Hasta La Gadget!

The role of wife and mother is something Jennifer Garner knows well. It’s one she’s played in her last seven consecutive films, an identity that’s boosted her cultural relevance over the past decade, as her on-screen career has taken a back seat to raising a family … and, err, Ben Affleck. 

Films like “Juno” and “Miracles of Heaven” showed Garner making the most out of the “wife” character, delivering her best film performances to date, exploring the joys and challenges of motherhood. Similar roles in more forgettable fare (”The Odd Life of Timothy Green,” ”Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day” and “Danny Collins”) have fallen by the wayside. And the less said about “Nine Lives” the better. 

Those clamoring for a Garner comeback of a different sort won’t find much to celebrate in “Wakefield,” which opens for a wider release on Friday. Based off the short story by E. L. Doctorow, the film finds Garner playing wife and mother yet again, but the typecasting could be easily forgiven if the material was deserving. Director Robin Swicord, who’s made a career out of bringing women’s stories to the big screen, is at the helm of her first film in years. And yet here these identifiers overwhelm fleeting moments of agency, as Garner’s primary function is to service the evolution of a husband who’s, well, kind of an asshole. 

“Wakefield” belongs to Bryan Cranston as Howard, a man who essentially ghosts his wife Diana (Garner) and children by going on a faux “Into the Wild” quest to find himself. Except instead of traveling all the way to the Alaskan hinterlands, Howard sets up shop in the attic overlooking his house, as he watches his family cope with his disappearance and presumed death. Apart from a handful of flashbacks where Garner gels well with a more adult, edgier tone, her scenes are mostly silent, taking place behind the attic’s glass window pane and through a pair of binoculars.

There’s a certain boldness in telling this story from the eyes of an unlikable protagonist, especially through the lens of a female director, and no one is better suited than Cranston to humanize an anti-hero. The film stays with Cranston’s character, even in his most arrogant and repulsive moments, as “Wakefield” is a deeply internal piece that strongly evokes its original source material. Exploring everyone’s perverse desire to pull the escape hatch on life is fascinating, but not allowing Garner a moment of respite under Cranston’s unrelenting gaze makes for a frustrating and far less dynamic experience. 

In a recent interview with Build Series, Swicord addressed these criticisms, agreeing that the story is the very “definition of the male gaze,” but claiming that the film ultimately subverts this power structure. There is something to be said about Swicord writing and directing a film that unapologetically empathizes with a middle-aged white male in crisis and not his wife. However, if her intention was to provide commentary on the ways men come to view women, she missed a crucial opportunity in the film’s ending to drive her point home.  

While Howard lives in self-imposed destitution, dumpster diving for food and communing with the town’s local raccoon population, Diana is left to her own devices. She later strikes up a romance with Dirk (Jason O’Mara), an ex-boyfriend and former work rival of Howard’s. Through flashbacks, it’s revealed that Howard was only initially interested in Diana because of what amounts to a pissing contest between himself and Dirk. It’s disappointing to say the least that Garner’s character so easily volleys back and forth between the two and is none the wiser.

Dirk’s encroachment on Howard’s so-called territory and an almost laughable come-to-Jesus moment during a rainstorm prompt him to return home months after disappearing. Before he walks through the door, however, Howard imagines the various reactions Diana and his family might have. In one scenario, they’re terrified, and in another, they break down crying. But before the audience is allowed to see her genuine reaction ― and a scene where she exists outside of her husband’s viewpoint ― the film cuts to black. The short story ends in a similar fashion, so the adaptation is nothing if not faithful, but the ending feels like a cop-out that unfairly robs the character of any semblance of justice. 

Curiously, “Wakefield” was filmed during the nearly one-year period after Garner and then husband Ben Affleck announced their separation. The actor was painted by the media as a philanderer in the midst of a mid-life crisis (see: fake phoenix back tattoo), while Garner held down the fort, shuttling kids back and forth from karate class. That’s why it’s somewhat baffling that given the material’s fascination with a husband’s failings, Garner chose to work on this project before eventually divorcing Affleck this April.

As she raises her three children, the actress is increasingly selective with her film work, especially leading parts that require her to be away from her family for long stretches of time. Maybe Garner has fallen victim to Hollywood’s pernicious stereotyping of women over 40, or maybe she’s had trouble finding roles that work within her constraints. She could be seeking out these roles, as she can relate in one way or another. Or perhaps, she just needs a new agent. 

