arguing is that Trump — and I promise this is the only time you will hear me say this — knew what he was doing.” — JAMES CORDEN“Guys, come on, don’t call Trump in the middle of the riot. You just saw him at the rally a couple hours ago — you gotta be chill. You call the morning after the insurrection, you know? You gotta play the game!” — TREVOR NOAH“Also, how embarrassing is this for Trump? Even his supporters knew they could call him any time and he won’t be busy.” — TREVOR NOAH“Overall, these videos make it pretty obvious that Trump incited the rioters. They were wearing Trump hats, carrying Trump flags, and they all just watched Trump speak, and they were chanting, ‘Fight for Trump!’ Even that dog from ‘Blue’s Clues’ is like, ‘I need a challenge here, guys. We all know what this is, right?’” — TREVOR NOAH“I mean, if one guy stormed the Capitol because he thought you said it to him, maybe you just can blame him. But if an entire stadium of people misunderstood you in the exact same way, I don’t know, man, that [expletive] on you.” — TREVOR NOAHThe Bits Worth WatchingDesus and Mero got personal with their “life coach” Whoopi Goldberg.Also, Check This OutWiig and Mumolo in a musical number from the new film.Credit…Cate Cameron/LionsgateThe “Bridesmaids” co-writers Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo share the screen in their new collaboration, “Barb and Star Go to Vista Del Mar.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More
#masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyGina Carano Is Off ‘Mandalorian’ Amid Backlash Over Instagram PostLucasfilm’s statement came hours after a new backlash against the actress, who on Instagram compared “hating someone for their political views” to the persecution of Jews during the Holocaust.The actress Gina Carano as Cara Dune in the second season of “The Mandalorian,” Disney’s hit “Star Wars” spinoff series.Credit…Disney+Feb. 11, 2021Updated 4:56 p.m. ETThe actress Gina Carano, who starred as Cara Dune in the “Star Wars” spinoff series “The Mandalorian” on Disney+, on Wednesday compared “hating someone for their political views” to the persecution of Jews during the Holocaust in an Instagram post, her latest social media post to create a fan backlash.Lucasfilm, the company within Disney that owns the show and the rest of the “Star Wars” franchise, condemned her comments and said in a statement that she was “not currently employed by Lucasfilm and there are no plans for her to be in the future.”“Nevertheless, her social media posts denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities are abhorrent and unacceptable,” Lucasfilm said in a statement.Ms. Carano was also dropped by her agency, UTA, according to The Hollywood Reporter.The Instagram post, which re-shared an image from a different account, is no longer visible on her page. It led to thousands of complaints on social media, where many people used the hashtag #FireGinaCarano, not for the first time. (Some conservatives, who viewed her posts as a matter of free speech, countered with #CancelDisneyPlus.)In September, Ms. Carano added “beep/bop/boop” to her Twitter bio, which many saw as mockery of people who list their pronouns. She denied that accusation and said she was responding to people who asked her to list her pronouns, “exposing the bullying mentality of the mob that has taken over the voices of many genuine causes.”She said she talked with her “Mandalorian” co-star Pedro Pascal, who “helped me understand why people were putting them in their bios.” (Mr. Pascal would later publicly support his sister, Lux Pascal, an actress who came out as transgender this week.)Ms. Carano has also mocked the use of masks and the need for vaccines during the coronavirus pandemic, and embraced baseless claims of voter fraud after the presidential election.Before she shifted to acting, she was one of the world’s top female mixed-martial artists and performed for two years on “American Gladiator” under the stage name Crush. She appeared in seven episodes of “The Mandalorian” as a trusty ally of the protagonist, played by Mr. Pascal, and is otherwise known for roles in “Haywire,” “Deadpool” and “Fast & Furious 6.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More
AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyCritic’s PickReview: Shakespeare’s Baddies Convene in ‘All the Devils Are Here’Patrick Page writes and stars in a meditation on the Bard’s villains, moving swiftly through a catalog of characters as if he were a chameleon.Patrick Page in “All the Devils Are Here: How Shakespeare Invented the Villain,” filmed at Sidney Harman Hall in Washington.Credit…via Shakespeare Theater CompanyFeb. 11, 2021Updated 1:00 p.m. ETAll the Devils Are Here: How Shakespeare Invented the VillainNYT Critic’s PickProspero steps out onto the stage, a sturdy white staff and book in hand. He kneels, opens the book and strikes the stage three times. As the last heavy thud echoes throughout the empty theater, the lights dim to an icy, concentrated glow. This is the magician, and this is his art.But it isn’t actually Shakespeare’s vengeful sorcerer we’re seeing; this is Patrick Page, and when he opens his mouth, it’s not Prospero but Lady Macbeth who speaks, in a jagged whisper. It’s a summoning: “Come, you spirits that tend on mortal thoughts.”It’s enough to make you shiver, and fitting for a play called “All the Devils Are Here: How Shakespeare Invented the Villain,” an enchanting one-man show full of Shakespeare’s vilest, silliest and most misunderstood characters: the baddies. Produced by the Shakespeare