100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 25, 2017 - Image 6

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

FALL 2018 HOUSES

# Beds Location Rent

11 1014 Vaughn $7700

9 1015 Packard $6525

7 1129 White St $5250

6 415 N. Thayer $4350

6 511 Linden $4800

6 605 Hoover $4500

6 708 E. Kingsley $4800

6 722 E. Kingsley $4650

6 1119 S. Forest $4350

6 1207 Prospect $4900

6 1355 Wilmot Ct. $5075

5 515 S. Fourth $3700

5 935 S. Division $4000

5 1016 S. Forest $5400

5 1024 Packard $3700

4 809 Sybil $3200

4 827 Brookwood $3000

4 852 Brookwood $3000

4 927 S. Division $3100

4 1117 S. Forest $3200

4 1210 Cambridge $3400

Tenants pay all utilities.

Leasing starts Nov. 10th

Reservations Accepted till 11/8.

CAPPO/DEINCO

734‑996‑1991

MAY 2018 – 6 BDRMS HOUSES

417 N. Thayer ‑ $4500

811 Sybil ‑ $4400

Tenants pay all utilities.

Showings Scheduled M‑F 10‑3

24 hour noticed required

DEINCO PROPERTIES

734‑996‑1991

FOR RENT

ACROSS
1 Bunches of bucks
5 Strip of
latticework
9 Expels
14 For each one
15 Jackson 5 hair
style
16 IV part
17 Stacy Lewis’ org.
18 Severely harm
19 Use, as for a
snooze
20 “Well, __-di-dah!”
21 Finishing a
sentence?
23 In the air
25 Ancient Peruvian
26 “Fresh Air” airer
27 Diagram on a
golf score card
31 Attachment to a
movable sprinkler
32 Divinity school
subj.
33 John Irving title
writer
36 Romantically
involved with
38 Oscar Mayer
product
40 “And she shall
bring forth __”:
Matthew
41 Bordeaux
brushoff
42 Co. known for
music
compilations
44 Bad news for
subway riders
48 VW preceders?
51 Fabric mishap
52 Grecian urn
glorifier, e.g.
53 Grammatically,
“have” in “I have
spoken,” e.g.
57 Letters between
mus and xis
58 Ball co-star
59 Revered Tibetan
60 Paltry
61 Author Kafka or
composer Liszt
62 City west of
Tulsa
63 Neck of the
woods
64 Short-tempered
65 College Board
exams, for short
66 Wordless
summons

DOWN
1 Character actor
Eli who often
co-starred with
his wife Anne
Jackson
2 Horse with a
spotted coat
3 Backyard pet
shelters
4 Massage venue
5 Unconvincing, as
excuses go
6 A long way off
7 Barely worth
mentioning
8 Grits, essentially
9 Dashboard
indicator
10 Textbook division
11 Oktoberfest
keepsake
12 Beat the pants off
13 More reasonable
21 GPS lines
22 Cpl., for one
24 No longer
encumbered by
28 South end?
29 Journey segment
30 Did terribly
34 Orthodontic
devices

35 Lays a guilt trip
on, say
37 Nervously
distracted
38 Took the title
39 Business abbr.
41 State of bliss
43 “Dinner!” ... and a
hint to the first
word of 21-, 27-,
44- and 53-Across
45 Stimpy’s sidekick

46 NFC East team
47 Take the wrong
way?
48 Unfair treatment,
with “the”
49 __ Haute
50 Forearm bones
54 Breathe hard
55 Give off
56 X-ray units
60 27-Across,
essentially

By Gail Grabowski and Bruce Venzke
©2017 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
10/25/17

10/25/17

ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:

RELEASE DATE– Wednesday, October 25, 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

6A — Wednesday, October 25, 2017
Arts
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com

WARNER BROS

It’s a bad movie
‘Geostorm’ is disastrous
(but still kind of funny)

New disaster movie stays true to its genre in its poor quality

“Geostorm” will probably be

heralded as one of the worst movies
of the year. Filled with bad CGI,
insipidly stupid characters and
a plot so confusing that hours of
trying to dissect it afterwards will
still lead one to failure, there’s no
doubt “Geostorm” is a bad movie.
It is a very, very bad movie. But it’s
not the worst movie ever made.
For all of its faults, against all odds,
with absolutely nothing going
for it and not a single character
that is likable in even the loosest
sense of the word, the third act
of “Geostorm” is actually a really
good time.

Dean Devlin directed and wrote

“Geostorm” as his directorial
debut, and it seems more likely
he simply went with the first idea
he had every single step of the
way and never bothered to think
through any moment of the film
for longer than three seconds.
The plot, which stems from the
seemingly simple idea of weather-
controlling
satellites
going

haywire, quickly becomes mired in
confusing government allegiances,
unclear character motivations and
an evil plan so nonsensical that it
renders almost every single action
taken by a character in the film to
be meaningless.

