Atlantic Monthly Contributors's Blog, page 1039

Rubio's Amendment to Kill Obamacare Is a Great Campaign Prop, at Least

Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who everyone expects to run for president in 2016, has proposed a bill that would amend the Constitution of the United States to prevent the government from enacting Obamacare. After 37 House attempts to revoke the bill in part or in full, Rubio has thrown in his lot with a far, far, far— really far — less likely strategy. Rubio is thinking about running for president.

Rubio's office explains the plan at his website.

[Rubio] proposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution providing that “Congress shall make no law that imposes a tax on a failure to purchase goods or services.” The provision would effectively reverse the ObamaCare individual mandate tax and prevent future attempts to tax individuals and businesses for failing to purchase goods and services Congress has deemed mandatory to have. ...

If passed by Congress and ratified by the states, the “Right to Refuse” amendment would reassert constitutionally limited government and exempt the more than 6 million individuals and businesses expected to be hit with thousands of dollars in mandate taxes set to begin in 2014.

Rubio has a partner in the effort, Rep. Steven Palazzo of Mississippi, who introduced a similar bill in the House.

If the House votes on Palazzo's bill, it would be the 38th time that the body has tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act since Republicans gained control in January 2011. We did a little data analysis, looking at how the first 36 of those votes went. Of all of the votes cast — some of which were in committees, not among the whole House — votes against Obamacare comprised 54.4 percent. Only a few votes saw a broad majority of support for curtailing the program. Those were usually tied to other funding proposals.

But 54.4 percent will not help the Rubio/Palazzo amendment. The rules for amending the Constitution are set out in its fifth Article. There are two ways to propose an amendment. The first is by introducing it in Congress. The second is at a convention resulting from an appeal by two-thirds of the states. If it's done in Congress, as this one would be, it requires two-thirds support in both the Senate and the House. If an amendment is successfully proposed, it requires state legislatures or states conventions in three-quarters of the states to approve it.

So what are Rubio/Palazzo's odds?

In the Senate: zero. The Senate is still controlled by Democrats. While they've been having some trouble overcoming Republican filibusters, they've had no trouble at all beating back Republican-led legislation. Particularly when it's an attempt to repeal the Democratic president's signature legislation. There have been 37 votes to repeal Obamacare in the House. There have been zero in the Senate.

In the House: zero. Again: 54.4 percent is not 66.6 percent — a two-thirds margin. Republicans have a strong majority in the House, but it's still well short of two-thirds. Republicans would need to pick up another 57 House seats to gain that advantage.

In fact, the last time the Republicans had a two-thirds majority in both chambers was the 43rd Congress. 1875.

In the states: a tiny, minute fraction above zero. Even if the amendment got out of Congress somehow, it would never be passed by three-quarters of the state legislatures as the Constitution mandates. Republicans have majorities in a number of states. They do not have majorities in 38 states — the required 75 percent. In 28 states they control both houses of the legislature. In 18, the Democrats do.

But approving a constitutional amendment is not a light endeavor, and legislators are generally predisposed to oppose them. The last time an amendment came before the states for approval, it was a measure that would have given Washington, D.C., full representation in the Congress. Only 16 states approved it. The one before that was the Equal Rights Amendment. Same result.

Given the odds outlined above, it's pretty safe to assume that this proposal won't go anywhere. In fact, it probably won't even come to a vote in the Senate, where it would need to be approved by a Democratically-led Rules Committee. So it is safe to expect that this idea will soon fade from public awareness and discussion.

Until sometime in early 2015, at which point it might come up in a debate.

       

We Don't Need 'The Wizard of Oz' in 3D

Today in show business news: Warner Bros. is reworking a classic, Justin Theroux gets a big TV role, and a Game of Thrones actress lands on her feet. 

Warner Bros. has some hideous plans to re-release The Wizard of Oz in IMAX 3D, because no one appreciates the old stuff anymore, they want it all big and headache-inducing. Supposedly the studio is doing this to celebrate the movie's 75th anniversary, but really it's just so they can sell remastered Blu-ray and Blu-ray 3D and DVD and Ultraviolet, whatever that is, copies of the movie. Look, businesses gotta make money, I get that, but couldn't they just release the movie as is, or clean it up a little bit, but keep it, y'know, not in 3D? Because 3D is frequently annoying and occasionally terrible. And we just had a garish 3D thing set in Oz! We don't need more. And we don't need The Wizard of Oz all gussied up. It's already gussied enough. It's good and wonderful as is. It's OK if some things stay the same. I know you don't really get money from things staying the same, but money isn't everything, is it? Oh, to a major movie studio it almost certainly is? Ah, I see. Oh well. We don't have to go see it if we don't want to, do we. [The Hollywood Reporter]

Justin Theroux has been cast in the lead role in Damon Lindelof's HBO series adaptation of the post-apocalyptic novel The Leftovers. Basically the Rapture happens but some people don't get Raptured so they have to just kinda live on Earth and deal with it. Theroux's character is a police chief and family man who is just trying to keep on keeping on. The show is just a pilot, so it might never see the light of day, but I am certainly curious about it. And I of course await with dread and to be honest some excitement the day when it's announced that Angelina Jolie has decided to try her hand at series television and is taking a meeting with Damon Lindelof. It'll be the beginning of the end — fitting, I guess, for this show. [Deadline]

Not wanting to spend her summer kicking around her mansion trying not to text R. Patz, Twilight actress Kristen Stewart has signed on to star in two movies that will film back-to-back this summer. The first is Camp X-Ray, about a young soldier who gets sent to guard Guantanamo Bay and winds up befriending an inmate. Sounds like an interesting role for her. And then there's Olivier Assayas's Sils Maria, playing the assistant of an actress (Juliette Binoche) who is obsessed with a younger actress (Chloe Moretz, ugh). So that might be more of a supporting role? It's unclear. Anyway, good for her. Good to be busy, to work work work. Much better than creaking around lonely, sun-drenched Los Angeles for the next three months. Nobody should be doing that. [Deadline]

[GAME OF THRONES SPOILER ALERT. TREAD CAREFULLY.] Though she may be gone from Westeros, actress Michelle Fairley is not outta the biz. No, she's just been cast in a recurring role on the poorly lit USA network show (that's redundant, I know, they're all poorly lit) The Suits. She'll play "a British entrepreneur who runs a successful international oil company" on the legal drama, making her debut on July 16. So, good for her! I mean, from critically respected and epic Game of Thrones to the USA network's suits drama The Suits is sort of the wrong direction, but she'll be fine. She probably booked this before Sunday's episode went kablooey. I'm sure she's getting offers a-go-go right now. This The Suits thing is just to tide her over. Plus [ANOTHER SPOILER ALERT IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOKS], she might not be done with Westeros for good. Just sayyyyying. You know what I mean. If you don't you should not have read this far and it's your fault. [Entertainment Weekly]

WGN America, that weird superstation from Chicago, is getting into the original scripted series racket. They've ordered, straight to series, a show called Salem that's set in 17th century Massachusetts. Yup, it's about witches and apparently "dares to uncover the dark, supernatural truth hiding behind the veil of this infamous period in American history." Oh it dares to uncover that supernatural truth? What, that there really were witches or the devil running amok in Salem? Huh. I know it was like like four thousand years ago or something, but that seems kinda disrespectful to the whole thing, doesn't it? "Oh, no, a bunch of people weren't murdered because of mass hysteria and fear, a terrible incident that nonetheless teaches us something about certain societal dangers. It's that they really were witches working for the devil! Cram it with walnuts, Arthur Miller." Sits kinda strange for me. And really, the only fictional thing about there being actual witches in Salem should be Hocus Pocus. Because it's based on an entirely true story. But, oh well. Good luck, WGN. You're gonna need it. [Deadline]

       

Obama's Trade Nominee Has a Romney-Style Love of Cayman Bank Accounts

[image error]Another Romneyesque figure has been spotted in President Obama's administration. Michael Froman, nominated to be the U.S. trade representative, has about $500,000 in a Cayman Islands account, The New York Times' Jonathan Weisman reports. Froman, a former investment manager at Citigroup, also benefitted from the "carried interest" loophole that helped Mitt Romney stay so rich. It allows private equity and hedge fund managers to claim earnings as capital gains, which is taxed at 15 percent, instead of as regular income, which is taxed at a rate of up to 39.6 percent. Obama's nominee for Commerce Secretary, Penny Pritzker, whom the president nominated on the same day. is also a quite Romneyesque. Pritzker is the heir to a hotel fortune, the subject of union employees' wrath, and comes from a family that "were pioneers in using tax loopholes to shelter their holdings." Also, she is so rich she "inadvertently omitted" $80 million in income.

Republicans have noticed. Obama "railed against fat cats who avoid taxes offshore," Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley said, yet has nominated two people with lots of cash in the Caymans. Froman says he will sell off the Cayman account within 90 days of being confirmed as trade representative. "Mike Froman has paid every penny of his taxes and reported all of the income, gains and losses from the investment on his tax returns," a White House spokesman said. Funny, Mitt Romney said the same thing: "I've paid all the taxes required by law."

       

Oklahoma Tornado Was a Record 2.6 Miles Wide

The deadly cyclone that struck on Friday in El Reno, Oklahoma, was the second EF5 tornado in less than two weeks to wreak devastation on the state. It was also the largest twister ever recorded in the United States. According to the National Weather Service, the May 31 tornado that killed 18 people grew to 2.6 miles wide, achieving a top speed of 295 miles per hour. The second-widest funnel, which devastated parts of Hallam, Nebraska, in 2004, spanned only 2.5 miles. The record only underscores the distressing frequency of tornados touching down in Oklahoma, which saw 24 people die, hundreds more injured, and millions of dollars in property blown apart, when a a 1.3 mile-wide tornado tore through Moore, Oklahoma, located 31 miles southeast of El Reno and 10 miles south of Oklahoma City, on May 20.

NWS officials told NBC News that the tornado's diameter was measured with a "mobile radar unit" stationed on a stretch of U.S. Route 81 just south of El Reno, near where the twister passed through the town of 16,729 residents. The radar unit was, presumably, luckier than the Weather Channel car that was upended by the very tornado it was designed to chase — and the storm chasers who, miraculously, made it out of the car alive. Some weren't so lucky.

       

Oscar Pistorius's Murder Case Is Postponed Until August 19

Update 7:18 a.m. Eastern (June 4): Well, it was a 15-minute hearing instead of a 10-minute, but the result went as expected—Magistrate Daniel Thulare ruled that the prosecution will have around two more months to complete their investigation in the Pistorius murder case which is now set for August 19. "Pistorius' trial is not expected to start before September, at the earliest," the AP reports. The news agency also adds, "The Paralympic champion's trial will likely be sent up to the High Court in Pretoria."

Today was the first time that the world got to see Pistorius, since February when he was sobbing and crying during the his bail hearing. Today, the AP reports that the Olympian was stoic. They add:

Pistorius spoke just once during Tuesday's hearing. "Yes, your honor," he said in a voice which croaked at first but which also had an air of newfound composure, when Thulare asked him if he understood that he was released on the same bail conditions and must reappear at the Pretoria Magistrate's Court on Aug. 19. 

Tuesday's court hearing came on the morning after a barrage of stories about Reeva Steenkamp and interviews with her friends and family ran on local channels—which of course puts Pistorius and his image in the court of public opinion. "In one documentary, broadcast in Britain by Channel Five on Monday night ... the mother said, her daughter "phoned me, we chatted about this and that, little girl things. I said, 'How’s it going with Oscar?' She said, 'We’ve been fighting; we’ve been fighting a lot.'" report The New York Times's Lydia Polgreen and Alan Cowell (emphasis ours). 

If convicted, Pistorius could face up to 25 years in jail.

Original: For the first time in nearly four months, the world will lay eyes upon the disgraced double-amputee Olympic sprinter Oscar Pistorius when he appears at a pre-trial hearing on Tuesday in the Valentine's Day killing of his longtime model girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp. The court proceedings will be short on time but long on emotion, with both the prosecution and the defense planning to push back the start of South Africa's most tabloid-friendly trial. Will the Blade Runner cry again? And will Steenkamp's family have to endure any more bloody photos without any real answers? Here's what to expect at Pistorius's public re-emergence and beyond.

[image error]Why Isn't the Trial Really Starting Yet? 

Investigators still need time to gather evidence, prosecutors will ask for an extension to help them do it, and the judge in the case is expected to grant the delay. According to the Associated Press, the trial will probably be pushed back until August — some seven months after Pistorius killed Steenkamp on Valentine's Day — and all that evidence from investigators may not even be presented until September or October. An early botched selection of an investigative lead wanted for murder himself sent cops back to the drawing board, and the Mail & Guardian expects a "swift adjournment" at Tuesday morning's hearing in Pretoria, which     

Racial Bias in Marijuana Arrests Is Worse Than You Thought

In six states, plus the District of Columbia, blacks are over five times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession than whites are. The national average? Black Americans are arrested nearly four times as much. And it's not because of increased use of the drug: according to the New York Times's report, black and white Americans have about the same rates of marijuana use overall.  So what's going on?

Essentially, the Times explains, it's probably one of a handful of biases written into the system of local law enforcement nationwide. The data they're using is from 2010, and was also used by the ACLU for a new report. The ACLU cites the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program as one possible reason for the disparity. That's because, they explain, the program incentivizes increasing drug arrest numbers by tying the statistics to funding. Law enforcement officials then concentrate on lower income neighborhoods to keep those numbers up, finding the lowest hanging fruit of crimes to enforce. 

The argument resonantes with criticism of the NYPD's "stop and frisk" program, which overwhelmingly targets young, black or latino men in the city (and, indeed, demonstrates a racial disparity in arrests for marijuana possession). But as the ACLU and the Times show, the problem of racial bias in arrests for possessing a drug that is, after all,  gaining acceptance across the U.S., is a national one. the ACLU found a bias in "virtually every county in the country," they told the Times, regardless of the proportional population of minorities in that county. 

[image error]

Source: ACLU

The disparity is worst in the Northeast and the Midwest, as the Times's map shows. Currently, marijuana possession is legal in Colorado and Washington state. Eighteen states have laws regulating medicinal use of the substance. 

       

California Prisoners Are Free to Read as Much Werewolf Erotica as They Want

Andres Martinez, serving time for attempted murder and robbery at the Secured Housing Unit at Pelican Bay State Prison in California, is free to read his werewolf-human erotica novel, according to a decision handed down by the First District Court of Appeal. And guess what? The ruling, which itself is an amazing piece of writing, actually breaks new ground on stepping back obscenity law. 

The erotica in question is The Silver Crown by Mathilde Madden. The back cover description does a lot of the talking for us on the tone of the novel, which currently has just one lukewarm review on Amazon: 

“Every full moon, Iris kills werewolves. It's what she's good at; it's what she's trained for. She's never imagined doing anything else . . . until she falls in love with one. And being a professional werewolf hunter and dating a werewolf poses a serious conflict of interest. To add to her problems, a group of witches decides she is the chosen one—destined to save humanity from the wolves at the door—while her boss, Blake, who just happens to be her ex-husband, is hell-bent on sabotaging her new relationship. All Iris wants is to snuggle up with her alpha wolf and be left alone. He might turn into a monster once a month, but in a lot of ways, Iris does, too.”

Much like Iris, all Andres Martinez wanted to do was snuggle up with Madden's novel, purchased years ago, and be left alone to enjoy the salacious prose. But prison officials confiscated the book, calling it obscene, because it contains sexually explicit passages and “advocates violence." Martinez appealed, which is how Justice James Richman eventually ended up delving into the Werewolf erotica genre (yes, it is a genre) to determine whether The Silver Crown met obscenity standards. Here's what he found, after reviewing the entire 262-page book (emphasis ours): 

"There are also a great number of graphic sexual encounters, one per chapter through most of the book, including detailed descriptions of intercourse, sodomy, oral-genital contact, oral-anal contact, voyeurism, exhibitionism, and ménage à trois. Semen is mentioned. Crude slang is used to describe various body parts and the sex act itself. The sex is sometimes rough but always consensual. Women are portrayed as frequently aggressive, always willing, and seemingly insatiable. Men are portrayed as frequently demanding, always ready, and seemingly inexhaustible. The sex occurs between humans and werewolves, as well as intra-species. On the other hand, the sex appears to be between consenting adults. No minors are involved. No bestiality is portrayed (unless werewolves count). And there is no sadomasochism." 

That, Richman explained in his unanimous decision, doesn't meet federal or state standards for obscenity. And what's more, prison officials apparently failed to consider the book's literary merit in considering whether it was protected under the inmate's First Amendment rights. This prompted Richman, along with Peter Orner, a creative writing instructor at San Francisco State University, to provide a literary analysis of the novel. Richman writes: 

"The characters are developed to a degree, with distinctive personalities, though deep introspection is lacking...And though perhaps less than Shakespearean, a ghost of Iris‟s dead brother appears in various scenes, especially to provide guidance to Iris in times of strife." 

Finding that "The Silver Crown does not lack serious literary value," The ruling ordered prison officials to return The Silver Crown to Martinez for his reading pleasure. But as the Recorder explains, the case seems bound to return to courts, as it sets up a direct conflict with another court's decision concerning the authority of prison officials to expand obscenity definitions when applied to prison reading materials. The case also pushes back on obscenity standards in its analysis of the value of the overall text, making it more difficult to label a written work as obscene. In short, more justices might have to read, think about, and write opinions on werewolf erotica. In our deepest, darkest, fantasies, this case would go all the way to the Supreme Court.  

(h/t @theglipper)

Photo: Fotokostic via Shutterstock

       

Vaccine Exemptions Could Help Make Whooping Cough a Thing Again

The rising percentage of parents opting out of at least one mandatory vaccination could be a major factor in the recent increase in whooping cough cases. That's according to a study, published in Pediatrics today, based on data from New York state, where religious exemptions to vaccination requirements are enforced loosely enough to allow parents to opt out based on personal or philosophical beliefs about the drugs, Reuters explains. 

Researchers tracked data from the state's Department of Health. They noticed that the proportion of religiously exempt kids, while still very small, had nearly doubled in the state: 23 in 10,000 to 45 in 10,000. And in counties with more than 1 percent of children under a religious exemption, whooping cough cases were higher: 33 out of every 100,000 kids, compared to 20 per 100,000 kids in counties with an exemption rate under 1 percent. 

But there's more: because the current whooping cough vaccine is less effective than the original, even vaccinated kids in counties with more exemptions are more susceptible to the illness. Most vaccines rely on "herd immunity" to boost their effectiveness — if a certain percentage of the population is vaccinated, the disease can't spread. Different diseases have different thresholds, and while the New York whooping cough numbers seem pretty tiny, increasing vaccination exemptions aren't just a localized issue.

Across the U.S., exemption rates have been on the rise for years. Those rates go up in part due to the increasing ease of getting an exception, but also because of fears surrounding the safety of the drugs. A popular claim, for instance, that vaccines can cause autism, was debunked after the author of the study from which that claim originates was caught deliberately falsifying data. But it's not quite as simple as the fallout from one faulty study: immunization rates also take a hit in poorer communities, as Mother Jones explained last week, for reasons that have nothing to do with conspiracy theories or Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey. 

       

Jill Kelley is Suing the Government Over 'Violations of Privacy' in Petraeus Scandal

Jill Kelley, the Tampa "socialite" who inadvertently led the FBI to evidence of Paula Broadwell and David Petreaus's affair, is suing the FBI, the Department of Defense and other unnamed government officials because, she says, the agencies violated her privacy, as well as that of her husband. This is bound to get Kelley back in the headlines again, months after she told the media that she wanted to stay out of the media. 

The 65-page suit, with both Jill and her husband Dr. Scott Kelley named as plaintiffs, doesn't name specific officials at any of the departments. Kelley, as you may remember, reported Broadwell to the FBI over a series of allegedly harassing emails, starting a chain of events that led to the discovery of Broadwell's affair with Petraeus. Her lawsuit alleges that 1) the government wrongfully searched her personal emails in the process and 2) that the government violated her privacy by leaking pertinent information to the media. It reads: 

"Rather than protect the Kelleys’ privacy interests as the law and their duty required, Defendants instead willfully and maliciously thrust the Kelleys into the maw of public scrutiny concerning one of the most widely reported sex scandals to rock the United States government. Defendants violated their legal duty to protect the Kelleys’ privacy, dignity, reputation, and security, and instead started, engaged with, and fomented a malicious campaign of “blame the victim” that has taken a tremendous emotional and financial toll on the Kelleys and their three young daughters, and even threatened their physical safety."

And insinuates that their case is the tip of the iceberg: 

"If Defendants can wreak such emotional, reputational, and financial havoc on a couple as educated, intelligent, successful, and public-spirited as the Kelleys, they could certainly do so to anyone. Accordingly, this suit seeks not only to vindicate Plaintiffs’ legal rights, help restore their reputations, champion the truth, and otherwise attempt to make them whole, but also to deter Defendants from such egregious violations of privacy in the future."

