I don’t know how I feel about this. Granted, I’m sure it’ll be way better material than The Forgotten or any of her husband’s movies, but does Julianne Moore really need to take a stint on Desperate Housewives? But its happening, so says TV Squad. Moore will appear in three episodes, including the season finale, as Bree’s sister. It sounds like fun casting, and part of me (the part that used to watch and like the show - I can’t make judgments on it now because I don’t watch it) thinks it could be a lot of fun, and the other part is a snob for Julianne and doesn’t want her “image” tarnished by stunt casting. I guess what’s the difference between this and all those actors and actresses who were on Friends and Will & Grace or now 30 Rock (not that I always enjoyed the former two, but I never really held it against the “guests”. So I’m leaning with the former.. but the whole thing just seems a little.. you know.
Speaking of the Canadian film industry, it seems the wrath of a conservative government might soon be having its day. The Globe and Mail is reporting that the Harper government has drafted guidelines that would allow it to pull financial aid for any film or television show that it deems offensive or not in the public’s best interest - even if government agencies have invested in them.
Says The Globe:
The proposed changes to the Income Tax Act would allow the Heritage Minister to deny tax credits to projects deemed offensive, effectively killing the productions. Representatives from Heritage and the Department of Justice will determine which shows or films pass the test.
Game and talk shows, news, sports, reality television and pornography are already excluded from access to the tax credits. The proposed prohibition would cover a sweeping range of material, such as anything of an explicit sexual nature, that denigrates a group or is excessively violent without an educational value.
A “sweeping range”? This is not good. We might seem innocent, but Canadians have built their film industry on explorations of violence and sexuality (David Cronenberg, anyone? Do you think Crash would have made it through these censors? Or Exotica? And Bruce La Bruce better kiss his tax credits goodbye.)
The government provides refundable tax credits to productions that are certified as having Canadian content. Producers shoot the film or TV show, finish post-production, pay their bills and then file a corporate tax return. The tax credit is included in the production company’s tax refund.
Toronto lawyer David Zitzerman of Goodmans LLP says the government’s plans smack of “closet censorship.” He tells the Globe:
The proposed new initiative, if not properly crafted, could potentially violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and lead to possible legal challenges against the Minister of Canadian Heritage,” Mr. Zitzerman said Wednesday. “Such a provision could potentially lead to the government acting as ‘morality police.’ The existing definitions of pornography and obscenity in the Criminal Code should be sufficient for the government’s purposes.
If you want to send a message to the Minister of Culture, Josee Verner, you may do so here.
If this is true, at least. Reuters had a really misguided article running a few days back that exclaimed “Genie awards show ignores “Juno”!” Yes, of course it did, because Juno is not Canadian. It is American produced in its entirety. But Jason Reitman didn’t seem to get that. He said:
It’s a Canadian director, Canadian stars, Canadian cast, Canadian crew, shot in Canada - how are we not eligible for a Genie when David Cronenberg’s film about Russians living in London shot in England with a British crew and British cast is eligible? I’m sorry, but somebody is going to have to explain that to me; I don’t get it,” he said, with proud father Ivan Reitman at his side.
Well, lots of movies are shot in Canada, Jason, and some of them star the likes of Rachel McAdams, Seth Rogen and Mike Myers. But they are not Canadian. Take Titanic, for instance. Canadian director, Canadian crew, shot in Canada. But the Genies gave all the awards to The Sweet Hereafter that year. And you didn’t see James Cameron yelling “Blasphemy!”
Eastern Promises, on the other hand, may have dealt with a British setting and plot, but it was, in fact, a Canada-Britain co-production, thus being eligible. L.A.-based Mandate Pictures developed and financed Juno and Fox Searchlight released it. Is that so hard to understand?
Anyway.. what makes Jason’s comments all the more idiotic is the statement the Genies released in regard to Jason’s comments:
Thanks so much for your coverage of the Genie Awards but I would like to clear up the confusion surrounding the movie Juno. The movie wasn’t snubbed by the Genies because it was never submitted to the Genie Awards. I have provided below a quote from our CEO, Sara Morton that will hopefully clarify the situation.
