ACROSS
1 “Oopsy”
6 Grand Prix
component
9 In things
13 Adult insect
14 Prefix with data
15 Subject
preceder
16 Laboratory
scam?
18 Saves, say
19 Challenge
20 Like some
flushes
22 Missed the mark
24 Spike TV, once
25 Nile threats
28 Snubbing a
testimonial?
33 Take for a while
35 B to C, e.g.
36 Call off
37 Something
shared on a
plane
40 Pres. when
Brown v. Board
of Education of
Topeka was
decided
41 “The Social
Contract” author
43 Hindu ascetics
45 John Deere rep?
48 Old Nair rival
49 “You betcha!”
50 Mozart opera
ending
52 Spendthrift
56 Hospital test
60 Large deep-water
fish
61 Ordinary law
office employee?
63 Actor
Auberjonois
64 Relaxed
65 Refresh, as a cup
of coffee
66 Participants in
some awkward
meetings
67 Case breaker,
perhaps
68 Flower holders
DOWN
1 Category for non-
recurring pd. bills
2 1979 disco
classic
3 Payment that’s
posted
4 Eternal
5 Philanthropist, e.g.
6 Common Market
letters
7 Ancient
colonnade
8 Sacred sites
9 Stocking stuff
10 Not backing
11 Party pooper
12 First family
member
14 Poet’s concern
17 Short
21 Being
23 Throw into
turmoil
25 On the ball
26 Monterrey title
27 “The Taming of
the Shrew”
setting
29 Obsessive idea
metaphor
30 Caravan
assembler
31 Common
Sundance entry
32 Notice from
Shakespeare?
34 Time for eggs
38 Worked on, as a
cold case
39 Fold, spindle or
mutilate
42 Crop cutters
44 Buck
46 Gin __
47 Other, in
Oaxaca
51 Slopes
52 Had on
53 Top
54 Fit to be tried
55 Student’s request
57 Vacation spot
58 Jack-in-the-pulpit
family
59 Gets caught off
guard
62 The ANC’s
country
By Paul Coulter
©2017 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
03/17/17
03/17/17
ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:
RELEASE DATE– Friday, March 17, 2017
Los Angeles Times Daily Crossword Puzzle
Edited by Rich Norris and Joyce Nichols Lewis
xwordeditor@aol.com
Classifieds
Call: #734-418-4115
Email: dailydisplay@gmail.com
BROADVIEW
APARTMENTS
‑
Spa-
cious
&
peaceful
North
Campus
living!!
1
&
2
bedroom
apartments
with
pricing
that
starts at $1110 per installment!! FREE
parking,
FREE
laundry,
and
FREE
shuttle
service! Call today for specials!
ARBOR PROPERTIES
Award-Winning Rentals in Kerrytown,
Central Campus, Old West Side,
Burns Park. Now Renting for 2017.
734-649-8637. www.arborprops.com
1 BEDROOM APTS Near N. Campus
Fall 2017-18 - $900/m + $25/m Utilities
Each unit has one parking space.
909 & 915 Wall St.
Deinco Properties 734-996-1991
4 BEDROOM HOUSE May 2017
New Kitchen & Study
Wood Floors Throughout
Washer/Dryer, Parking
$2800 + Utilities
1010 Cedar Bend Dr.
734-996-1991
CMB MANAGEMENT ‑ With 17 pre-
mier
locations
treating
every
resident
like
family since 1992.
Apartments as low as
$1050 per rental installment. Call today
for
specials
and
to
schedule
a
tour
of
your
new home! 734-741-9300
712 W. HURON - PURRRFECT, pet-
friendly
location
with
great
pricing!