The idea of Garner strictly as a wife and mother in her personal life and in her on-screen roles might be the dominant narrative of her celebrity, but she has already proven that she’s more than her megawatt smile, dimples and Capital One commercials. Five seasons on ABC’s “Alias” shot her toward superstardom, and cemented her status as an actress who could kick ass and emote with the best of them. At least, the Golden Globe Awards thought so. And playing a deranged woman who develops an attraction to a priest in the little known short film “Serena” confirmed that Garner could, yes, go dark. 

Despite making the most out of the little she’s given in “Wakefield,” you can’t help but walk out of the theater asking: What if? 

What if Garner made as many films as Affleck in the last decade? What if “Wakefield” took the time to explore what it’s like to be the one left behind? What if Garner finally found a role that allows her to be the movie star we always thought she could be? 

You can be highbrow. You can be lowbrow. But can you ever just be brow? Welcome to Middlebrow, a weekly examination of pop culture. Read more here.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

WASHINGTON ― Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation of potential ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government will hold up congressional probes that were looking into whether Trump affiliates colluded with foreign entities to interfere with the 2016 election, a letter from the FBI indicated on Thursday.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, had requested a copy of memos that former FBI Director James Comey reportedly made to memorialize conversations with President Donald Trump. One memo, first reported by The New York Times, allegedly indicated that Trump asked Comey to stop the investigation into his former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Comey was fired on May 9.

But Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein last week named Mueller, a former FBI director, as special counsel to lead the investigation, and the FBI told Chaffetz on Thursday that it couldn’t immediately provide a copy of Comey’s memos.  

“In light of this development and other considerations, we are undertaking appropriate consultation to ensure all relevant interests implicated by your request are properly evaluated,” Gregory Brower, assistant director of the FBI’s Office of Congressional Affairs, wrote in a letter Thursday. 

But Chaffetz said in a separate letter on Thursday that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has “its own, Constitutionally-based prerogative to conduct investigations.” While the committee did not want to interfere or impede Mueller’s investigation, Chaffetz wrote, the congressional probe would “complement the work” of the special counsel.

“Whereas the Special Counsel is conducting a criminal or counterintelligence investigation that will occur largely behind closed doors, the Committee’s work will shed light on matters of high public interest, regardless of whether there is evidence of criminal conduct,” Chaffetz wrote. “The focus of the Committee’s investigation is the independence of the FBI, including conversations between the President and Comey and the process by which Comey was removed from his role as director. The records being withheld are central to those questions, even more so in light of Comey’s decision not to testify before the Committee at this time.”

Chaffetz’s letter stated that Rosenstein told members of Congress last week that Mueller’s investigation “should not impede the ongoing congressional probes” and that Rosenstein requested congressional investigators coordinate efforts with the Department of Justice.

Trump has said he had already made up his mind to fire Comey before Rosenstein wrote a memo justifying Comey’s firing for his handling of the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails, and Trump said he was thinking of the Russia investigation when he made the decision to fire the FBI director.

Chaffetz said he is “seeking to better understand Comey’s communications with the White House and Attorney General in such a way that does not implicate the Special Counsel’s work.”

Meanwhile, Mueller has established his office at the Patrick Henry Building at Sixth and D streets Northwest in Washington, a location near D.C.’s federal courthouse that is already home to many Justice Department employees.

Lee Lofthus, who has served as DOJ’s assistant attorney general for administration since 2006, told reporters earlier this week that Mueller’s office was “up and running,” though its total staff size has not been determined. Lofthus said the special counsel will get its budget from a “permanent, indefinite appropriation” fund. 

“Basically, it doesn’t require us to go up to the Hill with a budget request,” he said. “It basically is an appropriation available if you have something like a special counsel, to make sure that the thing gets funded.”

Lofthus said DOJ would “make sure that the special counsel gets the money it needs.” 

Here’s the FBI’s letter to Chaffetz:

Here’s Chaffetz’s full response:

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Katy Perry’s calls for unity among pop music fans in the aftermath of the Manchester bombing have managed to unite at least one group.

The problem is that it’s conservative media pundits who are unifying with the aim to score cheap political points by taking the singer’s “border” comments out of context.

Perry appeared on the Elvis Duran radio show on Z100 in New York on Tuesday morning, expressing her thoughts about the tragedy, which she said left her “devastated.” She told Duran she felt it was time for pop-lovers to put their differences and rivalries aside in times of adversity:

As much… whatever we say behind people’s backs – because the internet can be a little bit ruthless as far as fanbases go ― but I think the greatest thing we can do is just unite, and love on each other… no barriers, no borders, we all need to just coexist.”

She emphasized that her comments were directed towards the rivalries that fans often create between each other about different performers, such as Perry’s own feud with Taylor Swift.

In this case, she urged her fans to support Ariana Grande, whose Monday concert was targeted by a suicide-bomber at the Manchester Arena. The attack left 22 people dead and dozens more injured. 

“Ari’s fans are my fans and my fans are Ari’s fans, and we are all loving on each other and we should just stay loving on each other,” she said, referring to Grande by a nickname.

But some conservative media personalities immediately attempted to bash her for daring to suggest that there should be no barriers or borders between people. 

Tomi Lahren and others on Wednesday felt obliged to chime in.

Fox News had a field day attacking Perry, inviting conservative firebrand Michelle Malkin to gripe about the singer’s comments.

“The next time we welcome Muslim refugees from Syria or Yemen into this country, that we should send them to her house,” she said, according to a video captured by Media Matters, a media watchdog group focused on conservative misinformation.

InfoWars host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones accused Perry of “shoot[ing] her mouth off about no barriers,” Media Matters reports.

He also added, for no good reason at all, that Perry has a “big fat pathetic satanic ass.” 

Breitbart was less directly insulting, but tried to claim Perry’s comments were actually directed towards the president, not music fans, saying her “preference for no ‘borders’ or ‘barriers’ may come from her staunch opposition to President Donald Trump.”

The last part is one thing they didn’t misquote. Perry told Vogue magazine last month that Trump’s election brought up a lot of trauma for her.

“Misogyny and sexism were in my childhood: I have an issue with suppressive males and not being seen as equal,” Perry said. “I felt like a little kid again being faced with a scary, controlling guy. I wouldn’t really stand for it in my work life, because I have had so much of that in my personal life.”

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

A Maryland Christian school has barred an 18-year-old senior from walking in next month’s graduation ceremonies because she is pregnant.

Maddi Runkles, who is a straight-A student, said she became pregnant five months ago. She said she expected some punishment, but also support from officials at the nondenominational Heritage Academy, in Hagerstown.

“This has been more shame than punishment,” Runkles told HuffPost.

Runkles said in January, when she and her parents notified the school about her pregnancy, she was immediately dismissed. When her parents appealed the decision, they were told she could come back, but would have to continue her studies at home after spring break. A second appeal from the family resulted in the school’s final decision: removing her from all leadership positions (she was student council president and vice president of the glee club) and banning her from walking at her graduation ceremony.

Heritage Academy’s strict policies require students to sign a pledge in which they agree to protect their bodies by “abstaining from sexual immorality and from the use of alcohol, tobacco, and illegal drugs,” according to the school’s website.

David Hobbs, administrator at Heritage Academy, addressed recent criticism in a statement released earlier this week. According to Hobbs, Runkles was punished “not because she’s pregnant, but because she was immoral.”

“Her immorality is the original choice she made that began this situation,” Hobbs wrote.

Runkles counters that her punishment is much more severe than what’s been doled out to others who have broken the pledge. 

“Sexual morality is not just limited to premarital sex,” she said. “There’s many different forms of it and there have been other kids committing forms of sexual immorality and they have never been treated this harshly.”

In his statement, Hobbs claims the school wanted to keep the matter private, “to protect: first Maddi, then Heritage.” However, Runkles says Hobbs planned to notify students that she’d broken the rules. She said she didn’t want her classmates to hear it from him, so she volunteered to read a prepared statement to her classmates.

“It was before my parents and about 70 students ― my whole high school,” Runkles said. “I immediately started crying. I was embarrassed that I had to stand before all my peers and admit what I had done … When I finished reading it, [Hobbs] got up and read off the punishments he saw fit.”

In March, Runkles contacted the pro-life group Students for Life of America. The organization’s president, Kristan Hawkins, said after speaking with the teen and her parents she contacted Hobbs and asked him to reconsider letting the high school senior walk during the graduation ceremony, scheduled for June 2.

“He basically said, ‘This is a private decision [and] who are you to come in and try to change that,’” Hawkins told HuffPost.

School administrators have ignored an online campaign supporting Runkles and direct pleas from her parents, Hawkins said.

Runkles’ father declined to comment Thursday. HuffPost was instead directed to a Facebook post attributed to him.

“Despite what some may think, Maddi nor her mother and I have ever advocated that she not be disciplined for her actions,” he wrote. “My daughter should be held accountable … but grace and love should be more prominent.”