The villain’s goal appears to

be to use the weather satellites to
unleash extreme weather upon
countries and peoples he doesn’t
like, but then he later initiates the
self-destruct mechanism of the
satellite control station, which if
successful would render all the
satellites worthless, returning the
earth to a state of global warming-
induced chaos. Why the villain
would be okay dying with everyone
else on earth when the satellites

go down is not explained in the
movie. How or why the villain is
doing anything that he does is not
explained in the movie. There’s an
attempt to explain why the space
station even has a self-destruct
feature, but the explanation falls
flat on its face and only serves to
call out the idiotic story that is
being told to the audience.

Gerard
Butler
(“London

Has
Fallen”),
Jim
Sturgess

(“Kidnapping Freddy Heineken”)
and Abbie Cornish (“6 Days”) all
fall completely flat as the main
characters of this film. Only Andy
García (“Passengers”), as the U.S.

President Andrew Palma, shows
any signs of life, and it is the third
act in which he begins to throw in
one-liners that the movie finally
becomes watchable. After an hour
and a half of what essentially
amounts to different people sitting
in rooms, staring at computer
screens and exclaiming, “Ahhhh
— so that’s what’s going on!” the
movie finally arrives at the actual
storms, and a semblance of what
could’ve been an entertaining
movie begins to assert itself.

Make no mistake: the final act

of “Geostorm” is still completely
asinine. Butler, at one point,
survives
a
giant
spaceship

explosion by wearing nothing more
then a spacesuit. But unlike the rest
of the movie, the last half hour is at
least fun to watch. It’s dumb fun,
rather than dumb drivel. It’s what
the trailers and advertisements for
“Geostorm” actually promised. At
last, the movie finally acts like the
garbage disaster flick that it is. At
last we get to watch Andy García
utter lines like, “I’m the goddamn
President of the United States.”
This is what we came for. Not for
the hackneyed plot. Not for the
terrible special effects. Not for the
actors and not for the first-time
director. For dumb punch lines
and famous people running from
falling buildings. “Geostorm” isn’t
enough of a disaster to be worth
the effort.

DAILY COMMUNITY CULTURE COLUMN

How far would we go to

achieve fame?

Columnist Bailey Kadian contemplates the price of fame

In one of the greatest works

of
Old
English
literature,

“Beowulf,” there is a scene
in which Beowulf heroically
defeats the monster Grendel and
is told, “You have won renown:
you are known to all men far
and near, now and forever.”
This is an extraordinary sort of
fame, one that will live beyond
Beowulf’s lifetime. From ancient
texts to beloved stories to our
modern realities, our desire
for fame appears. Beowulf is
the archetypal hero — and his
never-ending fame serves as the
reward for his act of defeat.

To be remembered is our

inherent desire. We hope our
identity will stretch far beyond
our short-lived existence. It’s
intriguing
how
enthralled

we are by the idea of doing
something to be remembered.
It’s complicated in that much
of what we do for our earned
recognition is fundamentally
good. Why we do it is harder
to
understand.
Some
claim

their fame came as a surprise,
for their efforts towards their
campaign, their organization,
their business or their movement
were totally directed towards
a specific purpose. It wasn’t for
personal recognition — their
fame just came as a byproduct.
Others were passionate about
the potential of earning fame
and therefore used some other
platform to go about attaining it.

In leading a movement of

some sort, does the glory rest in
the original intent? Or perhaps
if we traced the root of the
movement, would we find a
desire for esteem at its core? If
the overarching goal is fame, the
initial motive or passion loses its
significance.

Let’s
consider
a
singer

writing her own music. Music
starts as a passion, in hopes to
reach audiences that can relate
to her lyrics and experiences.
Maybe
after
enough
years

in the spotlight, the artist
is encouraged to shift her
priorities. Now that she has
overwhelming fame, everything
suddenly feels different. What
once was a genuine interest
has now become one strand
of a larger image; an image
revolving around the person,
not the passion.

If I lead a movement to

provide clean water for people
in
impoverished
countries

who cannot access it, and I
gain publicity for my efforts,
I imagine much of the lasting
impact would be about myself,
and not entirely about the act
that earned the recognition. The

idea we once pursued, a generous
act of public service, becomes
the thing we must pursue for us.
For the fame. For being known.
And of course, for that fame to
surpass our lifetime.

There is a plaque hanging up

on the wall at my high school.
My sister’s name is on it. She
won some award during her
senior year. I can’t remember
what the award was called, or
even why she specifically won
it, other than the fact that she
was one of the most talented
people who ever joined our
school’s
drama
department,

and the award recognized that
accomplishment. I remember
noting the significance of the
plaque, and how it would last
for years beyond her time
there. Why is that worth more?
There was something distinctly

valuable about her name being
planted on the wall. It was a
name that would be known and
seen by those passing through
the hallways for years following
her time there.

We
often
assume
that

acquiring fame will make our
circumstances better. Or maybe
it just reminds us that we
have indeed “made it,” in life,
because our efforts have been
noted by many people, thus
making them worth something.

