Wednesday, October 6, 2010

personal finance budgeting





It's hard to beat an excel spreadsheet for quickly shifting between a granular and top-level view of your personal finance situation. Here's reader Lauren's account balance spreadsheet she made to keep track of her expenditures, past, present, and future, and itemize her budget.



Download Lauren's Budgeter (XLS)



1. Scroll to the current month.

2. Enter your current balance in the "Starting Balance" box at the top left.

3. Enter your credits and debits on the appropriate dates they will hit your account. Use positive numbers for money getting added credits, and negative numbers for when it's getting taken away.

4. The green "Total" will change to reflect your total overall balance.



Use it as is, compare it to your own, or mod to fit your own needs.



Lauren says it's "quite nifty," and also uses it as a calendar.



Here's the excel code for the totaler for those who like to look under the hood:



TODAY();_8_10)

+SUMIF(_9_10d;"



It's hard to beat an excel spreadsheet for quickly shifting between a granular and top-level view of your personal finance situation. Here's reader Lauren's account balance spreadsheet she made to keep track of her expenditures, past, present, and future, and itemize her budget.



Download Lauren's Budgeter (XLS)



1. Scroll to the current month.

2. Enter your current balance in the "Starting Balance" box at the top left.

3. Enter your credits and debits on the appropriate dates they will hit your account. Use positive numbers for money getting added credits, and negative numbers for when it's getting taken away.

4. The green "Total" will change to reflect your total overall balance.



Use it as is, compare it to your own, or mod to fit your own needs.



Lauren says it's "quite nifty," and also uses it as a calendar.



Here's the excel code for the totaler for those who like to look under the hood:



TODAY();_8_10)

+SUMIF(_9_10d;"
robert shumake

The Hockey <b>News</b>: Fantasy Pool Look Column: Fantasy Pool Look: Late <b>...</b>

Looking to pick up a producer in the late-rounds of your draft? The Dobber has a few suggestions.

Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Sponsoring ABC <b>News</b> Health Coverage

NEW YORK — ABC News is announcing a yearlong project to focus attention on the diseases and health conditions that afflict the world's poorest people. The series, "Be the Change: Save a Life," will begin in December and continue through ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: Marketing Marathon

If your business plan is to be successful, marketing must play a part. Sure your product must be good and, of course, your product service should be excellent,


robert shumake

The Hockey <b>News</b>: Fantasy Pool Look Column: Fantasy Pool Look: Late <b>...</b>

Looking to pick up a producer in the late-rounds of your draft? The Dobber has a few suggestions.

Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Sponsoring ABC <b>News</b> Health Coverage

NEW YORK — ABC News is announcing a yearlong project to focus attention on the diseases and health conditions that afflict the world's poorest people. The series, "Be the Change: Save a Life," will begin in December and continue through ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: Marketing Marathon

If your business plan is to be successful, marketing must play a part. Sure your product must be good and, of course, your product service should be excellent,



Craig at Techcocktail DC by BudgetPulse


robert shumake




It's hard to beat an excel spreadsheet for quickly shifting between a granular and top-level view of your personal finance situation. Here's reader Lauren's account balance spreadsheet she made to keep track of her expenditures, past, present, and future, and itemize her budget.



Download Lauren's Budgeter (XLS)



1. Scroll to the current month.

2. Enter your current balance in the "Starting Balance" box at the top left.

3. Enter your credits and debits on the appropriate dates they will hit your account. Use positive numbers for money getting added credits, and negative numbers for when it's getting taken away.

4. The green "Total" will change to reflect your total overall balance.



Use it as is, compare it to your own, or mod to fit your own needs.



Lauren says it's "quite nifty," and also uses it as a calendar.



Here's the excel code for the totaler for those who like to look under the hood:



TODAY();_8_10)

+SUMIF(_9_10d;"



It's hard to beat an excel spreadsheet for quickly shifting between a granular and top-level view of your personal finance situation. Here's reader Lauren's account balance spreadsheet she made to keep track of her expenditures, past, present, and future, and itemize her budget.



Download Lauren's Budgeter (XLS)



1. Scroll to the current month.

2. Enter your current balance in the "Starting Balance" box at the top left.

3. Enter your credits and debits on the appropriate dates they will hit your account. Use positive numbers for money getting added credits, and negative numbers for when it's getting taken away.

4. The green "Total" will change to reflect your total overall balance.



Use it as is, compare it to your own, or mod to fit your own needs.



Lauren says it's "quite nifty," and also uses it as a calendar.



Here's the excel code for the totaler for those who like to look under the hood:



TODAY();_8_10)

+SUMIF(_9_10d;"
robert shumake

The Hockey <b>News</b>: Fantasy Pool Look Column: Fantasy Pool Look: Late <b>...</b>

Looking to pick up a producer in the late-rounds of your draft? The Dobber has a few suggestions.

Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Sponsoring ABC <b>News</b> Health Coverage

NEW YORK — ABC News is announcing a yearlong project to focus attention on the diseases and health conditions that afflict the world's poorest people. The series, "Be the Change: Save a Life," will begin in December and continue through ...

Small Business <b>News</b>: Marketing Marathon

If your business plan is to be successful, marketing must play a part. Sure your product must be good and, of course, your product service should be excellent,






















































Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Moms Making Money


To me, the premise of the show is to mentor amateur chefs as one emerges to be the MasterChef.



Is having a basic blueprint recipe for a dessert really different than the judges walking around, offering advice...in some cases, telling contestants they are doing things incorrectly? In the hamburger challenge, Chef Ramsey allowed the team that was losing to taste the burger of the team that was winning to give them a chance to change things up to cater to the customer (they declined, but were given the chance). In the wedding challenge, they stopped burned appetizers from going out to the guests...again, essentially giving the team that was "behind" to have a do-over and try again.



I have no problem if Whitney followed a basic blueprint of a recipe - for one, that doesn't guarantee results. For another, how do we know that Sharone did NOT look at the recipe?



The final four, by the way, is fine by me. I am not sure exactly why some of these contestants shouldn't be here, while others should be here. You screw up, you are out - let us not forget that Sharone's dish was panned by the food critics. It's not just the dessert that did him in.



I have no problem if Whitney followed a basic blueprint of a recipe - for one, that doesn't guarantee results. For another, how do we know that Sharone did NOT look at the recipe?



The final four, by the way, is fine by me. I am not sure exactly why some of these contestants shouldn't be here, while others should be here. You screw up, you are out - let us not forget that Sharone's dish was panned by the food critics. It's not just the dessert that did him in.




Katie Holmes is under the impression robots get a say when it comes to reproductive rights. The actress, seen yesterday on Letterman, is currently promoting her forthcoming movie, The Romantics. This explains, for those of us who are cynical, why she has been seen glued to the hip of her master/ husband Tom Cruise. They seem to spend a lot of time together as a family anyway, sure, but this week they’re suddenly inseparable (though, that might be because Cruise is pregnant himself, with his master’s demon seed). While Holmes lovingly pats her husband’s stomach, as though willing away their alien baby using the power of black magic and negative thinking, like a basic a$$ character off True Blood, check out her interview highlights and photos from her spread with Marie Claire.




  • On whether she’s ready to have more children: “Maybe in a couple of years, but right now I want to make sure I’m really there for Suri,” Holmes says in the October 2010 issue of Marie Claire, on stands Sept. 14.

  • On how she grew up with her own siblings: “I’m the youngest in my family — my closest sister is 5 years older than me, and the next one is nine years ahead of me, so I was a bit of an only child, and I liked it! I liked having all of my mom’s attention, and sometimes I think I still do.”

  • On her marriage to Tom Cruise: “It’s really exciting. Tom’s as big at home as he is on the movie screen. He’s so passionate about everything, whatever he’s doing. When he’s being a dad, he’s right there; he’s giving it his all. It’s inspiring and it’s fun. It’s an amazing life, but we always remind ourselves of how incredibly lucky we are.”

  • On how she and her husband visit each other on set when they can and arrange date nights, usually screening a current movie in their Beverly Hills home, followed by: “probably a two-hour discussion about what we thought.”

  • On how she’s raising daughter Suri: “We travel a lot, and so for me, it’s keeping a daily schedule for Suri that never changes. We wake up, and we do the same thing. She does her chores. I think it’s very important. If she doesn’t get her chores done, I notice she’s not really herself. She has to make her bed, she has to take her dishes to the sink, she has to put her clothes in the laundry… you know, that basic stuff,” Holmes says.