The post criticized the school’s decision to wait until the end of the year to fully discipline his daughter, given that her confession had been made months earlier.

“To the detractors, ask yourself how restoration can take place when you put a student’s punishment at the very end of their high school career,” he wrote. “When do you plan to show Maddi the love and grace that is supposed to take place after discipline.”

According to Hobbs, the school showed Runkles grace by not expelling her. She will still receive her diploma and is still permitted to attend graduation, she just can’t participate.

“We love Maddi Runkles,” Hobbs said. “The best way to love her right now is to hold her accountable for her immorality that began this situation.”

But that explanation doesn’t satisfy Runkles.

“You can’t claim to be pro-life and be against the killing of babies, but then try to toss out the girl who decides to keep her baby just because the situation does not meet your standard,” she said.

It also doesn’t sit well with her supporters.

“There’s a lot of young men and women watching this transpire and they’ve set a really awful example,” Hawkins said. “That’s why it’s important for us to make this stupid matter public to show every student this is not acceptable behavior and certainly not acceptable Christian behavior. Hopefully Christian campuses across the country will see this story and re-evaluate how they handle these things.”

type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=573ddcf5e4b0084474946a04,576d6b2ce4b0f16832396c7e

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Ramad Chatman, a black man from Rome Georgia, is serving a 10-year jail sentence after an entire jury found him not guilty of a crime he says he did not commit. 

On May 24, Georgia news station 11 Alive published a report on Chatman’s interactions with the justice system, which began with a first-time offender probation and ends with Chatman serving 10 years in prison ― despite the fact that Chatman was found not guilty of a crime he was accused of in between.

The outlet recounts the story, speaking with family members and legal experts in the video above. 

Chatman had been accused of a crime in connection to an armed robbery at a corner store in Georgia in July 2014. Police say the store was too dirty to collect fingerprints from, and four witnesses who were there that night say all they saw was a “black man in dark clothes,” according to 11 Alive. Camera footage also captured an unidentified black man. 

However, it wasn’t until months after the night of the robbery, when the store clerk was scrolling through her Facebook, that she randomly came across a photo of Chatman on her feed. 

“It triggered something in me, and it just made me freak out,” she testified, referring to the photo she saw, according to 11 Alive.

The clerk reported Chatman as the burglar to the police but he went to them first, believing it was all some sort of mix-up. 

“He turned himself in because he knew he was not guilty,” his grandmother Janice Chatman told 11 Alive. 

Chatman had been in trouble with the law once before. He was sentenced to first-offender probation of five years at the age of 19, when he entered a guilty plea for stealing a $120 television. His grandmother said he paid his fines and completed community service. 

After Chatman came forward to police in 2015 to rule himself out as a suspect in the corner store robbery, he was arrested for it. He faced a probation hearing, where Superior Court Judge Jack Niedrach decided Chatman did likely rob the store. Chatman’s probation was revoked, and per rules surrounding the first offender status, this meant Chatman was re-sentenced for his original crime.

He was ordered to serve 10 years in prison, backdated to when his first brush with the law occurred. He is expected to be released in 2022. 

Six months later, a jury found Chatman not guilty of the corner store robbery. They acquitted him of armed robbery and aggravated assault. The judge did not reinstate his probation, according to 11 Alive.

Chatman will remain in prison for getting arrested for a crime a judge thinks he “likely” committed while on probation for the earlier charge. 

The jury’s verdict is unsurprising. There was no certified evidence that Chatman robbed the convenient store. Transcripts from court proceedings, reviewed by 11 Alive, showed that her description of the suspect changed each time she testified. She reportedly misremembered the color of her attacker’s weapon and the clothes he wore, among other things. 

“What would bother most people about this is when people tell stories over and over again, they’re supposed to remain consistent,” Mark Issa, Chatman’s attorney, told the site. 

While Issa expressed sympathy for the emotional trauma the clerk experienced, he said Chatman is not the man responsible for the crime and that her anger was misdirected. In fact, Chatman tried to enter an Alford plea ― which is a guilty plea where the defendant also maintains his innocence ― before the trial began, but it was dismissed and his case went before a jury.

Ultimately, Chatman is currently serving a 10-year prison sentence for his initial crime of stealing a $120 TV.

Retired Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Norman Fletcher told the Rome News-Tribune last year that Chatman’s case reflects a failing in the legal system that continues to feed into America’s gross issue of incarceration. 

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.