Rachel Feldman 2

You Think Google Has Issues: Rachel Feldman Has Something To Say About Women & Directing, Okay?

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent

One hot week in August leading up to a full moon, from Aug. 1 to Aug. 7, there was a kind of ground zero for the D-word from Hollywood to Silicon Valley. We’re talking hot-button issues inclusion, fairness, and equity under the heading of Diversity. If you haven’t heard what happened, a recap is in order. Gwood17Here’s a timeline: on July 31 “CBS This Morning” covers a new USC Annenberg study that cites “inclusion crisis” in Hollywood, based on Dr. Stacy Smith’s co-authored academic dissection of 900 films and 39,000 “characters” charted over a decade that prove demographics are not improving in re: diversity, including women behind the camera. Aug. 1 the fall-out at TCA (Television Critics Association) summer summit in Los Angeles is that, no surprise, CBS execs Kelly Kahl (CBS Ent. Pres.) and Thom Sherman (Sr. Exec. Programming) are mercilessly held to the fire by reporters on diversity stats and the fracas is covered by Los Angeles Times, even with a caveat at 6:45 pm that tellingly announces a quote correction as: “An earlier version of this post quoted Kelly Kahl as saying, “I don’t how to answer that.” It has been corrected to read “I’m not exactly even sure how to address that.””

A quote correction is a rare occurrence in journalism, and underscores that an ideological brush-fire has started. Nobody means harm, but the stats don’t lie. It’s business as usual, but with resistance now.

By Aug. 3, NBC which is owned by Comcast, also owner of Universal with the banner NBCUNI, uses TCA to introduce its “Female Forward” push that is supposed to address the underrepresentation of women in helmer positions in television. Slated for 2018-2019 season, a mere 10 women get a shot behind the camera, in a drop-in-the-ocean attempt to correct DGA-compiled stats that only 17 percent of episodes on all platforms were directed by women, with — get this — only 3% by minority women.

FX Displays One of The More Diverse Pie Charts at TCA.

FX Displays One of The More Diverse Pie Charts at TCA.

Next, over the weekend of Aug. 4 – 6, a bombshell goes off in Silicon Valley with a self-proclaimed “classic liberal” 28-year-old Google software engineer’s memo on a site called Motherboard that pretends to be a counterpoint to the lack of women in tech roles with a screed that includes charts and graphs on why women are “biologically” absent from high-profile engineering jobs in tech, as well as tech in general. Ka-Pow!

On Monday, Aug. 7, the world wakes up to worldwide coverage of James Damore’s surprising anti-PC punch in the gut to women, and suddenly the floorboards are ripped up on gender resentments from Hollywood to Silicon Valley.

By Monday night Damore is fired by Google, and Weds., Aug. 9 said memo-writer threatens (and files) a lawsuit for wrongful termination — but the cat is out of the bag, and all gender hell has broken loose. Because if you follow the Damore logic, women have just been handed their ass in every profession. Rachel Feldman 2Enter director Rachel Feldman, who is former chair of the DGA (Director’s Guild of America) Women’s Steering Committee, and wow, is she pissed off.

“James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the controversial 3,300 word memo outlining his reasons why female employees were inferior workers, has been fired. Good for Google!  Their response was swift and their message clear; that kind of caveman thinking won’t be tolerated at Google,” Feldman begins. “But responding to pseudo-science that tries to legitimize prejudice is overt and relatively easy to spot. What’s much harder to root out, to see clearly, and eliminate is the insidious infection of unconscious bias.”

“I work in the Hollywood film and television industry as a director and I am a woman. I have more than paid my dues – with a masters degree in directing, numerous prestigious film festivals for grant funded indie films, trained on big studio movies working for famous, brilliant directors, and then directed over 60 hours of network and broadcast television – both episodic television and original movies, as well as taught directing on the Masters level – yet every job is still as hard to get as the first one, and I am called “a first time director” by many.”

In addition to being a director, writer, and filmmaker, Feldman, who is currently working on a script about equal-pay advocate Lilly Ledbetter (FAIR FIGHT), produced the 2013 DGA Women of Action Summit that was a first in the guild’s 80-year history to shine a spot on gender disparity. Ledbetter was born in 1938, and even though a “fair pay act” was named for her in 2009, she continues to fight for an equal share for women — both in representation and in the paycheck.

Ironically, James Damore’s Google platform for his numbskull pontificating about gender has opened the door for a class action suit, with some 60 female employees on board who learned via this scandal that they were paid up to $40K less than their male counterparts in some cases. Rampant sexism is the cause, as in Hollywood.

According to Deadline, an insider Hollywood news site, the EEOC is looking into gender discrimination in the industry’s most famous town in a big way.

“Decades ago producers and those who hire would say overtly sexist things to me and get away with it,” Feldman shares. “When a producer gives you the excuse for not hiring you because they “already had a woman director and the crew didn’t like her,” it was hard to hold my tongue and not point out the idiocy of that statement. But times have changed and now we are supposedly enlightened. We have diversity programs and initiatives up the wahzoo. So why has so little changed for women directors? What happened at Google was clearly terrible, but I wish my own industry were as vigilant in reacting to the perpetual gender exclusion that women directors in film and television live with every day.”

 L-R Nancy Rae Stone (producer), Feldman (director/writer), Nancy Schreiber ASC (Cinematographer), Barbara Kallier (gaffer), Pony Gold (key grip.)

Feldman’s Crew: L-R Nancy Rae Stone (producer), Feldman (director/writer), Nancy Schreiber ASC (Cinematographer), Barbara Kallier (gaffer), Pony Gold (key grip.)

You can also follow her activism on these topics on Twitter @WomenCallAction, and track Feldman as she responds to some tough questions on women and directing here:

Q:  What do you think of the recent Google memo about women (another male-heavy profession, tech), and are the attitudes in tech and movies parallel, if so why is that?

A: James Damore, the Google engineer who wrote the controversial 3,300 word memo outlining his reasons why female employees were inferior workers, has been fired.  Good for Google!  Their response was swift and their message clear; that kind of caveman thinking won’t be tolerated at Google.  But responding to pseudo-science that tries to legitimize prejudice is overt and relatively easy to spot. We have witnessed the tragedies of Eugenics attempting to rationalize genocide and most of us are lucky enough to live in a progressive culture where we strive for equality in every facet of our lives.  What’s much harder to root out, to see clearly, and eliminate is the insidious infection of unconscious bias.

Q: So why has so little changed for women directors?

A: What happened at Google was clearly terrible, but I wish my own industry were as vigilant in reacting to the perpetual gender exclusion that women directors in film and television live with every day.

Someone recently asked me if this was ageism because honestly, most of the woman I’m talking about are no longer the girls they were when they started directing in the 90’s.  But when the obstacles we face are exactly the same as the ones we faced 25 years ago, we must admit that gender exclusion is the culprit.

Q: Tricky issue – Kathryn Bigelow, DETROIT, what’s your opinion on this production, that director?

A: I thought DETROIT was very strong and I believe that the race conversation about a white woman telling this story is misplaced. Kathryn Bigelow is at the top of her game, she doesn’t need us to talk about her. I believe what we need to talk about the thousands of NON-CELEBRITY women who are brilliant, skilled, talented, proven, accomplished – and not working.  WHY?  How do we get the industry to pay attention to the women who have been ignored for way too long by gender exclusion?

Q: How about the thorny issue of wanting to be counted as a female director, but wanting to be seen on the world stage as a Director, no gender?

A: I think that women directors who have already had some measure of success can afford to take this position, but from my activist seat and from the position of having a career that has been severely affected by gender exclusion, I feel that any women who takes this position is doing a disservice to her sister filmmakers.  Not proclaiming your gender as a woman director in this day and age feels a bit like privilege to me.  We must fight for every woman to have a fair share and we will only do that if we join forces as women behind the camera.

Q: Top ten women director list, your choices (living or dead, domestic and international)?

A: It’s important that we banish the notion that there are only a handful of directors! We are a huge, underutilized labor force, and there is AN ARMY OF HIGHLY SKILLED DIRECTORS in both film and television.

Find us, hire us.There are so many brilliant, expressive voices to choose from but anyone I would name is already well known.  What I’d like to do it to invite our industry to hire new directors who they may never have heard of before.  These two links will allow for a great exploration: http://www.thedirectorlist.com/database/thedirecorlist.com and here.

Q: Are initiatives from groups like Geena Davis’ gender institute helpful?

A: The GDIGM is a great organization and quite effective. Geena is a great speaker and Madeline is a wonderful advocate.  We need more female protagonists and girls and women on screen who are not stereotyped, sexualized or victimized.  These are hugely important issues.

Q: What’s the greatest challenge of directing for women — getting funded, hiring enough women, etc?

A: The greatest challenge for women is to squash the idea that we don’t exist. Day after day we hear the same refrain – that there are only a handful of directors to hire – while THOUSANDS of us with Oscars, Emmy’s, Sundance awards, and hundreds of credits are ignored.  Why?  Why is all the focus on change to develop a pipeline for the future, with educational programs for new directors, when there are so many of us trained directors who could be working now and changing the stats NOW! The answer is that many of us don’t have agents, we are invisible – and why don’t we have representation? Because the agencies only want to hire hot celebrities who bring in fast money.  This cycle must change!!!

Q: Who is your favorite female director, or top three favorites and why?