Rents
starting at $1375! Call today for specials
& secure your new home! 734-741-9300
935 S. DIVISION
2 Bedroom + Study Fall 2017
Max Occupancy is 4
2 Parking Spaces Washer/Dryer
$2190 + Utilities
Cappo Mgmt 734-996-1991
FALL 2017‑18 Apts @ 1015 Packard
3 Bedroom - $1380 - basement
1 parking space avail for $50/m per unit
Deinco 734-996-1991
EFF, 1 & 2 Bdrm Apts Fall 2017-18
Many locations near campus
Rents from $850 (eff) - $1415 (2 bdrm)
Most include Heat and Water
www.cappomanagement.com
734-996-1991
GEDDES HILL ‑ HUGE contemporary
apartments
with
unforgettable
amenities!
Peaceful location adjacent to the Arbore-
tum
with
pricing
starting
at
$1800.
Call
to-
day for current specials! 734-741-9300
FOR RENT
PALACE FILMS
‘Things to Come’ shines
There are so many films
that really try to be about
something. “My movie’s about
technology” or “My movie’s
about parenting,” a writer
or
director
or
producer
might
say
(or
not-so-
subtly
display
on
the
screen),
hoping
to
grab
onto the coattails
of
ephemeral
salience. This isn’t
to say that these movies are
bad; on the contrary, they’re
often critical in shaping our
cultural, political and societal
conversations. But these films
often become polemic, spoiling
their would-be fascinating life
tales in favor of a “message.”
Rarer are the movies that
aren’t really about anything,
and in the process become
about
everything
—
about
life,
love,
loss,
longing,
leaving. Films that illuminate
the stories being lived by
those around us: the lawyer
handling your tort claim (see
Kelly
Reichardt’s
“Certain
Women”), your bus driver (see
Jim Jarmusch’s “Paterson”) or
your high school philosophy
teacher.
That last one is the subject
of “Things to Come,” the latest
from up-and-coming French
writer-director Mia Hansen-
Løve (“Eden”). The film stars
Isabelle Huppert (“Elle”) as
Nathalie, an aging philosophy
instructor whose life begins
to unravel. Her elderly mother
is losing her marbles (and
Nathalie temporarily adopts
her allergy-inducing cat), she’s
separating from her husband,
also
a
philosophy
teacher,
after he meets someone else
meanwhile,
protesters,
calling
for
better pensions,
interrupt
her
teaching.
Nathalie,
briefly a former
Communist,
is
resilient. Her tragedies are met
with grace; she defends herself
against a publishing company
turning their back on her, and
she advocates for a former
student
turned
intellectual
and writer, Fabien (Roman
Kolinka,
“Eden”).
As
the
travails of her daily life become
more and more unbearable, she
decides to visit Fabien to the
sounds of Woody Guthrie in
his new home outside of Paris,
a rustic commune among the
mountains.
Hansen-Løve and Huppert
make a brilliant pair. The
camera is always in motion,
placing the audience within
conversations.
Hansen-Løve
often opts to film a character’s
reaction to a line; the effect
is
a
deep
understanding
of the film’s relationships.
When Heinz (André Marcon,
“Marguerite”) tells Nathalie of
his affair, we hear his guilt, but
we see her anguish.
It
helps
that
Huppert,
undeniably one of the greatest
living actors, is on screen for
much of the film. She can
easily slip into a role, fully
living the part on film with
ease. Nathalie is no exception.
She can be feeble or forceful,
intellectual or still learning.
She’s a complex individual
whose thoughts, actions and
words are intricately brought
to life.
Hansen-Løve’s
screenplay,
further,
is
quick,
yet
unburdened
by
clunky
exposition
in
dialogue.
Characters
reveal
facts
through their language, but it
feels perfectly natural, like a
French Kenneth Lonergan.
At the risk of ascribing an
“about” to a movie already
deemed here to be “about”
nothing in particular, “Things
to
Come”
vividly
portrays
one
woman’s
navigation
through
compromises.
Her
philosophical treatises often
intertwine with the dueling
notions of thought and action
— a debate rendered in real
time among the protesting
students, as well as within
Fabien’s internal struggle over
how to create a better world.