What does this desire for

fame say about our intentions?
In an age where you can be
“exposed” on social media,
or publically hated, there is
more risk to acquiring fame.
In becoming a “known name,”
there is great potential for
immense criticism, almost to an
inhumane degree. If you make
one wrong move, it can stain
your name. It is permanent
— marked with the stamp of
impossible removal, for that one
mistake is just a Google search
away, locked in the histories of
our devices that never forget.
Our eternal glory may last, but
it rests in the hands of all of
us, with our widespread ability
to make whatever we want
known to the world. Our use
of technology has bridged the
gap between those in the public
spotlight and those who simply
observe the figures illuminated
by the light.

Now, more than ever, we have

the ability to be remembered.
But it does not promise a
favorable result. If anything,
there
is
more
risk,
more

publicity and more knowledge
about oneself that can circulate
all over this universe. Your
name may very well be known,
possibly resulting in a lasting
legacy, or likely, leaving the
remnants of its antithesis —
a tainted identity “known to
all men far and near, now and
forever.”

BAILEY
KADIAN

“Geostorm”

Warner Bros.

Pictures

Quality 16, Rave

Cinemas

IAN HARRIS
Daily Arts Writer

TV REVIEW
Ron Livingston thrives
as lead in ‘Loudermilk’

Loudermilk to join the ranks of Bojack and Frank Gallagher

In a world of Frank Gallaghers

and BoJack Horsemans, the trope
of the alcoholic male lead has found
sufficient footholds in recent years.
On Oct. 17, the Audience Network,


accessible
only
to
DirecTV,

AT&T U-verse and DirecTV Now
customers, premiered the pilot
of its new show “Loudermilk,”
from co-creators Peter Farrelly
(“Dumb and Dumber”) and Bobby
Mort (“The Colbert Report”),
ushering
in
another
abrasive

drunk protagonist to add to the
list.
“Loudermilk”
stars
Ron

Livingston (“Office Space”) as Sam
Loudermilk, a caustic recovering
alcoholic and substance abuse
counselor.

In the first few scenes, Sam tells

one of his AA attendees that “life’s
about fucking things up — and then
unfucking the things you fucked
up,” and the theme of this pilot
episode seems to be Sam doing just
that. Due to his acerbic attitude
and behavior, the priest (Eric
Keenleyside, “Godzilla”) of the
church where Sam holds meetings
informs him that his meeting
space will be revoked if he does not
help one of the church member’s in
rehabilitating her stubborn, drug-
abusing daughter Claire (Anja
Savcic, “Extraterrestrial”).

While
the
boozehound

character is not a new one, not
often do we find him as the focal
point of a TV show — probably due
in part to the fact that the attributes

of someone truly suffering from
alcoholism don’t lend themselves
well to making a loveable lead.
“Loudermilk,” however, creates
a compelling twist on the role of
the classic drunk. It may not seem
fair to categorize Sam in this trope,
considering he is four years sober
and leading sobriety meetings,
but he has the biting, me-against-
the-world attitude of someone just
getting “off the sauce.”

The
most
defining
points

of Sam’s character build are
dichotomous to the point of
verging on unbelieveable. Sam is

depicted as an extremely dedicated
counselor — denoted more by his
actions than his usually apathetic
comments — but he also goes on to
display an utter callousness toward
his fellow man, exemplified by
him pushing past an elderly man
going up the stairs. I believe it is
this same disconcerting, polarized
quality about him that makes him
a suitable lead — he’s constantly
pushing you away and pulling you
back in.

For many of the doubts I did

have, the writers would close the
gaps with the occasionally self-
aware comment from Sam. He tells
his budding love interest Allison

(Laura
Mennell,
“Watchmen”)

that he’s learned to be blunt and
harsh to cut through the lies and
excuses of the addicts he works
with, which bleeds over into his
personal life.

While so many of Sam’s traits

are abrasive to the point of
discomfort, I saw a lot of my darker,
hidden qualities in him, which
helped me relate much better to
the show and feel justified in my
own grating characteristics. When
Sam’s roommate and “only friend”
Ben (Will Sasso, “MADtv”) asks
why he pushed past an old man on
the stairs, Sam replies, “Maybe I
just wanted to get nowhere faster,”
and I’ll be damned if those words
didn’t come out of my own mouth.
These humanizing moments in the
face of otherwise atrocious actions
are what endears Sam to the few in
his life strong enough to withstand
his rough edges — and the same
can be said for the viewers.

Where the show does falter,

however, is in the strength of
the dialogue. Often times it
feels as though the writing is
more of a vehicle for delivering
social commentary and setting
up overthought jokes than it is
for carrying the plot along, or
communicating
relationships

between characters. Don’t get
me wrong, the show is definitely
comedic in nature, but the humor
wavers when it tries too hard.
While the show does have its
flaws and lulls, the pilot episode
and the show’s namesake present
a compelling case for viewers to
tune in again next week.

SOFIA LYNCH

For the Daily

“Loudermilk”

Season Premiere

Tuesdays at 8:30

p.m.

Audience

FILM REVIEW

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan