Video Recordings, Downloads and Streaming

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Music

      1984: The Year Pop Stardom Got Supersized

      by

      Forty years ago, the chemistry of pop stardom was irrevocably changed. Nineteen eighty-four was an inflection point: a year of blockbuster albums, career quantum leaps, iconic poses and an enduring redefinition of what pop success could mean for performers — and would then demand from them — in the decades to come.The indelible albums of 1984 were turning-point releases: Prince’s “Purple Rain,” Madonna’s “Like a Virgin” and Bruce Springsteen’s “Born in the U.S.A.” among them. Tina Turner reintroduced herself as a bruised but resilient survivor on “Private Dancer.” And Van Halen proved that hard rock could mesh with pop — even synth-pop — on “Jump.” These were pivotal statements from established acts who were decisively multiplying their impact.Those blockbusters were propelled by an unlikely convergence of artistic impulses, advancing technology, commercial aspirations and popular taste, all shaped by the narrow portals of the pre-internet media landscape. The eye-popping novelty of music videos, the dominance of major record labels and the cautious formats of radio stations still made for a limited, recognizable mainstream rather than the infinitude of choices, niches, microgenres and personalized recommendation engines that the internet opened up. It was a peak moment of pop-music monoculture. Listeners in the 1980s absorbed hits that felt like ubiquitous earworms: the fanfare-like synthesizer riff of “Born in the U.S.A.,” the saxophone cushioned by synthesizers in George Michael’s “Careless Whisper,” the drone and percussion and bawled vocals of “Shout” by Tears for Fears. Younger generations have definitely heard and seen their repercussions, whether or not they’ve played back the originals. The sounds and lessons of 1984 have been durable and widely recycled by countless synthesizer-pumped 21st-century hitmakers, among them the Weeknd (“Blinding Lights”) and Sabrina Carpenter (“Please Please Please”). More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Music

      How TwoSet Violin Won Fame by Poking Fun at Classical Music

      by

      The violinists Eddy Chen and Brett Yang arrived in the suburbs of Bangkok recently on a mischievous mission. They had come to record hip-hop videos about Beethoven, Bach and other titans of music as if they were alive today.“They called me calloused, called me unfeeling,” Chen, dressed as Beethoven, with a gray wig and crimson scarf, rapped in one video. “Can’t let them know what I am concealing.”It was just another day in the life of Chen and Yang, better known as the comedy duo TwoSet Violin, who have millions of fans for the humor and whimsy they bring to the often very serious world of classical music. Over the past 11 years, they have galvanized a younger generation of musicians and helped dispel their field’s stuffy image.Filming crews working with Eddy Chen, left, dressed as Bach, and Brett Yang, dressed as Shostakovich.Chen and Yang have performed Pachelbel’s Canon in D with rubber chickens, hosted wild composer-themed games of charades and brutally taken down actors pretending to play the violin in movies. They have produced skits about showboating musicians, pushy parents and high-stakes auditions.Some of classical music’s biggest names have joined in on the fun. Hilary Hahn joined Chen and Yang to perform Paganini caprices while hula-hooping. Ray Chen played a game in which he and the duo imitated violinists like Jascha Heifetz and Anne-Sophie Mutter.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 Shares179 Views

      in Movies

      Test Yourself on These Young Adult Novels Adapted Into Films

      by

      Welcome to Great Adaptations, the Book Review’s regular multiple-choice quiz about books that have gone on to find new life as movies, television shows, theatrical productions, video games and more. This week’s challenge is focused on tween and teen novels that made the leap from the page to the screen — and some of them more than once.Just tap or click your answers to the five questions below. And scroll down after you finish the last question for links to the books and their movie versions.3 of 5This 1972 middle-grade novel by Mary Rodgers has been adapted for the screen in 1976, 1995, 2003 and 2018, and its various productions over the years have starred Lindsay Lohan, Jamie Lee Curtis, Heidi Blickenstaff and Jodie Foster, among others. What is the title of the book? More