But Hansen-Løve did not have
to compromise: this movie
sings, from the stunning shots
of the French countryside to
the kitchen sink drama set
against
bookshelves,
once
overloaded but now with some
of their contents ripped out —
casualties from separation.
DANIEL HENSEL
Daily Film Editor
“Things to Come”
Les Films du
Losange
Michigan Theater
PHILLIP NELSON
Will the winner matter?
Nicki Minaj vs. Remy Ma.
If you haven’t heard about it
yet, you should probably start
following at least one trashy
media service on Twitter.
Long
story
short,
Nicki
contributed a couple feature
verses earlier this year that
may or may not have been
about Remy, and so a couple
weeks
ago
Remy
released
“ShETHER,” a vicious seven-
minute diss track, and followed
it up a few days later with
“Another One.” The songs
harken back to Nas’ 2001 Jay-Z
diss track “Ether” and Drake’s
2015 Meek Mill diss track
“Back to Back,” respectively.
Nicki responded last week with
three new tracks, two of which
— “No Frauds” and “Changed
It” — take aim at Remy.
This is usually the point
where we look at the material
and everyone takes sides on
who “won.” So, who won?
Frankly, no one. There can’t be
a winner when the opponents
aren’t even playing the same
game.
In an era when good quality
doesn’t necessarily translate
to high sales figures, these
two artists have very different
criteria for what constitutes
the title “Queen of Rap.” Who
fought
harder?
Definitely
Remy. “ShETHER” took shots
from all angles, not to mention
the dismembered Nicki Minaj
Barbie that appears on the
cover art. Who sold more?
Nicki, for sure. “No Frauds”
topped the iTunes charts in
multiple
countries
and
its
streaming traffic was over 100
times that of “ShETHER.”
Remy Ma is honoring the
same set of rules that the Nas
/ Jay-Z fued operated under:
long-winded rap verses that
solely function to harshly insult
opponents, firing rumors, facts
and alternative facts alike. She
drags Minaj with a number
of scathing accusations like
having a ghostwriter, sleeping
her way to the top and funding
her convicted-felon brother’s
wedding.
Nicki’s
game
is
very
different. I think she outlines
her rules best in her now-
deleted
Instagram
post
announcing the new tracks. In
a screenshot she writes, “Here
@ Young Money, we don’t do
diss records, we drop HIT
RECORDS & diss u ON them,”
a line with a flow so good that
she makes a strong case against
the ghostwriter accusations.
Minaj is obviously more
concerned with topping the
charts than hitting back. Both
“No Frauds” and “Changed It”
take swings at Remy, but do so
in a abbreviated fashion, only
lending a verse each to feud-
related insults. She doesn’t
take on Remy with a solo track,
but with songs featuring rap
heavyweights Drake and Lil
Wayne, ensuring that her sales
and popularity skyrocket.
Given this, we now consider
a new question: Whose rules
are we playing by? That’s an
issue that emcompasses far
more that the Nicki / Remy
dispute. In a world dominated
by social media and the mass
collection of data, it seems
that popularity and charts
take
precedent.
I
imagine
most people who generate
an opinion on this feud take
Nicki’s side, simply because
they know who she is.
But we can not write off
Remy merely because she’s
less popular. When she ignited
this feud, she thought she was
starting another Nas / Jay-Z
debacle. If she had, she would
take the crown.
But this is 2017, not 2001.
The content matters and the
numbers matter. So until these
women enter the same arena,
there can be no winner.
JESSICA ZEISLOFT
Daily Arts Writer
Famed feud brought to TV
The
opening
credits
of
“FEUD: Bette and Joan” are
gorgeous,
taking
aesthetic
inspiration from the cinema
of the 1960s. The technicolor
silhouette
animation
is
visually
reminiscent
of
“Mad
Men,”
though the theme
is less nostalgic
and more urgent;
instead of a man
falling through a
history of trends
and fads painted
onto skyscrapers,
this sequence involves two
women circling each other in
ever-shrinking circlets. The
most chilling shots are those of
a man who has the marionette
strings connected to these
women
wrapped
carefully
around his fingers, making
them dance and another man
ashing his cigar, causing little
Oscars statues to fall from the
end of it. The pilot episode of
the show is just as enthralling
as the credits; it’s the kind
of show that has you inching
forward on your seat and
holding your breath without
realizing until the screen cuts
to black.