Juno is an excellent film and the Academy salutes its success, which reflects the work of many talented Canadians both in front of and behind the camera. Regrettably, the filmmakers decided not to enter the film into the Genie Awards.
In order to be eligible for the Genies, a film must be Canadian, as defined by CAVCO and the CRTC. These are the accepted industry standards for recognizing a film as Canadian.
Ultimately, it’s up to the filmmaker to decide whether to seek Canadian certification. It would not be appropriate for me to speculate about the reasons for a filmmaker’s decision, or why they may or may not qualify.
Even though it wouldn’t have qualified in the end anyway, if Mr. Reitman wanted it so bad, he should have actually submitted the film. And while I’d be all for our country taking responsibility for “Juno”, I fear if we start doing stuff like that, we’ll have to start taking responsibility for stuff like this:
Notice how the commentator says “coming to America”? I must have forgot that the Toronto Maple Leafs played in Arizona now. Seriously though, that movie somehow looks even worse that I had intially imagined.
He once had a war of words with Gore Vidal (whom he addressed as “you queer” after Vidal called him a “pro-war-crypto-Nazi”) and he made such condescending remarks about gay rights as, “A homosexual has a right not to get hit by a truck.” Yes, William F. Buckley Jr., that great charmer of men and founder of conservative soapbox The National Review, is finally dead. After graduating Yale in 1950, Buckley rose to right-wing fame after penning the book God and Man at Yale, in which he went after the growing threat of “liberal professors” who were forcing their heathen views on unsuspecting students. He may be responsible, in fact, for popularizing the term “liberal professor” and for turning the American Right into a bunch of anti-intellectual, academia-hating Texans. More recently he has weighed in on the illogic of the Episcopal Church in trying to canonize homosexuals and spoken in support of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. He leaves a great legacy of tight-assed stubbornness behind him, and his influence will probably still be felt for years to come.
Call it tasteless, but its all very true. And in light of William F. Buckley‘s death, The Sword also offers a wishlist of conservative commentator be-gones to come (Dick Cheney’s presence along side Fred Phelps, Sr is a bit over the top, but otherwise its an agreeable list). They even include an expected death date (Jesse Helms is next, though personally I’m keeping my fingers crossed for Fred Phelps). Check it out and place your own bets!
The concepts of the leap year and leap day are distinct from the leap second, which results from changes in the Earth’s rotational speed.
The leap day was introduced as part of the Julian reform. The day following the Terminalia (23 February) was doubled, forming the so-called “bis sextum”. The first day of the bis sextum (February 24) came to be regarded as the intercalated or “bissextile” day. February 29 came to be regarded as the leap day when the Roman system of numbering days was replaced by sequential numbering in the late Middle Ages.
There is a tradition that women may make a proposal of marriage to men only in leap years, further restricted in some cases to only February 29. There is a tradition that in 1288 the Scottish parliament under Queen Margaret legislated that any woman could propose in Leap Year; few parliament records of that time exist, and none concern February 29. Another component of this tradition was that if the man rejects the proposal, he should soften the blow by providing a kiss, one pound currency, and a pair of gloves (some later sources say a silk gown). There were similar notions in France and Switzerland.
A person who was born on February 29 may be called a “leapling”. In non-leap years they may celebrate their birthday on 28 February or 1 March.
Leaplings include:
1468 - Pope Paul III (d. 1549)
1916 - Dinah Shore, American singer (d. 1994)
1956 - Aileen Wuornos, American serial killer (d. 2002)
1972 - Antonio Sabàto, Jr., Italian-born actor
1972 - Pedro Zamora, Cuban-born American AIDS activist (d. 1994)
1976 - Ja Rule, American rapper and actor
And on a personal note, this day brings a bit of fear to my mildly superstitious mind. In nearly every leap year since the year I was born, something horrific has happened to myself or a member of my close family. And I seriously mean horrific: cancer; a stroke; a near-death bout of meningitis resulting in a deaf ear; a tractor explosion resulting in 85% 3rd degree burns and six months of hospitalization; a rather eventful divorce; an emergency circumcision; and a family viewing of “Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot”. I know it sounds extremely dramatic (and perhaps a bit too telling), but I’m not making this shit up. 2008 is so far so good, but I will live in fear each day until 2009.
Syndicate this site