text:
INDIANAPOLIS — The NCAA's home-grown scandal is hitting hard at headquarters.
President Mark Emmert announced Monday that Julie Roe Lach, the vice president of enforcement, is leaving and will soon be replaced by private attorney Jonathan Duncan after her role in the botched investigation at the University of Miami. He even suggested the NCAA's board of directors and executive committee could hold him accountable for this mess, and it's not over yet.
After releasing a 55-page report detailing how the NCAA violated its own practices and policies by paying the attorney for convicted Ponzi-schemer Nevin Shapiro thousands of dollars to help with the Miami case, Emmert spent more than an hour doing damage control on the latest black eye to hit the organization.
"I think the damage is, first of all, for those people who were already skeptical or cynics, this feeds into their cynicism," Emmert told The Associated Press after a conference call with other reporters. "For those of us who have great confidence in all the people around this building, it's painful to have to deal with an issue that fails to live up to our standards and expectations. I think that's the challenge for all of us that work here."
Oregon has reached an impasse with the NCAA regarding the investigation of the Ducks' football program's relationship with Texas talent evaluator Willie Lyles.
Last year, it was clear the Ducks were pursuing summary disposition — in effect, plea bargain with the NCAA.
The Ducks are now expected to appear before the NCAA's committee on infractions this spring.
The report released Monday, written by attorney Kenneth L. Wainstein, details how now-former NCAA investigator Ameen Najjar appeared to manipulate the process by hiring Maria Elena Perez, Shapiro's attorney, to help the NCAA obtain information from a bankruptcy proceeding -- information that would have otherwise been unavailable. Shapiro has said that it provided improper benefits to dozens of football and basketball players at Miami.
According to the report, Lach obtained clearance for paying Perez, but the NCAA's legal staff nixed the idea. Najjar then contacted Perez himself with what the report describes as a "way around" the road block.
The report said Najjar, who left the NCAA last spring, assured Lach and Tom Hosty, the managing director of enforcement, that the legal staff had approved the deal when it had not. Najjar did not return phone messages Monday night.
The NCAA didn't figure out what happened, the report said, until Perez billed the NCAA $57,115 for hours in August. By that time, the NCAA had already paid out approximately $10,500 to Perez in expenses.
Wainstein called Lach cooperative and said nothing the external investigators found called her integrity into question. Lach did not immediately respond to a message left by The Associated Press on her cellphone.
"The actions we are taking today are clearly consistent with holding people accountable for their behavior," Emmert said. "If the executive committee believes some disciplinary action needs to be taken toward me, then I'm sure they will."
The incident has been an embarrassing blow to the NCAA, which is fending off a number of lawsuits and is the target of sharp criticism in some quarters for the penalties it handed to Penn State following the Jerry Sandusky child sex-abuse scandal. And Wainstein will now embark on the second part of the investigation, which could include looking into previous NCAA infractions cases and suggesting ways to prevent another rogue case.
"I don't have any specific recommendations now," Wainstein said. "But as President Emmert said, I'm a former prosecutor and I've managed prosecutions and investigations for the better part of 20 years, so I'm going to suggest some ideas that I import from that context."
Emmert already has two new ideas.
He suggested putting together a committee to hear what amounts to a preliminary case before moving forward, and perhaps adding an ombudsman to the NCAA staff. Emmert later said he's not sure how that would work though he acknowledged an ombudsman would need some power.
There are more immediate concerns, too.
Lach is expected to leave March 1 and over the past 18 months has been closely involved with creating a new enforcement structure. The new multi-tiered penalty approach was approved in October, and the first part of the NCAA's revised rulebook was backed last month at the NCAA's annual convention.
A second part or rules changes is expected to come sometime after April's quarterly board of directors meeting.
Now, though, Emmert wants school leaders to provide more input about enforcement policies.
"We need to be able, at the same time, to say OK as we're changing these rules, how do want them enforced? What approach to enforcement can we abide by?" he said.
That's where Duncan could help. He's a private attorney who has spent the last 15 years focused on sports law and education.
"We need to bring in expertise, like in the case of Ken, he's a prosecutor and has an approach that's very different to what we have in a voluntary association, but we need people with those various perspectives that can come to us," Emmert said. "That's one of the advantages of having John. John knows this world very, very well and will bring a very balanced perspective to the whole regulatory process."
How hard will these changes be at the NCAA's home office?
One of Emmert's first moves after taking office was promoting Lach in October 2010 from director of enforcement to vice president of enforcement, the first woman to hold the job. At the time, Lach promised to change the way the NCAA did business, offering more transparency about how investigations were handled. She delivered in part by setting up mock investigations for media members.
But she also presided over one of the most tumultuous times in NCAA history.
Lach was hired by the NCAA in 1998 as a student-athlete reinstatement representative after one year as an intern. She was named director of student-athlete reinstatement in 1999 and director of enforcement in 2004. She also spent nine years on the board of trustees at Millikin University, her alma mater.
Late last year, the Los Angeles Times reported that an NCAA investigator had been fired after her boyfriend had been overheard on a flight saying that the NCAA would never allow highly-touted recruit Shabazz Muhammad to play. Lach was on maternity leave when the investigator was reportedly fired.
And since last summer, two investigators have left, director of enforcement Bill Benjamin resigned and now Lach is on her way out, too.
"This is an outcome that nobody wants to see on their watch or anyone else's," Emmert said. "It's something that's an embarrassment to the association, it's something that's contrary to all the things we engage and all the things we espouse, so this is not a good situation at all."


text:
Kamal Hassin is Director of R&D and Product Management at Protecode. He can be reached at [email protected]
Software is a massive enabler for the semiconductor industry. It's difficult to find a device that isn't enabled by software in some way. Evolving from simple components to complex systems on a chip (SOC), semiconductor-based products now require many categories of software. The list starts with drivers to configure operating modes. On top of that, real-time operating systems (RTOS), SDKs, networking and security, administration, media formatting and compression, and of course an endless list of applications. Unsurprisingly, the semiconductor industry now spends more on software development than on all other R&D aspects.
How do developers build all of this software at a reasonable cost? Increasingly, they supplement custom coding with outsourced code, commercial libraries and open source software. Open source has become a significant component of all software development, intentionally and sometimes unintentionally, thanks to the abundance of available code, its apparent free cost, and a high degree of stability and security.
But while open source code can appear to be free, it is not without obligation. It typically comes laden with licensing and copyright responsibilities that are enforceable by law. Even accidental infringements can result in fines and injunctions which can play havoc with manufacturing schedules, inventory control and supply chain management. Given the significant deployment volumes for semiconductors and the products into which they embed, it is important to ensure that software licensing obligations are managed. Ignoring these obligations or simply being ignorant of them can have significant consequences, as some recent legal cases have shown. For example, a lawsuit regarding an open source component called "BusyBox" affected many large companies, including Verizon, Samsung, and others. Another case filed by the Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) against Cisco sought an injunction for the distribution of Linksys firmware as well as damages and costs.
There are a number of approaches to license management, ranging from doing nothing to fully automated real-time scanning of software to detect and report license obligations. All approaches can be viewed from a cost perspective, with the aim of maximizing developer productivity while minimizing legal risk. The cost of managing software license obligations is analogous to managing defects in the development process. It is well understood that the earlier a defect is identified and corrected, the less expensive it is -- and the same is true for licensing obligations. Likewise, the earlier a development organization identifies "licensing bugs" that attract unacceptable license obligations, the less expensive it is to adjust the software to achieve licensing compliance.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Last week, I attended the Nonprofit Technology Conference, and had the pleasure of attending an interesting session on "The Future of Nonprofit Storytelling." Moderated by Rob Wu of CauseVox, it included an all-star panel of storytelling experts: Cara Jones of Storytellers for Good, Jenna Sauber of the Case Foundation, and JD Lasica of Socialbrite. (I am also a Socialbrite colleague.) The panel pondered some interesting questions and offered concrete tips on how to create compelling stories, defining what is a story, storytelling tools, and creating an internal culture of storytelling.
Rob Wu, the moderator, asked these questions of the panel:
- What is storytelling?
- How is storytelling different from marketing communications?
- How do you shift your nonprofit into a culture of storytelling?
- What are your tips for capturing stories?
- What tips do you have for storytelling and storytelling tools?
- Where is storytelling going in the future?
I've captured most of the panel's comments, as well as a few audience questions, in the Storify story created from tweets and photos (below). There are a few highlights from the session for me. Among them:
On storytelling
Cara Jones offered a three wonderful nuggets of wisdom about storytelling:
"People will forget what you told them. They will forget what you did. But they will never forget how you made them feel."
"Use video for motion and emotion. Break out statistics and anything you want them to read into a separate place so they can read and digest the stats at their own pace separately. Keep the story to motion and emotion."
"Nonprofit stories have the unique ability to allow people to feel and want to be a part of something bigger."
On tips and tools
JD Lasica joked (seriously), "never have I watched a video and thought, ' oh that video just wasn't long enough!'"
Jenna Sauber advised nonprofits to consider episodic storytelling by breaking up longer stories into shorter ones with an arc.
Cara Jones urged storytellers: "Don't fear the close-up video. Exaggerate emotion for the audience."
JD Lasica reminded us that photos and other lightweight media also have impact as storytelling media.
On finding stories and shifting internal culture towards storytelling
JD Lasica suggested that "stories don't have to live within your own organization." Also, "you will find storytellers within your nonprofit in surprising places."
Jenna Sauber talked about how the Case Foundation uses an internal editorial calendar, and captures ideas between posts through its internal communications system, Yammer.
Cara Jones had a great idea for getting staff involved: "When nonprofits encounter internal resistance to telling stories, ask the staff to tell their stories. When staff feels heard, they are likely to go out and tell others' stories."
JD Lasica also highlighted some good tips from the panel in his blog post about the Nonprofit Technology Conference here.
The full session is captured in the Storify story, below.


