# data[].attributes.body
Un groupe du genre: death metal.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wallpaper Funny Bird Statue Of Liberty - 1920 x 1080 - Strange Funny Weird Crazy Absurd Awesome - photo image free beautiful

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Awesome wallpaper of Wallpaper Funny Bird Statue Of Liberty, resolution 1920 x 1080, type Strange Funny Weird Crazy Absurd Awesome, for Desktop of your PC. Beautiful wallpaper free for you!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Donald Trump, who built his career as a New York real estate mogul, became a reality television star by directly and dramatically sacking contestants on The Apprentice at the end of every show.

Only the strong survived, and the weakest competitors were told their shortcomings to their face and summarily dismissed with the catchphrase "You're fired!"

The Apprentice made for compelling television - 28 million Americans watched the first season finale - and helped cement Mr Trump's reputation as a take-charge, high-flying businessman among many Americans. It's a perception that candidate Trump capitalised on during his presidential campaign.

"When you cast that ballot, just picture a Wall Street boardroom filled with the special interests who have been bleeding your country and your city and every place else, and imagine the look on their faces when you tell them you're fired. Fired!" Mr Trump said at a 30 September, 2016, campaign rally.

Since becoming president he's had plenty of staff turnover - but several of his most high-profile dismissals have been carried out in a decidedly different manner.

James Comey, the FBI director that Mr Trump let go in May 2017, learned he was out by watching cable news while on a government trip to Los Angeles. The president's personal aide would later hand-deliver a letter with official confirmation.

Earlier this week, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson reportedly got the bad news when the president announced his replacement on Twitter. He had spent the last week in Africa and, according to some accounts, was only vaguely informed a few days earlier by Chief of Staff John Kelly that the president was considering a change.

This is not, needless to say, a commonly accepted way of dismissing employees.

"The right way to fire someone is in a manner that upholds their dignity, and shows them some respect, and gives them thanks for the service they provided, especially if they've done nothing wrong, violated the law or anything like that," says Michael McDermott, a management professor at the Georgetown University McDonough School of Business.

"I can't think of any business, organisation or government entity that has any kind of oversight that would tolerate this kind of behaviour in their chief executive officer."

He said doing a termination in person helps ease the shock and provide some comfort and reassurance.

"I think you saw even in Rex Tillerson, he was a little bit emotionally shaken by how it's happened," he added. "He's independently wealthy, he's had a very successful life, yet it was somewhat traumatic for him."

There have been other prominent White House sackings - including presidential adviser Steve Bannon, communications director Anthony Scaramucci and White House staff secretary Rob Porter. Those were reportedly all handled by Mr Kelly, without the president's direct involvement.

Reince Priebus, Mr Trump's first chief of staff, technically resigned - but the news was made public without his prior knowledge, via another presidential tweet.

The president has also publicly criticised or rebuked other members of his administration - including Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and National Security Advisor HR McMaster - while reportedly privately mulling their dismissal or hoping they would resign. At least so far, however, Mr Trump has refrained from pulling the trigger.

This all fits with a picture painted of Trump the real-world businessman, in a July 2016 Politico article by Michael Krause.

"Rather than magisterial and decisive, Trump the actual boss swings wildly between micromanaging meddler and can't-be-bothered, broad-brush, big-picture thinker," Krause writes.

"He is both impulsive and intuitive, for better and for worse. He hires on gut instinct rather than qualifications; he listens to others, but not as much or as often as he listens to himself. He's loyal - 'like, this great loyalty freak' as he once put it - except when he's not."
More from Anthony:

A terrible night for Trump in Pennsylvania

Where did the Republican Trump-haters go?

Seven key takeaways from the Russian indictments

Until he became president, Mr Trump was the king of his family-business empire, a decidedly different experience than that of governing in a constitutional democracy, with its checks-and-balances, consensus-building requirements and constant, white-hot scrutiny.

During a televised town hall forum on 29 March, 2016, Mr Trump boasted that firing people was easy - but he gave a clue, perhaps, of why he's so frequently shied away from the act.

When asked why he hadn't sacked his then-campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, who was accused of assaulting a female reporter. Mr Trump replied.

"I'm a loyal person," he said. "It would be so easy for me to terminate this man, ruin his life, ruin his family, he's got four beautiful children in New Hampshire, ruin his whole everything and say 'You're fired.' I've fired many people, especially on The Apprentice."

Lewandowski was eventually let go, three months later - and the news was delivered not by the candidate, but by his son, Donald Jr.

According to McDermott, the decision to fire someone can require an amount of courage. Telling a person they are no longer wanted or needed can be an uncomfortable situation.

"It gets to a leader's style," he says. "If you see people as objects to be used to achieve your ends, you're almost in a position where you don't have to show them respect as people, you just have to remove the chess piece from the board because it's an object."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why doesn't Trump fire people to their face?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Donald Trump, who built his career as a New York real estate mogul, became a reality television star by directly and dramatically sacking contestants on The Apprentice at the end of every show. Only the strong survived, and the weakest competitors were told their shortcomings to their face and summarily dismissed with the catchphrase "You're fired!"

# data[].attributes.body
L' architecture de New York est connue pour les gratte-ciel de Manhattan, la ville  est un résumé de l'histoire de l'architecture américaine et de l'architecture contemporaine.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It seems a little too perfect that the most anticipated movie slated for release on Christmas is about a Jewish boy held to deity status. I'm talking about " The Wolf of Wall Street," a Martin Scorsese marathon of excess, dolor, drugs, and money that stars Leonard DiCaprio. It's based on the memoirs of Jordan Belfort, at one point, a nice Jewish boy from the Bronx, but later a 1990s Icarus got flew too high and nosedived spectacularly.

At the helm of his firm Stratton Oakmont, Belfort made millions upon millions through financial treachery and ultimately went to jail for securities fraud and money-laundering. He also betrayed all of his friends. Five years after Bernie Madoff and the near-collapse of the U.S. economy, there may be resonance with the devil-may-care destruction wantonly wrought in the movie. As Joe Nocera explains, the impulse for a literal link should be avoided.

But the rise and fall of Stratton Oakmont in the late 1980s and '90s has nothing to do with the events that brought the financial system to the brink. It's just that movies don't do well describing what really happens day to day on Wall Street, not even Oliver Stone's two tries. It is easier - and in many ways more sensible - to do films like "The Wolf of Wall Street" and "Boiler Room" (the 2000 drama that was also said to be modeled after Stratton Oakmont). It is much easier to convey on screen Mr. Belfort's greed than Goldman Sachs's.

Greed may be good, you know, for a story arc, but what fuels 'Wolf' is the chaos. $100,000 sports cars smashed. Helicopters wasted. A luxury yacht (originally built for Coco Chanel) sunk off the coast of Sardinia. Orgies coalesce in penthouses, hotels, and on planes. The Hamptons are wasted. Dwarves are rented and thrown. A secretary is paid $10,000 to shave her head for entertainment. (This will spoil nothing for you.) With savage intensity, Belfort snorts, downs, smokes, and defiles everything on the primrose path to mega-wealth. For these reasons, the film will immediately become a classic among the heirs to the Boiler Room generation.

What's different about 'Wolf' though is that instead of it being a movie made top-heavy by a mawkish morality at the end, the screenwriter Terence Winter lines the depravity and the consequences of Belfort's depravity side-by-side. Life is unraveling and tragedy is unfolding attendantly; it has a dizzying effect because you keep expecting someone reasonable to bring in a pot of coffee.

Leonard DiCaprio as Belfort is mesmerizing and the physical requirements of the role are benumbing. It comes as little surprise that Belfort as a character is not particularly introspective or complex; DiCaprio's feat is that we're fixated by him anyway as he chucks hundred dollars bills into the trash and delivers bullpen floor speeches to his minions that would make Churchill blush. (To his credit, Jonah Hill as Donnie Azoff, Belfort's Sancho Panza, is surprisingly not like the Jonah Hill we know for at least eighty percent of his screentime.) The result is equal parts overdetermined, shocking, and engrossing.

If you like your cornflakes unfrosted, go see Ben Stiller in "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty." Otherwise, go. And if you're gunning to have Chinese food beforehand, make sure you have triple helpings. The bacchanal clocks in at exactly 180 minutes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'The Wolf of Wall Street' Was a Nice Jewish Boy from the Bronx

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It seems a little too perfect that the most anticipated movie slated for release on Christmas is about a Jewish boy held to deity status. I'm talking about " The Wolf of Wall Street," a Martin Scorsese marathon of excess, dolor, drugs, and money that stars Leonard DiCaprio.

# data[].attributes.headline
La meillleur place pour une vue 360 degree 

# data[].attributes.subject
La meillleur place pour une vue 360 degree 

# data[].attributes.body
est de Governors island.

# data[].attributes.body
JFK, La guardia et Newark sont les 3 aéroports de New York. Même si Newark et a New Jersey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Spider-Man: Homecoming arrives on July 7th. So far, Marvel and Sony have been careful about not revealing too much about the movie. We got our first trailer way back in December, and it's taken them until now to unveil new footage.

Before we get going, here's the new trailer, that was released yesterday. And then we're going to break it down...

I don't go shot by shot in order. Instead I try and connect the dots in the trailer based on what I think is happening. I'm probably wrong, of course, but that's the way it goes.

Let's get to work...

Forget About the Origin Story!

This doesn't look like the same apartment that Peter and Aunt May were living in when we met them in Captain America: Civil War, does it? My guess? They had to move into that smaller apartment right after the death of Uncle Ben, but now things are a little more settled, and May has moved them back to Forest Hills.

Also, let's take another moment to enjoy the fact that we don't have to sit through yet another Spider-Man origin story. Still, this is early in his career. Based on what we're seeing in these trailers, if I had to guess, the timeline is roughly that Peter has now been active for about a year, figure a few months or so before Civil War, and then roughly a year since then with his new suit. I'm willing to bet that the Vulture and friends are the first genuine supervillains he's going up against.

In the earlier trailer I pointed out all the cool Star Wars stuff in Peter's room, as well as the Mike Piazza decoration (visible again in this trailer) which proves once and for all that Peter is a New York Mets fan.

But what struck me about the above shot is the black and white photo just over Peter's shoulder. Could that be Uncle Ben?

Spidey may be, as Tony Stark quips, "your friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man" and these trailers have had the most New York flavour of any Spider-Man movie I've ever seen. But getting New York specific, Peter Parker lives in Forest Hills, and a bunch of the Queens we're seeing in Spider-Man: Homecoming looks an awful lot like Astoria. Note the Astoria Blvd N/W stop in the above.

I'm just including this shot because it's awesome. Again, so much of the previous Spidey movies felt focused on a kind of nebulous, blockbuster, Manhattan-centric New York City. But to lean on that "friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man" vibe, you've gotta put the kid in Queens.

In fact, the costume is one of my favourite things about all of this, so let's overanalyse that for a few minutes...

The Costume Rules

We learned a lot about the suit in this trailer. It's apparently so lightweight and flexible that it can be used for a quick change and doesn't have to be worn under his clothes. We saw the suit 'deflate' in the first trailer, but here we see it adhere to the body. It's a nice touch and answers a lot of the questions about whether Peter would die of heatstroke if he was walking around with a full costume under his street clothes all day.

There's three great things about this shot.

1) This is getting redundant, but holy moley, this costume is the sharpest looking live action superhero suit around right now. It's tough to improve on what is basically a perfect costume design, but that's what seems to have happened here.

2) Spidey appears to shoot a kind of timed web mine here. It sticks to the door of the car, and 'detonates' when that thug is next to it.

3) I'm pretty sure that the black highlights around his shoulders and chest are actually a function of the web shooters. So, the black belt is where the web fluid is stored, but rather than have to change cartridges in the web shooters themselves, the web fluid is pumped from the belt, up to the shoulders and down through the arms. Cool, right?

More evidence here...

Here's a better look at those external webshooters, which I love. See how the far end of it extends up the underside of the arm? That's what I'm talking about.

So the detachable Spider-logo is a drone? Could it be a spider-tracer? We haven't seen much of the spider-tracer in the movies, even though that's an essential piece of Parker technology. Basically, if Spidey wants to tail you to your hideout, he plants a tracer on you, and...well, really this explains itself, doesn't it? You don't need me for this stuff.

Also, since we're on the subject of suit-based tech, you gotta love that this costume comes with a 3D map of NYC so Peter can keep his bearings while web slinging. I imagine Google Maps is less effective when you're not sticking to the streets.

Can we talk about the homemade costume for a few minutes, please? For with Spidey surrendering his Stark suit, it looks like we may get as much of half of this movie with Peter back in his original, homemade Spidey suit.

This brings me perhaps more joy than the situation warrants. Why? I'm a huge advocate of a low tech Spider-Man. We got that fun homemade costume in the first Tobey Maguire/Sam Raimi Spider-Man movie, and it was great, but Peter went from that straight to something that not even a genius could cook up in his bedroom. At least here we know he's got a billionaire tech guru behind the real suit, right?

But from the moment we glimpsed blurry YouTube video of Peter's original costume in Captain America: Civil War, I wanted more of it. It's both low tech and functional, and it's a combination of practical and what a 15-16 year old who idolises superheroes would think looks cool.

The external web shooters on this are huge and clunky, and I will forever think of this as a nod to the 1970s Spider-Man TV series. I love that show.