The episode sets up the
legendary feud between Bette
Davis and Joan Crawford, two
power icons of Hollywood,
through the story of their
only film together: “Whatever
Happened to Baby Jane,” a
movie about a similar rivalry
between two women in 1962.
Fittingly, Bette and Joan are
played by Susan Sarandon
(“Thelma and Louise”) and
Jessica
Lange
(“American
Horror Story”) respectively,
two women whose careers
have been full of rich and
powerful roles. The supporting
cast,
full
of
recognizable
faces
like
Stanley
Tucci
(“The Devil Wears Prada”),
Alfred Molina (“Spider Man
2”), Kathy Bates (“American
Horror Story”), Judy Davis
(“The
Dressmaker”),
and
up-and-comer Kiernan Shipka
(“Mad
Men”)
is phenomenal,
but
Sarandon
and Lange are
formidable.
Both command
every
room
fully;
each
scene
they’re
in
together
is
thick
with
tension.
They
move
through
magnificent,
lonely
halls
and
delicately
constructed
film
sets
with
alternating
carelessness and overt self-
awareness, warily eyeing not
only each other but everyone
else in the room.
If you’re attuned to the
eccentricities
that
Ryan
Murphy can’t help but bring to
his work, you can catch some
of them in the pilot — perhaps
most tellingly, a scene in which
Joan, playing a character who
is confined to a wheelchair,
sees
Bette
talking
quietly
with one of the directors
and, instead of getting up
and
striding
confidently
over to them, wheels herself
angrily towards them. There
is a perfectly crafted scene
involving
the
two
women
angling for a specific chair that
will give them top billing in the
next morning’s paper, and it
could not be more meticulously
choreographed.
The
two
women never take their eyes
off each other, metaphorically
— they are straining, always on
the edge of propriety, on the
edge of their seats, on the edge
of snapping at each other’s
throats.
The show’s weakest point
is trying too hard to make a
feminist point through bits of
dialogue between the women,
when the plotlines and even
the score do it more effectively.
There are several one-liners
that are thinly veiled criticisms
of how we treat older women
in the media and Hollywood,
but it is often unclear what
brand of feminism they are
truly seeking to represent. At
times, these lines slip into the
narrative that women are more
cruel to each other than they
are to men, or than men are to
them, and it feels incongruous
and wrongfully placed, even in
a show about a feud between
two famous women.
The pilot captures what
happens
when
beloved
ingenues grow into powerful,
sometimes unlikeable women,
and what those women must
do to keep their power at the
expense of — well, it’s still
unclear. It captures what it
feels like to watch your own
work, an intensely private yet
also public experience in the
film industry. The punch that
this show packs comes not from
the unfolding of any feud yet
(incidentally, I have a suspicion
that once the feud builds, it’ll
lessen the intensity). Rather,
the bite of the show comes
from the remorselessness of
Hollywood and the media in
creating a culture in which,
as multiple people point out,
there can only be one “It girl.”
If the rest of the season is this
clever and well-paced, slinking
towards a kinetic explosion
of raw energy, then it has the
potential to be a phenomenal
bit of storytelling and one of
Ryan Murphy’s better pieces.
SOPHIA KAUFMAN
Daily Book Review Editor
“FEUD: Bette and
Joan”
Series Premiere
FX
Sundays at 10:00
p.m.
TV REVIEW
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
FILM REVIEW
MUSIC NOTEBOOK
6 — Friday, March 17, 2017
Arts
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com