text:
DESY X-Ray Source PETRA III Films Flow Behaviour of Liquid Crystals
Scientists from ICS-3, Utrecht University and DESY have filmed the flow behaviour of liquid crystals using a unique experimental setup at DESY's X-ray source, PETRA III. One of the things the new method shows is how the inner structure of a liquid crystal sample changes. The German-Dutch team published its observations in the journal "Physical Review Letters".
Original publication:
M.P. Lettinga, P. Holmqvist, P. Ballesta, S. Rogers, D. Kleshchanok, and B. Struth
The non-linear behavior of nematic platelet dispersions in shear flow
Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 246001 (2012)
Last updated: 23 May 2017


text:
MELBOURNE, Australia - After twice failing to win her breakthrough major as the No. 1-ranked woman at the Australian Open, Caroline Wozniacki is now expected to drop out of the top 10 after a fourth-round loss to a resurgent Svetlana Kuznetsova on Monday.
Wozniacki had the top ranking for the 2011 and 2012 editions of the season's first major, but lost in semifinals two years ago and the quarterfinals last year. Her 6-2, 2-6, 7-5 defeat to two-time Grand Slam winner Kuznetsova in the Round of 16 this time follows back-to-back first-round exits at Wimbledon and the U.S. Open.
Kuznetsova is moving in the other direction, after entering the tournament at No. 75. She's on a comeback from a right knee injury that ruled her out of the last U.S. Open, ending a run of contesting 40 consecutive majors.
The 27-year-old Russian moved into a quarterfinal and will next face either No. 1-ranked Victoria Azarenka or Elena Vesnina.
Play on Day 7 ran into Day 8 overnight, when Novak Djokovic needed just over 5 hours to beat Stanislas Wawrinka 1-6, 7-5, 6-4, 6-7 (5), 12-10 in a fourth-round match Sunday night, on the same court where he needed 5:53 to beat Rafael Nadal in last year's final.
"I just had flashback of 2012," said Djokovic, who ripped off his shirt to celebrate again, like he did last year. "It was maybe 45 minutes less this match than the one 12 months ago, but still it was still as exciting. I tried to enjoy the moment and couldn't ask for more. What a match point ... unbelievable."
The win was Djokovic's 18th in a row at Melbourne Park after winning the last two Australian titles, and earned him a place in the quarterfinals of a 15th consecutive major.
Wawrinka said he would take more positives than negatives out of the match. He led 5-2 in the second set after outplaying Djokovic in the first.
"For sure, I think the best match I have ever played," Wawrinka said. "I fought like a dog like always. At 4-4 in the final set, I thought I might have won the match, but he was just better."
Djokovic will next play No. 5 Tomas Berdych, who beat South Africa's Kevin Anderson 6-3, 6-2, 7-6 (13).
Fourth-seeded David Ferrer advanced 6-2, 6-1, 6-4 over No. 16 Kei Nishikori of Japan to set up a quarterfinal against fellow Spaniard Nicolas Almagro.
Roger Federer plays Milos Raonic later Monday, and U.S. Open champion Andy Murray faces Gilles Simon.
Serena Williams, aiming for a third consecutive major title, will play her fourth-round match against No. 14 Maria Kirilenko of Russia.
They will have a tough time matching the spectacle of Sunday's late-night encounter, which also overshadowed Maria Sharapova's accomplishment.
The reigning French Open champion advanced to the quarterfinals with a 6-1, 6-0 win over Kirsten Flipkens, and has lost just five games through four rounds. That's three fewer than the previous low mark at the Australian Open, held by Steffi Graf and Monica Seles.
She next plays fellow Russian Ekaterina Makarova, who beat fifth-seeded Angelique Kerber 7-5, 6-4. Sharapova defeated Makarova in the quarterfinals here last year on her way to the final, which she lost in straight sets to Victoria Azarenka.
Li Na, who reached the final here in 2011 and won the French Open later that year, saved a set point in the tiebreaker before beating Julia Goerges 7-6 (6), 6-1. She'll play No. 4 Agnieszka Radwanska, who beat No. 13 Ana Ivanovic 6-2, 6-4 for her 13th consecutive win.


