DOCSLIB.ORG

Family Law Section Webinar

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Family Law Section Webinar ORANGE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION FAMILY LAW SECTION WEBINAR QDROs, Fluctuating Markets, and COVID-19 Thursday, April 23, 2020 COVID‐19 QDRO TOPICS David T. Ruegg and John Madden IRMO Janes 217 Cal.Rptr.3d 916 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017) Stipulated agreement awarded Wife a fixed dollar amount of $113,392 from husband’s 401(k) in March 2010. In 2014 Wife requested a QDRO and that gains/losses on her interest be factored into the QDRO. Husband claimed that no gains/losses should be factored in because this was an JUDGMENT equalization award. Court: Wife should receive gains on her interest from March LANGUAGE: BE 2010 to the date of transfer. Not equitable for Husband to keep CAREFUL the gains because a QDRO had not yet been processed to move Wife’s interest. ABOUT YOUR NOTE: This case came out of 4th Appellate District, Division Three. Another case, In re Marriage of Heggie (2002) 99 FIXED DOLLAR Cal.App.4th 28, 120 Cal.Rptr.2d 707 out of 4th Appellate District, Division Three, comes to a different conclusion. The AWARDS rapid change in value over a short period of time does not require an adjustment of the award. The distinguishing feature between these two cases seems to be the passage of time. Best practice‐specify if market adjustment should apply and if so from what valuation date. Normal Early Withdrawal Rules: 10% Federal penalty ON TOP of ordinary income rates. No penalties if cash out is pursuant to a QDRO. See IRC §72(t)(2)(c). However, the cash out will be treated as ‘ordinary income’ for purposes of income DEFINED taxes. A 20% mandatory IRS withholding for CONTRIBUTION: estimated taxes will apply. Account holder can not ‘cash out’ via QDRO under CASHING OUT ERISA. However, Parties are free to discuss “side agreements.” (Agreement to pay ‘out spouse’ more AND THE QDRO than community entitlement with agreement to EXCEPTION ‘pay back’ employee spouse the net of any overpayment) QDRO ‘cash out’ exception does not apply to IRA accounts. See IRC §72(t)(3)(A). Strategy if possible‐Complete IRA rollover to 401k FIRST, then use the cash out exception. DEFINED CONTRIBUTION: OFFSETTING, EQUALIZING AND BUYOUTS, OH MY! Offsets: Let's just total up the community in both retirement accounts and only divide the larger account with an adjusted percentage. It's simple math‐let's not complicate things with more QDROs! What can go wrong? When you offset‐consider the fact that you are mathematically making two accounts equal in terms of the rate of return‐when in reality‐they are not equal. You could be allocating a large share of ‘better performing’ investments to one party and a large share of ‘crummy investments’ to the other! (See Handout) Equalizations: My client owes $10,000 in child support arrears and $40,000 from a buyout of the family residence. Let's just take an additional $50,000 from the tax deferred 401(k) plan. That’s a fair trade, right? Oh and let’s stipulate that the QDRO attorney will figure out how to take out the money tax free‐I hear QDRO attorneys can do that sort of thing. What can go wrong? In this scenario‐you are combining a post tax child support obligation, a capital tax asset house, and a pre‐tax 401(k) and ‘mashing’ them all together, all while ignoring any tax implications. Buyout of Spousal Support: Consider whether spousal support will or will not be deductible when doing a buyout against a pre‐tax/deferred tax asset. Consider‐In re Marriage of Fonstein (1976) 17 Cal.3d 738 does not allow the Court to consider tax ramifications that are not immediate and specific. ACTUAL VALUE VS ESTIMATED VALUE‐ UNDERSTANDING ACTUARY ‘LUMP SUM VALUES’ Actuaries are used to calculate the lump sum values of streams of payments. If someone offered you a choice between $100,000 today OR $500/month for the rest of your life‐what would you need to know to make the decision? Answer: Your Date of Death. “Tell me when you plan to die and I’ll tell you the value of these benefits.” Actuaries use ‘death tables’ and ‘discount rates’ to determine what is better: $500/month for the rest of your life or $100,000 today. Example: If you are 35 years old‐likely $500/month is the smarter decision. If you are 85 years old, likely $100,000 today is the smarter decision THANK YOU! David T. Ruegg, QDRO Attorney Law Offices of Ruegg & Ruegg 19510 Van Buren Blvd., Ste #488 Riverside, CA 92508 Telephone: (951) 523‐7376 Fax: (855) 880‐0098 [email protected] John Madden, Valuation Expert Moon, Schwartz & Madden 3333 Vincent Ave., Ste 260 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Telephone: (925) 258‐7100 [email protected] 1 of 2 Tool Created By Law office of David T. Ruegg (951) 523‐7376 [email protected] For questions on how to use this Tool, email: [email protected] (See tabs below for with/without statements) Enter applicable amounts above the black line. Date of Marriage: 1/1/2000 Date of Separation: 1/1/2010Valuation Date) Note: For use during marriage; assumes contributions are community property and split 50/50 Date Of Statement: Beginning Value$ 10,000.00 1/1/2000 Contributions Ending Balance Date of Statement: Period $ 3,134.00 $ 15,000.00 1/1/2001 Period $ 5,835.00 $ 20,000.00 1/1/2002 Period $ 5,000.00 $ 30,000.00 1/1/2003 Period $ 10,000.00 $ 50,000.00 1/1/2004 Period $ 100.00 $ 51,000.00 1/1/2005 Period $ 5,000.00 $ 60,000.00 1/1/2006 Period $ 100.00 $ 55,000.00 1/1/2007 Period $ 500.00 $ 56,000.00 1/1/2008 Period $ 100.00 $ 56,000.00 1/1/2009 Period $ 400.00 $ 60,000.00 1/1/2010 2 of 2 Trace Party 1 Party 2 Total Party 1 % Party 2 % Period 1 Balance$ 10,000.00 $ ‐ $ 10,000.00 100.00% 0.00% Contributions$ 1,567.00 $ 1,567.00 $ 3,134.00 Gains/Losses$ 1,866.00 $ ‐ $ 1,866.00 Period 2 Balance$ 13,433.00 $ 1,567.00 $ 15,000.00 89.55% 10.45% Contributions$ 2,917.50 $ 2,917.50 $ 5,835.00 Gains/Losses$ (747.77) $ (87.23) $ (835.00) Period 3 Balance$ 15,602.73 $ 4,397.27 $ 20,000.00 78.01% 21.99% Contributions$ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 Gains/Losses$ 3,900.68 $ 1,099.32 $ 5,000.00 Period 4 Balance$ 22,003.41 $ 7,996.59 $ 30,000.00 73.34% 26.66% Contributions$ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 10,000.00 Gains/Losses$ 7,334.47 $ 2,665.53 $ 10,000.00 Period 5 Balance$ 34,337.88 $ 15,662.12 $ 50,000.00 68.68% 31.32% Contributions$ 50.00 $ 50.00 $ 100.00 Gains/Losses$ 618.08 $ 281.92 $ 900.00 Period 6 Balance$ 35,005.96 $ 15,994.04 $ 51,000.00 68.64% 31.36% Contributions$ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00 $ 5,000.00 Gains/Losses$ 2,745.57 $ 1,254.43 $ 4,000.00 Period 7 Balance$ 40,251.53 $ 19,748.47 $ 60,000.00 67.09% 32.91% Contributions$ 50.00 $ 50.00 $ 100.00 Gains/Losses$ (3,421.38) $ (1,678.62) $ (5,100.00) Period 8 Balance$ 36,880.15 $ 18,119.85 $ 55,000.00 67.05% 32.95% Contributions$ 250.00 $ 250.00 $ 500.00 Gains/Losses$ 335.27 $ 164.73 $ 500.00 Period 9 Balance$ 37,465.42 $ 18,534.58 $ 56,000.00 66.90% 33.10% Contributions$ 50.00 $ 50.00 $ 100.00 Gains/Losses$ (66.90) $ (33.10) $ (100.00) Period 10Balance$ 37,448.52 $ 18,551.48 $ 56,000.00 66.87% 33.13% Contributions$ 200.00 $ 200.00 $ 400.00 Gains/Losses$ 2,407.40 $ 1,192.60 $ 3,600.00 Ending Balance$ 40,055.93 $ 19,944.07 $ 60,000.00 66.76% 33.24% Note: Allocation of contributions maybe different depending upon the period before, during and after the date of marriage, marriage and date of separation. Please contact David Prenovost, CPA for any questions regarding this worksheet at [email protected] 1 of 2 Tool Created By Law office of David T. Ruegg (951) 523‐7376 [email protected] For questions on how to use this Tool, email: [email protected] (See tabs below for with/without statements) Enter applicable amounts above the black line. Date of Marriage: 12/31/1990 Date of Separation: 12/31/1999 Date of Valuation: 10/1/2000 Note: For use after marriage; assumes contributions are separate property of contributing spouse Date Of Statement: Beginning Value$ 39,888.15 12/31/1999 Contributions Ending Balance Date of Statement: Period 1$ 21,111.85 $ 60,000.00 1/1/2000 Period 2$ 1,000.00 $ 62,000.00 2/1/2000 Period 3$ 1,000.00 $ 65,000.00 3/1/2000 Period 4$ 1,000.00 $ 70,000.00 4/1/2000 Period 5$ (1,000.00) $ 69,000.00 5/1/2000 Period 6$ 5,000.00 $ 73,000.00 6/1/2000 Period 7$ 100.00 $ 85,000.00 7/1/2000 Period 8$ 500.00 $ 90,000.00 8/1/2000 Period 9$ 200.00 $ 92,000.00 9/1/2000 Period 10$ 400.00 $ 100,000.00 10/1/2000 2 of 2 Trace Party 1 Party 2 Total Party 1 % Party 2 % Period 1 Balance$ 19,944.08 $ 19,944.08 $ 39,888.15 50.00% 50.00% Contributions$ 21,111.85 $ ‐ $ 21,111.85 Gains/Losses$ (500.00) $ (500.00) $ (1,000.00) Period 2 Balance$ 40,555.93 $ 19,444.08 $ 60,000.00 67.59% 32.41% Contributions$ 1,000.00 $ ‐ $ 1,000.00 Gains/Losses$ 675.93 $ 324.07 $ 1,000.00 Period 3 Balance$ 42,231.86 $ 19,768.14 $ 62,000.00 68.12% 31.88% Contributions$ 1,000.00 $ ‐ $ 1,000.00 Gains/Losses$ 1,362.32 $ 637.68 $ 2,000.00 Period 4 Balance$ 44,594.18 $ 20,405.82 $ 65,000.00 68.61% 31.39% Contributions$ 1,000.00 $ ‐ $ 1,000.00 Gains/Losses$ 2,744.26 $ 1,255.74 $ 4,000.00 Period 5 Balance$ 48,338.43 $ 21,661.57 $ 70,000.00 69.05% 30.95% Contributions$ (1,000.00) $ ‐ $ (1,000.00) Gains/Losses $ ‐ $ ‐ $ ‐ Period 6 Balance$ 47,338.43 $ 21,661.57 $ 69,000.00 68.61% 31.39% Contributions$ 5,000.00 $ ‐ $ 5,000.00 Gains/Losses$ (686.06) $ (313.94) $ (1,000.00) Period 7 Balance$ 51,652.37 $ 21,347.63 $ 73,000.00 70.76% 29.24% Contributions$ 100.00 $ ‐ $ 100.00 Gains/Losses$ 8,420.04 $ 3,479.96 $ 11,900.00 Period 8 Balance$ 60,172.41 $ 24,827.59 $ 85,000.00 70.79% 29.21% Contributions$ 500.00 $ ‐ $ 500.00 Gains/Losses$ 3,185.60 $ 1,314.40 $ 4,500.00 Period 9 Balance$ 63,858.01 $ 26,141.99 $ 90,000.00 70.95% 29.05% Contributions$ 200.00 $ ‐ $ 200.00 Gains/Losses$ 1,277.16 $ 522.84 $ 1,800.00 Period 10 Balance$ 65,335.17 $ 26,664.83 $ 92,000.00 71.02% 28.98% Contributions$ 400.00 $ ‐ $ 400.00 Gains/Losses$ 5,397.25 $ 2,202.75 $ 7,600.00 Ending Balance$ 71,132.42 $ 28,867.58 $ 100,000.00 71.13% 28.87% Note: Allocation of contributions maybe different depending upon the period before, during and after the date of marriage, marriage and date of separation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Selected Filmography of Digital Culture and New Media Art
    Dejan Grba SELECTED FILMOGRAPHY OF DIGITAL CULTURE AND NEW MEDIA ART This filmography comprises feature films, documentaries, TV shows, series and reports about digital culture and new media art. The selected feature films reflect the informatization of society, economy and politics in various ways, primarily on the conceptual and narrative plan. Feature films that directly thematize the digital paradigm can be found in the Film Lists section. Each entry is referenced with basic filmographic data: director’s name, title and production year, and production details are available online at IMDB, FilmWeb, FindAnyFilm, Metacritic etc. The coloured titles are links. Feature films Fritz Lang, Metropolis, 1926. Fritz Lang, M, 1931. William Cameron Menzies, Things to Come, 1936. Fritz Lang, The Thousand Eyes of Dr. Mabuse, 1960. Sidney Lumet, Fail-Safe, 1964. James B. Harris, The Bedford Incident, 1965. Jean-Luc Godard, Alphaville, 1965. Joseph Sargent, Colossus: The Forbin Project, 1970. Henri Verneuil, Le serpent, 1973. Alan J. Pakula, The Parallax View, 1974. Francis Ford Coppola, The Conversation, 1974. Sidney Pollack, The Three Days of Condor, 1975. George P. Cosmatos, The Cassandra Crossing, 1976. Sidney Lumet, Network, 1976. Robert Aldrich, Twilight's Last Gleaming, 1977. Michael Crichton, Coma, 1978. Brian De Palma, Blow Out, 1981. Steven Lisberger, Tron, 1982. Godfrey Reggio, Koyaanisqatsi, 1983. John Badham, WarGames, 1983. Roger Donaldson, No Way Out, 1987. F. Gary Gray, The Negotiator, 1988. John McTiernan, Die Hard, 1988. Phil Alden Robinson, Sneakers, 1992. Andrew Davis, The Fugitive, 1993. David Fincher, The Game, 1997. David Cronenberg, eXistenZ, 1999. Frank Oz, The Score, 2001. Tony Scott, Spy Game, 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • The Submarine Review December 2017 Paid Dulles, Va Dulles, Us Postage Permit No
    NAVAL SUBMARINE LEAGUE DECEMBER 2017 5025D Backlick Road NON-PROFIT ORG. FEATURES Annandale, VA 22003 US POSTAGE PAID Repair and Rebuild - Extracts; American PERMIT NO. 3 Enterprise Institute DULLES, VA Ms. Mackenzie Eaglen..........................9 2017 Naval Submarine League History Seminar Transcript.................................24 Inside Hunt for Red October THE SUBMARINE REVIEW DECEMBER 2017 THE SUBMARINE REVIEW CAPT Jim Patton, USN, Ret..................67 Awardees Recognized at NSL Annual Symposium...........................................73 ESSAYS Battle of the Atlantic: Command of the Seas in a War of Attrition LCDR Ryan Hilger, USN...............85 Emerging Threats to Future Sea Based Strategic Deterrence CDR Timothy McGeehan, USN, .....97 Innovation in C3 for Undersea Assets LT James Davis, USN...................109 SUBMARINE COMMUNITY Canada’s Use of Submarines on Fisheries Patrols: Part 2 Mr. Michael Whitby.......................118 Career Decisions - Submarines RADM Dave Oliver, USN, Ret......125 States Put to Sea Mr. Richard Brown.........................131 Interview with a Hellenic Navy Subma- rine CO CAPT Ed Lundquist, USN, Ret.....144 The USS Dallas: Where Science and Technology Count Mr. Lester Paldy............................149 COVER_AGS.indd 1 12/11/17 9:59 AM THE SUBMARINE REVIEW DECEMBER 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS President’s Letter................................................................................................2 Editor’s Notes.....................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Widescreen Weekend 2010 Brochure (PDF)
    52 widescreen weekend widescreen weekend 53 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (70MM) REMASTERING A WIDESCREEN CLASSIC: Saturday 27 March, Pictureville Cinema WINDJAMMER GETS A MAJOR FACELIFT Dir. Stanley Kubrick GB/USA 1968 149 mins plus intermission (U) Saturday 27 March, Pictureville Cinema WIDESCREEN Keir Dullea, Gary Lockwood, William Sylvester, Leonard Rossiter, Ed Presented by David Strohmaier and Randy Gitsch Bishop and Douglas Rain as Hal The producer and director team behind Cinerama Adventure offer WEEKEND During the stone age, a mysterious black monolith of alien origination a fascinating behind-the-scenes look at how the Cinemiracle epic, influences the birth of intelligence amongst mankind. Thousands Now in its 17th year, the Widescreen Weekend Windjammer, was restored for High Definition. Several new and of years later scientists discover the monolith hidden on the moon continues to welcome all those fans of large format and innovative software restoration techniques were employed and the re- which subsequently lures them on a dangerous mission to Mars... widescreen films – CinemaScope, VistaVision, 70mm, mastering and preservation process has been documented in HD video. Regarded as one of the milestones in science-fiction filmmaking, Cinerama and IMAX – and presents an array of past A brief question and answer session will follow this event. Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey not only fascinated audiences classics from the vaults of the National Media Museum. This event is enerously sponsored by Cinerama, Inc., all around the world but also left many puzzled during its initial A weekend to wallow in the nostalgic best of cinema. release. More than four decades later it has lost none of its impact.
    [Show full text]
  • Ramin Djawadi
    RAMIN DJAWADI AWARDS & NOMINATIONS 67th ANNUAL GRAMMY AWARDS GAME OF THRONES: SEASON 8 NOMINATION (2020) Best Score Soundtrack for Visual Media HOLLYWOOD MUSIC IN MEDIA TOM CLANCY’S JACK RYAN AWARD NOMINATION (2019) Main Title Theme – TV Show/Limited Series EMMY AWARD (2019) GAME OF THRONES Outstanding Music Composition for a “The Long Night” Series (Original Dramatic Score) EMMY AWARD (2018) GAME OF THRONES Outstanding Music Composition for a Series (Original Dramatic Score) EMMY NOMINATION (2018) WESTWORLD Outstanding Music Composition for a Series (Original Dramatic Score) GRAMMY NOMINATION (2017) GAME OF THRONES Best Score Soundtrack for Visual Media WORLD SOUNDTRACK AWARD WESTWORLD, PRISON BREAK: NOMINATION (2017) RESURRECTION, THE STRAIN Best TV Composer of the Year EMMY NOMINATION (2017) WESTWORLD Best Original Main Title Theme Music EMMY NOMINATION (2014) GAME OF THRONES Outstanding Music Composition for a Series GAME AUDIO NETWORK GUILD MEDAL OF HONOR NOMINATION (2011) Best Cinematic / Cut-Scene Audio EMMY NOMINATION (2010) FLASH FORWARD Outstanding Music Composition for a Series The Gorfaine/Schwartz Agency, Inc. (818) 260-8500 1 RAMIN DJAWADI GRAMMY NOMINATION (2006) IRON MAN Best Score Soundtrack Album iTUNES AWARD (2008) IRON MAN Best Score WORLD SOUNDTRACK AWARD MR. BROOKS NOMINATION Discovery Of The Year (2007) EMMY NOMINATION (2006) PRISON BREAK Outstanding Main Title Theme Music FEATURE FILM THE ETERNALS Chloé Zhao, dir. Marvel Studios Mitchell Bell, Kevin Feige, Nate Moore, prods. THE MAN FROM TORONTO Todd Black, Jason Blumenthal, Steve Tisch, prods. Sony Pictures Entertainment Patrick Hughes, dir. ELEPHANT Alastair Fothergill, prod. Disneynature Mark Linfield, dir. THE QUEEN’S CORGI Ben Stasson, prod. Lionsgate Ben Stasson, dir.
    [Show full text]
  • 27854 - Films in Context II
    27854 - Films in Context II Información del Plan Docente Academic Year 2016/17 Academic center 103 - Facultad de Filosofía y Letras Degree 416 - Degree in English ECTS 6.0 Course Period Second semester Subject Type Optional Module --- 1.Basic info 1.1.Recommendations to take this course 1.2.Activities and key dates for the course 2.Initiation 2.1.Learning outcomes that define the subject 2.2.Introduction 3.Context and competences 3.1.Goals 3.2.Context and meaning of the subject in the degree 3.3.Competences 3.4.Importance of learning outcomes 4.Evaluation 5.Activities and resources 5.1.General methodological presentation This unit will follow the methodology inspired by the European Higher Education Area. Its advanced level of film analysis requires knowledge of both formal and cultural approaches to film texts. Material is made available to students through a page on the Moodle platform. 5.2.Learning activities THEORY AND PRACTICE 27854 - Films in Context II a) Lectures: 1,2 credits (30 hours). Theory: formal, historical and cultural approaches to film. b) Practical sessions: 1,2 credits (30 hours). Practice: analysis of individual films. SUPERVISED ACTIVITIES a) Individual or group tutorials: 0,1 credits (2,5 hours). Assessment on how to write critical analyses of film. INDIVIDUAL WORK a) Essay writing: 2,2 credits (55 hours). Viewing of film texts and writing of essays. b) Individual study: 1,2 credits (30 hours). Individual work, reading of compulsory critical texts. ASSESSMENT a) Written exam on theory and practice: 0,1 credits (2,5 hours). 5.3.Program (27854) Trends and Contexts of English-Language Cinema II 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Fyse Final Draft
    Understanding Loyalty, Trust, and Deception Through an Analysis of Jack Ryan in Tom Clancy’s The Hunt for Red October and Its 1990 Film Adaptation Rachel Collins FYSE Espionage in Film and Fiction 13 December 2014 !1 In his debut 1984 novel The Hunt for Red October, Tom Clancy introduces the character of Jack Ryan as a CIA analyst and protagonist that classically upholds the fictional spy agent’s values of trust and loyalty, as defined by Alan Wolfe in his article “On Loyalty.” Ryan, not an agent, but rather an analyst for the CIA, is thrown into the world of spies and proves his capability through his balanced loyalties, intelligent trust, and straightforward actions. This thrilling character was easily transformed into an unforgettable hero both through Clancy’s novel and its 1990 film adaptation. In both the novel and film, through constant internal and external conflicts concerning trust and loyalty, Jack Ryan expresses the needlessness of deception and what it means to be a spy in a fictional story. To further examine Jack Ryan as a fictional spy character, the definition of loyalty must first be explored so it can be applied to him as a CIA agent. For this, Alan Wolfe, political scientist and sociologist on the faculty of Boston College, in his article “On Loyalty” successfully outlines a thorough definition of the concept of loyalty that will be used throughout this paper. Wolfe argues, “Loyalty is an important virtue because honoring it establishes that there is something in the world more important than our immediate instincts and desires” (48).
    [Show full text]
  • The New-Brutality Film
    New Brutality final.Qrk 20/7/05 9:14 am Page 1 Gormley The 1990s saw the emergence of a new kind of American Paul Gormley cinema, which this book calls the ‘new-brutality film.’ Violence and race have been at the heart of Hollywood cinema since its birth, but the new-brutality film was the first kind of popular American cinema to begin making this relationship explicit. The rise of this cinema coincided with the rebirth of a long-neglected strand of film theory, which seeks to unravel the complex relations of affect between the screen and the viewer. This book analyses and connects both of these developments, arguing that films like Falling Down, Reservoir Dogs, Se7en and Strange Days sought to reanimate the affective impact of white The New-Brutality Film Hollywood cinema by miming the power of African-American and particularly hip-hop culture. The book uses several films as Race and Affect in Contemporary Hollywood Cinema case-studies to chart these developments: • Falling Down both appropriates of the political black rage of the ‘hood film and is a transition point between the white postmodern blockbuster and the new-brutality film. Paul Gormley is Senior Lecturer and Course Tutor The New-BrutalityFilm • Gangsta films like Boyz N the Hood and Menace II Society for Media Studies in the provided the inspiration for much of the new-brutality film’s School of Cultural and mimesis of African-American culture. Innovation Studies at the University of East London. • The films of Quentin Tarantino (including Reservoir Dogs and He has published articles on Pulp Fiction) are new-brutality films that attempt to reanimate contemporary Hollywood the affective power of Hollywood cinema.
    [Show full text]
  • Selected Bibliography
    Selected Bibliography 4 Film Favorites: Lethal Weapon, Lethal Weapon 2, Lethal Weapon 3, Lethal Weapon 4. Los Angeles: Warner Bros., 2014. DVD. 24: The Complete Series. 2001–2010. Produced by Robert Cochran and Joel Surnow. Los Angeles: 20th Century Fox Entertainment, 2010. DVD. 48 Hours. DVD. Directed by Walter Hill. Paramount Pictures, 1999. A Good Day to Die Hard. Directed by John Moore. 20th Century Fox, 2013. Amazon Prime. A Stranger Among Us. Directed by Sidney Lumet. Hollywood Pictures, 1992. A Thief of Time. DVD. Directed by Chris Eyre. PBS Home Video, 2004. Abalos, David T. The Latino Male: A Radical Redefinition. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002. Abbott, Megan E. The Street Was Mine: White Masculinity in Hardboiled Fiction and Film Noir. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. Adams, Rachel, and David Savran, eds. The Masculinity Studies Reader, Keyworks in Cultural Studies. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2002. Alias—Seasons 1–5, Complete Series. 2001–2006. Produced by J. J. Abrams. Burbank, CA: Buena Vista Home Entertainment, 2006. DVD. Allen, Judith A. “Men Interminably in Crisis? Historians on Masculinity, Sexual Boundaries, and Manhood.” Radical History Review no. 82 (Winter 2002). Allen, Robert C., and Douglas Gomery. Film History: Theory and Practice. New York: Random House, 1985. © The Author(s) 2019 259 M. Yaquinto, Policing the World on Screen, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24805-5 260 Selected Bibliography Allen, Theodore W. The Invention of the White Race. New York: Verso, 1997. Alpert, Geoffrey P., and Roger G. Dunham. Policing Urban America. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1997. Alsultany, Evelyn.
    [Show full text]
  • Allusions to Shakespeare in Films and TV
    The Shape of a Language ISSN 2283-8759 DOI 10.13133/2283-8759-2 pp. 83-106 (December 2016) CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Archivio della ricerca- Università di Roma La Sapienza The Shape of a Language ISSN 2283-8759 pp. 83-106 (2016) “Danes Do It Melancholy”: Allusions to Shakespeare in Films and TV Irene Ranzato Introduction This contribution could only be possible in the age of ‘post-theatrical’ Shakespearean films, a period that Shakespeare film studies conven- tionally identify as starting in 1989 (the year of Kenneth Branagh’s Henry V)1, a year that marks the start of a cinematic production characterised by a mainstream postmodernism which “encour- ages a predominantly American film idiom to function as a global currency”2 . The focus of this article is, however, not adaptations of Shake- spearean plays per se, but source-text allusions to Shakespeare and to Shakespeare’s plays, which in either an overt or covert form are con- tained in dramatic dialogues and in visual elements in US-produced films and television shows, a form of intertextuality in which refer- ences to Shakespeare in audiovisual texts have multiplied. After a theoretical framing of the significance and import of allu- sions, this contribution will thus look into the ways Shakespeare has been ‘alluded to’ and explicitly quoted in a number of meaningful examples from American mainstream films and TV shows, with the 1 As Robert Shaughnessy notes, Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt, editors of the com- prehensive collection Shakespeare, The Movie (London-New York, Routledge, 2001 [1997]), symptomatically dropped most essays which focused on Shakespeare films released prior to 1989 when editing the second volume, Shakespeare, The Movie II (London-New York, Routledge, 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • Distracted Spectatorship, the Cinematic Experience and Franchise Films
    Distracted Spectatorship, the Cinematic Experience and Franchise Films By Elizabeth Nichols BA, MA Lancaster University 2017 This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy This thesis is my own work and has not been submitted in substantially the same form for the award of a higher degree elsewhere P a g e | ii Contents List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... iv Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... v Introduction: Distracted Spectatorship and the Cinematic Experience ..................................... 1 Chapter One: Defining the Cinematic Experience ................................................................... 17 Section One: Defining the Cinematic ................................................................................... 17 Section Two: Defining Experience ...................................................................................... 22 Chapter Two: Defining Distracted Spectatorship .................................................................... 37 Section One: Defining Spectatorship ................................................................................... 37 Section Two: Defining Distraction ....................................................................................... 49 Section Three: Defining Distracted Spectatorship Throughout
    [Show full text]
  • Best Movies in Every Genre
    Best Movies in Every Genre WTOP Film Critic Jason Fraley Action 25. The Fast and the Furious (2001) - Rob Cohen 24. Drive (2011) - Nichols Winding Refn 23. Predator (1987) - John McTiernan 22. First Blood (1982) - Ted Kotcheff 21. Armageddon (1998) - Michael Bay 20. The Avengers (2012) - Joss Whedon 19. Spider-Man (2002) – Sam Raimi 18. Batman (1989) - Tim Burton 17. Enter the Dragon (1973) - Robert Clouse 16. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000) – Ang Lee 15. Inception (2010) - Christopher Nolan 14. Lethal Weapon (1987) – Richard Donner 13. Yojimbo (1961) - Akira Kurosawa 12. Superman (1978) - Richard Donner 11. Wonder Woman (2017) - Patty Jenkins 10. Black Panther (2018) - Ryan Coogler 9. Mad Max (1979-2014) - George Miller 8. Top Gun (1986) - Tony Scott 7. Mission: Impossible (1996) - Brian DePalma 6. The Bourne Trilogy (2002-2007) - Paul Greengrass 5. Goldfinger (1964) - Guy Hamilton 4. The Terminator (1984-1991) - James Cameron 3. The Dark Knight (2008) - Christopher Nolan 2. The Matrix (1999) - The Wachowskis 1. Die Hard (1988) - John McTiernan Adventure 25. The Goonies (1985) - Richard Donner 24. Gunga Din (1939) - George Stevens 23. Road to Morocco (1942) - David Butler 22. The Poseidon Adventure (1972) - Ronald Neame 21. Fitzcarraldo (1982) - Werner Herzog 20. Cast Away (2000) - Robert Zemeckis 19. Life of Pi (2012) - Ang Lee 18. The Revenant (2015) - Alejandro G. Inarritu 17. Aguirre, Wrath of God (1972) - Werner Herzog 16. Mutiny on the Bounty (1935) - Frank Lloyd 15. Pirates of the Caribbean (2003) - Gore Verbinski 14. The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) - Michael Curtiz 13. The African Queen (1951) - John Huston 12. To Have and Have Not (1944) - Howard Hawks 11.
    [Show full text]
  • John Mctiernan's Explanation of 'Die Hard' As a Christmas Film Is A
    5/30/2021 John McTiernan’s Explanation of ‘Die Hard’ As a Christmas Film is a Lot to Unpack – The Hollywood Reporter SUBSCRIBE HOME > MOVIES > MOVIE NEWS John McTiernan’s Explanation of ‘Die Hard’ as a Christmas Film Is a Lot to Unpack For years, a mostly tongue in cheek battle has played out in which fans argue as to why it should be a holiday movie, and the director has his own thoughts. BY RYAN PARKER DECEMBER 16, 2020 3:44PM PHOTOFEST John McTiernan has oered up his explanation as to how Die Hard became a Christmas movie, but viewers may need to remove their shoes and make sts with their toes because there is much to unpack. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/john-mctiernans-explanation-of-die-hard-as-a-christmas-film-is-a-lot-to-unp… 1/7 5/30/2021 John McTiernan’s Explanation of ‘Die Hard’ As a Christmas Film is a Lot to Unpack – The Hollywood Reporter In a 12-minute-plus video posted on YouTube by the American Film Institute, a long-haired McTiernan SUBSCRIBE addresses the “controversy” surrounding his 1988 action classic starring Bruce Willis. For years, a mostly tongue-in-cheek battle has played among fans who argue whether Die Hard should, or should not, be considered a Christmas movie. e events of the lm take place on Christmas eve, but the lm was released in the summer of ’88. ADVERTISEMENT McTiernan’s take on why the lm became a Christmas movie is way deeper — with multiple moving parts.
    [Show full text]