The scandal also ended the career of Gen. John Allen, after the email trove also revealed a substantial exchange between Allen and Kelley, who denies that the two were sexually involved. Allen was cleared of any wrongdoing after an investigation, but he still retired earlier this year. Kelley also claims that, months before the scandal broke, she was forced to answer questions about her relationship to both Allen and Petraeus, who was a friend of hers, by FBI agents in a van: 

"...they then demanded she answer bewildering questions regarding her relationship with Director Petraeus and General Allen—including insinuations and accusations that she was engaged in adulterous activity—for approximately 30 minutes. Comments made by Agent Malone made it further apparent to Mrs. Kelley that her status as victim was not a priority for the agents, being subsumed, if not entirely overcome, by other considerations such as career ambitions. After this harrowing experience, the agents deposited Mrs. Kelley alone, without her luggage, at the airport."

Kelley also argues that her treatment — specifically her framing as the catalyst if the sex scandal and therefore responsible for the end of both Allen and Petraeus's careers — was sexist: 

"Such treatment was the product of sexual discrimination and stereotyping by Defendants. It is a recrudescence of an older culture where ambitious, attractive, vivacious and intelligent women were shamefully reduced to mere sex objects and publicly humbled when they dared to lean in to leadership roles."

The Kelleys' claim that the entire ordeal had cost financially and on their reputation. They're seeking an apology and unspecified damages. As of Monday, the Department of Justice hasn't commented on the suit, according to multiple reports. 

       

Going to Disney World Sure Is Expensive

Today in show business news: Disney raises its park fares to almost $400 per day for a family of four, Showtime finds a leading man, and The Killing holds steady.

If you've got little ones constantly pulling on your pant legs, tearfully begging you to take them to Disney World, or if you're one of those whimsical adults who loves going to children's theme parks, I'm afraid I have some bad news for you. It will now cost any person over the age of ten $92 for a day pass to Disneyland, plus $16 in parking fees, and a whopping $95 for Disney World. So if your kid's in fourth grade, that'll be nearly a hundred bucks to take them on the Dumbo ride. Or to wait in line at Splash Mountain. To pay twenty bucks for a soda and a damn churro. It's an expensive place, is what I'm saying. That's nearly $400 for a family of four to spend a single day at Disney World, forget hotels and flights and food and whatever souvenir you're hoodwinked into buying. So, I dunno. Maybe just put on the Aladdin DVD and call it a day. They can go to Disney when they're older and can pay for themselves. Or maybe they just won't go at all. I mean by the time they grow up it'll be like $200. Who's got that kinda money to ride the Thunder Mountain Railroad? [Deadline]

Dominic West, of The Wire fame but also of course Mona Lisa Smile, has been cast as the lead on a new Showtime pilot. The show is called The Affair and is about "two marriages, the affair that disrupts them and the fallout that ensues." West will play a stable family man who meets another woman and falls in love. Ohh so wait, was it inspired by this maybe? That would be fascinating. The show is from the creators of In Treatment, so it will likely be a very serious affair, but I wouldn't mind a little scandal and tawdriness. Not that that story is necessarily so tawdry, but this is Showtime. They could tawd it up, couldn't they? Tawd, Showtime. Tawd! [The Hollywood Reporter]

The return of AMC's once-dead mystery series The Killing proved that people still care about the old girl. The show's third season debuted last night to 1.8 million people, the same number of people that tuned into the season two premiere. Was it the same exact people? A new crowd eager to watch this show all about Seattle mayoral politics they've been hearing so much about? (They'd have been disappointed last night, then.) There's really no way of knowing, but it's likely that AMC is happy with the number. Of course they'll have to wait and see if people stay with the season, but I for one found the new mystery interesting, and grim, enough to want to see it through to its end. But then maybe that's it. How many rain-soaked murders can we really be subjected to? Let's stick with the two cases and then, I dunno, put Mireille Enos and Joel Kinnaman in a romantic comedy together. Y'know, really capitalize on their banter abilities. And make it somewhere sunny. Think about it, AMC. [Deadline]

Here's a trailer for the indie drama Short Term 12, staring United States of Tara's Brie Larson and The Newsroom's John Gallagher Jr. as foster care supervisors. Plus there's the girl from Justified and Rami Malek, who is cute in a sort of strange and mysterious way. The film was a hit at SXSW, so it's certainly got a particular kind of indie cred. I'm curious to see Brie Larson as a leading lady/serious actress type, and it's interesting that Gallagher is beginning his movie career. So, all around, plenty to see here.