text:
- Shows
- Movies
- Movie Reviews A-Z
- TOP 10's
- Animation Related
- Commentaries
- Interviews
- Location Tours
- Monster Madness
- Other Stuff
- Original Films
- Merch
- Site
Halloween 2 & 3
Mike / October 25th, 2011
October 25, 2011 at 3:04 am
First! Love your work james!
October 25, 2011 at 3:07 am
watching part 3 now! Great review as always
October 25, 2011 at 3:11 am
FIRST! … or maybe not since i am taking the time to watch before posting …we shall see……
Well for some reason it froze after part 2 which I am glad to see I am not the only one who thinks is good but overrated ( Lumus makes the movie)
let's see if James is with me on thinking 3 is underrated
October 25, 2011 at 3:12 am
Great review. Making a sequel to the original Halloween is an awful idea; it just can't be done, no matter how hard you try. It's really annoying when there are sequels to a movie or book that ends on a perfect cliffhanger.Devil_Rising
October 25, 2011 at 3:17 am
The series would have been better if they had used Carpenter's original idea, which was to make each new movie be it's own separate story, and the only bond between them would be that they all take place on Halloween night. They made a mistake in having Michael Myers be in Pt. 2, because then in Pt. 3, people expected him again, and thus didn't like 3 being different. If 2 had been different right off the bat, people would have expected 3 to be different as well, and the series could have been fresh and new with each installment. Oh well…Bassie02
October 25, 2011 at 3:19 am
I liked 2 a lot, but it was not creepy, like James says. Part 1 is scary without showing any blood, this sequel is an overdose of blood and its not that scary. The fact that we now why Michael hunts for Laurie, just took away all the mystery and fright of the first movie and the whole character. But for me it was still a satisfying movie. Seeing Myers walking behind here at the end of the hallway is just unforgettable to me. This is probably also the only Halloween movie with all the horrific and gory kills. Later sequels wouldn't show much blood at all.
I laughed my ass of when I saw Halloween 3. I soo bad, it's funny. People should watch it just because of that. Weird that James doesn't say anything about the huge plotholes or situations in the movie..Brian
October 25, 2011 at 3:19 am
I also wish Halloween would've went the anthology route, Halloween 3 is better than most other Halloween sequels. It could've been awesome to see what all they could've came up with, but no, cry babies just HAD to have shitty Michael Myers doing the same old shit. Yawn!curt kaskavage
October 25, 2011 at 3:21 am
Halloween 2 was a pretty good sequel. Probably not as good as the first but up there. The movie reveals michael, and lauries connection and dr loomis discovers michaels link to samhain. Great film. And yes, I do love HALLOWEEN III
October 25, 2011 at 3:21 am
Follow up post … remember kiddies to stay tuned for THE BIG GIVE AWAY after the final monster madness videoMondoMarcus
October 25, 2011 at 3:22 am
Every feels like the ending to the original Halloween was a set up for a sequel, but I disagree. The end was perfect WITHOUT a sequel. The idea was that Michael Myers could be anywhere. In your house, in the backseat of your car… anywhere.
With that being said, I liked Halloween 2. I thought it was good in a different way than the original. It has this real dream like, surreal quality about it. The bright vivid colors and the melencholy mood makes you feel like it's real late night/early, early morning when no one is awake and all of this terrible, macabre shit is going down. It has a very strange and weird feel to it and I think that's a good thing looking back on it. But again… it's so different from the original and worth checking out for different reasons.
Halloween 3 was actually very entertaining. I don't really consider it part of the series, but I enjoy it. I see it as a completely different movie and when looked at like that it's pretty damn good. So what? Loomis, Laurie, and Michael aren't in it. That doesn't make the movie bad, and I actually appreciate the vision that Carpenter had for the rest of the series.
I'm stoked to see your Halloween 4 review. IMO it is the second best of the series behind the original. Great , top notch atmosphere and some really great characters that you feel for. Definitely close to the first in terms of quality for me. Can't wait to see the rest.
October 25, 2011 at 3:24 am
when he gets to it I just want to know why the hell the freakin terminator busts MM out of jail
October 25, 2011 at 3:28 am
somehow im dont entirely agree with u. i think helloween 2 its almost as good as 1. they just wanted to make a finale for the first part. if they show michael myers more than in the firt movie its becouse they wanted to, also there is more slashing becouse people was asking for it. i was a fan of these two movies since a kid, im older than u so i saw them when released. i loved helloween thanks to this movies. about the third part, well, sucks as hell so ill not comment about it.
ill wait for ur reviews on part 4,5, 6, h20, etc. and btw the second part was directed by Rick Rosenthal and not Carpénter.
October 25, 2011 at 3:33 am
Good review of Halloween 2. Halloween 3 no offense that was fuking sloppy. I actually watched that same top 10 today cos i knew u would include 3 tomorrow though wasn't expecting it tonight. Sorry to say i am really disappointed that u didn't go further into some of the scenes of halloween 3.
October 25, 2011 at 3:34 am
Once again, fantastic review!curt kaskavage
October 25, 2011 at 3:41 am
I do also agree on the notion that HALLOWEEN should never had sequel. Even John Carpenter did not want to do it. But he was talked into it, and was also talked into producing HALLOWEEN.III whiched failed. Carpenter sold the rights of the series to the late Moustapha Akkad, and washed his hands clean of the series. I dont blame him. HALLOWEEN stands alone as a ground breaking feat in suspence, fear, and a superb film of the genre. I love the sequels that progressed. But the sequels feel more like a 2D story of the characters that we are just watching where we feel for them like the original.Sean Whitmore
October 25, 2011 at 5:02 am
I really should check out the third movie one of these Octobers. Not this one, though, I'm backed up on horror movies at it is.
I agree on all parts regarding the second one. Not as good as the first, but decent, and the one that does the best job of mixing the feel of the first movie with the base slasher franchise it went on to be.SikFuk48
October 25, 2011 at 5:26 am
Part of Halloween 3 takes place where I live, Dayton, Ohio!Einsam
October 25, 2011 at 5:39 am
rob zombie remake ok but he lost me in part 2 and part 3 hes only the writerCilliandrew
October 25, 2011 at 6:13 am
Halloween II has it's good points and it's bad. It is really the only solid Myers sequel, simply because it does introduce plot points that seem to have become accepted canon for the Michael and Laurie character across all of Halloween. I like that it picks up the very same night, and Donald Pleasance is always good! Felt like Jamie Lee barely did anything in this movie. She was doped and comatose until the very end.
Halloween 3 was one of those movies that I avoided like the plague until about 2 years ago… And to be quite honest i was stunned by how good a movie it was. I did not expect this, based on all the Halloween fans derision of it. Tom Atkins makes for a likeably silly protagonist, and the ungonk-ungonk commercial is the stuff of legend.
Throw in one of the greatest intensely ambiguous horror endings of all-time, and you have an underrated gem.
Don't forget to tune in for the big giveaway at 9!Cilliandrew
October 25, 2011 at 6:14 am
OH: I forgot to mention i always liked how the fake Myers in #2 turned out being Ben Tramer.
Poor Ben. Just never gonna get lucky with the ladies!Nyleao
October 25, 2011 at 6:15 am
nice review james! cant wait for the rest and cant wait for next year 🙂cheetingfuckingGAME
October 25, 2011 at 6:22 am
3:11 what a fucking idiot he says that so softly LOLBen_from_G-town
October 25, 2011 at 6:22 am
Nice to see the reviews of 2 and 3. I actually haven't seen these myself. I've seen H20 and the remake, and the first one, and I'm not sure what else. Seems like I definitely need to check these two out, though!Ty Hope
October 25, 2011 at 7:24 am
After James says "ITS CINEMASSACRE'S MONSTER MADNESS!" does anyone else find themselves saying "GODZILLA-THON" every time… lolnatsirt21
October 25, 2011 at 7:44 am
It felt a little lazy that he just used footage from another one of his videos when discussing Halloween 3, but I suppose you could run out of things to say when discussing the same movie so many times.Rolfenstein
October 25, 2011 at 7:54 am
Nice! Love your top tens.OuiLee
October 25, 2011 at 8:05 am
A good one!
October 25, 2011 at 8:12 am
You should do more top 10 man they were awesomehorrorfanboy
October 25, 2011 at 8:15 am
There's also a tv cut of the second movie which had many different scenes that were not in the theatrical version. It's a nice cut.
Also what's what's that movie at 00:00?knightm7
October 25, 2011 at 8:20 am
@Ty Hope: Yes!
October 25, 2011 at 8:20 am
Ya know what, I like Halloween 3. I think its just as good as the first two, and the last great film of the franchise. There, I said it.bort
October 25, 2011 at 8:40 am
I really wish they had gone with Carpenter's idea and have the series be an anthology revolving around Halloween. The first one ended so perfectly, a sequel, let alone 8 of them, really take away its power. It would have been cool to see all the new stories revolving around Halloween.Michael_Syrigos
October 25, 2011 at 8:48 am
Excellent review James and I liked that you included the review of part 3 from the top 10 vid. It gives it another chance to gain some exposure because it's a good horror film and I'd loved to have seen more Halloween movies in that direction, which was also the initial idea with the first one mind you.Cheznar
October 25, 2011 at 8:55 am
I really enjoy both movies that were discussed today…I just watched Halloween 1 and 3 last night…and I gotta say that Halloween III is a really good movie on its own somethin' about those dudes in the suits is just creepy as hell to me and the thought of a big company that secretly wants us all dead feels to me like a real life type of thing to me (I watch a lot of conspiracies lol) and Halloween II is one of the first horror movies I saw I remember when my sister was babysitting me and she forced me into watching Halloween II and Children of the Corn it fucked me up for a minute lol anyways thought I'd share with the class today thats all everyone take care and happy HALLOWEEN!!!!BMovieBen
October 25, 2011 at 9:21 am
I got Halloween about 3 months ago I still haven't seen it because i was saving it for Halloween and when i herd you where doing a sequel-a-thon i was praying you'd do one of these slasher movie series and i got my wish twice. great reviews James you're the reason i watch Horror moviesFirewall_Philip_Hanan
October 25, 2011 at 9:32 am
It would have been cooler is Michael changed costumes so you would never know which person on the street would be the killer. Every Halloween, he would keep changing costumes and killing people. And you could sell an awful lot of costumes each year.Jackred89
October 25, 2011 at 9:44 am
I agree with Halloween 2 being a good sequel that comes close to the original. I now know you are doing Halloween remake and it's sequel probably on the 30th with Halloween: Resurrection. I don't care much for Halloween 3 I mean it was okay. I am looking toward to seeing Halloween 4 review tomorrow. Keep up the good work James.
October 25, 2011 at 9:49 am
Another great review, James! Yeah, I think the series should have ended after II.
Mark Moore
I, Carly
a post-DOTM Transformers movieverse fanfic
October 25, 2011 at 9:53 am
I too am amused at the cop who drives like a madman, then has the audacity to blame the kid for getting infront of his car.
October 25, 2011 at 10:03 am
I think I'm going to have to give Halloween III a re-watching because I never made it past the first 10 to 20 minutes. I was never upset that Michael wasn't in it. I was pissed off cause they kept flipping to TV's showing trailers for the first two Halloween films and that Halloween III has nothing to do with the first two. It should have been simply called Season Of The Witch and had all trailers of the other Halloween films removed from it.Ty Hope
October 25, 2011 at 10:48 am
I will always hate part 3 because of that damn song……
October 25, 2011 at 10:56 am
I do remember watching halloween 3 and i hated it. It just seemed stupid with some of the scenes. SPOILER ALERT!
Such as the scene where the chick who TOm atkinson travels with goes insane I thought it was really annoying how many times she came bak to life. I was really hoping you would talk the good points and bad points of 3 since its the most hated u could of gave it more of a praise. Though I think by far its the worst and this was me watching it fully knowing that michael myers wasn't in it other than trailers.cidtheninja
October 25, 2011 at 11:04 am
sorry James, but Halloween 3 was total shit all around. To this day I'm disappointed I spent a Halloween night watching that shit. I myself like the premise of having a different premise each movie, but this movie guaranteed that was never going to be taken seriously.
oh, and listen to nostalgia critic's review of it to hear an argument not solely focusing on "no Michael Myers"boogins
October 25, 2011 at 11:15 am
I remember taping Halloween 3 on the VCR and watching it later that night after trick or treating and just being so damned confused. Back then we had no internet and my Parents didnt know what the hell I was talking about. Looking back it was not that bad of a movieKid_Icarus
October 25, 2011 at 11:23 am
I don't think Michael swinging blindly was an awful scene. I also think the hospital chase scene was nearly as good as the first movie's chase scene. Obviously the original is better, but I treat Halloween 1 & 2 as one movie. Every Halloween I watch them both.Mellowtrauma
October 25, 2011 at 11:30 am
Halloween III IS highly underrated, now I'm not saying it's a fantastic movie, but given all of the shit it's taken over the years, it still has it's moments of entertainment.
Personally I think the title should have emphasized Season of the Witch more, but we're talking about Halloween, they HAD to try and cash in on the name.The Count Otaku
October 25, 2011 at 11:34 am
Halloween 3 was the first Halloween film that scared me so much that I could barely sleep by myself. I first saw it on TNT's Monster Vision with host Joe Bob Briggs. Although it scared me back then, today it is one of my favorite horror movies. I even bought reproductions of all 3 Silver Shamrock Masks complete with the Silver Shamrock Novelties tag in the back. Although I have watched many horror films since then and thought I was invincible to horror movie fear, but in early 2009 I watched something online that scared me so much that I've been seemingly scarred for life. To this day I stil haven't recovered from it.BobJohnson
October 25, 2011 at 11:37 am
Hey James, you should make a movie!Darthleather
October 25, 2011 at 11:57 am
I still remember the first time I watched Halloween 3. I think it was on the TNT network, back before they "knew drama". The ending freaked me out.ytsejam
October 25, 2011 at 12:39 pm
I don't think Halloween 3 is underrated. It has some good scenes (specially the gorier ones), and I agree it takes some balls to show children getting killed like this movie does, but overall is boring and a waste of film. I remember how disappointed I was when watched it for the first time and realize it has nothing to do with the first 2 films, but that was a long time ago. Watching now, judging by its own merits didn't help. It was a piece of crap back then, it's a pice of crap now.19Szabolcs91
October 25, 2011 at 1:34 pm
I don't agree, I think Halloween 2 is a LOT better than the original.
It helps that it gets to the point right away and there's no boring setup with bad dialog and unlikable characters.
The kills are much more interesting, and Michael seems more badass and scary in this (except when he's blinded).
But hey, it's just my opinion.Oliver
October 25, 2011 at 2:21 pm
Hi James!! I was wondering when you would get to The Halloween series. In sweden the halloween movie is called " alla helgons blodiga natt" translated to english : all hallows eves bloody night. I laugh every time i think of it. 🙂
I hate how they managed to fuck up the series as(s) in all damn franshises.
It´s Cinemassacres Maunsteerr Maaaadneeeesssss
I´m so sorry, I don´t have anything better to do with my life.
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 🙁 🙂TehJedicake
October 25, 2011 at 2:23 pm
19Szabolcs91, the "boring setup" is probably the best part, it builds the awesome tension in it, it sets the mood.villa
October 25, 2011 at 2:40 pm
a couple more days and I will be able to donate some money for the AVGN movie!! yeeeeeea!!!Kao
October 25, 2011 at 2:46 pm
To each his own mates. However James f you ever read this I think you missed a very important point with Halloween 1 and 2. In my mind they essentially are a 2 parter and as such should be viewed back to back. When you are absolutely fresh after the first one the second one doesn't need its own build up since the first one serves as exactly that. I'd even go as far as saying they should make a dvd with parts 1 and 2 edited into a huge single movie for the quintessential Halloween night marathon, to allow the viewer to fully immerse in the entirety of the story.xofthelorry
October 25, 2011 at 2:52 pm
Don't worry about shitty translations to other languages. I'm originally brazilian and I've seen a shitload of horrid movie title translations.
For instance, Bruce Lee's Big Boss in Portuguese is called "flight of the white dragon".
Want to do something good out of your life here? You could post some pics of your sweedish friends (girls, please). LOLmadthedj
October 25, 2011 at 3:05 pm
I saw Halloween 3 as kid and was freaked out by the concept (killer insect masks) and the effects, but I watched it again a few years ago and it didn't hold up. This has nothing to do with Michael Myers not being in it. Taken as it is, as a stand-alone movie, it's not very good. It's not utter crap, but it is bad in a lot of ways. The idea is still interesting, but it suffers from a lot of problems that plague many horror movies, like logical lapses, cheesy effects and lazy writing.
I appreciate what it tried to do, but it still failed, in my opinion.
I think its biggest downfall was that it tried to do too much, between the cult story, the town, the mystery, the masks. Horror works best, I think, when it's smaller in scope, with a limited group in a small area. Or, if the scope is big, keep it locked on one horrific idea, not three or four. Spread the story too far and it's easy to lose focus.
Just my opinion.Mr. Stark
October 25, 2011 at 4:12 pm
Hey, James! Excellent Monster Madness this year! I laugh everytime I see E.T. in that monster line-up at the beginning. Imagine if somebody re-made E.T. 20 years from now, though not understanding it very well, it turns into a new series of horror movies with the likeness of The Extra Terrestrial! Actually, that would be a funny movie about re-makes/reboots…Josey
October 25, 2011 at 4:33 pm
Great job, James. Keep up the good work. Your videos keep putting joy into my crappy life.RustyCoffinNail
October 25, 2011 at 4:34 pm
Halloween 2 should have been the last. The rest are pretty much just sequel whoring. As far as Halloween 3, it should have been called something else like The Halloween Massacre or something else.TRIPP36
October 25, 2011 at 4:49 pm
i don't know if u really read the comments but i have to say i actually have been watching your videos since day 1 of your YouTube stardom i most enjoy your videos, and i i have to say this has been the best, i love the Octobers reviews so anyway to get to what i like to say the review of hollween 3 is top notch lol
October 25, 2011 at 4:53 pm
I don't like Halloween 2, I think it was pointless and destroyed the wonderful ending that the first one had. Carpenter's films always have a really ambiguous endings which is kind of like a signature of his. Halloween 2 seems very unecessary and is really nothing more than a cash grab to bank on the success of the original.
I wish Halloween 2 would've been a fresh and original story, the anthology idea was brilliant!
Halloween III Season of the Witch I feel is just a bad film in its own right. I admire it for trying to ditch the Myers story, but yeah…. It's got some cool ideas and such, but I really think it's just a bad film by itself.urrutiap
October 25, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Come on James. You can do better than t his. 2 to 3 minutes for each video is way too damn short. Oh yeah I'm sure you're really busy with that remake of Planet 9 or whatever its called. Spend more time with the sequel a thons for your Monster Madness. AND QUIT IT WITH THE DAMN SWEARING.gorgo249
October 25, 2011 at 5:32 pm
I totally dig on pretty much everything you do James, especially this but I just had to say. The stupid Assassins Creed commercial has totally soured me to ever playing that game lol. I know you don't have control over it but hearing that stupid song now makes my ears bleed. Keep up the good work James.gorgo249
October 25, 2011 at 5:36 pm
Additional: urrutiap, how did you ever come to like anything James does? He swears in like everything, its part of the humor so stop bitching already.Riddler
October 25, 2011 at 5:39 pm
I liked halloween 2 for showing more gore, but 3 was ingenius. people need to look past the fact that Micheal isn't in it and appreciante it for what it is; a cfreepy, scary film with deaths and a good story. The running killer comes up in a spin off of halloween-prom night, which, in the classic 1980 version, is a great movie. The sewuel….no running killer. Also, one thing that changed between halloween 1 and 2 that piisses me off is how Micheal goes down stairs-slowly, almost lady like, where in the first movie he was fast and menacing!Xilex90
October 25, 2011 at 5:46 pm
goodone james!
bring on more michael!LicaWolf
October 25, 2011 at 5:51 pm
Very interesting review. I liked the comparison of the fire scene with the scene from the Thing, and the little explanation about how the way Slasher villains move is inspired on the Mummy. That's the kind of trivia I like from the Monster Madness reviews.
I think the idea of doing a different story every movie was an original idea, a shame it didn't worked. I can't say much thought, I haven't watched the Halloween movies yet, but I plan watching them in Halloween night this year 🙂
@urrutiap: What do you mean 2 to 3 minutes? Today's video was more than 5 minutes long, not including the second part of the video. You keep complaining about the swearing. We get it, you don't like it. But remember there are plenty of people here who don't mind the swearing, you aren't the only one watching these videos. And even if James decides to take in consideration your complains, he probably has these videos ready ahead of time, so it's not like he's going to change them the day after you comment on them.Necramonium
October 25, 2011 at 6:34 pm
I always found Halloween's Michael bullshit, he can't be killed, but they never tell WHY he can't be killed, he is a human gone psychotic. Not a Freddy Kruger who is a demon.Mellowtrauma
October 25, 2011 at 6:35 pm
I think from now on, we should all just completely ignore the comments made by urrutiap. If we start to reply on the crap being said, it just feeds their ego and fuels them. If we all shutter it, it just becomes a single dumb post is a sea of legitimate comments, regardless if they like the review of hated it.mattyboyslasher
October 25, 2011 at 7:14 pm
Any connection that Halloween 2 was produced by Universal Studios, same as the original horror monsters?Mellowtrauma
October 25, 2011 at 7:30 pm
"I met this six year old child with this blank, pale, emotionless face, and the blackest eyes; the devil's eyes. I spent eight years trying to reach him, and then another seven trying to keep him locked up because I realized what was living behind that boy's eyes was purely and simply…evil."
To put it on other words, He's been beaten, shot, set of fire, Michael Myers is possessed by a darkness that cannot die.Darthleather
October 25, 2011 at 7:59 pm
I love the end of Halloween 3. No bullshit happy ending, They go all the way. The first Halloween did that, then part 2 ruined it.Sun-Wukong
October 25, 2011 at 8:07 pm
John Carpenter didn't leave the Halloween series outright after the second one; he still served as the producer for the third movie (which more than likely means it got his blessing) and the composer for III, 4, and 5.GoldenFrog
October 25, 2011 at 10:09 pm
I agree that Halloween 2 should have been the last. The ones after 3 that contained Myers just milked it.
And yes 3 did get blown out of proportion and hated, but for all the right reasons. It shouldnt have been called Halloween 3, but a movie of its own with its own title. Thats enough right there to piss anyone off that was expecting a new Myers flick.
Overall, however, it was decent, nothing special. It had its moments, good idea, but wasnt executed properly, and a tad boring at times.
October 25, 2011 at 10:55 pm
Look quickly for Dana Carvey in his film debut. He plays the reporter's assistant.
Also, in reference to Halloween III, I still think it's a pretty terrible film. For the most part, I found it boring and not very scary. There were perhaps one or two chilling moments but that's all. I think they should've just called it Halloween: The Season of the Witch instead of Halloween III. I believe that it was the roman numeral that really threw people off when seeing this film, thinking that it tied in with the first two films. Speaking of which, I remember reading that there was originally a sub-plot in Halloween III that involved a scientist sifting through the remains of Michael Myers. If that scene really existed at one point, I think they perhaps should've left it in.
October 25, 2011 at 11:20 pm
Great reviews as always. I love Monster Madness! I'm listening to a radio interview right now on YouTube with Tommy Lee Wallace, the writer and director of Halloween III on YouTube. Here's the link if you (or anyone here) wants to listen to it.gluserty
October 25, 2011 at 11:28 pm
I like "Halloween II: Season of the Witch"; anyway, the Michael Myers "Halloween" sequel were mostly dreadful, with the exception of "H20".
I notice James has taken more time to discuss this series so far, and he kind of rushed through the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series. I don't have a problem with that, it's just what I think.bigevilworldwide
October 25, 2011 at 11:33 pm
I liked Halloween III, its was actually pretty good if you didn't jump all over it about how it didn't have Michael in it. I always kinda thought It would have done better if they woulda just called it Season of the Witch, and dropped the halloween III just so it could have at least been its own movie. I don't think I have ever heard anyone say anything other than they hate it just because it doesn't have Michael in it either.Inkrypted
October 25, 2011 at 11:37 pm
In my opinion a sequel has to be really good since it has to at least carry as much story , depth, and originality as the first one. I don't feel that any of the Halloween sequel's have any of that and serve to make Michael Myers more of a characacher than something to fear. I feel like Halloween III should have featured Abbot & Costello it might have been better. This also applies to the Nightmare , and Friday The 13th series as well.Inkrypted
October 25, 2011 at 11:40 pm
Also is this where the corporation started that eventually made RoboCop. Now I know where they made their starting capital.psgamer92
October 25, 2011 at 11:57 pm
Another great review James. This sequel along with H20 are the best in the series imo. I agree though that first is the best and few movies are as scary as the first. After all the horror movies I have seen, from new to old, and original to remake, the original Halloween still stands as a film that can scare me and it takes a lot to scare me. I love the trivia you give in these reviews and I appreciate all the time you give to us for these reviews.
Also I wouldn't mind the other people complaining. The average Monster Madness video is 3-5 mins long so I don't understand why all the nit picking. People are upset because you did not give the ANOES franchise more attention but hey you picked that one! For the Friday fans, he had a top "13" and reviewed the remake before ANOES and Halloween where chosen for this MM! I don't see why people complain when your doing this for free! You are giving your time to us and that says a lot! Not to mention you still did an AVGN video this month and your busy with the AVGN movie and you still give us MM, and not only that but overall you have increased the timing of the videos. To me that is awesome!
On a last note Halloween is my favorite horror series, though I think there are some better stand alone ones. I think TCM is better than Halloween but I love the Halloween series more so I can't wait to see your opinions on them!stargrovestamos
October 26, 2011 at 12:50 am
Word!Sean Whitmore
October 26, 2011 at 2:24 am
Not for nothing, I like Nostalgia Critic too, but his review of Halloween 3 was BARELY more than "no Michael Myers".betawa
October 26, 2011 at 4:24 am
Halloween III is great! The best one. It's typical Carpenter. I don't care the boring Michael Myers shit.mactruck81
October 26, 2011 at 7:33 am
I watched most of halloween 3 last night trying to give it a second shot. The first time i watched it i was not aware of the new direction they were going and was royally irked when there wasn't michael myers. I kept waiting for him to pop out and start killing.
Watching it last night i seriously tried to give it a honest shot, but still i think it wasnt a good movie. The overall premise is spot on, but i think it is poorly executed. It doesnt have the suspense, or the scare that the myer's films have. Also the music through out was simply annoying to me. So in my opinion i think it was an honest shot at something better than a slasher franchise, but it was poorly executed. had it been an outstanding movie in its own right then people could have shrugged off the lack of myerszoslize
October 26, 2011 at 11:02 am
Am i the only one here who's genuinly confused about Ellie from the third one just being gone at the end of the film? We never get to see what happened to her and why in the fuck would Silver Shamrock make a robot copy of her? What am i missing here?bobby2shoes
October 26, 2011 at 11:02 am
Halloween is an heretical pagan celebration that has no place in proper christian society.hillbillyhatfield
October 26, 2011 at 12:35 pm
I like the 2nd. It finished the myers persona nicely. He and his opponent are dead. Classic showdown. Everything else after this with myers is just crap really. They make a good crazy psycho into a form of evil. It killed the whole, this could happen that made the first one great. Now myers is a freddy or jason, something that could never happen in real life. It destroyed the true horror.
I really like the 3rd one. Because I knew it was going to be a anthology of halloween themes. But since people didnt see myers in it, it was dumped on. But he wasnt suppose to be in it. It's a new story. It's a great stand alone movie, and would have liked to see more along the lines. But people bulked and this movie didnt do well in theaters. It goes along the lines of trick r treat.
I liked that the town of santa mira is the same town in invasion of the body snatchers. and the gas station is the one in the fog for you film buffs.
October 26, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Part II and H2O are my favorites, Hospitals are just naturally creepy, so a slasher stalking the halls just makes it moreso for me. While I get why people love the original, I liked this one much more. And I am one that hates teh open ending and am fully satified with II's finale.
Halloween III isn;t that bad at all, once you get past it isn't a true sequel. Tom Atkins is always a joy to see, and Dan O'Herlihy is both eerie and hysterical as the villain. I love when O'Herlihy is explaining his process to Atkins and talks about how he got the big magical Stonehendge rock.Haisman
October 26, 2011 at 2:52 pm
Great review, James!Doug
October 26, 2011 at 2:53 pm
i actually found Halloween 2 MORE frightening and suspenseful than the original. maybe it's because i watched them back-to-back and had the tension from part one still fresh on my mind. i also think the hospital setting helped the creep factor. think about it: anyone who's been in a hospital, as a patient, a visitor, whatever, knows they're brightly lit and constantly active, so seeing it dark and silent just feels off and makes you feel uneasy, even without the unstoppable killer stalking the halls.Zombie Goat Fetish
October 26, 2011 at 7:42 pm
I loved Halloween 2 the fact it actually picked up where the first ended was brilliant. I never knew part 3 was meant to be in a new direction that explains a lot, I must give it another view.Daemeon
October 26, 2011 at 9:00 pm
I'm sure it's already been mentioned but the kid who got totaled by the cop car is not wearing a boiler suit. Look closely and you'll notice it's actually 2 pieces so definitely not the same thing Michael wears.. Personally to me it looks like the kid is wearing a jean jacket and jeans, both dark blue, as opposed to Michael's dark grey jumpsuit. On a side note the kid is the same guy that Laurie's friend in the first movie tried to set her up with or at least has the same name.
Anyway I also wanna point out the reason for the change in setting in part 2. Rick Rosenthal the director, who had basically no experience at the time as a director, wanted to shoot the movie in pre von sternberg german expressionism. So lots of long hallways and alternative view points.
As for Part 3 well it's just a worthless movie. Granted it's been a long time since I've seen it but based on what I remember the acting was bad, the plot was sketchy at best and even at it's creepiest moments it wasn't. The high point of the film is the deaths which frankly they would have been better off releasing as a set of short horror snuff films.AntonLevay
October 27, 2011 at 8:33 pm
Brad Jones just put up a lengthy tribute to "Halloween III" that was pretty great. I love that movie. One of the most underrated horror films of the 80's/MelancholyRose
October 29, 2011 at 3:40 pm
My problem with Halloween III wasn't that Michael Meyers wasn't in it. It was because it was bad.
First of all, the plot is so inconceivably retarded, it takes a special kind of person to actually believe in it. I mean, I know it's fiction and all, but seriously— are you kidding me? Some stereotypical Bond villain tries to kill a bunch of kids by simply telling them "wear these masks and watch TV." In reality, that plan would never, ever work, but for some reason, it does in the movie. At the time he tells them to watch the television, it's at a time of day when most kids are out trick or treating, that, and what kind of kid would actually wear a mask while watching TV? Those masks looked stuffy as hell. He would probably succeed in only killing less than a quarter of the amount he intended. It's so utterly ridiculous.
The acting is abysmal, and you can say that most acting in the eighties was bad, but that's a piss poor excuse. The main character, the doctor, is a total buffoon who flirts with every single woman that comes on screen, and most of the time he just manages to bumble his way into success. His "cute" female sidekick jumps into bed with him the night she meets him, apparently in the mood for lots of hot sex despite the death of her father earlier that day. They also exchange corny pillow talk before engaging in premarital sex, such as "Where would you LIKE to sleep?" "That's a dumb question." GOD, I wish I hadn't heard something so atrocious.
The main villain is apparently one of the most richest people in the world because he sells Halloween masks, rich enough to run his own town and make his own army of suave, studly male robots to do his bidding. Really… robots? Yes, the protagonist and his sexed up housewife sidekick get pursued by lumbering, slow-moving robots, which you can apparently kill in one shot just by shoving your fist into their stomachs, yet everyone manages to get murdered by them.
To add more to the convoluted, stupid, twisted story, Bond villain gets the power for the tags on his masks from a huge rock that he stole from the Stone Hedge, which he tries to convince us is imbued with "magic powers," which he is using to put into his killer masks. Good lord, can anything else be more stupid than that? "IT'S MAGIC!!" Isn't that called a Deus Ex Machina? Not only did he manage to steal a huge rock, but it for some reason is three times the size of a normal stone from the Stone Hedge, and he implies it took a lot of work to steal it. I'm sorry, but how do you make stealing one of those rocks inconspicuous?!
The ending is horrible. The Bond villain's plans are foiled by the doctor and his sex kitten when he dumps the magic killer chips all over the robots after playing the killer pumpkin show which is… supposed to… I guess… activate the magic in the chips? I can only assume that's what it does, that and it can produce rattlesnakes and crickets to come out of your face. I still don't understand a single bit how that works. You play some pumpkin video and a magic chip makes snakes come out of your mouth? Yeah we see this all happen to some ginger kid towards the end of the film, which makes for great , gripping cinema, because I'm sure if it made any sense whatsoever, it might be scary.
The Bond villain dies at the end, when… something… happens… like, the computers chips are dumped all over the robot slaves and then while a bunch of pumpkin videos are playing… the stone from the Hedge… erupts into… blue flames? Anyways, it turns the Bond villain into what looks like a human-shaped wedge of bleu cheese.
After breaking out his sex kitten partner, the doctor drives off with her in the seat beside him, and then it's revealed that… she's a robot too. And she tries to strangle him. So he crashes into a tree and her arm gets ripped off so she tries to strangle him with one arm… and then… I… just can't explain it any further, it's just SO GODDAMN STUPID, MY WORDS CANNOT DO IT JUSTICE.
So then it's revealed that stopping the British-accented Bond villain didn't halt the killer pumpkin videos, so the doctor guy decides to call the studio to get it taken off the air. For some reason, some random kids drive up in a car at the gas station he's at… I don't know who they are or where they came from. As they're watching the pumpkin video with their masks on, the protagonist is telling them to take the videos off the air, on all of the multiple channels it's apparently running on. The kid watching the TV just keeps changing the channels like a lifeless, emotionless zombie. Really, if all kids were that stupid, I think he should have just left it on the air. He screams for them to take it off of the final channel, but they just leave it on. And it ends there.
Why did they take it off of two channels, but not the last one? That makes a lot of fucking sense. I guess they realized how crazy the guy sounded at the last minute. Oh well. More candy for the adults now that less than 1% of all kids wearing masks and watching the show are dead.
So yeah, James. THAT'S why Halloween III is bad, not because it doesn't have Michael Meyers. You might say "that's your opinion." It's my opinion that it's a motherfucking fact.
Also, the only good Halloween was the first film. Second one was okay. The rest, complete garbage. I hated Michael Meyers as a villain, but he wasn't much worse than this British suit-wearing Bond guy.SoTH
October 29, 2011 at 7:07 pm
People think that H3's failure to launch an anthology series was only because of arogance, but it simply just doesn't fit with being the third in the series.
It should be its own Halloween series and entitled "Halloween: Season of the Witch", and that's all. After that, they'd launch a new sub title.
Halloween 1 and 2 are like the Back to the Future series. Its meant to be predestine as a story split into two films and end there. It was the 3's fault all along that we have 4 and on, in the end that is.
It just doesn't fit, as Halloween 1 and 2 barely have anything to do with the holiday. Aside for a few aspects, its mostly about a psychopath who escaped the mental institution and returned home to where he killed his sister due to verious psychological issues.
October 30, 2011 at 2:34 am
it is a shame halloween 3 was shunned for being so different and on some parts didnt make that much sense but i wasnt bothered by it, i saw halloween 3 as a kid and i liked it. though i scratched my head on why it didnt have michael myers but i ignored it. as time went by i discovered that people hated it, i didnt know why and everytime i ask them they go ape shit and say it didnt have michael myers and why didnt the film makers change the title, and that was about it, even the nostalgia critic says it. it sucked growing up defending the movie and trying to convince them to just accept it for what it is, a pretty gory and well holiday themed with great music movie. but they wouldnt i myself get shunned for even mentioning it along with the other halloween movies. but i wont give up my opinoin, i will shout it out right now I LIKE HALLOWEEN 3 AND YOU HATERS SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELFS TO ALLOW THE SERIES TO GO TO RESURRECTION!!!badgerno1
October 30, 2011 at 7:25 am
I saw Halloween 3 before the others, as a kid. Loved it,still think it's great, pretty ballsy and original. Deserved a longer review.THELLAMA25
October 30, 2011 at 7:48 am
watched halloween this morning it was epic also found out dr loomis is from my town worksop also great reviewsbullshit
October 30, 2011 at 3:54 pm
I recently saw 3 and I absolutely loved it.
It is a shame they diddn't keep the trend of making it an anthology series instead of endlessly resurrecting Myers. I wonder where it would've gone from there if they did.
I think Zombie should bring this trend back. Mabye not remaking or rebooting 3, but atleast reimagining it.FXguy
November 1, 2011 at 8:05 pm
I'm surprised that James neglected to mention the fact that Halloween II starts off with a rehash of the end of the first film, but if you count the gunshots, Loomis shoots Michael *seven* times.Senna4ever
November 2, 2011 at 5:32 am
Pointless sequel…yet it had balls. It killed off the killer and for me this is where the Halloween series ends as the sequels were terrible…yes even H20.
However I loved III as it's something new. Myers is dead anyway.
I always see it as a seperate franchise and it's a shame they didn't continue the idea of a new Halloween story each year.
It's a great flick, it's scary with some great ideas.
Next year James should do a Antholgoy-a-thon for the next Monster Madness. There are some great horror anthology flicks out there for the obvious Creepshow and Twilight Zone to the overlooked Tales From The Crypt (original English version) and even Carpenter's own Body Bags. Stephen King's Cat's Eye, The House That Dripped Blood from writer of Psycho Robert Bloch. Monster Club.
I could go on and on. More than enough films to do a Monster Madness on.sharkey360
November 5, 2011 at 7:51 pm
I first saw Halloween III in 1993, it was also the first ever Halloween flick for me.
Even though it did not have Michael Myers at all, I found the film's concept to be very interesting and at times it does a good job delivering scary moments.
I noticed the film proved to be daring in the following concepts:
1. Emphasizing the commercialization of Halloween.
2. Showing how capitalism made impact on society's perception of Halloween
3. The film dared to show the killing of a child in a key scene. Even until now, showing children getting killed on cinema is taboo.
4. It cleverly mixes elements of science fiction with culture and horror.smashinglollipops
November 9, 2011 at 8:12 pm
I was hoping that you touch upon the fact that we never know why the girl is a robot at the end or why she didn't get fried along with all of the other robots, but i did like how you explain how it was planning to be an anthology series because it really had me confused why Micheal was not in it.smashinglollipops
November 9, 2011 at 8:13 pm
by it i meant Halloween 3bwall317
July 4, 2012 at 4:24 am
I've watched Halloween III a couple times I think for a thriller its not bad but i think it should take out the Halloween III title and just call Season of the Witch: Sam Hien of something like that.Schloss Ritter
July 31, 2012 at 4:23 pm
Every car was packed with explosives back then and exploded with the slightest impact, heh.
I think Halloween III may have been one of the reasons it became less common to number movie sequels.rush86
October 16, 2012 at 3:26 am
Yea i agree wit u james 100 percent. Halloween 1 and 2 were just great. It was a good story about a evil killer who wanted to wipe out his family. But it ends wit him dying and thats that. But of course some moron wanted to make money and just ruined the whole series from 4 on. Halloween 3 was good. And yea they should of just continued in that direction like u said. A different halloween horror story each movie.
June 6, 2013 at 10:55 pm
awesome review james
July 8, 2013 at 9:40 am
Donald Pleasence also plays a character called Loomis in the non-Halloween movie Innocent Bystanders, playing Annie Brackett, one of the cast members in Halloween II, Nancy Kyes, was also called Loomis, her billing name in the credits being Nancy Loomis.Nick Beaman
August 16, 2013 at 10:54 am
There's actually one major point to H2 that was actually improved over the first movie; the lighting. It's something that really stood out to me. There's this scene where Michael is walking and light is shining through a chain link fence onto his mask. The texture of the lighting gives him an even more eerie, unearthly and chill inducing presence. There are more scenes like this spread throughout the movie, but this one in particular really stood out to me.BladeRunner
August 30, 2013 at 10:41 pm
I love Halloween III, along with the original Halloween & Halloween 4 it's one of my favorite movies to watch on Halloween. When I was younger it bothered me that Michael Myers wasn't in it, but now I just like the film for what it its.
October 12, 2013 at 5:16 pm
trivia: the main villain in Halloween III Season Of The Witch also plays yet another memorable villain in the 80's: The Old Man aka The OCP President from Robocop & Robocop 2. damn, now that's what I call great casting.EchnaTron
October 21, 2013 at 5:05 pm
I just saw Halloween 3 and I have to say in my opinion it's pretty bad. Quite some things in there that make no sense and it has one of the worst endings in movie history. Now I can understand that people were glad to have Michael Myers back in part four.
October 24, 2013 at 2:03 pm
I didn't even realize Halloween 3 was an official sequel for the longest time. It's just not a good movie regardless of the title. Halloween 2 is the only worthwhile sequel in the entire franchise. It really should have ended there…
October 24, 2013 at 2:18 pm
P.S. The hospital setting is extremely creepy and the only aspect that outdoes the original. The biggest downside of the movie is the revelation that Laurie is Michael's sister. It was better when Mike was such a nut job that he's simply compelled to go after the first girl that reminds of his first kill, his sister.metal0737
June 26, 2014 at 5:29 pm
I thought I was the only one who didn't like Halloween 3Jacob Price
November 7, 2013 at 6:00 pm
I have a guess as to who plays the villain in Halloween III but I'm not sure if it's him or not. Please tell me. Is the villain in Halloween III Dennis Over-the-top-mother-fucking Hoppernammm3
March 21, 2014 at 6:38 pm
Lol, Halloween 3 was like Terminator 3 after both franchises tried to seal the deal that their endings for their sequels were done and "un-sequel-able". They were so wrong…metal0737
June 26, 2014 at 5:28 pm
Love part 2, but didn't like part 3.
June 26, 2014 at 5:30 pm
I didn't find it scary, but I do agree that Myers should have stayed dead.
July 31, 2014 at 8:55 pm
what movie is that in the beginning that starts at 00:00 and ends at 00:02?