    • 75 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      Thanksgiving Streaming Recommendations for Every Mood

      by

      Whether you’re with hanging out with children or adults, want to laugh or tuck into an adventure, here are some specific selections to stream.“What do you all want to watch?”This question has torpedoed many get-togethers, leaving the poor soul wielding the remote at a Thanksgiving gathering to search and scroll through seemingly infinite streaming options until everyone is cross-eyed and over it. Let’s skip that part, shall we? Here are a handful of picks that might fit the bill for some common holiday dynamics.Family Friendly, but Not CornyAlex Honnold climbs El Capitan in Yosemite National Park. His feat was captured in the 2018 documentary “Free Solo.”Jimmy Chin/National GeographicDocumentary with the little ones: “Tiger” (Disney+)There is no shortage of stunning nature documentaries, but this 2024 Disneynature film from the director Mark Linfield (“Planet Earth”) goes beyond the usual script to tell a poignant family tale. Narrated by Priyanka Chopra Jonas and filmed over the course of 1,500 days, we follow a tigress named Ambar in the forests of India as she protects her cubs from predators and adverse weather while on a perpetual quest to feed them and herself.Documentary with the teenagers: “Free Solo” (Disney+)This 2018 film that follows Alex Honnold on his free solo ascent of El Capitan, a vertical rock formation in Yosemite National Park, won the Oscar for best documentary for good reason. Not only will his feat shake your understanding of what is humanly possible, but how it was captured on film (Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi and Jimmy Chin directed) is just as gripping. Watch this on the biggest television you have. It’s worth it.Feature with the little ones: “Elemental” (Disney+)If you’ve already seen “Inside Out 2,” try this 2023 Pixar comedy set in Element City, where characters are divided into four strata: water, earth, air and fire, all magnificently rendered, creating a dazzling animated experience. The plot looks thoughtfully at family ties while telling a story of cross-cultural romantic love and self-actualization.Feature with the teenagers: “Spirited Away” (Max)It’s hard to believe it’s been nearly 25 years since the release of this now revered Oscar-winning fantasy anime from the celebrated Japanese filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki. It re-entered the zeitgeist this year with Billie Eilish’s track “Chihiro,” named after the film’s main character, a girl who slips into another realm, where she becomes trapped. The hand-drawn animation is transporting, and the coming-of-age themes will open the door for some deeper reflection.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 Shares149 Views

      in Movies

      Should I Sit Through the Movie’s Closing Credits?

      by

      The film has ended, but the names of the many people who worked on it are rolling across the screen. Do you stick around?Do you have a question for our culture writers and editors? Ask us here.Q: Is it morally correct to stay seated until the end of the credits in a cinema?I’ve thought about this question my entire adult life! I think a lot of other people have, too. But to answer it, we have to think about what movie credits do, and why they’re there at all.The stayers and the leaversThere are two schools of thought here, both of which, I think, are pretty reasonable.On the one hand are the “stayers.” I used to be one. When my partner and I began seeing movies together, I was often writing about them, and he was working in film production, so we had two good reasons to stick around. We felt it was a way of honoring and celebrating all the people who pitch in to make a movie. Filmmaking is inherently collaborative, more than most arts, and even the office assistants toward the end of the credits sequences (especially the office assistants) deserve acknowledgment for doing a stressful, surprisingly difficult job.And let’s be honest — we also stayed to the end because it was fun to spot our friends’ names in the credits.Over time, though, I’ve become more of a “leaver,” for a few practical reasons. I often see several movies in a day, and I’ve got to get across town for the next one. Sometimes I really need to use the bathroom. And in this era of ultra-budget productions and mega-effects-driven movies, those credits can go on for 10 or 15 minutes, especially when you add in post-credits scenes.This was not always the case. “End credits” weren’t really a common thing in American film until the late 1960s, when a much larger number of people involved in the production began getting credit for their work in the movie itself. Before then, there were usually a few title cards that announced major cast and crew credits. Adding the monkey wranglers and location scouts and drivers and production interns results in longer credits.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

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Music

      How One Man’s Tale of Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs Sex Tapes Landed Him in Court