A: I’d rather not talk about my s/heroes, but instead introduce folks to a tiny, tip of the iceberg list of hard-working, accomplished women who you’ve never heard of. This is by no means intended to be exhaustive or comprehensive, and this list focuses on television and not features.  There are thousands of talented women in the independent space, with stunning, award winning films – and many more in TV as well – let’s promote these women and get them working

Feldman’s Director Short List

Victoria Hochberg, Gloria Muzio, Neema Barnett, Debbie Reinisch, Hanelle Culpepper, Martha Coolidge, Amy Heckerling, Tanya Hamilton, Tessa Blake, Kat Candler, Shannon McCormack Flynn, Ellen Pressman, Leslie Libman, Vicky Jenson, Stacy Title, Linda Feferman, Matia Karell, Maggie Greenwald, Debroah Kempmeir, Debra Granick, Darnell Martin, Anna Forester, Heather Cappiello, Martha Coolidge, Nicole Rubio, Tanya Hamilton, Tessa Blake, Kat Candle, Leslie Libman, Beth Spitainy, Daisy Von Scherier Mayer, Jan Eliasberg, Elodie Keene, Diana Valentine, Jessica Landaw, Julie Hebert, Julie Anne Robinson, Katherine Brooks, Martha Mitchell, Nicole Kassell, Nzingha Stewart, Rachel Talalay, Rose Troche, Stacey Black, Alexis Korycinski, Allison Anders, Ami Mann, Amy Redford, Anna Mastro, Anne Renton, Catherine Jelski, Claudia Weil, Dee Rees, Helen Hunt, Jessica Yu, Donna Deitch, Kasi Lemmons, Lily Mariye, So Yong Kim, Neema Barnette, Tina Mabrey, Tanya Hamilton…

Q: Is film school a non-starter in production for women, what about AFI’s women in directing program, and is Sundance viable for women?

A: Film schools are great if you want to learn how to make movies and meet others who love the same. I have an MFA from NYU in directing and have taught directing in the MFA program at USC, but you don’t have to go to film school to learn to make films.

It’s important to note that women graduate at 50% of film school classes but the employment drops off the moment they enter the workforce.

We exist, we are interested and trained, we just don’t get the opportunities.

Q: About getting distribution and screenings — is it the same dog-and-pony show for any director?

A: If your project has a female protagonist you are in for a hard road.

If you can’t get one of the top 10 female actors who are interesting to foreign sales, your chances are slim to none.

These are insidious forms of gender discrimination and ones that need to be challenged.

Q: On how to promote a film — is it an advantage to say a woman is at the helm, or is it better to go in blind on that in some cases?

A: It’s probably never an advantage to be a woman director unless you are already a celebrity, no matter what the media might claim.

But I believe that for better or for worse, if we are not brave and proud and willing to take the heat – things will never change.

Q: What about sexism and entries into foreign (international) film festivals, any thoughts?

A: Women are terribly excluded from film festivals.  More of the same.

Final Thoughts on Similarities, Call it “GoogleWood”

In closing, here’s a metric ex-Googler James Damore doesn’t understand: the ageism against men in tech is so ingrained that by 26, most men are done in the fast lane if they haven’t migrated from the engineering track to management. In Hollywood, most women are done by 26 as ingenues, and fall out of the fast lane if they don’t accept character roles. The point? Technology was James Damore’s Hollywood, he just didn’t get the rules of the game.

 

# # #

[Editor’s note: HERE NOW, directed by Rachel Feldman will screen on Aug. 12 at Holly Shorts Film Festival, which runs from Aug. 10 -19.]

Rachel Feldman directing Amy Brenneman in HERE NOW

Rachel Feldman directing Amy Brenneman in HERE NOW

20227519_1735917299813855_1015844766_n

Before Kevin Spacey Locks the Gore Vidal Script for Netflix, A True Story

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent Everyone from Iran to Serbia seems to be bent on letting me know there’s a Gore Vidal biopic in the works starring Kevin Spacey. And while Gore would definitely think Kevin Spacey is hot, one wonders what he would make of another *damnable biopic,* especially about himself now dead […]

LeslieZ17

Leslie Zemeckis: The Lady & The Tiger and Her Emojis

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent It’s fitting that Leslie Zemeckis is in Italy when we decide to do an interview, because the word burlesque is derived from Italian roots in “burla,” meaning mockery, to poke fun yet shine a spotlight on sexuality. Actor, writer, documentarian Zemeckis has just come out with a line of […]

SpideyNow1

Best Spider-Man Ever, Wow, Tom Holland Looks Like It, Seriously

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent

We could run down the Marvel list of past Spider-Men: impish Tobey Maguire, troubled Andrew Garfield, and they were great. But why bother, Spidey fans, because Tom Holland owns the new web-slinger entry SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING, which opens July 7.

DnyFavHol17

Hey, is that Jon Favreau in the background? Yes.

Owns it along with his co-stars, that is. Those being Robert Downey, Jr.,  back as his Iron Man/Tony Stark mentor; Michael Keaton as not super-normal, real-world villain Vulture; and Marisa Tomei as a surprisingly bitchin’ Aunt May.  There’s what Robert Downey Jr. calls “the kids,” all the subplot superheros. Plus this has old and new Hollywood folks, such as Tyne Daly, Danny Glover, even Zendaya. For insiders, Amy Pascal, who got burned in the SONY email hack, comes roaring back as her Pascal Pictures pushed this one through to the finish line. Even Pascal gets her superhero cape back.

Producer Kevin Feige sets the scene here on how they thought about the new Spider-Man.

“We introduced Spider-Man in Civil War and you got to see the banter and the fun and contrast between he and the other heroes there,” says Feige. “And now, after the greatest vacation of all time, in which he got to spend this time with these rock stars, he’s got to go back to high school. So, it exacerbates his problem – a problem that I certainly had and I think most people who go to high school have – ‘Is there something more for me out there?’ But Peter knows there is because he just did it. He thinks he’s ready, and of course when you’re fifteen years old you often think you’re ready for something before you really are. That’s the fun of this movie, that’s the relatability of Peter Parker, and that’s why we wanted to do this and reintroduce Spider-Man to audiences through the lens of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.”

Yeah, okay, but Tom Holland says it in a much more fun way.

Wired for maximum energy, Tom Holland is so kick-ass even in talking about  this movie, like how he heard that he was cast as The One. “Well I didn’t actually hear I was going to be Spider-Man, I read about it on Instragram,” the newly minted web-spinner admits. “I didn’t get ‘the call.’ But no, it was an amazing experience.”

“I’d worked my ass off getting this job. And when all that hard work paid off and I could finally say I was Spider-Man, it was a pretty crazy experience.” SpideySPH17Plus he loves it when people bitch on the internet about the new onscreen reboot of Marvel’s “crown jewel” and “most successful comic book in the world,” according to Marvel Studio’s internal production notes, the hallowed “Spider-Man” created Stan Lee and Steve Ditko.

Holland scoffs a little at the doubters, in a good way.

“I love reading on the internet people complaining that there is so much in the trailers because you haven’t seen anything yet, there is so much more to come, the big twists and turns. My whole family watched it the other day, and my family are not ‘superhero fans,’ and they loved it. They loved it. They are my toughest critics and it was amazing to see them enjoy it, which is fun.”

Not to mention working with Robert Downey, Jr, again after almost flying off a building when they met up in the last big bang box office movie, Civil War. Let’s just say, Tom really digs working with the Suave Marvel Franchise Statesman.

SPHCncptArt17

Incredible illustrations as Concept Art.

“When Robert showed up on set, he was so excited to be there,” Downey’s film protege shares. “He saw the concept art, some of the footage and he thought it looked great. To me it was the perfect indicator that we’ve got something special here.”

A veteran of Hollywood and real life, being a franchise frontier is kind of second nature to Downey now. He talks about Peter Parker in such a cool way. “He is not part of the Military Industrial Complex” like Tony Stark is, Downey points out, adding Tom Holland plays it really new, for a re-sprung franchise. “Lest we forget,” Tony Stark’s counterpart says, “[Iron Man] pulled Peter Parker into life and death situations shortly after meeting him just a year or so ago.” But “he develops this belief in Mr. Parker.”

About the other teen superheroes, Downey is equally impressed. “You know what, speaking of homecoming, these kids are pretty damn good,” and then he switches gears to the reconfigured Aunt May character, played by Marisa Tomei.

“I’ve known Marisa for a long time, she’s just perfect,” he adds. “What a fresh start this franchise is getting.”

When thinking about New Spider-Man, Marisa starts laughing, “I feel like a newcomer next to him, because [Tom Holland] was born a pro. He is so capable. [Tom] is adept at everything he does.”SpiderTube17

Then she really takes a moment to say “it’s a gift to act in a ‘franchise’ film, to know you have a job coming. And to be part of something that is so beloved. That the fans really cherish and are really excited about. There’s a fever to it, to be part of something that is so anticipated.”

But is it too big, or too anticipated, you may wonder?

“It’s big, big movie —  with independent spirit at heart. The movie is as much about ‘finding your place in the world,’ as much as it is a giant superhero movie.”

As far as Aunt May Upgraded, “I wanted to try to keep some of the — not just the function, to look after [Peter], to be curious and deduced things and make a strong home for him — I wanted to make her [mine].”

This Aunt May “works, she has a publishing company. She has a past… [But], she’s trying to make these pies. I wanted her to make these apple pies like the original Aunt May, and the original granny glasses, and the apron and the bun in her hair. It helps transition into this new iteration.”

Plus if it’s Marisa (CRAZY, STUPID, LOVE), you get that this will be the first sexy Aunt May, just saying.

“I felt like I was in summer camp when I was working with them [Tom and the younger superhero cast members]. It was like ‘okay, not only are you not your age, but i’m not my age, we’re all 13 right now’ — I loved being with them.”

So you’re getting the idea how off-the-hook special this movie is, even with a kind of human villain, Michael Keaton. He’s a Hollywood insider who’s been around forever, but Keaton as “Vulture” plays a new flavor of heavy here.

Birdman’s Oscar nominee tries to break it down to the essence of his Spider-Man bad guy with “there is, you know, an underlying intelligence to it. It isn’t that simple. He has resentment.”

Vulture “may have been vulnerable.” He started out ethically okay, maybe but “my character [failed] doing things on the up-and-up, maybe — but he is put in a position to say, ‘I’m going to look after my family.’ I also like that he had a crew. I like these guys. These are all working class people. They all have legitimate gripes.”

When asked about the scope of Spider-Man: Homecoming, Keaton nails it for most of us. “These movies are always just so huge, how they put it together it beyond me. You can tell, the director, he really saw it.” Then he stops short, summing up the little details that apparently make this movie The One for diehard Marvel franchise fans.

Michael Keaton wants to talk The Suit.

“The suit was so intricate and artfully made — I don’t think those people (Costumers) get enough credit. You know, special wrenches to put the boots in a certain (position), I was knocked out by that.” Which leads into a whole discussion about Cosplay, but never mind.SpideyNow1

SPIDER-MAN: HOMECOMING  is right around the corner as this summer’s huge blockbuster entry and swings into the box office July 7, so get ready for it. See the official site here, with all the relevant hashtags and hoo-hah for such a massive fan movie.

JUST IN CASE YOU FORGOT THE SMALL PRINT

Columbia Pictures presents a Marvel Studios / Pascal Pictures production, Spider-Man™: Homecoming.  Starring Tom Holland, Michael Keaton, Jon Favreau, Zendaya, Donald Glover, Tyne Daly, with Marisa Tomei and Robert Downey Jr. Directed by Jon Watts.  Screenplay by Jonathan Goldstein & John Francis Daley and Jon Watts & Christopher Ford and Chris McKenna & Erik Sommers. Screen Story by Jonathan Goldstein & John Francis Daley.  Based on the Marvel Comic Book by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko.  Produced by Kevin Feige and Amy Pascal.  Executive Producers are Louis D’Esposito, Victoria Alonso, Patricia Whitcher, Jeremy Latcham, Stan Lee, Avi Arad, and Matt Tolmach. Mitch Bell, Eric Hauserman Carroll, and Rachel O’Connor serve as Co-Producers. Director of Photography is Salvatore Totino ASC, AIC. Production Designer is Oliver Scholl. Editors are Dan Lebental ACE and Debbie Berman.  Visual Effects Supervisor is Janek Sirrs.  Costume Designer is Louise Frogley. Music by Michael Giacchino. Music Supervision by Dave Jordan.

# # #

DTposter17

DARK TOWER Casts Wild Shadow with Baddie McConaughey & Pistol-Packing Idris Elba

by Screenmancer Staff It doesn’t entirely ruin the mystique around Stephen King’s eight-novel series “The Dark Tower” to know that the name of the main character, played by Idris Elba in the upcoming Columbia Pictures release of the same name, is from a Robert Browning poem. In fact it kind of arts it up. Browning’s […]

BGFFlogo17

Get Ready To Be Entranced: Sofia Coppola’s THE BEGUILED Grips

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent

There was a time when Sofia Coppola could be at an awards show and overlooked as a famous daughter; not anymore, not for years now since LOST IN TRANSLATION. But in her new film, THE BEGUILED, which is a retool of a 1971 Clint Eastwood starrer, she really comes of age as a visionary writer/director. Even in what is considered a remake of a movie based on a novel by Thomas Cullinan, it has a distinctive feel that’s all hers. The film opens Friday, June 23 in New York and Los Angeles, with wider release on June 30.KidanBGniceWith an all-star cast that includes Nicole Kidman, Colin Farrell, Kirsten Dunst, and Elle Fanning, you get a sense of why this movie won Best Director at the 2017 Cannes International Film Festival.

Picture a Southern all-girls boarding school during the battle-weary Civil War era, and a wounded enemy soldier appears. John McBurney (Colin Farrell) adds testosterone to a very delicate and well-mannered yet highly complex microcosm of women led by a formidable Headmistress named Miss Martha (Nicole Kidman).

KidsBG17

“This is my dream cast,” Sofia Coppola admits. “When I was writing it, I was picturing Nicole as Miss Martha. She always surprises me. Watching her, I’ve never seen anyone like that, she does so many different things at once.” She adds that the whole cast is on a par with Kidman.

You want to use a word like confection for the ethereal feel, but that description doesn’t do justice to the depth of rich multi-layered images that float on the screen like Spanish moss.

“This is very much a Sofia film,” Colin Farrell explains. “It’s very much aesthetically beautiful. She wrote every word of this. Her way feels maybe more right than some [as far as directing], there’s an immense lack of tension on the set, very playful. She’s incredibly easygoing and generous to her core it seems.”ColinDunstBG

Farrell is underscoring the fact that a remake can often feel like a re-do of someone else’s vision.

But if you look at the 1971 version, two minutes into the film, Eastwood is literally hitting on a twelve year old, with “not too young for kisses.” And even though the fabulous Geraldine Page stars as his Miss Martha, there’s a creepy feel to their interplay, down the line. So that’s essentially the breaking point for the 2017 Beguiled. It takes a left turn at the way the heightened sexual tension is framed.

“I didn’t know the movie and I watched it, and it really stayed in my mind. I watched it. It was so weird, and I thought ‘how would I do my version?’” I thought it would be interesting to do the same story but from the female characters’ point of view.”

Elle Fanning, who plays Alicia, describes her character as kind of an empowered seductress, but still innocent in a real way. “Anything Sofia does I think is incredible, it was also like, ‘yeah.’ Because it was all these girls and women — and Colin of course— they hold the power.”ColinElleBG

“The original film had been made from a guy’s point of view, so I went back to the book. Because I just liked the premise,” Coppola adds. “It’s such a crazy, extreme premise about power between men and women in such an extreme situation. The idea of looking at wartime from the point of view of the women left behind.”

“You try to make it personal. Try to relate to the characters because it’s such a different time. And yet I loved that it had elements that were familiar to me, this feminine beautiful world. A beautiful feminine world with violence and very gothic.”

“My tendency is to be on the subtle side. Colin was teasing me: ‘Oh, this is an action movie to you, there’s guns… there’s blood.’ It’s been fun to have this mix of beautiful dresses and a little gore. We had smoke machines everyday, and candlelight… a really ethereal look that is specific to this story.”

“Colin is a good sport about being our sex object in the movie, but he has to be dangerous and threatening, and romantic in the movie.” Farrell plays a mercenary soldier paid $300 off the boat from Ireland to fight as a Yankee, so he’s neither North nor South, but emblematic of the unspoken ever-present struggle for control between the sexes.

When the crushing attractions flare up between Farrell’s character and the many flavors of female in this strange closed world hunkered down  under siege of musket fire in a distance, Beguiled really poses some interesting questions about how women express their sexuality. Yet there’s a brutality to their mannered world that Farrell’s soldier-on-the-mend only begins to realize when it’s too late.

Not that every movie needs a memorable line, but when his John McBurney yells out “You Vengeful Bitches,” in a thick Irish accent, it’s an instant classic. Probably because Nicole Kidman’s Miss Martha is so poised and possibly inherently evil at the same time, in a nice way.NicBGbad17

Kirsten Dunst, who plays wronged love interest Edwina, sums up Sofia Coppola’s deft directing hand best, as “she doesn’t second guess herself. I’ve known her for so long, I’m working with my friend, you can’t really beat that.”

Since he is outnumbered in this eerie thriller, Colin Farrell gets the last word. “I’m surrounded by extraordinary talent. Watching these extraordinary women do extraordinary work. There’s an amazing sense of camaraderie. It’s been a joy.”

Don’t miss what the women have in store for their wounded houseguest, it’s a very rewarding fight to the finish.

Focus Features awards-buzzworthy film THE BEGUILED rolls out in New York and Los Angeles on Friday, June 23, with wider release on June 30.

Directed by Sofia Coppola (“Lost in Translation,” “Somewhere”)
Written by Sofia Coppola, based on the novel by Thomas Cullinan and the screenplay by Albert Maltz and Grimes Grice
Starring Colin Farrell, Nicole Kidman, Kirsten Dunst, Elle Fanning, Oona Laurence, Angourie Rice, Addison Riecke, Emma Howard.

Watch This Making-of With Director & Cast

 

BGFFlogo17

93 Minutes I Rated R

Official Site I Facebook I Twitter I Instagram

#TheBeguiled #VengefulBitches

# # #

Karen Black FeFF 2009_2

Leslie-Ann Coles Will Make You Think About The Female Eye… Festival Too

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent

Well, how many times have we heard it? “Ladies and Gentlemen,” even that phrase grates because it’s loaded from a, take a guess? Male perspective. And this is where Leslie-Ann Coles founder of The Female Eye Festival comes into sharp focus. FeFF Award WinnersFor the festival’s 15th anniversary, which opened yesterday in Toronto and runs through June 25, Coles may just be telling us what we need to hear right now. Listen up, since no one else seems to be championing story, sans capes, and what women are doing in film right now. What about Patty Jenkins and her big bang box office Wonder Woman, you ask?

“I think it is fantastic and great for all women directors. I just find it interesting that the Bigelow won for The Hurt Locker – which is a film that dealt with war — from a more personal perspective, and now we have a wonderful director with a superhero flick — again it’s an action movie,” Coles explains. “I always think about all the great films that the world has seen over the years that have often fallen under the radar of public and critical acclaim.”LA Coles Founder & Director 2016

Leslie-Ann Coles, in front of last year’s mural.

“I was always kind of interested in the (mostly male superhero) genre,” how women behind the lens see things differently, Female Eye’s tireless champion adds. “Part of the hoopla is that a women directed this,” Wonder Woman. It’s in the genre “of bastion the old boys club.”

“I was thinking also about public and industry. The general public, I don’t know how much they pay attention to who directed a film. Do they look at the poster and wonder who the director is? I don’t think the general public thinks [for example] ‘it stars Charlize Theron, wow, who is the director?’”

If you ask ‘what about women driving the box office behind a Billion Dollar Beauty & The Beast?’ “I think women buy tickets and they make a lot of decisions — maybe I’m wrong about that. This is all great… There is a film we are showing this year that we are all floored by  — we don’t often see a 74 year-old actor out of New York — the title is ‘Can Hilter Happen Here.’”Round Table Discussions 2016

As far as the full slate for the 15th Female Eye Festival, “there are some other films, documentaries, where I’ve been astonished how the women who create these films survive the front lines to get the story.  You’ll be taken aback by their work and their stories.”

The only requirement for participating films is obvious, Coles notes. Films are curated “very much with the caveat that they have to be directed by a woman.”

“There are many film festivals in the world. We have been around for 15 years, but we stand firmly behind the women in the director’s chair. I think it’s important to stand behind that.”

“Somebody asked me the other day, ‘do you think it’s important still?,’” and Coles points to the dismal stats on women at the helm of bigger budget films not just in Hollywood, but around the world.

What women have to say, it turns out, is a very different statement about the age-old entanglement of perpetual seat-filler plot-devices: Sex and Violence, she notes.Directors 2016

A film came out of New York one year that blew the viewer panels away, “Virgin” (2003). “That film was co-executive produced by Robin Wright Penn and starred Elizabeth Moss.” There was a real possibility that no one would distribute this project, so, Female Eye made sure to give it screen time. That director, Deborah Kampmeier, is out of New York.

“There was a rape of lead actress — perpetrator rapes her,” then Moss has to deal with “the man who impregnated her.”

“What struck me is that women tend to treat sex and violence very differently. Nothing is gratuitous. It’s often what [audiences] don’t see with explicit violence or sex.” The director “has come back to us with Split, Houndog — I’m a big fan of her work. She’s really underrated as a director, she is an important director, she created some, creates some great films, there have been so many.”

Karen Black FeFF 2009_2Karen Black is a past honoree.

“Nancy Savoca (Dogfight, If These Walls Could Talk) is another one; she shot a film in one apartment, one location on a micro budget,” Coles recalls.

As for her personal journey from dancer to actor to filmmaker to Festival Director? (See her bio on http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0171320/)

“I have a documentary; it has taken me eight years to finish it. Documentary about early music journalism from 1965 to 1975 from a classic black and white archive. The photographer shot for Melody Maker magazine the forerunner to Rolling Stone.

“It’s a great story when there were no rock’n’roll photographers.” This doc includes the photo “that redefined Syd Barrett (Pink Floyd) great photograph… he’d locked himself in the bathroom. They went into the bathroom and spent time locked in the bathroom with Syd Barrett — there’s this photograph half in shadow and half in light — a session with Jimi Hendrix two weeks before he died in his manager’s office. Keith Moon (The Who) — stunts that went awry — these guys had incredible access. in the mid 1970’s punk came in and didn’t respect the old guard. The World changed then.”

Now the world has changed again, from mass public shootings, war-mongering around the globe like never before to psychotic drum-banging in world politics, and maybe that’s why movies told from a female perspective are an important counterbalance. In any case, the 15th Female Eye Festival takes place this week. Visit the filmmakers and their bios on display, as well as slate and schedule, at 15th Annual Female Eye Film Festival, June 20th – 25th, 2017 #FeFF2017

 

SNAPSHOT from FeFF

The FeFF celebrates the 15th Anniversary edition June 2017!

At our milestone 15th anniversary in 2017, FeFF will present an eclectic variety shorts and features in all genres from across North American including a curated shorts program from Ireland entitled, “Irish Women’s Stories” along with a selection of independent films from France, Israel, Germany, Finland, Poland, Russia, Australia, UK and Asia… just to name a few foreign delegations. We are delighted to announce in 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 the Female Eye ranked one of the world’s “Top 50 Film Festivals Worthy of the Entry Fee” by the renowned Movie Maker Magazine (Santa Monica, California). 

 Founder / Artistic and Executive Director Leslie – Ann Coles conceived the Female Eye Film Festival in 2001 having observing that women directors were a minority among filmmakers at the international film festivals she attended with her debut film, “In The Refrigerator.” In 2001, the Female Eye Film Festival (FeFF) was established and incorporated as a provincial not-for-profit organization in Toronto, Canada. In 2002, the Female Eye presented 42 films in its inaugural year; 70% of the participants were local Toronto directors. (Read more here...)

[Coles new documentary is MELODY MAKERS

http://www.melodymakersmovie.com/

https://www.facebook.com/MelodyMakersthemovie/

@melodymakersmov

“Always Honest, Not Always Pretty” www.FemaleEyeFilmFestival.com

2017, The Female Eye voted worlds “Top 50 Festivals Worth the Entry Fee” for five consecutive years (2013-2017) by Movie Maker Magazine

“The lack of gender equity in filmmaking [and in other arts] is perhaps a self-sustaining cycle. Movies shape the way that people see the world and by extension, the way that people see women.” – Odessa Kelebay

# # #

MikeArrivesTCM17

Michael Douglas Got Booted & Suited Up for TCM 2017, Like You Were There

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent

While he has nothing on the elder Douglas, Golden Era Legend Kirk Douglas at almost 101 years old, TCM celebrated the life and career of Hollywood youngster Michael Douglas during a taping of “Live From the TCM Classic Film Festival” on April 8 at the famous Montalban Theatre during the eighth annual festival. MichaelD17

Host Ben Mankiewicz said beforehand, “Michael Douglas has been part of our collective Hollywood consciousness his entire life. From chasing bad guys through the streets of San Francisco to playing an iconic bad guy in Gordon Gekko, Michael has stayed not only relevant, but vital. To say that I’m looking forward to discussing the career of an actor who played Liberace 38 years after producing One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is a huge understatement.”

Mike3shotTCM17
Just take a scroll through these absolutely iconic Michael Douglas portraits and think back on the guy behind the red rows of seats in A CHORUS LINE, and all the other movie credits on this legendary resume, being the life’s work of Michael Douglas, to date of course. MikeArrivesTCM17Like the old man, he will likely last a century, hopefully. Congratulations to the actor, producer, director, and Academy, as well as audience, favorite Michael Douglas.MikeFitting17

There’s great footage of their chat on TCM’s website, but we’ve got these photos — truly works of art — that really set the tone for a classic time had by all at the recent Turner gala celebration. MikeShowTCM17

You’ll learn more about that from TCM’s post-dated official news announcement below.

MikeTCMExec17Left to right: Charlie Tabesh, Senior Vice President Programming and Production; Turner Classic Movies; Pola Changnon, Senior Vice President, Creative, Brand and Marketing, Turner Classic Movies; Ben Mankiewicz. Host, Turner Classic Movies; Jennifer Dorian, General Manger, Turner Classic Movies; Michael Douglas; Genevieve McGillicuddy, Director, TCM Classic Film Festival

Here’s Official Rundown from TCM

Turner Classic Movies (TCM) previously announced that legendary actor Michael Douglas would attend the 2017 TCM Classic Film Festival for a pair of major events. On April 8, Douglas sat down with TCM host Ben Mankiewicz for an in-depth interview about his career at the legendary The Ricardo Montalbán Theatre as part of the annual Live from the TCM Classic Film Festival series. In addition, the Oscar®-winning icon participated in a discussion following a screening of the 1979 thriller The China Syndrome, which he produced and starred in opposite Jane Fonda and Jack Lemmon.

TCM added screen legends and beloved icons to its impressive lineup for the 2017 TCM Classic Film Festival, which took place April 6 – April 9 in Hollywood, including:

·        Best in Show (2000) – cast members from Christopher Guest’s acclaimed mockumentary – Fred Willard, John Michael Higgins, Jim Piddock and Bob Balaban – were on hand to discuss the hilarious comedy about the eccentric characters competing at a national dog show.

·        Bob Newhart – the Golden Globe® and Emmy® winner was selected to introduce a screening of Hell Is For Heroes (1962).

·        John Landis, Jim Abrahams, David Zucker and Jerry Zucker – attended a 40th Anniversary screening of their irreverent sketch comedy The Kentucky Fried Movie (1977) and participated in a conversation about the film.

·        Dick Cavett –Emmy-winning television personality was set to introduce screenings of Monkey Business (1931), the first original film production from the Marx Brothers, Way Out West (1937) and sit down for a conversation in Club TCM.

In addition, the 2017 TCM Classic Film Festival presented a number of rare screening events that celebrate cinema’s ability to immerse viewers in the film experience, including:

·        Nitrate Films – this years festival showcased the history of cinema and highlight the institutions that work hard to protect original nitrate prints for contemporary audiences to experience, including Academy Film Archive, George Eastman Museum and the UCLA Film & Television Archive. Lineup included: Black Narcissus (1947), The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934), Laura (1944), and Lady in the Dark (1944) all shown at the Egyptian Theatre. Nitrate projection made possible through support of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, Turner Classic Movies and The Film Foundation in partnership with the American Cinematheque and the Academy Film Archive.

·        Cinerama – a screeing of the very first film made for the ultra-widescreen process – the aptly titled This is Cinerama (1952) – in its original format presented at ArcLight Cinemas’ Cinerama Dome.

·        Speedy Accompanied by the Alloy Orchestra – a screening of the Harold Lloyd comedy Speedy (1928), with original music by the famed Alloy Orchestra.

·        Those Redheads from Seattle in 3D – the world-premiere restoration of the rarely-seen musical Those Redheads from Seattle (1953), presented in its original 3D format.

Previously announced events and appearances include Oscar® winner Sidney Poitier for the 50th anniversary opening-night screening of In the Heat of the Night (1967); Mel Brooks for the 40th anniversary screening of his Hitchcock spoof High Anxiety (1977); actress Lee Grant for screenings of Detective Story (1951) and The Landlord (1970); and actor-director Peter Bogdanovich for screenings of The Last Picture Show (1971) and What’s Up, Doc? (1972). Grant and Bogdanovich were interviewed in the Festival’s central gathering point, Club TCM. And legendary father and son filmmakers Carl Reiner and Rob Reiner were honored with a hand and footprint ceremony at the TCL Chinese Theater IMAX®.

Complete bios for each of the artists appearing at the 2017 TCM Classic Film Festival and for film descriptions, please visit the festival’s website: filmfestival.tcm.com

The 411 on 2017 TCM Classic Film Festival

For the eighth consecutive year, thousands of movie lovers from around the globe descended upon Hollywood for the TCM Classic Film Festival. The 2017 festival that took place Thursday, April 6 – Sunday, April 9, 2017. Over four packed days and nights, attendees were treated to an extensive lineup of great movies, appearances by legendary stars and filmmakers, fascinating presentations and panel discussions, special events and more.

TCM host Ben Mankiewicz served as official host of the TCM Classic Film Festival, with TCM’s Tiffany Vazquez introducing various events. The festival’s official hotel and central gathering point for the eighth consecutive year was The Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel, which has a longstanding role in movie history and was the site of the first Academy Awards® ceremony. Screenings and events during the festival were held at the TCL Chinese Theatre IMAX, the TCL Chinese 6 Theatres and the Egyptian Theatre, as well as other Hollywood venues.

This year’s festival theme? Make ‘Em Laugh: Comedy In The Movies. From lowbrow to high, slapstick to sophisticated comedies of manners, the 2017 TCM Classic Film Festival showcased the greatest cinematic achievements of lone clowns, comedic duos and madcap ensembles.

Why We Love Turner Classic Movies (TCM)

Turner Classic Movies (TCM) is a two-time Peabody Award-winning network that presents great films, uncut and commercial-free, from the largest film libraries in the world highlighting the entire spectrum of film history. TCM features the insights from Primetime host Ben Mankiewicz and Saturday daytime host Tiffany Vazquez, plus interviews with a wide range of special guests and serves as the ultimate movie lover destination. Currently in its 22nd year as a leading authority in classic film, TCM offers critically acclaimed series like The Essentials, along with annual programming events like 31 Days of Oscar® in February and Summer Under the Stars in August. TCM also directly connects with movie fans through events as the annual TCM Classic Film Festival in Hollywood and the TCM Classic Cruise, as well as through the TCM Classic Film Tour in New York City and Los Angeles. In addition, TCM produces a wide range of media about classic film, including books and DVDs, and hosts a wealth of material online at tcm.com and through the Watch TCM mobile app.

TCM is a division of Turner, a Time Warner company, Turner creates and programs branded news, entertainment, sports, animation and young adult multi-platform content for consumers around the world. Turner brands and businesses include CNN/U.S., HLN, CNN International and CNN.com, TBS, TNT, TCM, truTV, Cartoon Network, Boomerang, Adult Swim, Turner Sports, Bleacher Report, FilmStruck, Super Deluxe, iStreamPlanet and ELEAGUE.

Connect with TCM for Next Year’s TCM Event & Right Now via App on iOS and Android
Website: www.tcm.com

Facebook: www.facebook.com/tcmtv
Twitter: twitter.com/tcm | twitter.com/tcmpr
TCM Store: shop.tcm.com

Download TCM app to watch now; available for iOS and Android Platforms (Google Play).

Bonus Feature – Graphiq Visualization of Michael Douglas Movies

# # #

Hiroyuki Sanada, Ryan Reynolds, Director Daniel Espinosa, Olga Dihovichnaya, Rebecca Ferguson, Ariyon Bakare  and Jake Gyllenhaal seen at Columbia Pictures World Premiere of "Life" the movie at SXSW 2017 on Saturday, March 18, 2017, in Austin, TX. (Photo by Eric Charbonneau/Invision for Sony Pictures/AP Images)

LIFE is Already Scary, Now It’s A Scarier Reynolds & Gyllenhaal Movie, Thanks

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent

What is it with ‘ripped from the alt-news headlines’ movie plots lately? KONG: SKULL ISLAND has a hollow earth slash reptilian b-story, even a CIA mind control “Monarch” reference on a briefcase. Now LIFE, starring Ryan Reynolds and Jake Gyllenhaal, has a waterborne microbe from Mars mass-extinction horror twist.

Ryan Reynolds and Jake Gyllenhaal seen at Columbia Pictures World Premiere of "Life" the movie at SXSW 2017 on Saturday, March 18, 2017, in Austin, TX. (Photo by Eric Charbonneau/Invision for Sony Pictures/AP Images)

Ryan Reynolds and Jake Gyllenhaal seen at Columbia Pictures World Premiere of “Life” the movie at SXSW 2017 on Saturday, March 18, 2017, in Austin, TX. [Photo by Eric Charbonneau/Invision for Sony Pictures/AP Images]

While scary stories about hostile life on Mars is a running theme since B-movies in the 50’s, this one has some actual science to back it up.

LIFE, directed by Daniel Espinosa, touts the fact that the producers and writers consulted with “astrobiologists and space medicine experts,” one of whom is Dr. Kevin Fong. “Space is an extreme environment, like any of the extreme environments we’ve attempted to conquer in the 20th century – deserts, polar ice caps, our highest mountains,” Fong explained. “What we know about extreme environments is that you can’t go there for long and it’s not without penalty. You come back literally less than the person you were.”

“It’s hard enough to stay alive up there on a routine mission when everything goes right.  When things start to go wrong, people start to die off pretty quickly.” These cheery words underscore his experience as an astrophysicist and MD who’s worked on NASA’s Human Adaptation and Countermeasures Office at Johnson Space Center in Houston, meaning he is a medical expert on keeping folks alive and kicking in space.

No offense to the astro-geniuses, but frankly movie stars can explain a movie better.

Cast and crew of "Life" seen at Columbia Pictures World Premiere of "Life" the movie at SXSW 2017 on Saturday, March 18, 2017, in Austin, TX. (Photo by Eric Charbonneau/Invision for Sony/AP Images)

Cast and crew of “Life” seen at Columbia Pictures World Premiere of “Life” the movie at SXSW 2017 on Saturday, March 18, 2017, in Austin, TX. (Photo by Eric Charbonneau/Invision for Sony/AP Images)

In typical Jake Gyllenhaal extreme-character mode, he plays International Space Station denizen David Jordan, who’s already clocked 473 days afloat in outer space. “It was a beautifully paced, terrifying script.  It’s a fun idea. You think you know where it’s going, and then it evolves into something where you really, really don’t,” he added. “The life form is literal, but it’s also an incredible metaphor for what can happen. Curiosity is one of the most important human traits, but I think searching too far can be full of hubris. In that way, the life form is a repercussion for that kind of curiosity.”

“My grandfather was a doctor,” Gyllenhaal shared, “and Daniel and I talked about the similarities in my character to my grandfather. It’s a bit of an homage to him.”

Next some newcomers join the freaky plot, and things get terrifying as a look for proof of life on Mars backfires. Naturally the movie includes a requisite CDC, Centers for Disease Control, rep. This one comes in the form of Rebecca Ferguson, as Miranda North. “Miranda is a microbiologist sent up to protect everyone on Earth from whatever this is that we find,” Ferguson explained.

Her character puts up some “firewalls” against extra-terrestrial contamination. “The firewall is, first, the container that the specimen was in.  And then the room.  And then the station itself.  She has to do whatever she can do to protect Earth, because we don’t know what this life form is.” No, it’s not a gimmicky ‘life form,’ either.

Producer Julie Lynn nailed it best on that front. “We didn’t want the life form to be a person in a suit or a puppet. We wanted it to be something that could evolve from a cellular piece, a tiny cell. It’s not that it comes out with an intent to do harm; it is its own creature, and it is affected by what happens to it.”

Paris, France - Monday March 13, 2017: Jake Gyllenhaal and Rebecca Ferguson at the Columbia Pictures "LIFE" Photo Call at The Planetarium of Le Grand Palais

Paris, France – Monday March 13, 2017: Jake Gyllenhaal and Rebecca Ferguson at the Columbia Pictures “LIFE” Photo Call at The Planetarium of Le Grand Palais

Rebecca Ferguson spins it as a relationship game with the pathogen. “We all have our own relationship to this creature. Some of us love it, we nurture it.  Some of us want to kill it off in the beginning.  And that creates an incredible tension in the group,” she said.

Ryan Reynolds rounds it out with, “this script had such a degree of reality and a feeling of constant tension,” that he reteamed with his DEADPOOL writing pals Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, to ratchet up the stakes. Coincidentally, Reynolds also went back to the well with his SAFE HOUSE director Daniel Espinosa.

Having worked well with Reynolds, Espinosa is also super excited about LIFE. “I think the reason so many great directors have walked into science fiction is to work with the unknown — the fear or fascination with the unknown,” he said.  “We live in a world that is quite mundane, but in space, you enter an adventure – you don’t know how it looks, how it feels, what it can do to you, where it is. It doesn’t make a sound. That’s terrifying.”

Whatever the hell LIFE’s monster is in this case, the SAFE HOUSE director made it even scarier when he added that “this script felt more like a realistic science fiction. Maybe science reality.” Picture waking up ’50,000-year-old microbes’ inside crystalline hibernation on Mars, that is. Or, in movie critic shorthand, the DNA from amber plot device from Jurassic Park, but with super-freaky outer space Martian microbial goo meets Alien. Sorry for the gross oversimplification but this helps put your fears to rest, folks, because it’s only a movie. We hope. Alternative news purveyors might spin it as a doomsday scenario for planet Earth, lol. LIFE, go see it before it happens. It opens Mar. 24, brought to you by Skydance and SONY (Columbia).  Interestingly, Megan Ellison’s brother David Ellison is listed as a producer. The film has bowed in Berlin, Moscow, Paris, and at SXSW in Austin, Texas last week. [Most of the photos included are from SXSW premiere.] See their official website for showtimes and venues. Hahtag #LIFEMOVIE

Directed by:  

Daniel Espinosa

Written by:

Rhett Reese & Paul Wernick

Produced by:

David Ellison

Dana Goldberg

Bonnie Curtis

Julie Lynn

Executive Producers: 

Don Granger

Vicki Dee Rock

Cast:

Jake Gyllenhaal

Rebecca Ferguson

Ryan Reynolds

Hiroyuki Sanada

Ariyon Bakare

Olga Dihovichnaya

# # #

JAWv7Grt17

We Interrupt Our Movie Coverage for Wikileaks “Zero Year” & Recall Gibney’s ZERO DAYS

by Quendrith Johnson, Los Angeles Correspondent

“Hello World,” is usually a newbie’s first line of code in programming, but as of Wikileaks Vault 7 data dump about CIA covert hacking on Mar. 7, followed by Julian Assange’s “Press Conference” on Mar. 9, the whole world is actually reeling, as in the wake-up call: Hello World!

But fear not, leave it to the much-maligned Entertainment Journalists to tread where no investigative reporter dares to go.JAWv7Om17
Later on, the actual self-conducted Q & A that Julian Assange held via video press conference is included in a very compelling transcript form. Glean from that what you will, it’s like the ultimate star hacker interview.

For now, when you look at Vault 7 in relation to the July 8 release of Alex Gibney’s documentary ZERO DAYS about the Stuxnet virus, it all makes sense. You can read this later, linked here, but for now just stare hard at the self-released description by tricky Wikileaks itself.

Ready? Wikileaks Vault 7 is “The first full part of the series. ‘Year Zero,’ comprises 8,761 documents and files from an [undisclosed internal server at Langley, CIA HQ]. ‘Year Zero’ introduces the scope and direction of the CIA’s global covert” cyber weapons exploits. Zero Days, Year Zero, hmm.ZeroDaysPoster16
Located on the interwebs at https:// wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/ (which is not linked live here for security reasons and not to endorse Wikileaks), Year Zero alone says quite a lot.

So let’s have some fun with it. One reporting agency had a pundit on who sarcastically commended the CIA hacking team on its excellent choice of code names, such as UMBRAGE, whereby the CIA pretends to be other hacking entities by mimicking their stolen code. But they entirely missed out on Year Zero subtext.

Meaning, the bromance between comic nerds and hackers is writ large here. First, for nerd cred, “Year Zero” is also “an alternate reality game (ARG) based on the Nine Inch Nails concept album of the same name.” These internal hackers are toying with us.

As in, how about with an alternative reality game reference twist that is a clue to a shadow alternative government or deep state? But wait, there’s more. “Zero Year” is also “a year-long comic book crossover event published by DC Comics that began in June 2013 and ended in July 2014, featuring the superhero Batman.” Which is the Vault 7, Part One, start date Assange mentions, being 2013.

DC Comics describes this as “The second arc of BATMAN: ZERO YEAR is collected as the New 52 origin of The Dark Knight delves into Bruce Wayne’s past with the Red Hood Gang and his run-ins with aspiring District Attorney Harvey Dent! You won’t want to miss the moment that Bruce becomes Batman! [BATMAN #21-24].”

Red Hood Gang is so close to a hoodie reference, specifically Edward Snowden’s red hoodie he wears in CITIZENFOUR to shield himself while on the interwebs. Not to mention that if Bruce Wayne as Batman goes up against the DA, District Attorney, being the Gotham government, well isn’t that analogous to the CIA defying the actual government with their new cyber hacking superpowers?SnowCit417

Hey, if the Right Wing can have its conspiracy theories, there’s the extent of a comic book conspiracy. InfoWars and those YouTube conspiracy theorists only wish they’d seen these parallels.
Back to reality, or in Wikileaks version of reality, Year Zero must mean a year of undetectable cyber exploits by the CIA, which are now hit hard by daylight.  While the revelations may shock many around the world, Alex Gibney, the documentary filmmaker behind the Eliot Spitzer expose, already bumped up against this internet leviathan, this covert sea monster of cyber space, by landing actual ex-CIA and NSA officials on the record in his documentary about the Stuxnet virus at the center of ZERO DAYS. CIA’s brave Gen. Michael Hayden even uses his actual identity as he hints at an internecine war between spy agencies in ZERO DAYS.

Stuxnet is described in the movie as a “self-replicating computer malware (known as a ‘worm’ for its ability to burrow from computer to computer on its own) that the US and Israel unleashed to destroy a key part of an Iranian nuclear facility, and which ultimately [mutated] and spread beyond its intended target.”

Pay close attention to that “computer to computer” line, because Julian Assange will refer to an “air-gap” later, and you need to know what that is to understand the ramifications of this new class of weaponzied programs. Air-gap jumpers mean the virus can literally jump without a wire, through the ether to infect nearby computers, thus a potentially endless domino effect of digital disaster.AlexGibney16
Filmmaker Alex Gibney basically told the world about what was to come in Wikileaks Vault 7 when he categorically stated for ZERO DAYS, the following: “I started out making a small film investigating ‘Stuxnet…’ What I discovered was a massive clandestine operation involving the CIA, the NSA, the US Military and Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad to build and launch secret cyber ‘bombs’ that could plunge the world into a devastating series of… attacks on critical infrastructure, shutting down electricity… this science fiction scenario…”
And it was only Oscar short-listed for 2017, even though, pyrrhic victory, it is now vindicated as a real contender.2016-06-28 11.17.02
Symantec anti-virus whiz Eric Chien, who is in ZERO DAYS, said “when you have black motorcycles, wearing all black following you, behind you, you start to wonder.”

On why Stuxnet wasn’t part of the Snowden leak, he casually mentioned “Edward Snowden didn’t leak this because those files are stored on a different server.” Unbelievably important information, now backed up by Wikileaks Vault 7, and Julian Assange himself.
Speaking of the white-haired, self-conflicted, quasi-programming wizard from Oz, Australian-born Assange speaks here in his own words. Granted, some of his Britishisms have been converted to American English (i.e.; favour to favor).

This is the Mar. 9, transcript, presented in its entirety (typos and all), so as to honor the tradition of unedited versions, that Wikileaks trademark.

Assange tends to be long-winded and overuses the word “problematic” as a euphemism for all hell breaking loose, but it’s worth a read to draw your own conclusions about the Vault 7 data dump that is literally as important as a big budget Hollywood release in its footprint in the media.JAWv7Grt17
(Note the linked ZERO DAYS article at the end, which includes a complete 101 download on hacking terms.)

JULIAN ASSANGE INTERVIEWS HIMSELF, STREAMING ON VAULT 7

JULIAN ASSANGE: We now need a digital Geneva convention that will commit governments to protecting civilians from nation-state attacks in times of peace and just as the Fourth Geneva Convention recognize that the protection of civilians require the active involvement of the Red Cross – protection against nation-state cyber-attacks requires the active assistance of technology companies and companies like Wikileaks which can provide information about these attacks.
The tech-sector plays a unique role as the internets first responders and we therefore should commit ourselves to collective action which will make the internet a safer place affirming a role our role as a neutral digital Switzerland that assists people all over the world to be secure.

So now I will go on to some questions, first of all I confess this is one from me.

Q: Does Wikileaks have a position on this sort of material?

Well Wikileaks has a position on publishing in general – we fight for the rights of publishers to publish, we fight for the rights of sources to be protected and we fight for media accuracy.

Having obtained a perfect record in the last 10 years it’s one of our comparative advantages, but otherwise we don’t have a position on particular issues that we’re publishing about but in this case we do have a position.

We have a position because these types outside the weapons are used to attack the communication technology the journalists use to communicate with their sources and with each other. The sorts of technology that investigative reporters reporting on the national security sector reporting on war crimes use to communicate their information within their media organization and back-and-forth with their sources.

For example the New York Times has put up a tip line – it is based upon the signal protocol.

Now Signals a good encryption system for mobile smart phones, now what’s the problem – well if you control the smart phones it doesn’t matter how good the encryption system is. So signal and telegram from that perspective can simply be bypassed by attacking the endpoints, attacking one of the telephones belonging to the source or one of the telephones belonging to the journalist.

And the New York Times has a central tip-line – one phone that all of its tips go to for the signal protocol and of course that phone can be hacked it doesn’t matter what the security system is, as a result you see the numbers coming into the coming into it and you see the messages exchanged.

So Wikileaks does have a position – we want to secure communications technology because without secure communications technology journalists are not able to effectively hold the state to account.

WikiLeaks protections for its sources, are they affected by this?

No they’re not affected not directly – why is that well because we’re specialists in this area, we’re specialists in source protection and I’ve known in general about this type of problem for a long time. So our systems are developed to not be exposed and not based on smart phones for example we have specialised cryptography that is not susceptible to these types of attacks. On the other hand are our lawyers susceptible to these types of attacks ? Yes they are – a lot of
them are susceptible to these types of attacks. Are our key security security staff ? No because we understand that, but we want to protect all our staff and the rights of journalists and sources to communicate effectively.

Ok so that’s my question now I’ll go onto the others – the question from CNN:

Q: As long as these are overseas targets isn’t it legal for the CIA to do this?

Well first of all I’d just like to .. It’s a legally important question in the United States but there are many questions that might be asked by CNN, and one that seems to defend the interests of the CIA I think is a bit problematic* to have been the first question to be asked.

Well the answer is this – unfortunately the CIA does have a history of attacking not only the political parties operating overseas we just published how the central intelligence agency issued instructions to its staff to penetrate the last French election cycle in 2012, the last French presidential election.

It has a habit of behaving badly inside the United States as well.

That’s an extensive habit going on for years. Most recently in 2014 the CIA was denounced by the US Senate Intelligence Committee because it had hacked their investigation in Congress into the CIA torture program and had used its hackers to retrieve documents that the Senate Intelligence Committee had evidencing what the Central Intelligence Agency did in terms of torture.

Why did it do that ? I mean it’s given various excuses, the answer probably is because it perceived that information would be a threat to itself as an institution. That’s how institutions behave especially intelligence institution – the CIA is the largest intelligence agency in the world by budgetary expenditure and of course it wants to maximize its own institutional power.

And key individuals also want to defend their programs or increase their roles, get themselves into a position where they can cash out and go to work for defense contractors.

What about WikiLeaks material in the first part of Vault 7 – does it demonstrate the CIA attacking targets within the United States ? That’s an interesting question the answer is not known.

There are more than 22,000 IP addresses that we have detected, internet addresses that correspond to computer systems within the United States.

Now one of the large research programs projects we have underway is to discover:

How many of those systems are attack systems that are used to relay and pass attacks from the CIA out into the rest of the world. How many of those intermediary victims – that is say an internet service provider which is hacked in order to create an attack somewhere else overseas. How many are direct victims. How many corresponding to say a visitor to the United States from a foreign country. How many correspond to joint operations between the CIA and the FBI, with the CIA providing technical support . It’s a complex question that is not resolved but there are more than 22,000 IP addresses corresponding to CIA activities in the United States.

Q: Is there proof that the CIA are involving in an internal struggle [vs NSA] – leaking as opposed to something else?

Well we can’t we can’t comment directly on sourcing. As someone who’s studied the behaviour for many years of intelligence agencies in different countries it is an unusual time in the United States to see an intelligence agency so prominently involved in domestic politics.

Now it’s a level of principle that’s quite problematic , there are arguments on the other side that obviously – if there’s an extreme government then perhaps it does call for illegal behaviour by an intelligence agency. We don’t have an opinion on whether that is the case yet or not the United States.

Wikileaks is intellectually intrigued to see this conflict occurring because it does tend to generate whistleblowers and sources on both sides of the equation.

Q: What are the implications for journalists and sources?

I explained previously these types of the technology are used to penetrate the computers and phones that journalists used to communicate with each other and communicate and protect their sources. I think that’s an incredible problem.

In response to the Edward Snowden disclosures and some others much more encryption has been used by individual companies specializing in it like with Whisper Systems, like Telegram but also included into Apple and Microsoft and other products so that is fairly effective at hindering bulk interception, which is what the national security agency’s been doing. Passively taking all the information say that flows from Latin America to North America or from North America to Europe.

But in response the Central Intelligence Agency at least has diversified to specialise on attacking the endpoints prior to encryption occurring or after decryption occurring. And say okay but that at least means that they have to engage in target in attacks which is more more expensive and might have more of an audit trail – that’s true but we have exposed the particular section of the central intelligence agency called the automated implant branch.

So that is not just to develop viruses and other attacks to put into people’s computer systems to facilitate a CIA hacker in doing that but also to automate how that is done.
So you can you can see that between an individual targeted attack which is direct and invasive and massive passive bulk interception the intermediary point which is the increasing automation of targeted attacks. Their automated enough they start to approach the level of bulk capacity intersection we’re not there yet for most countries but we are shifting significantly away from one CIA officer directing one hacker who attacks one target.
Rather we’re seeing systems developed and whole branches of the Central Intelligence Agency to automate attacks and infestations of CIA malware into targets.

Q: How do these practices by the CIA impact on members of the general public?

With android phones, iPhones, Samsung TVs etc, well in a number of ways. So you might think as a member of a kind of average person well is the CIA interested in you? We have this problem that increasing automation of these attacks means that the interest may not have to be that high.
You might be you might know someone who knows someone who say works for the French government will be the target of such an attack because they’re involved in decision-making about large French exports, and we published a previous document showing how the ODNI – that’s the oversight body for all intelligence agencies instructed the CIA to try and get hold of every single French contract valued at over 200 million dollars.
Similarly in the information we revealed about CIA attacks on the French political parties there was two instructions to try and determine where the French political parties will try and go for a more German oriented economic policy of increasing exports. Now really what’s going on is that the Central Intelligence Agency and the ODNI through who they tend to be involved in contracting is close to organizations say like Boeing and then wants to assist Boeing in unfair competition say against Airbus which the French have a stake in.

Q: About redaction, WikiLeaks has often stated they only redact in exceptional cases [i.e.; what is the policy]?

Well there’s been a lot of false reportage about what our redaction policy is. Our redaction policy is essentially the same as the Freedom of Information Act which is – we don’t react unless there are important ground to do so and then we only do so for a limited period of time until those important grounds have elapsed.
In this particular case we redacted some 78,000 pieces of information for Vault 7 part 1. That information corresponds as i said before to IP address of targets and attack machines. Well why did we redact that – well because we want to investigate which ones are targets, which ones are attacking scenes which ones were victims that were attacked to get a place hold to make another attack and if we publish them all immediately it’ll be harder to create that investigation.

Q: What is the time period that these publications relate to?

The time period is 2013 to 2016 for the part 1 publication be published on Tuesday. Other material in Vault 7 is also recent and there is some old material. Interestingly one of the key systems, attack systems developed by the Central Intelligence Agency which affects multiple computer types at once it’s called HIVE and if you look carefully you’ll see that in our publications on Tuesday there’s a reference to HIVE being first started more than a decade ago.
So the CIA has been involved in this for quite a long period of time gradually expanding its capacity as it managed to get budgetary and political pre-eminence over its chief bureaucratic and budgetary rival the National Security Agency. That’s a very interesting story about the conflict between these two rival agencies over time.
The CIA budget used to be smaller than the national security budget and it’s now something like 1.5 times the size of national security budget, as a result the CIA has been able to build its own drone air force and massively expand its hacking operation so it doesn’t need to ask the National Security Agency for favors.
And of course if you also want a favor a favor can be asked back but also a lot of the operations of the CIA conducts are a bit questionable for example that operation conducted against the Senate Intelligence Committee. Now if the CIA had no capacity that it would have had to ask National Security Agency to provide it with hackers to help it attack and try and take those documents off Dianne Feinstein and her staff.
Now it wasn’t able to, didn’t need to disclose that to the National Security Agency because it has the capacity to do it itself and the National Security Agency having been in the media so prominently especially after it’s complications in 2013 , has far more oversight and accountability for its digital operations then the Central Intelligence Agency does. It’s a real question whether in practice there can be meaningful oversight.
I don’t think there can be – I think it’s an illusion that there can be meaningful oversight although one has to try because you can’t leave a regulatory ground unoccupied because it it will simply, the bureaucratic organization will expand into that regulatory ground and occupy it.

Q: So why can’t the CIA hacking operations be effectively regulated?

Well they’re done in secret, its arcane complex technology and look what has happened with the CIA – loss of control over it’s entire cyber weapons arsenal.
So if the CIA which is certainly, it’s highly motivated to try and keep control of it – if it can’t even control its entire cyber weapons arsenal because information can flow without oversight – then what is the chance that it can control how that Arsenal is used ? It can’t, there’s absolutely nothing to stop a random CIA officer or contractor or liaison agent working for the British using that technology against whoever they like whatever personal reasons they like.
The technology is designed to be unaccountable, it’s designed to be untraceable, it’s designed to hide itself, it’s designed to to remove traces of its activity, it’s designed to throw off people looking to see where there are fingerprints that might demonstrate who authored that technology.
And that is done by collecting viruses and malware from mafia and various groups in other states and assembling them, that’s something that we published that there’s a whole section of the CIA working something called umbrage which is designed to do that. And we have quite a lot more material that talks about these attempts to throw off authenticated, sorry to throw off attribution to discover who was really behind a particular cyber attack.

Already an antivirus expert has come forward to say that a sophisticated malware that he had attributed to a state either Iran or China or Russia now he believes actually is from Central Intelligence Agency, because the type of attack system that uses corresponds directly to a description that we published of an attack system and it’s rare enough that it seems unlikely it would be independently discovered discovered.

Unless of course that China has already gotten hold of these parts of the CIA arsenal and that China is using them to pretend to be the CIA.

Q: is the CIA causing commercial damage to companies through these practices?

Yes – potentially billions of dollars of damage because if say you’re in China which is now the world’s largest economy and you run a company and you want to equip all your employees with particular phones or particular computers – do you trust that if you go and buy a dell computer or computer running Microsoft or Apple phone can you trust that it’s not vulnerable to these CIA attacks ?
Well because Apple and Dell and so on are all based in the United States where it’s understood that the u.s. government is breaching previous promises that is made which is to tell us industry about these vulnerabilities – then it starts to look like that the u.s. government and US industry is in cahoots and then you can’t trust any exports from United States.
So one report just at the time of Edward Snowden’s revelations suggested that practice by the National Security Agency of imperiling US industry would cost 40 billion dollars in exports, so this sort of behavior by the Central Intelligence Agency undermining those commitments by the Barrack Obama administration to tell US technology companies about vulnerabilities before they were exploited by foreign intelligence agencies or by cyber Mafia – that breach of promise decreases trust both in the US government but also in US exports.

Q: How do these publications shed light on the ability of the CIA to penetrate high security networks not connected to the internet?

Important question – they’re called air-gapped network so if your worried about being attacked over the internet make your machines internet disconnected that’s what most police network do for example or networks that are inside companies say like Boeing, they disconnect the network so that hackers they think can’t attack them – but the CIA has created a number of viruses one for example called HammerDrill which are air gap jumping virus.
So they sit on a computer waiting – this particular one HammerDrill sits on a computer, windows computer waiting until someone goes to burn a cd-rom, put software on a cd-rom and it jumps onto the cd-rom and infects the executable programs that you put on the cd-rom so they want to go somewhere else it then affects the other computer and starts a channel.
There’s a number of at least 30 different types of malware that the CIA has created to try and do that, some that are designed for CIA hackers and CIA agents to say pretend to go somewhere and pretend to give a presentation or use VLC a video player to play a video to give a presentation, meanwhile behind the scenes the video presentation software and it’s trojanised version of VLC goes into the computers that it’s plugged into – surveys them, infects them and ransacks the material and brings it back.
If you invite someone into your company or government department to give a presentation they put this into the presentation computer and now its infected. Similar to play a video and it’s infected, many other different things. One is even a virus scanner someone is pretending to be a computer security consultant to remove viruses from an organization and in fact the virus checking program is the CIA virus that is used to infest the rest of the computer network and retrieve information.JAWv7l17

Q: Among the list of possible targets are there any references to extremists or transnational criminals?

Not in the material that we published on Tuesday [Mar. 7] – Vault 7 part 1. No. It’s conspicuous, there’s there’s no reference to terrorism theres no reference to extremists, there are references to many other target types for example liaison agents so Allied intelligence agencies that speak to the central intelligence agency.
And the CIA has developed a menu of frequent attacks include attacking the liaison officers coming only from QCHQ or the DGSE which is a French intelligence agency who think that they are cooperating with the CIA but really the CIA is infesting the liaison agent. So they’re all there in a menu called “fine dining” it’s a list which literally describes itself as a menu of frequent attacks and attack types that is given to CIA case officers and they say yeah I want to attack and infest some agent that I control, a liaison, someone working for a foreign government department etc.
What is not there is any reference to terrorists any reference to extremists and that actually shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone , no one no one who studies the intelligence world it shouldn’t surprise them because even if you just look at the budgets that came out in 2013 to the US intelligence black-budget you don’t see anything like the majority of the body going towards extremism even though they are very strong political reasons to try and catch any operation in counter terrorism and counter extremism to get more money despite that political pressure.

Something like a third of the US the entire US intelligence budgets is described as countering various forms of extremism and the overwhelming majority is not but particularly for the CIA the vast majority of the expenditure and attack types are geopolitical. They’re about, you know similar to the information revealed about the attacking of the French election cycle – understanding who could be pals with the CIA , who could you know help out the institution in one way or another so for example spy on Airbus, that information you then pass to the US Chamber of Commerce among others which is listed in the material and US Chamber of Commerce and then adjust what is doing in order to that is Boeing and these companies are closely connected to each other.
It’s not even about what is the policy that can help us industry the most, boost US economy the most, it it’s about which elements of the US economy and or related intelligence organizations in the United States and outside the United States are best able to ask for favors because they have proximity – they have interpersonal proximity or they have institutional proximity.

Q: About the story that’s in the press with possible hacking monitoring of President Donald [Trump] and his team, do these revelation shed any light on what is possible in this regard?