text:
1. They are idols of hearts and of households,
They are angels of God in disguise.
The sunlight still sleeps in their tresses,
His glory still gleams in their eyes.
These truants from home and from Heaven
They have made me more manly and mild,
And I know now how Jesus could liken,
The Kingdom of God to a child.
2. Oo Oo Oo Oo Oo Oo
And I know now how Jesus could liken,
The Kingdom of God to a child.
Words taken from a poem by Charles Dickens, "The Children," Heart Throbs, ed. Joe Mitchell Chapple (Chapple Publishing Co., Ltd,: Boston, 1905).
Text: Catherine Hardy
Music: Catherine Hardy
Artist: Hardy
Album: Music Published in the Church Magazines: New Era
Composition Date: 1977-08-01
More Info: New Era


text:
Cisco Systems plans to shut down its US and Canadian operations for the last week of December as part of a larger plan to cut fiscal 2009 expenses.
A Cisco spokeswoman confirmed the year-end office shuttering with El Reg, saying the networking omnicorp will close its doors December 29 through January 2. Certain exceptions will be made for certain business-critical teams like technical assistance and product ordering services for channel partners and customers.
The shut-down is part of Cisco's plan to reduce its fiscal 2009 expenses by over $1bn, "given the challenging macroeconomic environment," according to a company statement.
Other steps in Cisco's cost-saving scheme include reductions in travel and "discretionary-related expenses," like outside services, trade shows, prototypes, marketing, and equipment.
Shutting down operations at the end of the year isn't entirely uncommon for tech firms over the past few years, but it's the first time in Cisco's history that its swung such a plan into action.
Certainly a sign of the times.
Cisco's stocks fell nearly 6 per cent in the final hour of trading after news of the shut-down began to circulate. And some are blaming Cisco's four-day US and Canadian vacation on the overall decline of the tech-happy Nasdaq exchange. ®