      by

      Courtney Burgess, a one-time music industry bit player, said he had videos showing encounters involving celebrities. Prosecutors recently subpoenaed him.In federal court, the music mogul Sean Combs is facing a sweeping indictment that accuses him of running a criminal enterprise that engaged in sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy.Online, a cottage industry of amateur sleuths, speculators and self-described past associates have accused him, often with little grounding, of far worse.After Mr. Combs was charged in September, the social media theorizing about rampant celebrity debauchery and additional victims only grew more feverish and conspiratorial. Soon, a man began showing up on true crime podcasts claiming he had been given videos that showed sexual encounters involving Mr. Combs and a variety of other stars, including some he said looked to be inebriated and underage.Media outlets have received anonymous emails offering to negotiate deals to provide the supposed footage, but none have published any images and it remains unclear whether such videos even exist.Yet in a startling twist that brought the internet rumor mill into the U.S. court system, prosecutors recently subpoenaed Courtney Burgess, the man who said he had the explosive videos, to testify in front of a grand jury considering additional charges against Mr. Combs.The surfacing of Mr. Burgess, a one-time music industry bit player, has only amped up the circuslike frenzy surrounding the case. With much of the investigation shrouded in secrecy, it is unclear whether the prosecutors view Mr. Burgess as a possible new witness — the keeper of a smoking gun — or simply wanted to test the online bluster of someone seeking to be part of the action.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 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      Paramount Takes Promotional Stunt to New Level for ‘Gladiator II’

      by

      The studio plans to air the same 60-second trailer on 4,000 TV, radio and digital channels on Monday.For a snapshot of what movie marketers think it now takes to get the public’s attention — even for a sequel to a popular movie — consider the astounding stunt that Paramount Pictures has planned for “Gladiator II.”On Monday at 9 p.m. Eastern, Paramount will debut a final 60-second trailer for the film on more than 4,000 television networks, digital platforms, local stations, Spanish-language outlets and radio stations simultaneously.Based on average audience totals for a Monday evening, the trailer could reach roughly 300 million potential customers, according to Marc Weinstock, Paramount’s president of worldwide marketing and distribution. “We aimed to create a big moment to match the scope and grandeur of Ridley Scott’s epic film,” Mr. Weinstock said.The promotional tactic is known as a roadblock, and marketers have used them for decades. But the number of channels is typically much smaller. In what was described by Variety magazine in 2009 as the largest roadblock ever, Sony Pictures Entertainment simultaneously aired ads for the disaster movie “2012” on 450 television networks.Mr. Weinstock would not say how much Paramount is spending on Monday’s stunt. According to a “Gladiator II” producer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid conflict with the studio, the airtime was relatively inexpensive to purchase — about $2 million in total, with a spot during “Monday Night Football” as the most expensive. Wavemaker, a media agency, helped Paramount coordinate the effort.Marketing a movie used to require little more than buying ads on NBC on a Thursday night when millions tuned in to watch shows like “ER” and “Friends.” With the intense fracturing of the media landscape, however, studios have been forced to conjure up ever more provocative ways to grab attention. A single premiere? How quaint. Paramount staged “Gladiator II” red carpets in Australia, Japan, Ireland, France, Denmark and Britain in recent weeks. On Monday, a premiere in Los Angeles will involve the construction of a faux coliseum on Hollywood Boulevard.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 Shares119 Views

      in Television

      Mike Tyson and Netflix Are Sluggish During a Hyped Fight

      by

      Tyson looked slow and unsteady in a dull loss to Jake Paul. For many, Netflix’s latest live programming was hindered by buffering.The anticipated boxing match between Jake Paul, the 27-year-old social media influencer, and Mike Tyson, the 58-year-old former heavyweight champion, ended in unspectacular fashion on Friday night as boos rained down from the crowd at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas.Paul was declared the winner after eight dull rounds during which Tyson looked slow and exhausted. Many fans watching at home were just as displeased: Netflix, which was airing the fight as part of its expansion into live programming, experienced a variety of technical difficulties.Here are three takeaways from the event:A Made-for-Streaming SpectacleThe night’s final match was not one to remember, but it capped days of spectacle.During their weigh-in on Thursday, Tyson slapped Paul across the face, explaining later that Paul had stepped on his foot. After the fight, Paul and Tyson seemed to forgive each other in the ring. “That was a good slap, I liked that,” Paul said.Paul had entered the ring after a dramatic walkout during which he and his brother, Logan, approached in a slowly moving car. Paul, who has compiled an 11-1 record since his first professional boxing bout in 2020, easily won the fight by landing effective punches that broke through Tyson’s defense. Tyson, who last fought an official match in 2005, fell to 50-7.Netflix took advantage of the event to show off for its more than 280 million subscribers. People dressed as characters from “Squid Game,” whose second season releases next month, were shown ringside. After one of the night’s earlier fights, Netflix played a trailer from Jamie Foxx and Cameron Diaz’s upcoming movie, “Back in Action,” which will premiere in January.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