Theater Company at Sidney Harman Hall in Washington, and directed by Alan Paul, “All the Devils Are Here” is a chronological catalog of Shakespeare’s villains — including the lady with stains on her hands that no amount of Purell can get out, and the cuckolding, crown-stealing sibling. Page, who also wrote the script (and is lately known for his performance as another grand villain, Hades, in the musical “Hadestown”), begins with some general context, bringing us back in time to the flimsy villains that showed up in 16th century morality plays and how a young Shakespeare, influenced by such shows and those of his contemporary Christopher Marlowe, first broached the role of the villain in his early works.In the roughly 80-minute production, Page peppers in tidbits about his personal relationship to the texts, like how he remained haunted by “Macbeth” even when he stepped off the stage, along with a few nods to Shakespeare in pop culture — like the imprint of “Hamlet” in “The Lion King” and the echoes of “Richard III” and “Macbeth” in “House of Cards.” Addressing some of the nuances behind the characterizations of these rapscallions and miscreants, Page asks worthwhile questions: Is Iago a sociopath? Does Shylock reflect Shakespeare’s early prejudices, and does Othello later subvert them? Is the jolly old rascal Falstaff not just a fool, but another villain to contend with?In the production, Page blends casual analysis with personal reflections on Shakespeare’s plays.Credit…via Shakespeare Theater CompanyThe production reminded me of another I’d enjoyed recently: the Irish Repertory Theater’s “On Beckett/In Screen,” written by and starring Bill Irwin (and available to stream this month as part of the theater’s Home Winter Festival). Both work in a form that speaks to the audience as not just vessels of the actor’s performance, but also as fellow scholars examining the text with him. I’m a student at heart, one of literature especially, so I count any piece that melds the virtuosity of stage performance with the intellectual rigor of a classroom, minus any didacticism, as a precious night of theater.And yet for Shakespeare stans like myself, the contextual analysis is a touch light, no more than the connective thread between villains. But when we do arrive at those villains — alas! — Page, with his bottomless bass (soon to be set to audio in a Shakespeare@Home production of “Julius Caesar”), seems possessed by such a mastery of his craft, moving teary-eyed through the pain of Shylock and the comic pomposity of Malvolio with such swiftness that it’s like watching a chameleon change hues before your eyes: stupefying, effortless.Does Page have the Weird Sisters casting spells by his side? I don’t think so, but just as well, he has Elizabeth A. Coco’s revelatory lighting, heralding and punctuating his tonal and oratorical shifts. Then there’s Gordon Nimmo-Smith’s exacting sound design, to create an air of mischief and terror, or usher in a scene in a verdant garden or rowdy pub.But it’s Page — looking exceptionally svelte in an all-black ensemble, standing or sitting at a lonely desk and chair onstage while the cameras follow him with a pristine eye and perfect attention — who is the devil, the mage, the usurper.In the final scene, he arrives at Prospero, who ends “The Tempest” rehabilitated and delivers one last monologue to the audience — here, the camera moves to show Page facing the empty theater — denouncing his magical games and bidding us farewell. Page does the same, snaps the staff in half and closes his book onstage.But has the spell really ended, just like that? Hours later, I’m still utterly beguiled.All the Devils Are Here: How Shakespeare Invented the VillainThrough July 28; shakespearetheatre.org.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More
AdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyHow the Trump Era Broke the Sunday-Morning News ShowAny number of hallowed political and media institutions fell apart. So why should the most hallowed political-media institution of them all escape unscathed? Credit…Photo illustration by Mike McQuadeFeb. 11, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ETOn the Sunday after Joe Biden’s inauguration, Rand Paul appeared on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” to make baseless claims of election fraud and to lecture the host on how to do his job. “Hey, George, George, George!” the Republican senator from Kentucky sputtered at Stephanopoulos, who had repeatedly tried — and failed — to get Paul to acknowledge that Biden had not “stolen” November’s election. “Where you make a mistake,” Paul continued, “is that people coming from the liberal side like you, you immediately say everything’s a lie instead of saying there are two sides to everything. Historically what would happen is if I said that I thought that there was fraud, you would interview someone else who said there wasn’t. But now you insert yourself in the middle and say that the absolute fact is that everything that I’m saying is a lie.”Paul was not necessarily wrong in his criticism. Ever since Tim Russert became the host of NBC’s “Meet the Press” in 1991 and began subjecting Democrats and Republicans to his “tough but fair” questions, the contemporary Sunday-morning public-affairs show anchors have cast themselves as facilitators of a point-counterpoint format. “It’s not my job to express my opinions,” Stephanopoulos told The Hartford Courant upon being handed the reins of “This Week” in 2002. “It’s my job to ask the right questions, to make sure that people learn something