text:
NEW ORLEANS — The Super Bowl closes a tumultuous year for the NFL.
NEW ORLEANS — The Super Bowl closes a tumultuous year for the NFL.
Suicides by former NFL players. Thousands of others filing concussion lawsuits. New studies linking football to brain disease. Still no testing for human growth hormone. The specter of other purported performance-enhancing products — deer-antler spray, anyone? — being peddled to players.
A pay-for-pain bounty scandal. A lockout of officials resolved only after a ludicrous game-ending call. Zero minority hires for 15 coach or general manager openings.
And yet the league is as popular as ever.
Advertisers paid nearly $4 million per 30-second television commercial for the right to reach the 100 million or so Americans expected to tune in to Sunday's Super Bowl between the AFC champion Baltimore Ravens and NFC champion San Francisco 49ers. Eleven of the 12 most-watched TV programs during the last 2� years were NFL postseason games, according to the league.
Uncertain, though, is what the future holds for an NFL still coming to grips with the dangers of a brutal sport that makes it tremendously wealthy.
"The game has changed and keeps changing. ... It is such a violent game, and such a collision game, that careers are going to be kind of like not long at all. Because you take those licks — you've only got so many in your body, and at some point that's going to wear it out," said Ravens running backs coach Wilbert Montgomery, who played that position for the Philadelphia Eagles and Detroit Lions from 1977-85.
Montgomery said he got six concussions in one season alone, and others along the way, including one that knocked him out cold a few days before playing for the Eagles in the NFC title game at the end of the 1980 season.
"I know one thing: Back then, it didn't make any difference. They gave you smelling salts and then, after that, you went back in," Montgomery said. "I have headaches all the time. That's why I say my wife is always messing with me when I have outbursts, saying, 'You've been hit too many times upside the head.'"
Montgomery laughed for a moment. Then he rubbed his forehead and continued talking, mentioning former teammate and friend Andre Waters and opponent Dave Duerson. Both committed suicide; researchers studied their brain tissue and found signs of chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE, a degenerative disease also found in boxers and often linked with repeated blows to the head. Former star linebacker Junior Seau, who shot himself in May, also was found to have CTE. Baltimore's starting center on Sunday, Matt Birk, has pledged to donate his brain for study when he dies.
"It's a serious thing," Montgomery said. "It's scary."
So the league must figure out how to deal with "walking a fine line," as 49ers CEO Jed York described it: The two-sided task of making the game safer, which commissioner Roger Goodell acknowledges is imperative, while not making it "too safe," thereby diminishing the popularity of an enterprise that is violent by its very nature.
"There's no question that that is a bit of a conundrum. But to me, we've got to place more weight on player safety," said Giants co-owner John Mara. "The rules changes that we've implemented over the past five or six years have not made the game any less exciting."