Well that there were earlier Press reports that the Trump cabinet has been using a encryption system called confide where the messages disappear quite quickly it’s sort of like an extra encrypted version of snapchat. Well it doesn’t matter it’s on smartphones the software attacks smartphones, doesn’t matter what encryption you’re running on telegram or signal or confide if you can bypass that encryption you can turn on the microphones, it can monitor movements, it can activate the camera to look at photos that have been taken.

Has the CIA done that ? This material doesn’t comment on whether it has done that to the president Trump.

I suppose a question that is of interest, because there was a lot of press – there were numerous Press reports from New York Times, The Washington Post and some in Politico that people close to Donald Trump had been monitored in a counterintelligence activity. Possibly by some parts of the US government, possibly by the FBI, FBI had been mentioned, NSA had been mentioned – on the other hand it seems that many of the leaks to the media are coming from the Central Intelligence Agency based upon how they’re described.
There are a number of collaborations that are evidenced by the material that we publish between the FBI and CIA and the National Security Agency and CIA so I think there’s a real question whether that technology is being used or has been used in these types of investigations – that is a separate tech question to whether CIA officers have been pressing the button on that technology.
What is often done in the commercial industry, the commercial spying industry – if you’re in the commercial industry you can be prosecuted for hacking someone – so what happens in the commercial industry and we did a big publication we of Hacking Team where we published more than more than million emails from an Italian computer hacking contractor called Hacking Team, it sets up attack sites and it writes the software and then it helps configure it for a hacking attack and then it gives the people they’ve told it to in a government department, Intelligence Agency, Police Service – the ability to press the button so they hope to that removes them from being accountable for the attack.
They’ve just created the system to attack the actual button was pressed by different party so that’s obviously a possibility in the United States in relation to a number of different attacks. Publications don’t say anything directly about the President and cabinet but that is a general phenomenon of people creating attack systems and facilitating attacks in some way but being careful about the legalities of actually pressing the button.

Q: How many parts to the vault 7 series?

What we have a lot of material – it’s a big journalistic investigation from us, from our partners, we need more partners. So that those who engaged in journalistic excellence on reporting and material that we have published so far and there have been some good report, we will look at those people and trying to produce some of them to get them in – there is more work than WikiLeaks can do on its own that’s quite typical with some publications, so we assemble international teams to try and get as much understanding in as many different languages as possible.
And then also finally make sure a lot of the material is published so the public can also catch any angles that us and the combined journalistic have missed – in this case we have extra problem which is that we have quite a lot of exploits that is this key attack code that we want to disarm before we think about publishing it.
And to have that discussion we’re going to work with some of these manufacturers that have called for it to try and get those antidotes out there before we publish more information that can give clues to the cyber mafia or other intelligence agencies on how to do this.
There is a fair criticism I think of that methodology and we’re watching closely which is that the CIA was so careless to produce this material, this enormous cyber weapons arsenal and lose control of it at least once and that it has spread. So does the various Cyber Mafia already have it, do foreign intelligence agencies already have it. Well I think that’s a serious question , they were securing it very well so it’s quite possible that numerous people could have it also it has spread appears to have spread within a number of individuals within the US intelligence community. So how much more will it spread ?
I think it’s quite hard to control even if Wikileaks quickly doesn’t publish any of these cyber weapons I think it is quite hard to stop the spread elsewhere which might have already occurred so therefore what you want is the fastest possible antidotes, and for that to work the fastest way of course it’s just publish everything but at the moment we’re watching to see whether there is a spread, and analyze what we have, work with some of the manufacturers to create, to create antidotes to these weapons.

Q: Why is Wikileaks focusing only on problems from the United States?

That’s not true, we’ve published just in the last few months very significant collections of materials from Germany from Turkey in fact in response to our Turkish publications the Turkish government put seven Turkish journalist who has reported on our publications into prison.
A very serious situation – one of those Turkish journalists is fortunate enough that he was a foreign correspondent for Geseit which is german newspaper and so he’s getting a bit of support from Germany but the the other six are in a serious situation – completely outrageous that they’re simply reporting on what we published and the Turkish government, Erdogan’s government has abused concerns about the coup that occurred a few months ago – to crack down on reporting about corruption.
In this case the emails that were from Erdogan’s son-in-law who was the minister for energy and that’s what we published you can look them up at Baret’s Box. On Russia and China we have published hundreds of thousands of things most of them are critical about 80% critical and more than 2.3 million from the Syrian government including our Bashar Al-Assad’s personal emails.
So all cultures tend to just look at themselves and speak to themselves, they speak their own language and they’re aware of themselves and what other people say about then all what’s being published about their culture. When it’s published about another culture, another country then don’t pay attention. Of course but people raise this for you know distracting reasons to try and question the messenger because the content itself is so powerful.

Ok that’s it .

Let me just break, I’ll just break for about three minutes and see if any other questions that are really important have come in and if so i might answer them…

G’day my name’s Julian Assange , Welcome back to the Wikileaks press conference we have found some other questions from Fox, CBS, ABC and another journalists.

We’ll start first of all with CBS Jeff Pegues who asks:

Q: Why did you release the documents on Tuesday, can you comment on the timing?

We have a description of the timing in the frequently asked questions, it was as soon as we were ready but it wasn’t the weekend anymore. Those were the only factors involved – interestingly the administration says it’s going to prepare some response on cyberwar, not sure exactly when it is they said within 30 days but 30 days might have already elapsed but it didn’t play a part in our timing.
Nothing else played a part in our timing, it’s quite a you know you can imagine it’s quite a difficult effort to pull this kind of thing together. There has been also a number of attacks on our players and on even the various forms of streaming hardware that we used to create these press conferences. Secure systems are all fine, but the streaming system is insecure because it’s for the public.
It went down and we have some workaround for some parts, I’m not sure if some of the other glitches that you’ve seen today if it has anything to do with that probably not, probably just glitches.
What occurred on Tuesday was much more serious, but to be fair I mean we’re publishing an epic scoop on the CIA, the biggest in it’s history and they deserve to have a little comeback.

Ok Bryan Ross from ABC:

Q: Mr. Assange have you ever been paid by the Russian government or state funded outlet RT?

The answer is no, but quite interesting to see the ABC taking that line.
This is the largest publication of Central Intelligence Agency documents – number 1. An enormous journalistic scoop about all sorts of things that affect journalists and almost every individual within the United States and in many other countries about the in some sense the future of what it means to be a state, where is the border between one state and another ?
Borders are created by sea and land, borders are also created by one army meeting another army and then making a truce , that’s where borders come from.
On the internet there’s no borders and if there’s something like the use of force, that’s a very interesting question as to how much state computer hacking is like a use of force in some ways it isn’t in some ways it is, then obviously borders because start to become pretty mushy so enormously interesting that instead here we have a pretty sad question trying to divert from epic publication to something else.

Hillary Vaugn from Fox asks:

Q: How long do you anticipate it will take to help tech companies to issue fixes or secure devices?

What is the timeframe – that is a very important question. My experience as a computer security guy which is what I used to be in my previous profession, well some of those fixes will be fast. Ones that just affect a little part of the system with a little part that you can make a hole in and go through but the fix is just plugging this little hole, tweaking a little, distributing it, testing and distributing. Those can be issued potentially in just two or three days.
Problems that affect more critical aspects of computer code that’s in a telephone or TV or somewhere else, some of them can take a lot longer to fix. And for some systems like Android with many manufacturers possibly like those Samsung TV’s, there is no automatic update this isn’t some people have to manually try and pull something so that the only people who are aware of it can fix the problem. If you’re not aware of it,the problem is not fixed.
That’s a question journalists should be asking of the the various manufacturers involved.
It is an important question and it’s important to put pressure on those companies to make it , basically to make security something that the market cares about and they’ll respond, and they are to a degree already responding.
If they can get away with it they’ll say nothing that’s what that’s what google did initially was to just say nothing at all hoping perhaps that maybe we wouldn’t discuss it because Android is significantly more insecure than iOS – which is the software is used on Iphone. Both of them have severe problems, that are described in these CIA documents that were published but Iphone has slightly slightly less.

Another journalist says :

Q: Is it clear which countries were among the targets of the program?

Partly – we have a lot of records in this part 1 material, a lot more in the others that we’re studying that reveals tens of thousands of targets so yes many of the targets are revealed but many are also not to do with how the CIA split up the different it’s different sections and branches some of the operational branches only within that branch can be quite closely held do they know what the target are .
In other cases there’s collaboration between branches and support of one branch to another and the information about targets can spread further but as we have already stated there are more than 22,000 just in this initial batch of material, IP addresses that correspond to the United States. It’s not clear which are attack infrastructure, intermediary victims or targets.
But there’s also as we’ve stated attacks, numerous attacks on Europe and Latin America including Brazil including Ecuador and we’re still assessing which parts of the those governments and individuals have been attacked but Brazil and Ecuador are not really known for their extremists.JAWv7smrk17

Assange signs off with “Ok that’s it thanks guys, bye.”

If this isn’t a premise for movie, you really wish it was, because the unelected official unauthorized entity known as Wikileaks is really unleashed here. Plus, he implies there will be a sequel Part Two, possibly more.

Whomever gave Assange/Wikileaks the virtual keys to the kingdom at Langley, CIA headquarters, in Virginia is being sought out by any means necessary and dubbed the next Edward Snowden, and it just adds to the political chaos of the moment. So we’re even given a protagonist or anti-hero depending on which way the intel spins on the next data dump.

Luckily we have movies like Alex Gibney’s meticulously researched and prescient documentary ZERO DAYS to sort through the mire. ZERO DAYS should have won Best Documentary, only this was Oscar’s Year Zero, where everything went haywire in Hollywood too, with the wrong winner “leaked,” sigh.

In the end, all we really want is for all government, even a shadow government, to mind its own business, except in the movies, where it’s appropriate to find outlandish scenarios and world-breaking intrigue.

But this is not a movie folks, it’s happening in America right now. Maybe it’s time to pull the cash plug on some of these alphabet agencies, scrub the black ops, and ask for receipts. ZERO DAYS was released by Magnolia Pictures back in July, and can be viewed via links here.

# # #