from the program, to present all sides of the story and let people make up their own minds.”But nearly two decades later, Stephanopoulos’s approach was untenable. “Senator Paul, let me begin with a threshold question for you,” he said at the interview’s outset. “This election was not stolen, do you accept that fact?” Paul dodged the question to claim that there were “people who voted twice” and “dead people who voted” and “illegal aliens who voted.” Stephanopoulos repeated, “Can’t you just say the words ‘The election was not stolen’?” Paul could not; instead he gave Stephanopoulos his history lesson about Sunday shows. “You’re forgetting who you are as a journalist if you think there’s only one side,” Paul taunted.The interview was barely an hour old before Paul posted a link on Twitter. “Partisan Democrats in the media think they can get away with just calling Republicans liars because they don’t agree with us,” he wrote. “Watch me stand up to one here.” Three days later, The Federalist ran a story headlined: “Rand Paul’s Cage Match With George Stephanopoulos Is a Pattern Everyone on the Right Should Follow.”The Donald Trump years have broken any number of hallowed political and media institutions, so why should the most hallowed political-media institution of them all, the Sunday show, escape unscathed? Yes, those self-important shows with their self-important anchors have never been as crucial to our constitutional system as they like to imagine. But they have at least provided a refuge from the soft-focused fecklessness of the networks’ evening news and the shrieking of the prime-time carnival barkers on cable. That changed during Trump’s presidency. In some instances, the shows were less about educating the viewing audience than flattering an audience of one. “The reality is that the president is a political genius,” Stephen Miller told Jake Tapper on CNN’s “State of the Union” during a contentious interview in 2018. “I’m sure he’s watching and is happy you said that,” Tapper told Miller. (Trump soon tweeted a link to the segment, praising Miller.)Even worse, the shows became platforms for disinformation. In October 2019, Chuck Todd invited Ron Johnson, a Republican senator from Wisconsin, on “Meet the Press” to discuss the revelation that Trump had withheld military aid to Ukraine unless the country’s president agreed to investigate the business dealings of Hunter Biden. Johnson previously told The Wall Street Journal that he “winced” when he learned those two issues were connected. But when Todd asked about that report — “What made you wince?” — Johnson launched into a conspiracy theory about the origins of Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. “I have no idea why we’re going here,” Todd complained. Two months later, Ted Cruz, a Republican senator from Texas, reached out to “Meet the Press” to discuss the Ukraine scandal. As Todd later told Rolling Stone, he assumed that Cruz, an avowed Russia hawk, wanted to push back against a Russian disinformation campaign. But when Todd asked Cruz whether he thought Ukraine tried to sway the 2016 elections, Cruz replied, “I do.” “You do?” Todd asked in disbelief. “Here’s the game the media is playing,” Cruz said. “Because Russia interfered, the media pretends nobody else did.” Looking back on the interview, Todd told Rolling Stone: “He wants to use this for some sort of appeasement of the right. I didn’t know what else to think.”Todd appears to have done a good deal of thinking about the plight of the Sunday show. In 2018, he wrote a cri de coeur for The Atlantic about “a nearly 50-year campaign to delegitimize the press,” imploring his colleagues to fight back: “It means not allowing ourselves to be spun, and not giving guests or sources a platform to spin our readers and viewers, even if that angers them.” A few months later, Todd hosted an episode of “Meet the Press” dedicated to climate change and made a point of not inviting any climate-change deniers. But should climate denialism be the only verboten point of view on Sunday shows? Last month, more than three dozen progressive groups wrote an open letter to members of the media calling on them to interview only those elected officials who “publicly concede that the 2020 presidential election was free and fair, and that claims to the contrary are false.” In other words, the groups wanted journalists to give Republicans who lie about election fraud the same treatment Twitter and Facebook gave Trump: deplatforming them. It’s hard to imagine, however, the Sunday shows ever taking such a step. There are, of course, the financial incentives: The trade associations and defense contractors that sponsor the Sunday shows presumably expect bipartisan bang for their advertising bucks. But the bigger impediment is the shows’ self-conception. If “This Week” and “Meet the Press” were to deplatform Republicans who won’t acknowledge, without caveats, that Biden won, then their guests would consist almost entirely of Democrats — and the Sunday shows would resemble prime-time programs on MSNBC and CNN. No self-respecting Sunday show wants that. In January, Todd beseeched what he called “sober-minded” Republicans to appear on his show. “Stop helping to reinforce the incorrect notion that the mainstream news media isn’t interested in your side of the debate,” he wrote in Politico.In the meantime, the Sunday shows are making do with those Republicans who will show up. Earlier that same month, Todd again hosted Ron Johnson, who again used the opportunity to spew nonsense, boasting about a recent hearing he had held to look into allegations of voter fraud. “The fact of the matter is that we have an unsustainable state of affairs in this country where we have tens of millions of people that do not view this election result as legitimate,” Johnson said at one point.“Then why don’t you hold hearings about the 9/11 truthers?” Todd asked. “How about the moon landing? Are you going to hold hearings on that?” It was a good line, and Todd seemed pleased with himself. It did not occur to Todd, however, that the same question could be asked of him. If “Meet the Press” is going to have guests like Johnson, why doesn’t it host 9/11 truthers and moon-landing conspiracists as well?Source photographs by Joshua Roberts/Getty Images; Andrew Toth/FilmMagic, via Getty Images. AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More
#masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }At HomeMake: BirriaExplore: ‘Bridgerton’ StyleParent: With ImprovRead: Joyce Carol OatesAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyTheater ReviewTheaters Go Digital to Talk About Life (and Death) in the PandemicGerman playhouses are finding innovative ways to forge connections while their doors are closed.Jonny Hoff as Werther and Florian Gerteis as his friend Wilhelm in “werther.live.”Credit…werther.liveFeb. 11, 2021, 4:41 a.m. ETAn interactive thriller about the race for a vaccine. A morbid installation on the stage of a theater no one can visit. A literary classic set during lockdown and narrated through social media posts. This is what theater in Germany looks like in early 2021.Nearly a year after the pandemic first shuttered playhouses in the country, German theatermakers have become increasingly adept at working around virus-related restrictions. Now, instead of the deluge of archival recordings or the broadcasts of productions planned before the pandemic, an increasing amount of digital theater is using technology to address Covid-era concerns.A recent spate of online productions from state-run and fringe theaters have examined contemporary themes of loneliness, isolation, fear of death and our chances for beating the virus. As lockdowns throughout Germany continue to be extended — Berlin has already announced that theaters in the city won’t reopen until after Easter — it’s heartening to see directors and actors finding new ways to forge connections with remote audiences by focusing on contemporary themes, even when taking well-known works as their starting point.Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s “The Sorrows of Young Werther,” from 1774, is one of the foundation texts of German literature. The epistolary novel, about a young artist who kills himself because of unrequited love, catapulted Goethe to fame and jump-started the Romantic movement in Germany. (The book also inspired a rash of copycat suicides). These days, “Werther” is sometimes seen like other classics that are required reading in school: musty, quaint and cloying in its depiction of adolescent passion and confusion.The director Cosmea Spelleken gives Goethe’s Sturm und Drang hero a refreshing update in “werther.live,” an intricately built and skillfully executed production with a live digital run through March 3 that replicates the in-person theatrical experience. This means that the show can be viewed — for a modest 4 euros (about $5) — only when performed in real time by the actors and technical team.Werther chatting with Lotte, played by Klara Wördemann.Credit…werther.live“werther.live” is a successful experiment in subjective storytelling: The audience experiences the plot almost exclusively from Werther’s perspective, via screen recordings from his computer. Over 120 minutes, we follow the novel’s four main characters through their Facebook profiles, Instagram feeds and WhatsApp conversations. Despite the 21st-century interventions, the production remains surprisingly faithful to the plot and emotional tone of the 18th-century original.At the start of the production, Werther (Jonny Hoff), a university student, is glad that he decided to put his academic career on hold during the pandemic. In his free time, he Skypes and chats regularly with his friend Wilhelm (Florian Gerteis), who is studying in France and, the coronavirus notwithstanding, seems to be having the time of his life.Werther, on the other hand, never seems to step away from his computer, let alone leave his room. He e-meets Lotte (the love interest in Goethe’s original) after buying an illustrated book of antique firearms (foreshadowing!) from her on eBay. Then, after some cyberstalking, Werther’s interest in Lotte becomes an infatuation. As they trade text and voice messages and video chat, we experience Werther’s increasing infatuation with a woman he’s never met. Klara Wördemann’s Lotte isn’t cruel or calculating, but she is careless in the way she leads him on. We understand, however, that she does reciprocate his feelings, at least in part. Their video chats are shot through with tenderness, but also sorrow. Of all the theatrical productions I’ve consumed over the past few months from my laptop, “werther.live” is among the most genuinely innovative. A manifesto of sorts posted on its website outlines the creative team’s aesthetic approach. “Filmed stages? Theater monologues in front of webcams? You’ll find none of that here. We believe that digital theater makes a new form of storytelling possible, in which the digital surfaces are actively part of the story.”The same evening as I watched “werther.live,” I downloaded and logged in to Webex, a web-meeting app, to take part in the Nuremberg State Theater’s production of “The Doses,” an “interactive choose-your-own-adventure” by Philipp Löhle about the race for a coronavirus vaccine.The three characters in “The Doses,” a production of the Nuremberg State Theater.Credit…Staatstheater NürnbergIn the video chat room, I gazed around at a mosaic of participants who had punctually joined the meeting. (Others who tried to log in late were refused entry.) A man in a Guy Fawkes mask instructed us to turn off our cameras. One by one, the faces of the roughly 90 audience members vanished. For the next half-hour, we watched as three actors performed, in real time, a high-octane biological thriller that seemed at least partially ad-libbed and contained a healthy dose of humor.In “The Doses,” a researcher, a human guinea pig and a radical anarchist scramble around a lab in search of a coveted vaccine. Each actor is equipped with a camera while navigating the research facility, and Webex’s split-screen format allows us to follow them on their increasingly frenzied quest.The audience, too, gets to play a role, via poll questions that appear onscreen. Should the anarchist enter the lab via the door or the window? (The audience chose the window). Should she disguise herself as a cleaning woman or a cat? (A cat, obviously!) Should the researcher grab the blue or the red vaccine?I’m not certain that the audience always chose wisely, since the short production ended in bloodshed and mayhem. Even so, if all the applause emojis in the chat window after the performance were any indication, the viewers were well pleased.Despite their unusual formats, both “werther.live” and “The Doses” told dramatic stories, however avant-garde their means. In late January, however, Darmstadt State Theater, in southwestern Germany, put together a timely livestream that, on the surface, had little to do with conventional theater.On the main stage of an auditorium, which has been empty for most of the last year, the German artist Gregor Schneider mounted his installation “Dying Room” (“Sterberaum”). First exhibited in Innsbruck, Austria, in 2011, “Dying Room” was conceived by the artist as a sculptural space where a person could die with dignity. Gregor Schneider in the livestream “Dying Room,” from the Darmstadt State Theater.Credit…Benjamin WeberInitially, Schneider said he was looking for a real person to die in the room over the course of the exhibition. He even enlisted a doctor to help him find volunteers. But even for the outré tastes of the European art establishment, the concept was a step too far. Among the general public, it was treated as a morbid publicity stunt.The ubiquity of death over the past year — to date, Germany has recorded over 60,000 Covid-19-related deaths — has provided a more sobering context for “Dying Room.” In Darmstadt, the installation was streamed on the theater’s website for three days and nights, and shot from three angles to give different perspectives on a modest room, with white walls and a herringbone floor, that had been constructed on the stage. In lieu of an expiring subject, Schneider himself provided the performative element: The artist, clad in all black, stayed onstage throughout the more than 70 hours of the livestream. In this new framework, and against the backdrop of the continuing pandemic, it seemed neither tasteless nor sensational, as previous presentations were called. Instead, Schneider succeeded in creating a space for contemplation and stillness that was heightened by his own high-endurance performance. Like “werther.live” and “The Doses,” the livestream showed that art and technology, when ingeniously combined, can respond to our age of solitude and disquiet with an urgency and immediacy more readily associated with live performance.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More
#masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyBest of Late NightStephen Colbert Gets Serious About New Insurrection Evidence“Because only by facing this truth will we have any hope of stopping it from happening again,” Colbert said. “Also, I’m pretty convinced it wasn’t antifa now.”“That’s right, there’s even more hard-to-watch video. Next up, deleted scenes from ‘Cats,’” Stephen Colbert joked on Wednesday night.Credit…CBSFeb. 11, 2021, 3:52 a.m. ETWelcome to Best of Late Night, a rundown of the previous night’s highlights that lets you sleep — and lets us get paid to watch comedy. We’re all stuck at home at the moment, so here are the 50 best movies on Netflix right now.Guilt by DissociationStephen Colbert brought some levity to former President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial on Wednesday after House managers presented powerful new video from the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, which Trump is accused of inciting.“That’s right, there’s even more hard-to-watch video. Next up, deleted scenes from ‘Cats.’” — STEPHEN COLBERTBut Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel also got serious to address the severity of the violence as shown. Colbert said he empathized with House managers because not only did they have to experience the attack and then relive it while presenting the footage as evidence, but they also had to do so “in front of Republican senators desperately trying to ignore that truth and desperately trying to treat it like it was a waste of time.”“But it’s not a waste of time, because whether or not the ex-president is impeached, or whether or not they vote to do the right thing to keep him from holding office again, it is important that one time, as a nation, we look this straight in the face and as it is laid out definitively for the unprecedented and premeditated violation that it is. Because only by facing this truth will we have any hope of stopping it from happening again. Also, I’m pretty convinced it wasn’t antifa now.” — STEPHEN COLBERT“It was a very powerful presentation, much more than anything I’d seen before. I have no idea how you could watch that and vote for anything other than ‘guilty as charged.’ Trump should have been removed from office that day.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“Despite the powerful evidence supplied by the House managers and objective reality, many G.O.P. senators seemed to be barely paying attention. Instead, they were seen explicitly not listening: feet up on their desks, reading books and reading briefing papers on other topics. Yes, other, more interesting topics like, ‘How does history tend to remember cowardly, fascist-enabling, worthless pieces of garbage?’” — STEPHEN COLBERT“Always weird when a violent insurrection has a director’s cut.” — JAMES CORDEN“A lot of Republicans saw the new footage and were like: ‘Wow, this is really horrifying. I’m not going to change my vote, but yikes.’” — JAMES CORDENBad ReviewsThe majority of other late-night monologues were dedicated to just how poorly Trump’s lawyers performed on Tuesday, as agreed upon by several Republicans — including Trump himself.“Today was a successful day for Donald Trump’s lawyers in that they did not speak.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“The former president’s lawyers had the day off, and they needed it, because they’re still in reconstructive surgery from punching themselves in the face for two hours yesterday.” — STEPHEN COLBERT“They never addressed key issues. They went off on meandering tangents. One guy cried while reading a poem. It was going so badly for the Republicans, I thought Ted Cruz was going to start another insurrection just to change the subject.” — TREVOR NOAH“Trump’s lawyer was so bad he actually flashed the Rudy signal over Mar-a-Lago.” — JIMMY FALLON“Republicans are like: ‘Wow, that defense was terrible. He couldn’t have made a worse case. Anyway, not guilty.’” — JIMMY FALLON“It’s the first time in history a president has been impeached a second time. He incited and cheered on a violent mob that breached the Capitol for the first time in 200 years, and injured 140 police officers in an attempt to overthrow democracy. You’d think his lawyers would be a little more prepared. Instead, Castor meandered aimlessly like he was auditioning to be on one of those sleep apps.” — SETH MEYERS“I left a voice mail on Ecstasy in 1997 that made more sense than this.” — SETH MEYERSThe Punchiest Punchlines (Man Camera Lawyer TV Edition)“Trump was not happy with how it went yesterday. They say the last time he was this mad was when he found out there was a Donald Trump Jr.” — JIMMY KIMMEL“The one man who really did not enjoy Castor’s performance was his client, because reportedly during Castor’s opening statement, the used-POTUS was ‘almost screaming’ at the TV. When has he ever ‘almost’ screamed? Back in the White House, the TVs had so much spittle on them, they came with wiper blades.” — STEPHEN COLBERT“On one hand, Trump was furious. On the other hand, screaming at the TV all day made him feel like he was president again.” — JIMMY FALLON“I mean first Giuliani, now these guys. Trump is really bad at picking an effective lawyer, which I chalk up as great news for Melania.” — JAMES CORDENThe Bits Worth WatchingSamantha Bee made a case for raising the minimum wage on Wednesday’s “Full Frontal.”What We’re Excited About on Thursday NightThe rapper Cardi B will sit down with Jimmy Fallon on Thursday’s “Tonight Show.”Also, Check This OutJay-Z in concert in Virginia Beach in 2019. He’s on the list of nominees for the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame released Wednesday.Credit…Brian Ach/Getty Images North America, via (Credit Too Long, See Caption)Tina Turner, Jay-Z and the Foo Fighters are among this year’s Rock & Roll Hall of Fame nominees.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More
#masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }What to WatchBest Movies on NetflixBest of Disney PlusBest of Amazon PrimeBest Netflix DocumentariesNew on NetflixAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyKristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo on ‘Bridesmaids’ and ‘Barb and Star Go to Vista Del Mar’The friends, confidants and collaborators explain why it took more than a decade between films and why Jamie Dornan is their dream co-star.Kristen Wiig, left, and Annie Mumolo star as middle-aged suburbanites in “Barb and Star.” The “characters are a lot who we are,” Mumolo said, and Wiig added, “Just the part we don’t show anybody.”Credit…Photographs by Maggie Shannon for The New York TimesFeb. 10, 2021Has it really been a decade since “Bridesmaids” upended comedy moviemaking? That 2011 film, which was written by Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo and starred Wiig as a woman whose life is thrown into disarray by the wedding of her best friend (Maya Rudolph), was a riotous success: While putting its female ensemble at the center of a raunchy, R-rated romp and initiating a conversation about women’s roles in comedy, it took in more than $288 million at the worldwide box office. “Bridesmaids” helped to elevate Wiig from the ensemble cast of “Saturday Night Live” and earned her and Mumolo an Academy Award nomination for their screenplay.Instead of reappearing immediately in a follow-up collaboration, the two longtime friends have since been seen in individual projects: Wiig has acted in films like “The Martian,” “The Skeleton Twins” and “Wonder Woman 1984,” while Mumolo has appeared in comedies like “Bad Moms” and “This Is 40.”But Wiig and Mumolo were not taking a vacation from their partnership. They have also spent several years on a new film, “Barb and Star Go to Vista Del Mar,” which will receive a video on demand release from Lionsgate on Feb. 12. Written by Wiig and Mumolo and directed by Josh Greenbaum, “Barb and Star” casts the two screenwriters as the title characters, a pair of well-meaning if blissfully clueless Midwesterners whose trip to a luxury resort unexpectedly lands them in a ludicrous life-or-death adventure.Compared with the somewhat more grounded comedy of “Bridesmaids,” Wiig and Mumolo said in a recent video interview, they wanted “Barb and Star” to reflect a more freewheeling and farcical spirit. That sensibility could be found in the sketches they created for the Groundlings, the Los Angeles performance troupe where they met, and in the movies that influenced them when they were growing up, like “Airplane!” and “Top Secret!”“Silly sometimes is underrated,” Wiig explained. “It’s fun and it doesn’t take itself too seriously.”Mumolo added, “That’s where our heads were at for several years — because it took that long to get the movie made.”Wiig and Mumolo spoke further about the making of “Barb and Star Go to Vista Del Mar,” how it grew out of “Bridesmaids” and their affection for the middle-aged characters they portray. These are edited excerpts from the conversation.Wiig and Mumolo in a musical number from the new film.Credit…Cate Cameron/LionsgateDid your friendship and partnership begin at the Groundlings?ANNIE MUMOLO Kristen and I had a lot of success there. We just had a very similar sense of humor. I’ve loved writing with her from Minute 1.KRISTEN WIIG We definitely gravitated toward characters of the middle-aged realm. It was almost an afterthought where, years later, we were like, wow, all of our characters are middle-aged women who have crazy wigs.MUMOLO They’re invisible and underrepresented in movies and TV, but they felt very real to us. The woman working behind the desk at my dad’s dental office, who was obsessed with Fabio and entered a contest to win a ski trip with Fabio.Was it difficult to continue the collaboration when Kristen left to join “Saturday Night Live”?MUMOLO I’ve never even told Kristen this but I actually did feel very sad when she moved away to do “Saturday Night Live.” Because I missed her.WIIG [eyes pinkening] Aww.MUMOLO I did feel like, oh, maybe that was the end of an era, even though we did have a lot of ideas we wanted to do. But I did really miss her.WIIG Oh, I missed you! But we found each other again, like long-lost creative lovers. We started writing “Bridesmaids” in, like, my second year there.Did “Bridesmaids” start out with more of the absurdist humor that we see in “Barb and Star”?WIIG Oh, yeah. There were a couple of ideas for musical numbers.MUMOLO Kristen’s very first boss was this woman who was kind of a Barb and Star. She was obsessed with dolls.Wiig began collaborating with Mumolo at the Groundlings troupe. Mumolo said, “I’ve never even told Kristen this but I actually did feel very sad when she moved away to do ‘Saturday Night Live.’ Because I missed her.”Credit…Maggie Shannon for The New York TimesWIIG When we were running around to find Lillian [the bride, played by Maya Rudolph], we were going to find a woman lying on the ground. We’re like, “It’s Lillian — she’s dead!” And then we were like, “Oh wait — it’s not Lillian.” And then we just keep running.After the success of “Bridesmaids,” were you just inundated with offers to do more writing?WIIG We had opportunities to do more writing and it still felt like such a new thing for us. Writing a movie is such a different beast than anything we had ever attempted before.MUMOLO Everyone does come to you and say, I have a story for you. My life is your next comedy! Our parents had a lot of people giving them stuff. My poor dad, his patients were giving him scripts. He would be like, what should I say to people?“Bridesmaids” helped open up a conversation about equality for women in moviemaking, but it also elicited a certain amount of backhanded, “I didn’t know women could be funny” praise. Did that surprise you?MUMOLO We actually didn’t know about the perception that women quote-unquote “couldn’t be funny,” until our movie was being marketed and the question was raised in the press. And then it really was hit over the head. It was strange.WIIG The lack of opportunity for female writers, actresses and filmmakers has always been there. And because it became such a conversation, it was a little like, why is this a thing? Why are we still talking about this? Are we really talking about women being funny?Was there a point where you knew “Barb and Star” would be your follow-up to “Bridesmaids”? Did you feel an obligation to come back with another film quickly?WIIG It was never like, Oh, we’d better write something soon. This just happened when Annie and I were joking around, and it was like, oh, maybe we should write something.MUMOLO “Bridesmaids” took five and a half years to get made. It’s almost like being pregnant and giving birth. If you were to find out you were pregnant with a baby the day after you just had a baby, it’s too much. You need that time for your brain to decompress and just live life.WIIG There’s also so much more joy in writing it when it doesn’t feel like an assignment. We wrote the first draft [of “Barb and Star”] in a really short amount of time. We just wrote it in a vacuum and thought, is this funny or is this weird? Then we had eight or 10 people over and read through the whole thing. And we were like, oh, maybe this is something we should continue to work on.Wiig on Mumolo’s casting as a co-star: “I need the world to see more Annie. Because she literally is the funniest person that I know.”Credit…Maggie Shannon for The New York TimesWhere did the Barb and Star characters come from?MUMOLO On “Bridesmaids,” we were writing scenes for Lillian and her mother [played by Lynne Marie Stewart], and we’d go on these runs where the mother would just be talking about Costco. [Exaggerated Midwestern accent] “I love that, where did you get that beach cape? It’s out of sight!” “I got it at Costco!” But they had nothing to do with anything. So it’s grown over the years, and it’s funny because the more we talk about it, we do realize, these characters are a lot who we are.WIIG Just the part we don’t show anybody. The real versions of us when we’re just together on the phone.Do you admire their unrelenting obliviousness?WIIG What I love about them is they just unconsciously filter out what anyone is thinking of them. They could walk into a room and people could be like, You were not invited. And they would leave and just be like, That was a fun party. They just live in this innocent bubble where everything is wonderful and new to them.MUMOLO I do envy the way they find joy in the littlest things — an in-flight magazine — if you could just bottle it and take it with you everywhere.Was “Barb and Star” designed to give Annie a bigger screen role than she had in “Bridesmaids”?WIIG It’s definitely a two-hander. I’ve always been like, I need the world to see more Annie. Because she literally is the funniest person that I know.MUMOLO We had written a role for me in “Bridesmaids” as one of the bridesmaids. But because of the process of the movie, we were on-again, off-again so many times for so many years. I was like, I’m living my life and I was having a family. So I got pregnant. We had gotten sort of shelved and then they called like two weeks later and said, “We’re back on!” And it was like, I’m pregnant. So that’s going to be great.WIIG How many months pregnant were you?MUMOLO I was seven months pregnant when we began shooting, and I had my son a week and a half after we wrapped. I couldn’t play that role, so we redeveloped it and we recast it. Now I have my amazing 10-year-old son that I would just never trade for it.Wiig and Mumolo in “Bridesmaids.”Credit…Suzanne Hanover/Universal PicturesHow did you come to cast Jamie Dornan as the film’s love interest?WIIG We could talk about that for an hour. You just never know when you cast someone, what it’s going to be like. And then he shows up on set and we were all just like, You’re amazing.MUMOLO The first day we met Jamie, we were sitting in our costumes, our wigs and everything, and I said, “We have to be your dream gals.” And he said, actually, “I really was a big fan of ‘The Golden Girls’ and had a huge crush on Estelle Getty.” Doesn’t that just make you love a man?[In an email, Dornan replied: “I loved ‘Golden Girls,’ yep. Didn’t have a crush on Estelle Getty, but she was my favorite character and my friend. I joined an online fan club for her!”]Was there any particular joy in making a movie that takes place at a lavish beach resort?WIIG I will say it was just very hot. If you are capable of zooming on any shot where we’re outside, we are sweating.MUMOLO There were scenes where we were on the sand, looking at each other, and we’re like, I just want you to know, I’m blacking out right now — I can’t see you.Did you have to get any special training for the scenes where you’re riding a jet ski?WIIG It was a version of Annie I had not seen before. She’s like: “Get. On.” She took control of that thing like she had been jet-skiing her whole life. I was terrified. I was holding on for dear life.MUMOLO That was, for sure, my favorite. Just flying over the open ocean was pretty exhilarating. Kristen was holding onto me, screaming.WIIG I have a fear of sharks and things that can grab me from the water. I was just very scared.Was it at all disappointing for you that “Barb and Star,” which was planned as a theatrical release, is instead coming out on VOD?WIIG Just for the pure sense of enjoyment, there’s nothing like a watching a comedy in a theater with other people. Being in a room with a bunch of people who are happy and escaping for a minute is, like, the dream. Of course we envisioned our movie being in the theaters, and it was just this inevitable choice that was made for us, not just by the studio but by the way the world is. We want people to be safe and they can watch it in their homes and that’s cool, too.MUMOLO In a weird way, it actually might be meant to be. It feels like a crazy thing now, like, oh my God, imagine going on a trip? When you think of Barb and Star never leaving their hometown, I’m starting to feel like I’ve never been out of my house.Have you decided what your next collaboration will be?WIIG I’m going to speak for both of us and say that we’ll always do stuff together. Who knows what the next thing will be? I don’t know. But there will be something on the horizon. Another 10 years from now? I don’t know [laughter].MUMOLO We have dreams of, like, let’s take Barb and Star somewhere else.WIIG It would just have to rhyme with their names.MUMOLO We’ve got a rhyming dictionary and a globe.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More