text:
There are countless ways to mess up seminar marketing. Of all the possibilities, the following six are the worst. Commit two or more of these seminar sins, and you will join the legion of advisors who mutter "Seminars don't work anymore."
Seminars do work, by the way, so long as you get everything right. "Everything," by the way is spelled out in my white paper, "Seminar Success Zone" available free at www.billgood.com/successzone.
#1: Ignore Competitors. You can have a great seminar idea. But if five other people in your market have the same great idea and each of them is blasting out 5,000 invitations every month, results are likely to be around 0.2%. Yikes.
Ignore what the other people in your market are doing at your peril. Research your market first.
Call half a dozen clients in as many different areas. Ask them to save all the seminar invitations they receive. Even take a box to each home prominently labeled "Seminar Invites for Buford." In a month, go pick up the boxes, bringing a nice thank you gift of course.
Your boxes will contain the invitations sent out by Response Mail Express, CIS Marketing and Emerald. You may see invitations created by advisors and printed locally. With a little practice, you can recognize the style of each of the big three. But if you see that one company is dominating the market, consider using another so that your invite stands out.
What you are really looking for is one or more invitations being sent month after month. Odds are, invitations sent out repeatedly are the ones that are working.
It's time for onsite research. Certainly do not sign up for a competitor's seminar. You would not want someone doing that to you. But there's nothing wrong in paying a visit to the restaurant or hotel on the night of the event. Walk past the registration table a couple of times. Are people showing up? Or is it empty? My guess is the room will be full.
Now you know what invitation is working in your marketplace. I'm not saying copy it, but certainly take into account the subject, invitation style, bullet points and location etc. According to me, "It's easier to rewrite than it is to write."
#2: Don't Test. Before committing the troop to a particular seminar idea, let's test market. Your day job, of course, is financial advisor. But your other job is direct response marketer. As such, the first commandment is: test.
Instead of blasting out 5,000 invitations, I want you to test small. The big mailing houses may require a 5,000 minimum. So you need to work with a local mail house or printer to test small. What's small? Maybe 1,500 or 2,000 invitations.
You need a minimum response rate of 0.8%. Obviously, 1% or 1.2% is better and, by the way, is quite achievable in today's market. But, you can be extremely profitable at 0.8%, assuming everything else works.
Suppose your first mailing fails. You sent out 1,500 invitations and only two couples accept. You spent $1,000, or whatever. Not $5,000. You didn't blow your whole budget. Round up four or five client couples and invite them to dinner. By surrounding your two prospects with clients, you have an excellent chance of getting one new account. You made profit on a failed seminar campaign.
Now, test again. Change the invitation. Or change the list or location. Test again. Keep testing small until you hit 0.8% or better.
#3: Bad Invitation. If you want a bad invitation, here's how to create one: (1) Go cheap. Print a wedding style invitation on your laser printer. (2) Don't sell.
I am looking at an invitation right now headlined "Savvy Medicare Planning: What Baby Boomers Need to Know about Medicare Coverage." All it offers is "Up to date information you need to help you understand the basics of Medicare." With that little bit of information would you give up several hours of your time?
A good invitation has a good title. This one actually did. But a good invitation also has three to five bullet points arguing persuasively for the reader to pick up the phone. A good invitation sells. It does not merely inform.
#4: Bad Location. A few years ago, I was helping a client debug a failing seminar. As I went down my little checklist, I asked, "What is your location?"
He answered: "A quality Holiday Inn." I replied: "There is no such thing."
We moved his location to the best restaurant in town. He sent out another invitation, identical except for the restaurant. Both events were booked solid.
Make no mistake: People will come for food. It is the skill of the presenter that converts the so-called "eaters" into prospects. (Advisors who complain about "eaters" generally have poor presentation.)
Wrong locations include: country clubs, ethnic restaurants (Mexican, Chinese, Thai, etc.), public libraries, community meeting rooms, Moose Lodges (yes, I had to reprimand someone for using one of those), and worst of all, your office.
Don't get me wrong. You can use your office but not for a public seminar. It's fine for an educational seminar for clients and client guests. The usual social contract for people you have never met is: you buy dinner and I'll give you some time. Use your office for a public seminar and I guarantee failure.
#5: Boring Presentation. Let's say you are served a delicious bowl of soup. A fly lands in it, struggles for a moment and then drowns. Of course you're done with the soup. Your otherwise perfect meal is ruined.
Your droning speaking style is the fly in the soup. Those eight couples who came to check you out begin mentally checking themselves out within minutes, or even seconds of the drone beginning.
You've heard it said, "Seniors have a short attention span." Rubbish. If you believe that, you have a serious droning problem. I have personally attended many advisor seminars, some lasting as long as two hours, and I have seen these same "short attention span seniors" totally engaged, and then even hanging around after the seminar for spirited conversation and even more question asking.
Let me define professional-grade speaking skills: You know your material cold and deliver it with passion and conviction.
You can measure the quality of your speaking with a statistic you gather from your post seminar report card. It's the appointment request rate.
The question on your report card should read something like, "Yes! I would like an appointment to review my situation." Here's what the results mean:
40% or more request an appointment = professional grade presentation skills.
30%-40% = adequate speaking style, but improvement needed.
20%-30% = boring. No passion or conviction. Probably reading bullet point slides.
Less than 20% = paralyzing experience. Join Toastmasters or get a speaking coach.
First master the your content. That means you go "noteless." OK, for your first few seminars, you can have all the notes you can put on a 3×5 card.
I have developed a procedure to master content. I named it "The 25% Solution." You can get a copy at my Seminar Success Zone web page. The key to presentation style is actually content mastery.
#6: Misuse PowerPoint. I cannot even begin to count the number of seminars wrecked by misuse of PowerPoint. With PowerPoint misuse, even a good speaker can put an audience down. Those splashes you hear? That's members of the audience pitching forward into their soup.
There are two main ways of misuing PowerPoint. One is using too many slides (also called "PowerPoint poisoning.) Somewhere, someone got the idea that a seminar with 150 slides is a good thing. Guess what. If you give a seminar with nothing more than a flipchart, no one will approach you after you wrap up and say, "I am very disappointed that you didn't have any slides."
Slides are visual aids. They are not the show. A good rule of thumb is: Only use a PowerPoint slide if it shows a picture of something that cannot easily be put into words. And NEVER use bullet point slides. And even worse is reading bullet point slides. No bullet point slides, ever.
For your standard presentation, five or six slides should be about right.
Second misuse: Leaving a slide on screen when you are talking about something else. When not talking about a slide, turn it off. Press the "B" key. When ready to resume, press "B" again.
As you cure an ailing seminar campaign, start with these six factors. Handle them well, and if you can also sell, you can build a great business from seminar marketing.


text:
Acetaldehyde at Wilmington
This page last reviewed September 28, 2010
One of the important contributors to health risk from air pollution, acetaldehyde is a colorless liquid and at dilute concentrations has a very noticeable fruity odor. Acetaldehyde will quickly evaporate at ambient temperature and pressure. Acetaldehyde can cause eye, skin and respiratory tract irritation. California has determined under Assembly Bill 1807 and Proposition 65 that acetaldehyde is a cancer-causing compound. The ARB has taken regulatory actions to reduce acetaldehyde emissions.
The predominant sources of acetaldehyde emissions in the atmosphere are gasoline motor vehicle exhaust. Mobile sources contribute 85% and industry-related stationary sources contribute 15% of the statewide emissions. Approximately 60% of mobile source acetaldehyde emissions are from on-road motor vehicles, with the remainder from non-road mobile sources. Acetaldehyde emissions also occur naturally during the respiration of higher plants and can be found in ripening fruit such as apples.
The ARB emission standards for new vehicles have resulted in steady decline in vehicular emissions of acetaldehyde. The decline is expected to continue. (Over the years 1996 through 2000, the ambient acetaldehyde levels remained relatively constant.)
Ambient Monitoring Results
Ambient levels of acetaldehyde are routinely monitored at approximately twenty sites in the California air toxics monitoring network. The statewide average concentration of acetaldehyde during 1998-2000 was 1.2 ppb (parts per billion), based on values ranging from 0.05 ppb to 8.1 ppb. Relative to the statewide average, the Los Angeles County region was 24% higher, with an average concentration of 1.5 ppb for the same time period.
The ambient monitoring results at Wilmington are provided here:
- A graph comparing the monthly summaries of acetaldehyde at the community with historical statewide and regional levels
- A table of summary statistics
- Raw data in Excel format
Cancer Risk
Cancer risk is the number of excess cancer cases among a million people if the people are exposed to levels of a toxic air pollutant over 70 years. Acetaldehyde represents approximately 2% of the potential cancer risk of the nine measured compounds, excluding diesel particulate matter. Acetaldehyde represents less than 1% of the potential risk of the nine measured compounds and the estimated diesel particulate matter.


text:
Sign up for a chance to win a FREE $100 Giftcard every week.
*By completing this form you are signing up to receive our emails and can unsubscribe at any time.
We'll notify you via email if you're a winner.
Tell your friends !!!
The Biza Isadora features a memory foam cushioned insole, soft leather linings and rubber outsole.
Facebook Instagram


text:
SU 3rd Floor - Room 308
Front Desk / Center Staff
Marvin Woodard Jr.
MRC Coordinator
The Southern Oregon University Multicultural Resource Center (MRC) endeavors to create an inclusive community that recognizes, celebrates, and supports the diverse life experiences of the SOU community. Toward this goal, we seek to support the African-American, Latino/Hispanic American, Native American, Pacific Islander, American Asian, and Queer communities of SOU by maintaining an open center where these students and staff may connect with a variety of constituencies including students, student organizations, administration and staff to explore the multifaceted issues of race, class, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation.
The goal of the MRC is to maintain a space in a central location on campus where all students, faculty, and staff may meet, share ideas, design and execute plans for community and campus programs which advance understanding of the various social and cultural elements in our campus community and region.
Find us on social media!


text:
How can we help you?
We matched that to:
What do I do if I don't recognize a transaction?
If you don't recognize a transaction, there are several ways to proceed. Often, unrecognized transactions turn out to be legitimate transactions that aren't labelled or posted in an expected way. Before calling us to identify or dispute a transaction, have a look at these tips.
Tips to help identify unfamiliar transactions:
- Review your receipts – If the date is unfamiliar, remember that transactions may appear a few days late, delayed, or may be amended after the date of purchase (at a hotel, for example). Sometimes merchants use different names or have an alternate company name than the one you recognize.
- If the location is unfamiliar, keep in mind that some merchants (airlines and large companies, for example) have offices or processing centres in multiple cities.
- Look out for trial offer transactions – Sometimes trial offers automatically enroll trials into paid monthly subscriptions unless they are cancelled before the identified date.
- Discuss it with the merchant directly – If you speak to someone who can review the transaction, like a manager or call centre, often they can correct the mistake and resolve the issue and/or give you a refund. Keep track of the dates and names, and key points or outcomes of any conversations for reference.
- Consult with other card users or account holders if anyone else is authorized to use the card or account in question
- Understand the status – For Credit Cards, transactions may sometimes temporarily show under Pending and Posted at the same time. This has no effect on your Current Balance or Available Credit. TD can't assist you with a transaction dispute until the transaction has been posted.
Once you have reviewed these tips and still wish to discuss a transaction, or believe there may be fraud on your account, you have several ways to reach us, listed below.
Please choose the options that best fits your concern:
If this is about your Credit Card
Call TD Credit Cards Customer Service at 1-800-983-8472 and one of our Customer Service Specialists will be happy to speak to you. We highly recommend calling within 30 days of your TD Credit Card statement date if possible.
If this is about your TD Access Card
Call EasyLine telephone banking at 1-866-222-3456 or visit your local TD Canada Trust branch immediately and we will investigate on your behalf.
Thank you.
Please note that the answers to the questions are for information purposes only for the products discussed. Individual circumstances may vary. In case of discrepancy, the documentation prevails.


text:
26 Grilled Snacks, Appetizers, and Side Dishes For Your Memorial Day Grill
So not everyone can be in charge of the main course. That's ok, because today we salute you, Mr. Relegated To Snack And Sides Duty On Memorial Day Weekend Man.
Here are 26 recipes for snacks, appetizers, hors d'oeuvres, and side dishes so good that the family will be swarming around your little Smoky Joe instead of taking up their usual positions next to Uncle Jesse's burger station. Show 'em what you got.
Finger Foods and Snacks
- Figs Stuffed with Goat Cheese »
- Bacon-Wrapped Crimini Mushrooms »
- Planked Goat Cheese-Stuffed Peppadews »
- Yaki Onigiri (Japanese Grilled Rice Balls) »
Meaty Appetizers
- Italian-Style Meatballs with Pecorino and Parmesan »
- Armadillo Eggs (Cheese-Stuffed, Sausage-Wrapped, Grilled Jalapeños) »
- Barbecue Meatballs »
- Negimaki (Scallion-Stuffed Beef Rolls) »
- Sriracha Hot Wings »
- Pig Candy »
- Bacon-Wrapped, Jalapeno and Cheese-Stuffed Shrimp »
Vegetables and Sides
- Smashed Potatoes »
- Hasselback Potatoes with Garlic and Parmesan »
- Grilled Hasselback Sweet Potatoes with Rosemary and Garlic »
- Romaine Salad with Spicy Ranch, Tomatoes, and Fried Onions »
- Grilled Zucchini with White Cheese and Zucchini Flowers »
- Eggplant Caprese »
- Chinese Eggplant with Sweet Ginger-Miso Paste »
- Brussels Sprouts with Bacon »
- Zucchini with Parmesan and Garlic Chili Oil »
- Zucchini Rolls with Goat Cheese and Mint »
- Grilled Asparagus, Zucchini, and Bread Salad with Olive-Caper Dressing »
- Corn with Chili Lime Butter »
- Italian-Style Grilled Corn »
- Charred Asparagus Tacos with Creamy Adobo and Pickled Red Onions »
- Sweet and Spicy Grilled Pickles »
More Memorial Day Recipes!
- 24 Grilled Chicken Recipes For Your Memorial Day Grill »
- 16 Grilled Steak Recipes for Your Memorial Day Grill »
- 20 Grilled Pork Recipes For Your Memorial Day Grill »
- 25 Sausage and Hot Dog Recipes For Your Memorial Day Grill »
- 13 Sweets for Your Memorial Day Cookout »
- Drinks for Memorial Day Weekend »
All products linked here have been independently selected by our editors. We may earn a commission on purchases, as described in our affiliate policy.


