"Dog Park" Director Jade Jenise Dixon Says #MeToo

Director Jade Jenise Dixon

As Director Jade Jenise Dixon's feature film, Dog Park, enjoys a limited theatrical run and is released to high praise on both Amazon Video and Google Play, Jade has been closely watching the news about the sexual abuse of power in Hollywood with her eyes wide open.

Director, Jade Jenise Dixon

"I've been watching all of this unfold with tears in my eyes because I never thought Hollywood's 'dirty little secret' would come to light," says Jade. Like countless other women in Hollywood, Jade can finally speak freely about the subject. "You just couldn't speak about this stuff openly before. Now I can stand with countless other women and say, 'Me Too.'"

Now that the dirt is coming out from under the rug, Jade is hopeful that things will continue to get better, and is thankful for the people who work with her based on her talent. "There are also the 'good guys' who just want to make great movies or TV shows and truly value everyone equally for what they bring to the table. And for those people, I am truly grateful."

Jade Jenise Dixon on set with cinematographer

The Los Angeles Times says that in Jade's latest feature film, Dog Park, "Dixon displays a solid point of view with a refreshing perspective centered around women's success and choices."

A Romantic Comedy about a man who uses his ex-girlfriends dog to pick up women at the dog park, Dog Park, also won "Best Ensemble Cast" at the 2017 Downtown Los Angeles Film Festival. 

Dog Park movie poster

Dog Park, is now available on Amazon Video and Google Play. More video platforms will be added in the coming months via distributor, Indie Rights and sales agent, California Pictures.

• Dog Park on Amazon Video
• Dog Park on Google Play 
• IMDB

SOURCE: Parker Street Productions

The Trailer:

National Press Club Examines 2016 Russian Election Hacking at a Headliners Book Rap Featuring Donna Brazile on December 12th

Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House

As investigations in Congress and by Special Counsel Robert Mueller continue, one of the targets of the hacking into the Democratic National Committee's computer network, Donna Brazile, is telling her story. The former DNC chair and longtime Democratic Party strategist shares her personal account of the 2016 Presidential election.

Brazile will appear at a National Press Club Headliners Book Rap on Tuesday, December 12, 2017, at 6:30 p.m. in the Club's Conference Rooms to discuss

Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns That Put Donald Trump in the White House, which will be published next month on the one-year anniversary of the 2016 election.

Publisher, Hachette Books, calls the book "equal parts campaign thriller, memoir and roadmap for the future." And Brazile adds, "At a moment when our democracy is in crisis, it's time to tell the truth about what went wrong in 2016. Our nation is under unprecedented assault, and if we don't get the facts out, it will happen again."

Donna Brazile

This event will feature a discussion with the author, an audience question-and-answer session, and a book signing. Tickets are $5 for National Press Club members and $10 for the general public. 

• To purchase tickets and copies of the book, please click here. Books will also be available for purchase at the event, no outside books or memorabilia are permitted.

Proceeds from this event benefit the non-profit affiliate of the Club, the National Press Club Journalism Institute, which offers innovative, practical training to journalists and communications professionals working in a rapidly-changing media environment.

NATIONAL PRESS CLUB LOGO.  (PRNewsfoto/National Press Club)

SOURCE: National Press Club

Book Cover Created by 99designs Designer Honored at Prestigious 31st Annual New York Book Show

"Havenwood"

99designs, the world's largest online graphic design marketplace, today announced that a book cover created by a designer from its global design community was named a winner in the prestigious 31st Annual New York Book Show Awards.

"Havenwood," a self-published novel by Eric Slade whose cover was created by 99designs designer Andrei Bat, received first place honors in the "Self-Published Cover" category in the "Young Adult" genre of the awards, which were presented at a ceremony in New York City last week.

According to Slade, who commissioned designer Andrei Bat to work on the cover design through the 99designs online graphic design platform, "Havenwood's cover included 19th century decorative elements to convey a sense of history to prospective readers. Andrei Bat's digital painting style is both luminous and moody."

Hosted by the Book Industry Guild of New York (BIGNY), the New York Book Show is an annual event that offers publishing and printing professionals an opportunity to mingle while honoring the best examples of quality book design and production from the previous year. The show's aim is to showcase the best books as judged by a panel of industry professionals who evaluate manufacturing, production, and design qualities of entries in six main and a myriad of subcategories. The winners (which are featured in an online gallery here) are selected from hundreds of entries sent in by publishers and suppliers from around the country.

"This award is further validation of the creativity and high quality of our designer community," said 99designs CEO Patrick Llewellyn. "99designs has from its earliest origins been a champion for great design from talented individuals around the world. In recent years, we've dedicated even greater resources in tools and processes to further help our community to produce their best work. We commend Andrei on this award and for his contributions to 99designs." 

• For more information on the winning design and winning designer, Andrei Bat, visit here.

SOURCE: 99designs

Eric Slade (Image via eric-slade.com)

More About Havenwood:

(via Eric Slade's Site)

Chattanooga, Tennessee, 1914 — Tanna Cravens boards an airship bound for a colony in Fairyland… But a magical frontier ruled like the Old South isn’t the best home for a woman ahead of her time.

Abandoned by her husband on a failing farm atop an ancient fairy hill, Tanna finds herself in the middle of a war between the human plantation owners and the indigenous elven tribes who want them gone.

With her farm in flames and a dark fairy hoard descending on the colony, Tanna must secure a safe place for those she loves before the paths between the worlds are closed forever.

In an alternate history where Shades of Milk & Honey and Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell might have taken place in England, Havenwood is found just beyond the door between Fairyland and the American South.

Bonus Video:

The Thing: Dread Fears And The 'Other' In The Polar Environment

A scene from John Carpenter’s The Thing from 1982 (IMDB/Universal/JohnCarpenter)

By John Ash, University of Cambridge

John Carpenter’s celebrated 1982 film The Thing is a science fiction classic. Although not an initial commercial success, it has achieved cult status and traditionally is screened (with its 1951 and 2011 counterparts) on the first full night of winter by crews staying at the Scott-Amundsen Base in Antarctica. It may seem a strange choice at first, yet the links between the polar regions and science fiction are strong.

From the pursuit by Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein of his creation into the frozen north, to Ripley’s fruitless call to Antarctica traffic control in Alien, writers have used the remoteness and novelty of the poles to enhance the menace and drama of their work. Carpenter capitalises on the dark polar nights and the claustrophobic confines of an Antarctic base to ratchet up the tension and paranoia as an alien infiltrates the outpost.

Inspired by John Campbell’s 1938 novella, Who Goes There?, The Thing follows the crew of an Antarctic base who discover an alien life form that can assimilate and perfectly mimic the appearance of other organisms. Operating at the cellular level, the alien tissue invades by gradually supplanting the original cells until what remains is an exact copy of the now consumed host.

The station personnel fight a desperate battle against the invader, devising a technique for testing blood samples for infection and struggling against the distrust that grows up in the group when they realise its ability to copy and replace their colleagues.

The Thing is a polar film. Not only is it set in a polar environment, but its characters exemplify the strains of living in extended close proximity in the isolation and climatic extremes of an Antarctic base. It is also a film that speaks to the subject of “The Other” – a theme in the humanities that examines how a society identifies itself, not by defining the laudable characteristics to which it aspires, but by reviling others as exemplars of that which it rejects.

The eponymous alien constitutes an iconic Other. It defies description and therefore order. Having no fixed form other than the organisms it assimilates, it morphs – like a deceitful trickster god – into different shapes. Sometimes that shape is an incomplete transition phase, a chaotic mismatch of biological structures that affronts the logical processes of evolution (in one famous shot we see a detached human head that becomes mobile by growing arthropod legs). The assimilation process both frightens and disgusts, and the subversion of the base personnel’s own bodies into instruments of human destruction adds an extra touch of terror to the whole invasion process.

Kurt Russell, Richard Masur, and Donald Moffat in The Thing.(IMDB/Universal/JohnCarpenter)

Why planet Earth?
But why would an alien come to our planet in the first place? The problem receives consideration in the work of Dr Lewis Dartnell, an astrobiologist who argues persuasively that Earth possesses no property or resource that an advanced civilisation would want to acquire. Reassuring though these arguments are, there remain nagging doubts.

The alien may be a survivor of a convict group condemned to exile on a distant planet. Recalling the First Fleet expedition to establish a colony in Australia in 1788, Commodore Arthur Phillip was under instruction as commander to maintain good relations with the indigenous people. Nonetheless, the effects of colonisation on the first nations living in Australia were devastating.

Kurt Russell in The Thing. (IMDB/Universal/JohnCarpenter)

Stephen Hawking has made similar observations on the meeting of alien and Earth cultures and the lessons of history. And HG Wells famously made the same point in The War of the Worlds. They may be understating the case. In terms of existential risk, subjugation by an alien race may expose humanity to cruelty and misery that exceeds even annihilation.