  • On what kind of mother she wants to be: “I try to do what my mom did for me… just spending time with her, making doll clothes and planting in the garden … When Suri comes to the set, we have art projects, and I just try to keep her busy and inspired.”






robert shumake

Fox <b>News</b> poll: Angle by three in Nevada, Raese by five in West <b>...</b>

A new Fox News battleground state poll on the race for the seat held by the late Sen. Robert Byrd for 51 years shows Republican businessman John Raese with a 5-point lead over Democratic Gov. Joe Manchin among likely voters — 48 percent ...

Orlando Magic <b>News</b> for October 5th: Quentin Richardson in <b>...</b>

Today's Orlando Magic news post includes word that Quentin Richardson will start at small forward tonight when the Magic take on the Houston Rockets in preseason action. Plus, a video of Dwight Howard practicing his free throws, ...

Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: &#39;The Hangover 2&#39;, &#39;Thor&#39; Images, &#39;Avatar <b>...</b>

Don't pretend like you're too cool to spend $995 on officially licensed, 'Tron Legacy' light bike suits. [via Gizmodo] - Months ago 'The Hangover.


robert shumake

Fox <b>News</b> poll: Angle by three in Nevada, Raese by five in West <b>...</b>

A new Fox News battleground state poll on the race for the seat held by the late Sen. Robert Byrd for 51 years shows Republican businessman John Raese with a 5-point lead over Democratic Gov. Joe Manchin among likely voters — 48 percent ...

Orlando Magic <b>News</b> for October 5th: Quentin Richardson in <b>...</b>

Today's Orlando Magic news post includes word that Quentin Richardson will start at small forward tonight when the Magic take on the Houston Rockets in preseason action. Plus, a video of Dwight Howard practicing his free throws, ...

Movie <b>News</b> Quick Hits: &#39;The Hangover 2&#39;, &#39;Thor&#39; Images, &#39;Avatar <b>...</b>

Don't pretend like you're too cool to spend $995 on officially licensed, 'Tron Legacy' light bike suits. [via Gizmodo] - Months ago 'The Hangover.



Lechia &amp; Dave Ramsey by _Full Spectrum Photography_


robert shumake


















To me, the premise of the show is to mentor amateur chefs as one emerges to be the MasterChef.



Is having a basic blueprint recipe for a dessert really different than the judges walking around, offering advice...in some cases, telling contestants they are doing things incorrectly? In the hamburger challenge, Chef Ramsey allowed the team that was losing to taste the burger of the team that was winning to give them a chance to change things up to cater to the customer (they declined, but were given the chance). In the wedding challenge, they stopped burned appetizers from going out to the guests...again, essentially giving the team that was "behind" to have a do-over and try again.



I have no problem if Whitney followed a basic blueprint of a recipe - for one, that doesn't guarantee results. For another, how do we know that Sharone did NOT look at the recipe?



The final four, by the way, is fine by me. I am not sure exactly why some of these contestants shouldn't be here, while others should be here. You screw up, you are out - let us not forget that Sharone's dish was panned by the food critics. It's not just the dessert that did him in.



I have no problem if Whitney followed a basic blueprint of a recipe - for one, that doesn't guarantee results. For another, how do we know that Sharone did NOT look at the recipe?



The final four, by the way, is fine by me. I am not sure exactly why some of these contestants shouldn't be here, while others should be here. You screw up, you are out - let us not forget that Sharone's dish was panned by the food critics. It's not just the dessert that did him in.




Katie Holmes is under the impression robots get a say when it comes to reproductive rights. The actress, seen yesterday on Letterman, is currently promoting her forthcoming movie, The Romantics. This explains, for those of us who are cynical, why she has been seen glued to the hip of her master/ husband Tom Cruise. They seem to spend a lot of time together as a family anyway, sure, but this week they’re suddenly inseparable (though, that might be because Cruise is pregnant himself, with his master’s demon seed). While Holmes lovingly pats her husband’s stomach, as though willing away their alien baby using the power of black magic and negative thinking, like a basic a$$ character off True Blood, check out her interview highlights and photos from her spread with Marie Claire.




  • On whether she’s ready to have more children: “Maybe in a couple of years, but right now I want to make sure I’m really there for Suri,” Holmes says in the October 2010 issue of Marie Claire, on stands Sept. 14.

  • On how she grew up with her own siblings: “I’m the youngest in my family — my closest sister is 5 years older than me, and the next one is nine years ahead of me, so I was a bit of an only child, and I liked it! I liked having all of my mom’s attention, and sometimes I think I still do.”

  • On her marriage to Tom Cruise: “It’s really exciting. Tom’s as big at home as he is on the movie screen. He’s so passionate about everything, whatever he’s doing. When he’s being a dad, he’s right there; he’s giving it his all. It’s inspiring and it’s fun. It’s an amazing life, but we always remind ourselves of how incredibly lucky we are.”

  • On how she and her husband visit each other on set when they can and arrange date nights, usually screening a current movie in their Beverly Hills home, followed by: “probably a two-hour discussion about what we thought.”

  • On how she’s raising daughter Suri: “We travel a lot, and so for me, it’s keeping a daily schedule for Suri that never changes. We wake up, and we do the same thing. She does her chores. I think it’s very important. If she doesn’t get her chores done, I notice she’s not really herself. She has to make her bed, she has to take her dishes to the sink, she has to put her clothes in the laundry… you know, that basic stuff,” Holmes says.

  • On what kind of mother she wants to be: “I try to do what my mom did for me… just spending time with her, making doll clothes and planting in the garden … When Suri comes to the set, we have art projects, and I just try to keep her busy and inspired.”









Monday, October 4, 2010

foreclosure investing


Two bad economic reports this morning reinforce today’s call by 300 economists and policymakers urging the president and Congress to “redouble efforts to create jobs” through investment in infrastructure, sending aid to the states and creating public service jobs.


First, the bad news.



  • U.S. poverty hit its highest rate since 1994, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In 2009, one in seven people were in poverty, and one in five children were in poverty.  

  • U.S. home seizures reached a record for the third time in five months in August as lenders completed the foreclosure process for thousands of delinquent owners, according to RealtyTrac Inc. Bank repossessions climbed 25 percent from a year earlier to 95,364. RealtyTrac sees a record 1.2 million repossessions this year, up from just under 1 million last year, with more than 3.2 million homes in some stage of foreclosure.


Such data make all the more relevent the statement by 300 prominent economists, “Don’t Kill Growth and Jobs in the Name of Deficit Reduction.”  In short, the statement urges the president and lawmakers:




  • Don’t kill growth and jobs in the name of deficit reduction.

  • Target what drives deficits. Don’t fix what isn’t broken.

  • Restore fiscal responsibility, while investing in the future.

  • Take the high road to fiscal balance.


In a conference call today with some of the signers, Campaign for America’s Future co-director Robert Borosage said the statement is:


a cry action on the economy—for a return to common sense.


In urging Washington to focus on bold initiatitves and massive job creation rather than deficit reduction, Borosage said the reason is simple: More unemployment will only reduce government income, which in turn will lead to a higher budget defict.


Robert Reich, former labor secretary, put it this way on today’s conference call:


Some people point to the fact that U.S. economy is tech growing…but what we learned is that it’s slowing.


Last quarter’s sorry 1.6 percent growth in gross domestic product (GDP):


should be a warning sign to everyone that we are not just in danger of a double dip recession, but that we are not getting out of the hole at all.


What you expect when an economy is getting out of the hole is rapid economic growth [because so many people are ready to jump into the production process]. But this time it’s not happening. This is a very dangerous sign.


Borosage says in contrast, the position of  House Minority Leader John Boehner, who says he and the Republicans will cut $100 billion from the budget if they get a majority in the House this November,


condem us to higher unemployment and continued stagnation.


With more than 26 million unemployed and underemployed U.S. workers, a dire need to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure and shore up vital socal services, Borosage said:


Anyone with a wit of business sense would grab this moment as the time to rebuild America.


Print This Article
| E-Mail This Article
|Comments
(2)




So rather than take the time to generate the correct documentation, it seems the banks cut corners. Yet these are not small nicks off the end of the corners, despite protests from the banks that the documents are essentially true, just signed badly.

Documents like those cited in this article -- which are common -- falsify the chain of title for the underlying properties. Clean title is so crucial for real estate deals that they won't close if a seller can't give good title. In fact, one major title insurer, Old Republic National Title Insurance, will no longer insure titles for GMAC foreclosures because of the document problem. The stock market is weighing in, too, as shares of title insurers have taken a hit.

The chain-of-title problems has other practical consequences. Banks sometimes don't know which properties they can foreclose on. For example, banks have foreclosed on homes bought with cash. Two banks have tried to foreclose on the same property. And so on. The "mistakes" have been many.

Beyond the title problem is the fundamental issue of the integrity of the court system. When attorneys file false documents, it's called a fraud on the court for a reason: Courts can't function when lawyers do that.

The Bright Light of Bankruptcies

According to attorneys who assist clients facing foreclosure, bad documents have been turning up for years. So why is the practice only coming to light now? Because most people facing foreclosure don't have attorneys to check the documents. Most don't even contest the foreclosure.

Bankruptcy court is where most of the fraud comes out because in bankruptcy, to prove the bank is owed money and that its claim is "secured" -- meaning it should get paid first -- a bank has to prove it has the right to foreclose. It has to produce the necessary documents. Indeed, the reason that the banks are halting foreclosures in only 23 states is that in those states, judges are involved in the foreclosure process, meaning somebody might actually start looking at the documents.

Not all debtors in bankruptcy have attorneys, and not all those attorneys know what to look for. But enough attorneys have caught on to the bank's practices that robo-signer fraud is finally getting exposure on the same scale as it's being committed.

Caveats All Around

Title companies take note: It's increasingly obvious that GMAC's foreclosure problems are the tip of the iceberg. The title you insured on the resale of any foreclosed property -- particularly on mortgages that were included in securitizations -- might be clouded. Better double-check those documents.

Purchasers of foreclosed properties: I hope you bought title insurance. And you might want to get your lawyer to look at the foreclosure file.

Homeowners facing foreclosure: Make sure you or your attorney scrutinizes bank documents carefully because if anything is amiss, you may be able to get a meaningful modification of your mortgage instead of losing your home.

Banks submitting these documents: You could face big sanctions if courts notice you make the same kind of bad filings over and over.

Attorneys submitting these documents: If state bar associations start paying attention, you could risk your professional license on the robo-signed dotted line.

Sea Ice <b>News</b> – delayed a day – but still something interesting <b>...</b>

It makes good news right now because of the nice 15 year trend down, which is actually a 30 year trend down. The problem is that our satellite data for the sea ice extent started in 1979 (for the whole year at least). ...

Medical Nobel Goes To Developer Of IVF - Science <b>News</b>

Robert Edwards receives prize for work that led to 4 million births.

<b>News</b> the Old Media Won&#39;t Tell You: More Trash at One Sparsely <b>...</b>

12774581 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fbigjournalism.com%2Fmpleahy%2F2010%2F10%2F03%2Fnews-the-old-media-wont-tell-you-more-trash-at-one-sparsely-attended-left-wing-rally-than-at-all-the-tea-parties-around-the-country-in-a-year-and-a-half%2FNews ...


eric seiger eric seiger

Two bad economic reports this morning reinforce today’s call by 300 economists and policymakers urging the president and Congress to “redouble efforts to create jobs” through investment in infrastructure, sending aid to the states and creating public service jobs.


First, the bad news.



  • U.S. poverty hit its highest rate since 1994, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In 2009, one in seven people were in poverty, and one in five children were in poverty.  

  • U.S. home seizures reached a record for the third time in five months in August as lenders completed the foreclosure process for thousands of delinquent owners, according to RealtyTrac Inc. Bank repossessions climbed 25 percent from a year earlier to 95,364. RealtyTrac sees a record 1.2 million repossessions this year, up from just under 1 million last year, with more than 3.2 million homes in some stage of foreclosure.


Such data make all the more relevent the statement by 300 prominent economists, “Don’t Kill Growth and Jobs in the Name of Deficit Reduction.”  In short, the statement urges the president and lawmakers:




  • Don’t kill growth and jobs in the name of deficit reduction.

  • Target what drives deficits. Don’t fix what isn’t broken.

  • Restore fiscal responsibility, while investing in the future.

  • Take the high road to fiscal balance.


In a conference call today with some of the signers, Campaign for America’s Future co-director Robert Borosage said the statement is:


a cry action on the economy—for a return to common sense.


In urging Washington to focus on bold initiatitves and massive job creation rather than deficit reduction, Borosage said the reason is simple: More unemployment will only reduce government income, which in turn will lead to a higher budget defict.


Robert Reich, former labor secretary, put it this way on today’s conference call:


Some people point to the fact that U.S. economy is tech growing…but what we learned is that it’s slowing.


Last quarter’s sorry 1.6 percent growth in gross domestic product (GDP):


should be a warning sign to everyone that we are not just in danger of a double dip recession, but that we are not getting out of the hole at all.


What you expect when an economy is getting out of the hole is rapid economic growth [because so many people are ready to jump into the production process]. But this time it’s not happening. This is a very dangerous sign.


Borosage says in contrast, the position of  House Minority Leader John Boehner, who says he and the Republicans will cut $100 billion from the budget if they get a majority in the House this November,


condem us to higher unemployment and continued stagnation.


With more than 26 million unemployed and underemployed U.S. workers, a dire need to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure and shore up vital socal services, Borosage said:


Anyone with a wit of business sense would grab this moment as the time to rebuild America.


Print This Article
| E-Mail This Article
|Comments
(2)




So rather than take the time to generate the correct documentation, it seems the banks cut corners. Yet these are not small nicks off the end of the corners, despite protests from the banks that the documents are essentially true, just signed badly.

Documents like those cited in this article -- which are common -- falsify the chain of title for the underlying properties. Clean title is so crucial for real estate deals that they won't close if a seller can't give good title. In fact, one major title insurer, Old Republic National Title Insurance, will no longer insure titles for GMAC foreclosures because of the document problem. The stock market is weighing in, too, as shares of title insurers have taken a hit.

The chain-of-title problems has other practical consequences. Banks sometimes don't know which properties they can foreclose on. For example, banks have foreclosed on homes bought with cash. Two banks have tried to foreclose on the same property. And so on. The "mistakes" have been many.

Beyond the title problem is the fundamental issue of the integrity of the court system. When attorneys file false documents, it's called a fraud on the court for a reason: Courts can't function when lawyers do that.

The Bright Light of Bankruptcies

According to attorneys who assist clients facing foreclosure, bad documents have been turning up for years. So why is the practice only coming to light now? Because most people facing foreclosure don't have attorneys to check the documents. Most don't even contest the foreclosure.

Bankruptcy court is where most of the fraud comes out because in bankruptcy, to prove the bank is owed money and that its claim is "secured" -- meaning it should get paid first -- a bank has to prove it has the right to foreclose. It has to produce the necessary documents. Indeed, the reason that the banks are halting foreclosures in only 23 states is that in those states, judges are involved in the foreclosure process, meaning somebody might actually start looking at the documents.

Not all debtors in bankruptcy have attorneys, and not all those attorneys know what to look for. But enough attorneys have caught on to the bank's practices that robo-signer fraud is finally getting exposure on the same scale as it's being committed.

Caveats All Around

Title companies take note: It's increasingly obvious that GMAC's foreclosure problems are the tip of the iceberg. The title you insured on the resale of any foreclosed property -- particularly on mortgages that were included in securitizations -- might be clouded. Better double-check those documents.

Purchasers of foreclosed properties: I hope you bought title insurance. And you might want to get your lawyer to look at the foreclosure file.

Homeowners facing foreclosure: Make sure you or your attorney scrutinizes bank documents carefully because if anything is amiss, you may be able to get a meaningful modification of your mortgage instead of losing your home.

Banks submitting these documents: You could face big sanctions if courts notice you make the same kind of bad filings over and over.

Attorneys submitting these documents: If state bar associations start paying attention, you could risk your professional license on the robo-signed dotted line.

Sea Ice <b>News</b> – delayed a day – but still something interesting <b>...</b>

It makes good news right now because of the nice 15 year trend down, which is actually a 30 year trend down. The problem is that our satellite data for the sea ice extent started in 1979 (for the whole year at least). ...

Medical Nobel Goes To Developer Of IVF - Science <b>News</b>

Robert Edwards receives prize for work that led to 4 million births.

<b>News</b> the Old Media Won&#39;t Tell You: More Trash at One Sparsely <b>...</b>

12774581 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fbigjournalism.com%2Fmpleahy%2F2010%2F10%2F03%2Fnews-the-old-media-wont-tell-you-more-trash-at-one-sparsely-attended-left-wing-rally-than-at-all-the-tea-parties-around-the-country-in-a-year-and-a-half%2FNews ...


eric seiger eric seiger


New Baby by mwinvesting





















































Saturday, October 2, 2010

Making Money Without



Diddums. Casey Affleck admits that he ‘went broke’ filming his fail movie with Joaquin Phoenix. The movie, I’m Still Here, was filmed over two years and was revealed to be a fake documentary-style movie that Affleck thought anyone with two working eyes and ears would be fooled by. The film showed Phoenix, who would have made interesting material without the pretentious/ staged nature of the movie, doing coke/ hookers and getting pooped on. Or, as I like to call it ‘Wednesday’.  That’s some mid-week pAArtying and moviegoers agreed. Affleck’s movie went up against his big brother’s movie, The Town (which topped the US box office and opened on Rotten Tomatoes to a 93% fresh rating), and only took $96,658 in its opening weekend. Sucks to be the less talented brother, and there’s something I never thought I’d say of these two. Speaking to The Telegraph in the UK, Affleck says he came clean about the hoax everyone knew about so as not to permanently damage Phoenix’s reputation. The movie was supposed to be a cynical look at Hollywood and its trappings. Not poop.


Casey Affleck has admitted that I’m Still Here, his hoax documentary about Joaquin Phoenix, was a “planned, staged and scripted work of fiction” that nearly bankrupted him. Affleck said the project was an essay on celebrity culture. “It was pretty much all within the realm of possibility: people use prostitutes, people use drugs, especially in Hollywood. We didn’t take it so far that it wasn’t believable,” he told The Daily Telegraph. “Having something at stake is a great motivator and once this thing became public for me that was very helpful because there was no question: I had to see it through, no matter how long it took. I went broke. I hadn’t worked for more than a year, and I was pouring money into the movie. I had to stop for a month to do The Killer Inside Me. If I hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been able to finish the film – I was out of money. There was a lot at stake financially and, if we had left [the hoax] there, it would have been very damaging to Joaquin’s career.”




Casey Affleck, Joaquin Phoenix: I’m Still Here mockumentary movie trailer.


by Max Evry


Why do we crave sequels? Is it to revisit characters we fell in love with the first time around? To see a property improved upon by new talent? Before the "Godfather"'s and "Star Wars"' of this world, there was a time when sequels were frowned upon in Hollywood. Now they are the kneejerk reaction to nearly any film that makes bank, usually within two or three years of the original’s release. Sometimes, though, it takes a little longer…


Oliver Stone’s "Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps" is part of a tradition of late sequels, in this case a whopping 23 years after the 1987 original, which won Michael Douglas an Oscar for his portrayal of financial shark Gordon Gekko and put Stone firmly on the map. It is a rare sequel which brings back both the original stars (including a hilarious Charlie Sheen cameo) and production team that made the first such a classic. It also introduces new characters, such as Shia LaBeouf’s eager protégé and Josh Brolin’s ruthless corporate raider.


Pulling old franchises out of mothballs and throwing them back in the multiplex is starting to become a habit with studios, and with the looming release of the "Wall Street" sequel we take a look back at some of the best and worst late sequels, ponder what went right and wrong, and peer into the future where some of our long-cherished series' will be back on the big screen.


THE GOOD

What keeps a series alive and relevant in the public consciousness during a lengthy hiatus between installments? What keeps an audience hungry for more? These are some proven brands that continued to deliver the goods.


The Gang’s All Here

Many people thought Francis Ford Coppola could never recapture the magic that made the first "Godfather" a runaway success in 1972. Coppola himself was hesitant, requesting that promising young filmmaker Martin Scorsese helm the sequel, but eventually he came around and made what many consider an equal in "The Godfather: Part II." Once the '80s hit, Coppola fell hard from his early triumphs and suffered a nearly decade-long losing-streak at the box office until he reluctantly dipped back into the well for "The Godfather: Part III" (15 years after the last sequel).


Impressively re-assembling almost the entire surviving cast from the first two, and again penning the screenplay with author Mario Puzo, Coppola tried to redeem gangster Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) by making him go legit. Of course the attempt fails and he gets pulled back in to a web of corruption and murder. Though the film fell short critically, particularly against the casting of Coppola’s daughter Sofia, it still managed to nab a Best Picture nomination and revitalized the director’s career. Aside from great bombastic performances by Pacino and Andy Garcia, as well as a rooftop shootout that ranks as one of the highlights of the trilogy, the film grossed $137 million dollars worldwide.


Coppola’s friend Steven Spielberg experienced a similar fan outcry on "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" (19yrs), in which he, Harrison Ford and George Lucas brought back possibly the most famous adventure hero in the world for one more go-round. Despite complaints of silly gophers, monkey swinging and criticisms of 66-year-old Ford's performance, the film grossed nearly $800 million worldwide, and became Spielberg’s highest domestic grosser since "Jurassic Park." Clearly if ever a series was critically bulletproof, it was Indiana Jones.


This year saw the release of "Toy Story 3" (11yrs), which was tied up in the lengthy negotiations between Disney and Pixar before the two companies merged, and actually began production without Pixar for a time. Once creator John Lasseter took control of the property again, he scrapped the Disney version and brought on director Lee Unkrich, who edited the first movie and co-directed "Toy Story 2." After enjoying some of the best reviews of the year, the film became the first Pixar feature to gross over a billion dollars worldwide, making it the most successful late sequel of all time.


In all three of these cases the original talent both in front of and behind the camera returned, which, despite the aging of the cast (not a problem with animation), created an instant comfort-level with audiences that they were once again in the right hands.


The Star is the Star

Though Scorsese never did helm that "Godfather" movie, he did get to take a crack at another beloved classic, Robert Rossen’s 1961 pool shark flick "The Hustler." For "The Color of Money" (25yrs), Paul Newman returned as “Fast Eddie” Felson, and as in the new "Wall Street," the iconic star was paired with a hot newcomer, in this case Tom Cruise. Returning to Fast Eddie earned Newman a long-awaited Academy Award for Best Actor, and the film became Scorsese’s highest grossing effort to that point. It proved that if a performer is recognized enough with a character, as long as the team behind the film is good, it doesn’t matter if the filmmakers return or not.


Sylvester Stallone has been able to resurrect his franchises with a Christ-like tenacity. In 2006 "Rocky Balboa" (16yrs) followed on the heels of what many consider the nadir of the series, 1990’s "Rocky V," a folly originally designed to kill the Italian Stallion before producers got cold feet and left the heroic boxer alive, thus disappointing those wanting closure on an already waning series.


Absent of John G. Avildsen, who directed the original and the fifth film, Stallone crafted a fitting coda to the series that used his age to the advantage. Stallone pulled the stunt again on 2008’s "Rambo" (20yrs), the first in the bloody series Sly helmed himself. In either case it was Stallone who carried both these characters to box-office redemption.


Other instances of the original star coming back without the original director or co-stars include Anthony Hopkins in "Hannibal" (10yrs), Bruce Willis in "Live Free or Die Hard" (12yrs), and Arnold Schwarzenegger in "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" (12yrs). The latter made over $400 mil worldwide, enough to warrant a 4th entry, "Terminator Salvation." While none of these sequels are considered in any segment of the population as being to equal the originals, it is remarkable that all the stars were well past their 50s yet still identifiable with the characters that brought them worldwide fame.


THE BAD

Does desire for a sequel wane after more than a decade in mothballs, or do certain films not warrant a sequel in the first place? Where does it all go wrong? Studios rely on sequels to build on the goodwill an audience has towards the characters and storytelling of the filmmaker, so what can make a seemingly well-oiled machine misfire?


The Gang’s Still All Here

The original "Escape From New York" was a quirky, satirical sci-fi action flick centered around Kurt Russell’s performance as grizzled anti-hero Snake Plissken. The premise -- Plissken must rescue the president from a future NYC, now a prison colony -- was simple, and made for an effective B-movie that became a cult classic and solidified Russell and director John Carpenter’s partnership. 15 years later when the two got back together to make a bloated, big-budget carbon copy titled "Escape From L.A.," they disappointed fans by repeating themselves without adding any substance. Despite the expense they also wound up alienating mass audiences who were largely unfamiliar with the cult status of the original.


The opposite problem plagued the sequel to the 1980 classic "The Blues Brothers." Despite several splashy new song-and-dance pieces, "Blues Brothers 2000" (18yrs) was hobbled not only by the absence of long-deceased John Belushi, but also a far leaner budget and a studio-imposed PG-13 rating which dulled the edge of the humor. Add a kid sidekick to the mix, and Jim Belushi having to bail due to schedule conflicts, and you have a recipe for disaster, regardless of the intentions of original writer/star Dan Aykroyd and original writer/director John Landis.


In both these cases the films failed to earn back half their budgets, and are generally viewed as regrettable footnotes to the fondly remembered forerunners. Whether you have more or less money, or are bringing back all the players, some movies are best left alone.


When Talent Returns But Directors Don’t

The absence of original writer/director James L. Brooks kept the sequel to Best-Picture winner "Terms of Endearment" from achieving the same deft balance of comedy and drama. "The Evening Star" (13yrs) was doomed to pass through the night sky unnoticed.


After years of development with original writer Robert Towne, star (now director) Jack Nicholson, and producer Robert Evans, "Chinatown" did not get a worthy successor in The Two Jakes (16yrs). Original director Roman Polanski had long since fled the country and was unable to helm, but it was sheer hubris to forget that it was Polanski, not Towne, who insisted on "Chinatown"’s devastating Greek tragedy ending. While "Jakes" has moments of grace, it shambles along as a mere neo-noir shadow of its predecessor.


Whoever thought "Basic Instinct 2" was still ripe for sequelizing over a decade after we’d already seen all Sharon Stone had to offer (and then some) clearly got what they deserved when this expensive flop stunk up theaters 14-years after the first one bowed. As if the thought of a now-middle-aged Stone gallivanting around naked wasn’t enough to turn people off, hellraising director Paul Verhoeven was nowhere to be found, and neither was a co-star with any screen charisma (sorry, David Morrissey). The film famously never even cracked $10 million in ticket sales, the only sequel to a massive grosser to fail so spectacularly.


The Gang’s All Gone

Stanley Kubrick’s "2001: A Space Odyssey" is often hailed as one of the great landmarks of motion picture history. The 16-years-late follow-up "2010" is an odd duck in that beyond the film’s signature spaceship and a brief cameo from Keir Dullea, there’s almost nothing stylistically or thematically to link this film to Kubrick’s masterpiece. It bears no resemblance in visuals, quality, cast, director, or even prescience, as the Soviet Union-heavy plot in the film’s future can attest to. It remains largely forgotten today.


"Superman Returns" was the first film in 19-years to feature the Man of Steel, 26 years if you account that it is technically a follow-up to 1980’s "Superman II." Although it follows their look and feel, it stayed far too reverent to the Richard Donner films, which were largely unknown to a generation and sullied by two further, inferior sequels. Though it tallied $390 million worldwide, it failed to deliver on its $270 million pricetag, and an embarrassment-adverse studio actually kept the film in theaters abnormally long in order for it to limp to $200 million stateside.


The idea of making a direct sequel to a decades-old film without any returning cast or crew is a fiasco not worth repeating. It’s also worth noting, briefly, that nobody will fall for the old “Son of” trick either, as the makers of "Son of the Pink Panther" (10yrs) and "Son of the Mask" (11yrs) learned.


THE FUTURE

So what have we learned from all this? We know that whether the story demands it or not, a studio, and sometimes the original creative participants, are not going to let go of a chance to further a franchise if they can help it. When a good career goes south it is a logical idea to dip back into the well to regain your popularity, but most of the time it seems like late sequels represent cynical commercial interests reluctant to take chances on new material, relying too much on brand nostalgia to carry a film to box-office glory and belly-flopping in the process.


Currently in the pipeline for future release are "Monsters Inc. 2," "Scream 4," "Men In Black III," "Beverly Hills Cop IV," "Mad Max: Fury Road" and "Ghostbusters 3." "Tron Legacy," which holds the late sequel record at arriving over 28 years after the original "Tron"'s 1982 bow, will arrive this Christmas with a wave of anticipation. What these new entries will learn from the past is uncertain, but you can rest assured that Sharon Stone will not be naked in any of them.









Tags Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps






<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

The WORCESTER PARK Blog, Surrey ¦: Sky <b>News</b>

"I came out of my front door this morning to see a VERY low flying BA jet passing over Trent Way - just seen on the news that it had to make an emergency landing after just 10 minutes. Never seen one that low even though we're used to ...


bench craft company rip off
bench craft company rip off

How To Make Money Online Without Selling Your Soul by sitsgirls


<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

The WORCESTER PARK Blog, Surrey ¦: Sky <b>News</b>

"I came out of my front door this morning to see a VERY low flying BA jet passing over Trent Way - just seen on the news that it had to make an emergency landing after just 10 minutes. Never seen one that low even though we're used to ...


bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off


Diddums. Casey Affleck admits that he ‘went broke’ filming his fail movie with Joaquin Phoenix. The movie, I’m Still Here, was filmed over two years and was revealed to be a fake documentary-style movie that Affleck thought anyone with two working eyes and ears would be fooled by. The film showed Phoenix, who would have made interesting material without the pretentious/ staged nature of the movie, doing coke/ hookers and getting pooped on. Or, as I like to call it ‘Wednesday’.  That’s some mid-week pAArtying and moviegoers agreed. Affleck’s movie went up against his big brother’s movie, The Town (which topped the US box office and opened on Rotten Tomatoes to a 93% fresh rating), and only took $96,658 in its opening weekend. Sucks to be the less talented brother, and there’s something I never thought I’d say of these two. Speaking to The Telegraph in the UK, Affleck says he came clean about the hoax everyone knew about so as not to permanently damage Phoenix’s reputation. The movie was supposed to be a cynical look at Hollywood and its trappings. Not poop.


Casey Affleck has admitted that I’m Still Here, his hoax documentary about Joaquin Phoenix, was a “planned, staged and scripted work of fiction” that nearly bankrupted him. Affleck said the project was an essay on celebrity culture. “It was pretty much all within the realm of possibility: people use prostitutes, people use drugs, especially in Hollywood. We didn’t take it so far that it wasn’t believable,” he told The Daily Telegraph. “Having something at stake is a great motivator and once this thing became public for me that was very helpful because there was no question: I had to see it through, no matter how long it took. I went broke. I hadn’t worked for more than a year, and I was pouring money into the movie. I had to stop for a month to do The Killer Inside Me. If I hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been able to finish the film – I was out of money. There was a lot at stake financially and, if we had left [the hoax] there, it would have been very damaging to Joaquin’s career.”




Casey Affleck, Joaquin Phoenix: I’m Still Here mockumentary movie trailer.


by Max Evry


Why do we crave sequels? Is it to revisit characters we fell in love with the first time around? To see a property improved upon by new talent? Before the "Godfather"'s and "Star Wars"' of this world, there was a time when sequels were frowned upon in Hollywood. Now they are the kneejerk reaction to nearly any film that makes bank, usually within two or three years of the original’s release. Sometimes, though, it takes a little longer…


Oliver Stone’s "Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps" is part of a tradition of late sequels, in this case a whopping 23 years after the 1987 original, which won Michael Douglas an Oscar for his portrayal of financial shark Gordon Gekko and put Stone firmly on the map. It is a rare sequel which brings back both the original stars (including a hilarious Charlie Sheen cameo) and production team that made the first such a classic. It also introduces new characters, such as Shia LaBeouf’s eager protégé and Josh Brolin’s ruthless corporate raider.


Pulling old franchises out of mothballs and throwing them back in the multiplex is starting to become a habit with studios, and with the looming release of the "Wall Street" sequel we take a look back at some of the best and worst late sequels, ponder what went right and wrong, and peer into the future where some of our long-cherished series' will be back on the big screen.


THE GOOD

What keeps a series alive and relevant in the public consciousness during a lengthy hiatus between installments? What keeps an audience hungry for more? These are some proven brands that continued to deliver the goods.


The Gang’s All Here

Many people thought Francis Ford Coppola could never recapture the magic that made the first "Godfather" a runaway success in 1972. Coppola himself was hesitant, requesting that promising young filmmaker Martin Scorsese helm the sequel, but eventually he came around and made what many consider an equal in "The Godfather: Part II." Once the '80s hit, Coppola fell hard from his early triumphs and suffered a nearly decade-long losing-streak at the box office until he reluctantly dipped back into the well for "The Godfather: Part III" (15 years after the last sequel).