And the fact that the 'boots' are just red gym socks pulled all the way up with the bottoms tucked in is just a total joy. None of us have ever done that. Ahem.

You can see that the gloves are fingerless, which makes sense for someone who needs to get a feel when climbing.

I'm trying to figure out what the white lenses in the mask are, though. I guess it would make more sense if these were basically like reflective sunglasses, for two reasons...

1) I just want to stick to that 'found stuff' vibe as much as possible.

2) It would remind me, again, of the 1970s Spider-Man TV series costume.

Vulture and the Villains

The choice of wording here can't be accidental. It seems like Tony Stark himself might be doing some 'damage control' for bad PR brought on either by Spider-Man or some Avengers-centric misadventure. But it does bring up another possibility...

An article in USA Today described Michael Keaton's Adrian Toomes as running a company that cleans up after superhero/supervillain battles. That sure sounds like Damage Control, a fun Marvel comic from the 1980s.

The thing is, Damage Control was in development as an ABC TV series. Has that been put on hold? Or is Spider-Man: Homecoming going to launch Damage Control the way that Avengers ended up launching Agents Of SHIELD?

One thing about Spidey's early comic book battles with the Vulture, is that he was always portrayed as being completely out of his element in the air. Anything that puts Spider-Man at a disadvantage is on message as far as I'm concerned. But using the Vulture here is great because even though they've gone the whole 'high tech animal themed menace' route, this battle isn't about brute force (the way it could be with, say, Doctor Octopus), it's about putting Peter in a situation that he has absolutely no clue how to deal with.

This is a great shot, and probably the single most menacing image of the Vulture I can remember. Usually you associate these beat-up, defeated, limp Spidey images with Doc Ock or Green Goblin. So this is a great supervillain moment from a guy who is kind of a second-tier Spidey villain. Glad he's getting his moment in the sun here.

I can't imagine this shot is accidental. Compare Adrian Toomes "suiting up" with his Vulture armour to...

...this bit with Tony emerging from the Iron Man armor. Expect them to lean pretty heavily on the similarities between those two characters. Unfortunately, I wouldn't be surprised if that bit with Toomes talking to Spidey in the warehouse is also a 'come to the dark side' speech. Michael Keaton can make anything work, of course, but I feel like we've already been down that road in Spidey movies.

Check out Bokeem Woodbine as The Shocker! That's...that's all I've got right now. He's part of Adrian Toomes' crew, though, so he's...part of Damage Control? Also, my speculation from the previous trailer analysis that this scene and others like it with Peter in the old costume take place in flashback can pretty much be thrown out the window now.

We still don't know who Donald Glover is playing in this movie. Somebody offer me some theories, please!

Captain America Fitness Challenge

Okay, I kinda howled at the "Captain America fitness challenge." This is hilarious, and the fact that he's wearing his Avengers costume from 2012 speaks to a few things...

1) This is an old video, recorded before Cap went anti-authority in The Winter Soldier and Civil War.

2) This version of the costume was always mostly intended to be a kind of 'public relations' suit, and the darker one he's wearing on missions at the start of The Winter Soldier is the more practical version.

3) You have to love that they're showing this video to an entire gym class on a tiny, old ass TV.

Speaking of that gym class...

Mary Jane! Right? No?

Hey look, it's Zendaya as 'not Mary Jane Watson!' To give you an idea of how out of place her character is supposed to be in a school full of science students, she's sitting there reading W. Somerset Maugham's Of Human Bondage.

Hey, look! It's Zendaya as 'not Mary Jane' again! Any idea what's on her shirt? I'm trying to figure this out.

Also, she's totally Mary Jane Watson, right?

I like that there's a lot of Jacob Batalan in this trailer, but while he was introduced in the first trailer, this is the first time we hear him addressed as "Ned." So, once and for all, he's playing Ned Leeds.

What are Peter and Ned workshopping here? The colours seem to indicate that maybe it's a discarded piece of Iron Man tech?

My least favourite thing about both of these trailers has been the Staten Island Ferry sequence. It just seems like the obligatory over-the-top piece of blockbuster action, when the rest of the tone is so much more low key and 'neighbourhood'. On the other hand...

...this is a cool shot. And I like the idea that Spidey isn't just holding it together himself (not to mention the assist from Iron Man), but that he's had to basically spin a web to try and get this to work.

I'd like to think that this bit at the pool party is part of a sequence like the very end of Ferris Bueller's Day Off, when Ferris is hustling to get home by taking shortcuts through everybody's backyards.

It says a lot about how exciting Spider-Man: Homecoming looks when a full blown Iron Man action sequence seems like the least interesting thing about the movie, doesn't it?
Did you spot anything I missed? Let me know in the comments...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Spider-Man: Homecoming - breaking down the new trailer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spider-Man: Homecoming arrives on July 7th. So far, Marvel and Sony have been careful about not revealing too much about the movie. We got our first trailer way back in December, and it's taken them until now to unveil new footage. Before we get going, here's the new trailer, that was released yesterday.

# data[].attributes.body
En 1830, New-York devient la plus grande ville des Etats-Unis. La ville en pleine expansion est alors bruyante (elle l’est toujours) et sale.

Les habitants réclament alors la création d’un grand espace vert, qui deviendra Central Park.

1853, l’emplacement du futur Park est acheté, pour un prix de 5 millions de dollars. Un concours est lancé pour dessiner le parc, mais les travaux ne débuteront qu’en 1857 car le terrain était alors qu’une décharge marécageuse habitée par des chèvres et des cochons.

# data[].attributes.body
Il est un homme riche de New York

# data[].attributes.body
La serie populaire FRIENDS est basé en NYC!

# data[].attributes.body
En 1625, une colonie Neerlandaise a fondé New Amsterdam. Après, en 1664, New Amsterdam a été renommé a NEW YORK.

# data[].attributes.headline
Construction du métro dans le Bowery, New York, 1901

# data[].attributes.subject
Construction du métro dans le Bowery, New York, 1901

# data[].attributes.body
La première ligne de métro en New York a ouvert le 27 octobre 1904. Le Maire George McClellan a prit les commandes de la course inaugurale pour créer le métro.

# data[].attributes.body
L'histoire de la ville de New York s'échelonne sur plusieurs siècles et commence, bien avant l'arrivée des premiers colons dans ce qui est maintenant Manhattan, avec l'occupation par les populations amérindiennes.

# data[].attributes.body
La statue de liberté était un cadeau de la France pour commémorer l'alliance entre la France et les Étas Unis pendant la Revolution Americaine.

# data[].attributes.headline
" En 1945, la Société des nations laisse la place à l’ONU, qui installe son siège à New York. L’après-guerre est prospère du point de vue économique, comme c’est souvent le cas, mais c’est là le seul point positif. Car New York est rongée par les problèmes de logement et d’insalubrité. La ville est très sale, et des millions de rats hantent les égouts. La dégradation rapide des logements favorise la spéculation immobilière sous toutes ses formes."  http://www.routard.com/guide/new_york/1875/histoire.htm#ixzz5ABIrPC8h

# data[].attributes.subject
" En 1945, la Société des nations laisse la place à l’ONU, qui installe son siège à New York. L’après-guerre est prospère du point de vue économique, comme c’est souvent le cas, mais c’est là le seul point positif. Car New York est rongée par les problèmes de logement et d’insalubrité. La ville est très sale, et des millions de rats hantent les égouts. La dégradation rapide des logements favorise la spéculation immobilière sous toutes ses formes."  http://www.routard.com/guide/new_york/1875/histoire.htm#ixzz5ABIrPC8h

# data[].attributes.body
La deuxième personne à avoir exploré la baie fut le Britannique Hudson en 1609, qui a donné son nom au fleuve, il était alors au service des Pays-Bas.

Les Hollandais furent les premiers Européens à s'installer sur le territoire, et c'est en 1614 qu'ils construisirent le Fort Nassau.

# data[].attributes.body
Le premier gratte-ciel à New York était le "Tower Building", construit en 1889, il avait 11 étages.

# data[].attributes.headline
La ville de New York (New York City) est depuis lors divisée en cinq arrondissements (boroughs) : Manhattan, Brooklyn, The Bronx, Queens et Staten Island. Elle compte aujourd'hui 8 175 300 habitants, ce qui en fait la commune la plus peuplée des États-Unis.

# data[].attributes.subject
La ville de New York (New York City) est depuis lors divisée en cinq arrondissements (boroughs) : Manhattan, Brooklyn, The Bronx, Queens et Staten Island. Elle compte aujourd'hui 8 175 300 habitants, ce qui en fait la commune la plus peuplée des États-Unis.

# data[].attributes.body
Blair Waldorf

# data[].attributes.body
Histoire de New York

Le premier explorateur à avoir aperçu l'île de Manhattan a été le navigateur Giovanni da Verrazzano, en 1524 pour le compte de la Couronne française. Il dénomma ce lieu qui était habité par des Indiens algonquins et iroquois, la Nouvelle-Angoulême.