The second reason why a seemingly illogical alien visit might not be comforting is the unexpected. The alien might simply have developed engine failure and made a forced landing. (Perhaps it was shot down). But in any event, improbability does not provide the same degree of comfort as impossibility, and that mathematical certainty eludes us.
Carpenter’s alien is an imaginative analogue of the many creatures in the natural world with the ability to change appearance for competitive advantage – from cephalopods that adapt skin cells to the colours of the seabed to insects that undergo the widespread process of metamorphosis.

Its lack of fixed form and its physical pollution of human tissue exemplify Otherness, as its calculating ruthlessness epitomises its inhumanity. In the end, the humanity of the base personnel is defined not so much by their difference from the alien as their willingness to sacrifice themselves to defeat it – which is perhaps why the movie remains so popular among crew members who have to rely on each other every single day as they live through their own polar adventures.

About Today's Contributor:
John Ash, Associate at the Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge

This article was originally published on The Conversation.

Are Dogs Trying To Tell Us Something With Their Expressions?

Image via Shutterstock

By Jan Hoole, Keele University

Dogs have been part of human social groups for at least 30,000 years. So it’s not unreasonable to suppose that we might have had some influence on their behaviour, and perhaps their understanding, during that time. We certainly know that dogs have developed ways to communicate with us, for example by whining when they are distressed or barking to alert us to intruders.

Many dog owners would probably say their pets can even tell us things using facial expressions, just like humans do. But is that really true? Perhaps they are just showing emotion without meaning to communicate (just like humans also sometimes do). New research published in the journal Scientific Reports suggests it might be, but there are still reasons to be sceptical.

In a rather elegant experiment, the researchers set up four scenarios. They offered a dog food (a guaranteed way to get their interest) while the human handler was facing towards and also away from the dog. They also had the handler face towards and away from the dog without offering food. They found that the animals showed facial expressions more often when the handler was facing towards them than away, regardless of whether or not food was involved.

Until now, there has been little work on whether or not facial expressions in dogs are involuntary. You might be able to see when a dog’s happy, angry or sad from their face, but that doesn’t mean they are purposefully trying to tell you how they felt.

The new paper suggests that the expressions may be a means of communicating something to the person. It is certain that the expression is more frequently displayed when the human is facing towards the dog, even though the handler did not look directly at the dog during the trial, and that humans respond to that expression.

If I make this face, will you stop shouting? (Shutterstock)

That dogs are able to understand when a person is paying attention to their behaviour is well documented. We also know that dogs show different facial expressions when in the presence of humans, especially in the case of that “guilty” look that every dog owner knows. That particular expression doesn’t actually mean they are feeling guilty. It’s more an attempt to appease the owner who is angry for some, to the dog, unknown reason.

But there are some questions about the particular facial expressions the dogs made in the new study that mean the evidence isn’t conclusive. For example, one of the expressions the authors noticed was the raising of the inner end of the eyebrows. This increases the size of the eyes and makes the dog look more puppy-like.

Studies have shown that humans prefer animals that look like infants. This explains the popularity of breeds with short noses and large eyes, such as boxers and pugs. Dogs that raise their eyebrows more frequently seem to be more popular with people than those that don’t. This could have led to the breeding of dogs that are more likely to show these more attractive expressions alongside those that have childlike anatomical features.

Tongue wagging
Another important indicator that the authors noted was when the dogs showed their tongues. Unfortunately, the researchers didn’t separate tongue movements that indicate stress, such as licking the nose or lips, which can be an appeasing signal, from those that indicate pleasure, anticipation or excitement, such as panting or hanging the tongue out of the mouth. Without this distinction it is difficult to draw conclusions about the emotional state of the dogs.

Previous research also suggests that dogs are aware of when a human is paying attention to them and may change their behaviour accordingly. It is possible that these dogs, aware that the human is facing them felt a level of anticipation, excitement and possibly some anxiety which affected their facial expression. The fact that the food produced no extra interest when the person was turned towards the dog or away from them, could be influenced by the fact that the dog was not actually given the food.

The authors suggest that the dog’s facial expressions may be partly a result of their emotional state and partly an attempt to actively communicate with the handler. Without any evidence about the effect of the expression on the behaviour of the handler, it is difficult to say if that is true.

If further research could make distinctions between the type of tongue movements involved in these expressions, as well as the raising of the eyebrows, we might be able to say with more certainty. But whatever the outcome, many dog owners will probably continue to swear their pets are trying to tell them something.

About Today's Contributor:
Jan Hoole, Lecturer in Biology, Keele University

This article was originally published on The Conversation.