Impressively re-assembling almost the entire surviving cast from the first two, and again penning the screenplay with author Mario Puzo, Coppola tried to redeem gangster Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) by making him go legit. Of course the attempt fails and he gets pulled back in to a web of corruption and murder. Though the film fell short critically, particularly against the casting of Coppola’s daughter Sofia, it still managed to nab a Best Picture nomination and revitalized the director’s career. Aside from great bombastic performances by Pacino and Andy Garcia, as well as a rooftop shootout that ranks as one of the highlights of the trilogy, the film grossed $137 million dollars worldwide.


Coppola’s friend Steven Spielberg experienced a similar fan outcry on "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" (19yrs), in which he, Harrison Ford and George Lucas brought back possibly the most famous adventure hero in the world for one more go-round. Despite complaints of silly gophers, monkey swinging and criticisms of 66-year-old Ford's performance, the film grossed nearly $800 million worldwide, and became Spielberg’s highest domestic grosser since "Jurassic Park." Clearly if ever a series was critically bulletproof, it was Indiana Jones.


This year saw the release of "Toy Story 3" (11yrs), which was tied up in the lengthy negotiations between Disney and Pixar before the two companies merged, and actually began production without Pixar for a time. Once creator John Lasseter took control of the property again, he scrapped the Disney version and brought on director Lee Unkrich, who edited the first movie and co-directed "Toy Story 2." After enjoying some of the best reviews of the year, the film became the first Pixar feature to gross over a billion dollars worldwide, making it the most successful late sequel of all time.


In all three of these cases the original talent both in front of and behind the camera returned, which, despite the aging of the cast (not a problem with animation), created an instant comfort-level with audiences that they were once again in the right hands.


The Star is the Star

Though Scorsese never did helm that "Godfather" movie, he did get to take a crack at another beloved classic, Robert Rossen’s 1961 pool shark flick "The Hustler." For "The Color of Money" (25yrs), Paul Newman returned as “Fast Eddie” Felson, and as in the new "Wall Street," the iconic star was paired with a hot newcomer, in this case Tom Cruise. Returning to Fast Eddie earned Newman a long-awaited Academy Award for Best Actor, and the film became Scorsese’s highest grossing effort to that point. It proved that if a performer is recognized enough with a character, as long as the team behind the film is good, it doesn’t matter if the filmmakers return or not.


Sylvester Stallone has been able to resurrect his franchises with a Christ-like tenacity. In 2006 "Rocky Balboa" (16yrs) followed on the heels of what many consider the nadir of the series, 1990’s "Rocky V," a folly originally designed to kill the Italian Stallion before producers got cold feet and left the heroic boxer alive, thus disappointing those wanting closure on an already waning series.


Absent of John G. Avildsen, who directed the original and the fifth film, Stallone crafted a fitting coda to the series that used his age to the advantage. Stallone pulled the stunt again on 2008’s "Rambo" (20yrs), the first in the bloody series Sly helmed himself. In either case it was Stallone who carried both these characters to box-office redemption.


Other instances of the original star coming back without the original director or co-stars include Anthony Hopkins in "Hannibal" (10yrs), Bruce Willis in "Live Free or Die Hard" (12yrs), and Arnold Schwarzenegger in "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" (12yrs). The latter made over $400 mil worldwide, enough to warrant a 4th entry, "Terminator Salvation." While none of these sequels are considered in any segment of the population as being to equal the originals, it is remarkable that all the stars were well past their 50s yet still identifiable with the characters that brought them worldwide fame.


THE BAD

Does desire for a sequel wane after more than a decade in mothballs, or do certain films not warrant a sequel in the first place? Where does it all go wrong? Studios rely on sequels to build on the goodwill an audience has towards the characters and storytelling of the filmmaker, so what can make a seemingly well-oiled machine misfire?


The Gang’s Still All Here

The original "Escape From New York" was a quirky, satirical sci-fi action flick centered around Kurt Russell’s performance as grizzled anti-hero Snake Plissken. The premise -- Plissken must rescue the president from a future NYC, now a prison colony -- was simple, and made for an effective B-movie that became a cult classic and solidified Russell and director John Carpenter’s partnership. 15 years later when the two got back together to make a bloated, big-budget carbon copy titled "Escape From L.A.," they disappointed fans by repeating themselves without adding any substance. Despite the expense they also wound up alienating mass audiences who were largely unfamiliar with the cult status of the original.


The opposite problem plagued the sequel to the 1980 classic "The Blues Brothers." Despite several splashy new song-and-dance pieces, "Blues Brothers 2000" (18yrs) was hobbled not only by the absence of long-deceased John Belushi, but also a far leaner budget and a studio-imposed PG-13 rating which dulled the edge of the humor. Add a kid sidekick to the mix, and Jim Belushi having to bail due to schedule conflicts, and you have a recipe for disaster, regardless of the intentions of original writer/star Dan Aykroyd and original writer/director John Landis.


In both these cases the films failed to earn back half their budgets, and are generally viewed as regrettable footnotes to the fondly remembered forerunners. Whether you have more or less money, or are bringing back all the players, some movies are best left alone.


When Talent Returns But Directors Don’t

The absence of original writer/director James L. Brooks kept the sequel to Best-Picture winner "Terms of Endearment" from achieving the same deft balance of comedy and drama. "The Evening Star" (13yrs) was doomed to pass through the night sky unnoticed.


After years of development with original writer Robert Towne, star (now director) Jack Nicholson, and producer Robert Evans, "Chinatown" did not get a worthy successor in The Two Jakes (16yrs). Original director Roman Polanski had long since fled the country and was unable to helm, but it was sheer hubris to forget that it was Polanski, not Towne, who insisted on "Chinatown"’s devastating Greek tragedy ending. While "Jakes" has moments of grace, it shambles along as a mere neo-noir shadow of its predecessor.


Whoever thought "Basic Instinct 2" was still ripe for sequelizing over a decade after we’d already seen all Sharon Stone had to offer (and then some) clearly got what they deserved when this expensive flop stunk up theaters 14-years after the first one bowed. As if the thought of a now-middle-aged Stone gallivanting around naked wasn’t enough to turn people off, hellraising director Paul Verhoeven was nowhere to be found, and neither was a co-star with any screen charisma (sorry, David Morrissey). The film famously never even cracked $10 million in ticket sales, the only sequel to a massive grosser to fail so spectacularly.


The Gang’s All Gone

Stanley Kubrick’s "2001: A Space Odyssey" is often hailed as one of the great landmarks of motion picture history. The 16-years-late follow-up "2010" is an odd duck in that beyond the film’s signature spaceship and a brief cameo from Keir Dullea, there’s almost nothing stylistically or thematically to link this film to Kubrick’s masterpiece. It bears no resemblance in visuals, quality, cast, director, or even prescience, as the Soviet Union-heavy plot in the film’s future can attest to. It remains largely forgotten today.


"Superman Returns" was the first film in 19-years to feature the Man of Steel, 26 years if you account that it is technically a follow-up to 1980’s "Superman II." Although it follows their look and feel, it stayed far too reverent to the Richard Donner films, which were largely unknown to a generation and sullied by two further, inferior sequels. Though it tallied $390 million worldwide, it failed to deliver on its $270 million pricetag, and an embarrassment-adverse studio actually kept the film in theaters abnormally long in order for it to limp to $200 million stateside.


The idea of making a direct sequel to a decades-old film without any returning cast or crew is a fiasco not worth repeating. It’s also worth noting, briefly, that nobody will fall for the old “Son of” trick either, as the makers of "Son of the Pink Panther" (10yrs) and "Son of the Mask" (11yrs) learned.


THE FUTURE

So what have we learned from all this? We know that whether the story demands it or not, a studio, and sometimes the original creative participants, are not going to let go of a chance to further a franchise if they can help it. When a good career goes south it is a logical idea to dip back into the well to regain your popularity, but most of the time it seems like late sequels represent cynical commercial interests reluctant to take chances on new material, relying too much on brand nostalgia to carry a film to box-office glory and belly-flopping in the process.


Currently in the pipeline for future release are "Monsters Inc. 2," "Scream 4," "Men In Black III," "Beverly Hills Cop IV," "Mad Max: Fury Road" and "Ghostbusters 3." "Tron Legacy," which holds the late sequel record at arriving over 28 years after the original "Tron"'s 1982 bow, will arrive this Christmas with a wave of anticipation. What these new entries will learn from the past is uncertain, but you can rest assured that Sharon Stone will not be naked in any of them.









Tags Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps






bench craft company rip off

<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

The WORCESTER PARK Blog, Surrey ¦: Sky <b>News</b>

"I came out of my front door this morning to see a VERY low flying BA jet passing over Trent Way - just seen on the news that it had to make an emergency landing after just 10 minutes. Never seen one that low even though we're used to ...


bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off

<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

The WORCESTER PARK Blog, Surrey ¦: Sky <b>News</b>

"I came out of my front door this morning to see a VERY low flying BA jet passing over Trent Way - just seen on the news that it had to make an emergency landing after just 10 minutes. Never seen one that low even though we're used to ...


bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off

<b>News</b> Corp. Donates $1 Million to U.S. Chamber of Commerce <b>...</b>

The donation is the News Corporation's second known contribution to a group that is advertising heavily to support Republicans this year.

Small Business <b>News</b>: The White Paper Overview

Pundits still say they are a great way to develop credibility for your business easy to distribute in their popular current PDF format and also, if done right,

The WORCESTER PARK Blog, Surrey ¦: Sky <b>News</b>

"I came out of my front door this morning to see a VERY low flying BA jet passing over Trent Way - just seen on the news that it had to make an emergency landing after just 10 minutes. Never seen one that low even though we're used to ...


bench craft company rip off bench craft company rip off












































Friday, October 1, 2010

Money Making Websites


You would think that Californians had learned their lesson by now.



Remember Darrell Issa? Issa, who ran against Barbara Boxer in 1998, but lost his party's nomination to Matt Fong, the California Treasurer. In that race, Issa spent $12 million of his own money and, after losing, went on to get elected to the House in 2000. Issa actually stands to become the head of the House Government Operations Committee if Republicans take control of the Congress in he next election.



Issa, you may recall, gave Californians Arnold Schwarzenegger as their governor. Issa contributed $1.6 million toward the recall of Gray Davis and presumed he would be his party's nominee to replace Davis. Then, following the recall of Davis, the party tapped Issa on the shoulder and said, "Your work is done." Schwarzenegger became governor. And California, like the rest of the country, sank into even worse economic shape than when Davis was in office.



Now, California Republicans want you to refocus. The man who had no governmental experience whatsoever, yet who went on to become the chief executive, was really a highly successful movie actor with little aptitude for the job. That may not have been the best idea. What California needs now is a businessman. Or businesswoman. Enter Meg Whitman.



Beyond being another figure in a business success story who now believes that power is her next entitlement and governing is the next challenging hobby, Whitman, like Schwarzenegger, has no government experience. That is problematic for two reasons. One is that California is a remarkably diverse state. Its near hemispheric political divide between its northern and southern constituencies makes politics in the state capitol very complicated. In these economic times, to send another candidate to Sacramento who simply mouths that "Government needs to be run like a business" would be disastrous.



The second issue is Whitman's opponent. In my opinion, Jerry Brown is one of the most visionary and dedicated public servants I have ever encountered during my life time. Smart, tough, experienced, committed, Brown wasn't making a fortune for himself these past four decades. He was serving the people of California. The attack ad that Whitman shows of Bill Clinton laying into Brown is unfair, inaccurate and repugnant. Primary races can be bloodier than the general election and Brown versus Clinton exemplifies that. But Clinton is guilty of a bit of hyperbole when he states that Brown spent down California's surplus while in office. The most casual examination of the record shows that, in classic California fashion, a loss of property tax revenues forced Brown to spend a good deal of the state's surplus, but not all of it. Californians, with their preposterous property tax laws, never seem to recognize that a loss of revenue to the counties and/or cities usually spells undue pressure on the state to find that money elsewhere. Even Schwarzenegger, the fitness role model, was reduced to selling state park land to make up for huge gaps in his budget. Clinton in full attack mode is a sight to behold, but not one Californians should base this race on.



In their websites and in their official statements, both Whitman and Brown say the usual things about jobs, taxes and education. But it is in the area of jobs from clean energy technologies and in pension reform that Brown holds the clearest edge. California has, through necessity, been a leader in environmental policy-making. Spend any time in California and see how many hybrid cars are on the road. How many wind turbines are in operation. How much photo-voltaic equipment is already in place. Brown knows that this is just the beginning. Where Whitman and other business types believe that markets themselves will lead us where we need to go, Brown knows that government must lead. The push to bring as much of the American power grid into the renewable market must come from government. The money we spent on Iraq alone might well have begun to solve this problem once and for all.



Whitman the businesswoman lacks the political skill to bring the pension issue into the 21st century. Unions and pensioners must be brought to the table for talks that recognize them as entitled on one hand yet partners with taxpayers on the other. Brown will do that. And he must before the pension problem in California crushes the government into insolvency.



All governments need to be run in a more business-like manner and now more than ever. But government should never literally be run like a business. Business is about cold numbers, strict adherence to bottom lines and the ascent of those with the greatest skills and advantages. Governing requires a humanism that we find largely absent in the business world of today. It calls for skills that the business world often overlooks or shuns. Governing requires the ability not to follow spreadsheets and marketing advice but to weigh all of the relevant information and decide what is best for all of California in both the long and short term.



There is no one better for that job than Jerry Brown.



------

A post script regarding the New York governor's race. Voter dissatisfaction is real and valid. But Palladino versus Cuomo is a nearly impossible distortion of that reality. The difference between Carl Palladino and Andrew Cuomo, in terms of effectiveness, talent and experience, is the between a water pistol and a fire hose. A pea shooter and a cannon. When Eliot Spitzer was elected, a great man became governor. That man faltered and was replaced by an interim governor who has struggled. Now, New Yorkers can return another brilliant, hard-working public servant to the governor's office by electing Andrew Cuomo.






If Apple gets its way, the next big wave of content to hit iTunes might be magazine and newspaper subscriptions.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Apple is trying to convince publishers to offer newspaper and magazine subscriptions for the iPad through Apple’s own portal./> id="more-386602">/> Even before the iPad was launched, rumors of this sort of arrangement were already underway. Many of the Western world’s biggest publishers, including Time Inc., Hearst and Condé Nast, released iPad-optimized magazines or newspapers to coincide with the product’s release.

However, magazines have been limited to single issue sales. Some apps notify a user when a new issue is available, but at $4 or $5 an issue, most users are unlikely to forego a print or online subscription for iPad content.

The big holdup with bringing subscriptions to the iPad has reportedly revolved around user data and, of course, money. Publishers often use their subscriber database to better target customers and to entice advertisers. Apple reportedly doesn’t want to give publishers such easy access to customer information.

Additionally, Apple would likely want to take a 30% revenue cut off any subscriptions sold within iTunes, the same as it does for apps, music, books and video files now.

Both of these points are contentious with publishers, who have acquiesced by selling issues individually or are trying to either build apps that are really just portals to subscriber-only websites (à la The Wall Street Journal) or apps like Zinio that are PDF portals of sorts on their own.

Of course, the big promise with the iPad has been that it is an opportunity for publishers to redefine magazine or newspaper content by making it more engaging and interactive rather than just being a facsimile of the print edition.

Publishers who are looking at ways to combat declining print sales may be able to use Apple’s 160-million strong iTunes customer base to help boost sales. That might be worth a trade-off of control and profit.

For Apple, having unique arrangements with publishers to offer compelling subscription content that is auto-delivered to iOS devices could be a big differentiating factor between the iPad and future competing devices.

Apple’s foray into the world of e-books remains small, especially when compared to market giant Amazon.comclass="blippr-nobr">Amazon.com, but the iPad has the ability and the form factor to provide a much more compelling experience for subscription content.

We’ve reached out to several publishers for comment on this story and have not heard back. We’ll keep following this story for future developments.

In the meantime, let us know what you think of iPad-tailored subscriptions for newspapers and magazines. Do you currently read print publications? Would you be more or less likely to subscribe to a tablet-friendly digital version?

For more Apple coverage:

    class="f-el">class="cov-twit">Follow Mashable Appleclass="s-el">class="cov-rss">Subscribe to the Apple channelclass="f-el">class="cov-fb">Become a Fan on Facebookclass="s-el">class="cov-apple">Download our free apps for iPhone and iPad

Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 10/1 - Arrowhead Pride

Good morning, AP. Another day, another post full of Kansas City Chiefs news. The stories died down a bit today. Most stories are now focused on this weekend's games. There are a couple of good ones, though. Be sure to check them out.

Saamidd set for Dewhurst after course gallop - Horse Racing <b>News</b> <b>...</b>

SAAMIDD set up a mouthwatering clash with Frankel in the Dubai Dewhurst on October 16 after the Champagne Stakes winner came through his racecourse gallop on Thursday in decided style.

Today in Tech: <b>News</b> around the Web - Fortune Tech

A round-up of the companies, deals, and trends that made headlines. Every day, the Fortune staff spends hours poring over tech stories, posts, and reviews from all over the Web to keep tabs on the companies that matter.


eric seiger dermatologist eric seiger do

You would think that Californians had learned their lesson by now.



Remember Darrell Issa? Issa, who ran against Barbara Boxer in 1998, but lost his party's nomination to Matt Fong, the California Treasurer. In that race, Issa spent $12 million of his own money and, after losing, went on to get elected to the House in 2000. Issa actually stands to become the head of the House Government Operations Committee if Republicans take control of the Congress in he next election.



Issa, you may recall, gave Californians Arnold Schwarzenegger as their governor. Issa contributed $1.6 million toward the recall of Gray Davis and presumed he would be his party's nominee to replace Davis. Then, following the recall of Davis, the party tapped Issa on the shoulder and said, "Your work is done." Schwarzenegger became governor. And California, like the rest of the country, sank into even worse economic shape than when Davis was in office.



Now, California Republicans want you to refocus. The man who had no governmental experience whatsoever, yet who went on to become the chief executive, was really a highly successful movie actor with little aptitude for the job. That may not have been the best idea. What California needs now is a businessman. Or businesswoman. Enter Meg Whitman.



Beyond being another figure in a business success story who now believes that power is her next entitlement and governing is the next challenging hobby, Whitman, like Schwarzenegger, has no government experience. That is problematic for two reasons. One is that California is a remarkably diverse state. Its near hemispheric political divide between its northern and southern constituencies makes politics in the state capitol very complicated. In these economic times, to send another candidate to Sacramento who simply mouths that "Government needs to be run like a business" would be disastrous.



The second issue is Whitman's opponent. In my opinion, Jerry Brown is one of the most visionary and dedicated public servants I have ever encountered during my life time. Smart, tough, experienced, committed, Brown wasn't making a fortune for himself these past four decades. He was serving the people of California. The attack ad that Whitman shows of Bill Clinton laying into Brown is unfair, inaccurate and repugnant. Primary races can be bloodier than the general election and Brown versus Clinton exemplifies that. But Clinton is guilty of a bit of hyperbole when he states that Brown spent down California's surplus while in office. The most casual examination of the record shows that, in classic California fashion, a loss of property tax revenues forced Brown to spend a good deal of the state's surplus, but not all of it. Californians, with their preposterous property tax laws, never seem to recognize that a loss of revenue to the counties and/or cities usually spells undue pressure on the state to find that money elsewhere. Even Schwarzenegger, the fitness role model, was reduced to selling state park land to make up for huge gaps in his budget. Clinton in full attack mode is a sight to behold, but not one Californians should base this race on.



In their websites and in their official statements, both Whitman and Brown say the usual things about jobs, taxes and education. But it is in the area of jobs from clean energy technologies and in pension reform that Brown holds the clearest edge. California has, through necessity, been a leader in environmental policy-making. Spend any time in California and see how many hybrid cars are on the road. How many wind turbines are in operation. How much photo-voltaic equipment is already in place. Brown knows that this is just the beginning. Where Whitman and other business types believe that markets themselves will lead us where we need to go, Brown knows that government must lead. The push to bring as much of the American power grid into the renewable market must come from government. The money we spent on Iraq alone might well have begun to solve this problem once and for all.



Whitman the businesswoman lacks the political skill to bring the pension issue into the 21st century. Unions and pensioners must be brought to the table for talks that recognize them as entitled on one hand yet partners with taxpayers on the other. Brown will do that. And he must before the pension problem in California crushes the government into insolvency.



All governments need to be run in a more business-like manner and now more than ever. But government should never literally be run like a business. Business is about cold numbers, strict adherence to bottom lines and the ascent of those with the greatest skills and advantages. Governing requires a humanism that we find largely absent in the business world of today. It calls for skills that the business world often overlooks or shuns. Governing requires the ability not to follow spreadsheets and marketing advice but to weigh all of the relevant information and decide what is best for all of California in both the long and short term.



There is no one better for that job than Jerry Brown.



------

A post script regarding the New York governor's race. Voter dissatisfaction is real and valid. But Palladino versus Cuomo is a nearly impossible distortion of that reality. The difference between Carl Palladino and Andrew Cuomo, in terms of effectiveness, talent and experience, is the between a water pistol and a fire hose. A pea shooter and a cannon. When Eliot Spitzer was elected, a great man became governor. That man faltered and was replaced by an interim governor who has struggled. Now, New Yorkers can return another brilliant, hard-working public servant to the governor's office by electing Andrew Cuomo.






If Apple gets its way, the next big wave of content to hit iTunes might be magazine and newspaper subscriptions.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Apple is trying to convince publishers to offer newspaper and magazine subscriptions for the iPad through Apple’s own portal./> id="more-386602">/> Even before the iPad was launched, rumors of this sort of arrangement were already underway. Many of the Western world’s biggest publishers, including Time Inc., Hearst and Condé Nast, released iPad-optimized magazines or newspapers to coincide with the product’s release.

However, magazines have been limited to single issue sales. Some apps notify a user when a new issue is available, but at $4 or $5 an issue, most users are unlikely to forego a print or online subscription for iPad content.

The big holdup with bringing subscriptions to the iPad has reportedly revolved around user data and, of course, money. Publishers often use their subscriber database to better target customers and to entice advertisers. Apple reportedly doesn’t want to give publishers such easy access to customer information.

Additionally, Apple would likely want to take a 30% revenue cut off any subscriptions sold within iTunes, the same as it does for apps, music, books and video files now.

Both of these points are contentious with publishers, who have acquiesced by selling issues individually or are trying to either build apps that are really just portals to subscriber-only websites (à la The Wall Street Journal) or apps like Zinio that are PDF portals of sorts on their own.

Of course, the big promise with the iPad has been that it is an opportunity for publishers to redefine magazine or newspaper content by making it more engaging and interactive rather than just being a facsimile of the print edition.

Publishers who are looking at ways to combat declining print sales may be able to use Apple’s 160-million strong iTunes customer base to help boost sales. That might be worth a trade-off of control and profit.

For Apple, having unique arrangements with publishers to offer compelling subscription content that is auto-delivered to iOS devices could be a big differentiating factor between the iPad and future competing devices.

Apple’s foray into the world of e-books remains small, especially when compared to market giant Amazon.comclass="blippr-nobr">Amazon.com, but the iPad has the ability and the form factor to provide a much more compelling experience for subscription content.

We’ve reached out to several publishers for comment on this story and have not heard back. We’ll keep following this story for future developments.

In the meantime, let us know what you think of iPad-tailored subscriptions for newspapers and magazines. Do you currently read print publications? Would you be more or less likely to subscribe to a tablet-friendly digital version?

For more Apple coverage:

    class="f-el">class="cov-twit">Follow Mashable Appleclass="s-el">class="cov-rss">Subscribe to the Apple channelclass="f-el">class="cov-fb">Become a Fan on Facebookclass="s-el">class="cov-apple">Download our free apps for iPhone and iPad

Arrowheadlines: Chiefs <b>News</b> 10/1 - Arrowhead Pride

Good morning, AP. Another day, another post full of Kansas City Chiefs news. The stories died down a bit today. Most stories are now focused on this weekend's games. There are a couple of good ones, though. Be sure to check them out.

Saamidd set for Dewhurst after course gallop - Horse Racing <b>News</b> <b>...</b>

SAAMIDD set up a mouthwatering clash with Frankel in the Dubai Dewhurst on October 16 after the Champagne Stakes winner came through his racecourse gallop on Thursday in decided style.

Today in Tech: <b>News</b> around the Web - Fortune Tech

A round-up of the companies, deals, and trends that made headlines. Every day, the Fortune staff spends hours poring over tech stories, posts, and reviews from all over the Web to keep tabs on the companies that matter.


eric seiger do Dr. eric seiger


My Express Site Revolution by Netsalaries