text:
Signed or not, Richard eager to contribute
PEORIA, Ariz. -- At this point, Padres left-hander Clayton Richard is accustomed to being the last man standing.
After all, Richard was the only pitcher on San Diego's staff to make all of his starts (33) in 2012. And now, he is the lone player in camp without a contract for 2013.
Richard and the Padres have an arbitration hearing scheduled for Feb. 19, though the lefty said on Monday that he's hopeful a deal can get completed between now and then.
Richard, who matched his career best in victories (14) last season, has asked for $5.55 million. The team offered $4.905 million. Last season, Richard made $2.705 million.
It's been a busy month for the Padres, who reached deals with seven of their arbitration-eligible players, including third baseman Chase Headley, who will make $8.575 million. Another arbitration-eligible player, outfielder Kyle Blanks, agreed to a contract in November.


text:
When Al and Toni New arrived in the riverfront Australian city of Bundaberg, Queensland, they waded right into the middle of the worst flooding in the town's recorded history.
"The river was almost 32 feet high," said Al New, manager of deployment and operations for the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association's Rapid Response Team (BGEA RRT) in the United States. "It washed homes completely off their foundations, pushed them across to other areas.
"All the homes in the immediate area of the river were either gone or completely flooded."
The damage in Bundaberg didn't surprise the husband and wife chaplain team. They've witnessed the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and the ruin caused by Superstorm Sandy in the Northeast. There was, however, something different about their assignment on the other side of the world. This time, Al and Toni were on a mission to help train 16 new Australian RRT chaplains how to respond to nature's worst.
The Australian chaplains arrived from all over the country and prepared for on-the-job training in Bundaberg – nicknamed "Bundy," – which flooded in late January after Tropical Cyclone Oswald swept over the northeast side of the coast. The destruction in the wake of the storm provided an opportunity for the newly formed Australian RRT to receive valuable hands-on training.
Australia Sees Need for Rapid Response Team
Interest for a Rapid Response Team in Australia began to develop in 2008, according to Jack Munday, International Director of BGEA RRT and Specialized Ministries. During that time, massive wildfires set the country ablaze, causing utter devastation.
"There was a lot of grief, a lot of trauma," said Munday, who explained that momentum for a new response team was building, but wasn't yet organized enough to take shape.
In July, 2011, the Australian RRT officially got its start. "Sharing Hope in Crisis" seminars took place in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, and Perth. (Sydney and Melbourne hosted Billy Graham Crusades in 1959, the same year BGEA opened an Australian office.)
"Sharing Hope in Crisis set a fire in my heart," said Stewart Beveridge, an Australian chaplain who is now coordinating RRT chaplaincy deployments. "It's a way to get alongside hurting people and care for them. The training and experience with Billy Graham Rapid Response Team has given me confidence and skills to respond to hurting people, to be Jesus' hands and heart in the 'valley of shadows.'"
The floods of 2013 placed Beveridge and 15 other chaplains in the center of one such valley, as they deployed to the first major RRT event in Australia.
"It was key, because it was the first time that the Rapid Response Team and Samaritan's Purse Disaster Relief deployed together in Australia, and it was important to establish the collaboration and coordination between the two organizations," said Munday.
Uncharted Territory
Many of the new RRT chaplains had worked in schools, hospitals, and nursing homes, but had never ministered to people in the midst of natural disaster.
"The power of nature to overwhelm and destroy is humbling," said Beveridge. "It made us all feel a bit smaller."
Al and Toni got to work instructing the chaplains on how to talk with people who have just lost everything. Al says it's all about "the approach."
"You never go up to somebody and ask, 'How are you doing?'" said Al New. "They'll look at you and say, 'Well, how do you think I'm doing? I just lost everything I own.' So our approach is, 'How are you holding up?'"
That simple question can open the door to meaningful conversation that helps the chaplains figure out how they can best meet the needs of the homeowners they encounter.
A Ministry of Presence
About 2,000 homes and 7,500 people in the Bundaberg area were affected by the floods. Breaking up into groups, the team focused on one family at a time.
That's when the chaplains realized their task may be more difficult than they expected.
"The Australians are private people, so praying for them publicly was hard for them," said Al New. "We'd have people tell us they didn't want to pray, so that was something very different."
"The teams had to learn how to be invited into the private space where we Aussies express thoughts about faith and God," said Beveridge. "Prayer in public space is a cultural cringe here. So is talking with a stranger about belief in God."
Determined to show respect and sensitivity for the people of Bundy, the team focused simply on having a "ministry of presence."
"We're just there," said Al New. "And they know we're there to help."
Week after week, the team waded through the muddy streets of Bundy, showing residents they weren't just swooping in for a couple of days and then leaving. That set the RRT apart from many of the other agencies working in the area.
"After a month or so, the government recovery teams finished, the State Emergency Service withdrew, and the RRT 'Blue Shirts' kept coming back," said Beveridge. "That is powerful to the locals – 'You guys still here?' – and before you know it, there is a chat and a cup of tea.
"They earned the invitation by presence, the commitment to stay and support a city as it gets back on its feet."
The people of Bundy gradually began to trust the RRT chaplains and started to share their stories.
"It wasn't until we built relationships in the area, probably about the middle of the second week, before they really loosened up and felt comfortable with us, just sitting and drinking tea," said Al New. "Then they opened up and let us pray with them."
New Friends
During their time in Bundy, the RRT stayed at a YMCA. There, they came in contact with many displaced families who were also temporarily calling the Y "home." One of those families was a married couple that Al and Toni began to talk with.
Arthur and Eve are Bundaberg residents who lost most of their possessions to the flood.
"I was talking with Arthur – just general conversation," said Al New. "Then I switched gears on him. I said, 'Arthur, what's your relationship with the Lord?' He dropped his head and wouldn't look at me."
It became clear that Arthur wasn't interested in talking about God. Al dropped the subject, but he and his wife continued to spend time with Arthur and Eve.
When the time was right, Al tried again.
"I said, 'Arthur, are you gonna let me pray for you before I leave here today?' And he just grinned and nodded his head yes, so I prayed for him right there."
During the next few weeks, the two couples shared meals, prayers, and laughs. Al and Toni also helped Arthur and Eve with their flooded home. Samaritan's Purse volunteers and BGEA RRT chaplains dug up $1,400 worth of muddy jewelry in Arthur and Eve's yard, polished it piece by piece, and presented it back to its rightful owners.
The couple was touched by the genuine care and concern shown by the chaplains. By the end of their time together, Arthur even said he wanted to start going to church.
"He was seeing hope because Samaritan's Purse had helped with his home. He was a changed person when we left," said Al.
Arthur wasn't the only one changed by the partnership between the Rapid Response Team and Samaritan's Purse Disaster Relief. Al and Toni watched the Australian RRT chaplains quickly hone their skills as they worked with the people of Bundy.
"They were really good chaplains," said Toni New. "You just saw such servant's hearts in each one of them. They went above and beyond."
Once their work was done, Al and Toni parted ways with their Australian counterparts, who remained in Bundy to continue to help and encourage residents.
A Growing Ministry
There are currently 32 BGEA RRT chaplains in Australia, and the interest is growing. That gives Beveridge great hope for the future of his country.
"An active Rapid Response Team allows us to respond across the nation," he said. "Floods, fires and cyclones challenge us every summer. It seems to be getting busier every year. We needed an open door so Christians can share the hope we find in Jesus with our hurting neighbors."
"We sense and feel the Lord's blessing on this fledgling ministry," said Jorge Rodrigues, Executive Director of Samaritan's Purse Australia/New Zealand. "We believe that it will be used of the Lord in increasingly larger disasters in the future."
Rodriques and Beveridge both believe the new RRT has a solid foundation. Al and Toni wholeheartedly agree.
"I think they've got a really good start, and Australia's going to be blessed by their opportunity to deploy and help out their country," said Toni New. "I just feel it was such a privilege and a real blessing that we were able to be there."
To find out more or to support the Australian Rapid Response Team, check out the BGEA Australia website here.


text:
Log in to favorite videos, comment and create playlists!
Для просмотра Redtube выбран следующий язык: Русский. Switch to English
You need the latest version of Adobe Flash Player to view this video.
Click here to download.
You are seeing this message either because your Flash Player is outdated or because your browser does not support HTML5 player.
This 1080P download is only available upon purchase.
Video available for purchase on Modelhub.
Login to your RedTube account!
Don't have an account yet?


text:
I cannot tell you how psyched I am for Shutter Island. And the premiere - with Mick Jagger, Michelle Williams, and a pleather jumpsuit, wasn't half-stepping either.
Jeez Louise (as my mom would say), can this woman do any wrong? I mean, clothes-wise. I can't speak to any other aspect of her life. And only a small aspect of this one.
Mira Sorvino's embellished coat is a pretty way to keep warm. (If her bare legs and open-toed shoes weren't the tip-off that in fact she'd gone door to door in a car and had no need to keep warm.)
I love that Emily Mortimer always rocks her English pallor. Especially because she actually lives in Brooklyn and it makes other pallid gals feel better about their life choices. The getup's a touch mumsy though, no?
I always thought I hated those built-in underwire dresses, but I think it's just because my boobs don't fit in them. Go for it, Teresa Palmer.
Paz de la Huerta rocks the Morticia.
Patricia Clarkson does Morticia 2.0.
Mick Jagger and girlfriend L'Wren Scott: Fearless luxury. (That's the toast my bf and I always do. We saw it in a watch ad in the FT's "How to Spend It" magazine.)
Ruby Jerins: more hope for the future.
I think we can safely call Anna Lynne McCord's WTF disco catwoman, a certifiable Ugly.
[Images via Getty]