# data[].attributes.body
Empowerment
Empowering
For celebrating
hammock
let your dog loose ( tight)
take it or leave it
once in a lifetime
career prospects
selling point
To stand out
Addictions
Perks

Street Party
Block Party
Parade

Floats
Admittance vests

To go berserk = To act in crazy and violent way

To get my goat:
"Slow restaurants really get my goat!

Restaurant goer
Foodie= food lover.

Service is congenial.
"Brazilians are very congenial."

"I'm good not naive."
"To wait for the other shoe to drop."

To blame.

Guilty pleasure= something you do, even  though you know it's far from perfect.

Twisted:
Aftermath

Perks of personality

To get back to you (what goes around, comes around)

Surrounding myself with...
Pulling back your life, your self esteem.

Impacting

Painstaking system
To do something painstakingly.
To do the heavy lifting.
thorough= complete
to do something thoroughly.

Bidding my time.
To have your respite

That's a niche

To be farfetched
To jump the shark

"You Good"

Henchmen
Thug

Blue collar
White collar

# data[].attributes.body
https://londontopia.net/londonism/fun-london/language-top-100-cockney-rhyming-slang-words-and-phrases/

# data[].attributes.body
At the beginning of my English learning process I felt like a fish out of the water. I remember when I started at CCAA school, the lessons were very simple and easy (or they should have been) . It was strange trying to speak new words with a new intonation, I think it made me feel embarrassed. But that is water under the bridge now. As (the) time passed by, I got used to the new language and now I am way more comfortable speaking, writing, listening to it...I actually think English is( fairly) easier than Portuguese.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Zack Snyder and Henry Cavill speak at the 2012 Comic Con in San Diego. (Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP)

The weekend belonged to "Black Panther," the Marvel Cinematic Universe's latest offering, and rightly so: Ryan Coogler's solid introduction to the kingdom of Wakanda wowed critics (97 percent fresh on Rotten Tomatoes) and audiences (A-plus CinemaScore) alike, racking up an estimated $235 million in its first four days of release. As some wags noted, this was more money than "Justice League" earned in its entire domestic run.

And while "Justice League" was certainly bad - a product that reeked of overbearing corporate meddling; a movie that reportedly cost upward of $300 million to make and yet somehow looked cheap and shoddy - I'm still sad that it ( reportedly) marks the end of Zack Snyder's efforts with the DC Extended Universe. He brought a unity of vision, both ideological and aesthetic, to Warner Bros.' effort at countering Disney's MCU.

There was some sniggering when DC announced that Snyder, hot off the heels of "Watchmen" (2009), would direct "Man of Steel." Indeed, the auteur was forced to assure audiences that there would be no slow-motion action sequences, his signature artistic affectation. But this was always a mistake. The reason Snyder's previous comic-book adaptations, "300" and "Watchmen," had worked was that the speed-ramping effect he so loved - in which he slowed down the action and sped it back up as the camera drifted along, a spectator to carnage - perfectly mimicked the experience of reading a comic book. You see a frame and then another frame, but not what happens between them. Speeding up, then slowing down, suggests how the eye flits across the page, going from one act of violence to another.

The effect reappears in "Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice," a film more comfortable with the mythopoeic ideal of alien gods and men who dress like bats doing battle for the soul of society. Snyder dispenses with Batman's origin story briefly, capping off a slo-mo killing of Martha and Thomas Wayne with a shot of Bruce, a child, enveloped by bats, rising out of a hole in which he has fallen, drifting out of a cave and into the sky as if accepting his destiny to simultaneously live both below and above the people.

This aesthetic carried into other movies overseen by Snyder during his tenure atop the DCEU. The early action sequences in "Wonder Woman" felt very much like outtakes from "300," filled as they were with statuesque individuals leaping into the air in slow motion, firing arrows and hurling spears at invading savages. Wonder Woman's (Gal Gadot) charge through the German offices echoed Batman's (Ben Affleck) rescue of Ma Kent (Diane Lane) in "Batman v. Superman." And it's not surprising that the single best moment in "Justice League" toys with the use of slow motion to demonstrate exactly how powerful Superman (Henry Cavill) is.

This aesthetic vision may have triggered sniggers - aggressively unique artistry often does - but it's far superior to the MCU's house anti-style, that cautiously competent CGI mishmash that defines the adventures of the Avengers and their friends.

More than a house style, however, Snyder oversaw a house ethos. And it's here that the recent spate of DC films - as wildly uneven as they were, as messy as they could be purely in terms of storytelling - has always been more consistent, and more interesting, than their counterparts at Marvel. Consider Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), the key to the MCU's success. He is wildly erratic as a character, swinging from libertarian privatizer of peacekeeping to statist global governance proponent to mad genius tinkering with godhood to father figure aiding a kid in need, depending on what the movie he happens to be in needs him to do to keep the action moving. He's a plot device, not a person.

There's no idea behind the Marvel films writ large, no overarching thought. One of the reasons "Black Panther" is so interesting is that there's a philosophical struggle at its core, a messy tussle between security and safety on the one hand and the duties we have to the weaker amongst us on the other. And some of the other Marvel films have tinkered with notions larger than "heroes good, villains bad." "Winter Soldier" was about the iniquities of drone warfare and the dangers to civil liberties posed by a too-powerful government while "Civil War" is about the hazards of occupational licensing. Too often, however, some all-powerful thingamajig is controlled by a hulking, forgettable, oddly colored bad guy who wants to either take over or destroy the world.

But there's a unity of vision to the Snyder-led DC movies that is simply lacking over at Marvel. The idea, beginning with "Man of Steel," was a simple one: What would happen if gods appeared on Earth? Snyder's reboot of Superman asked us to consider what responsibilities a man with godlike power would be willing to accept. "Batman v. Superman" asked how the world's most powerful men - batty billionaires and tech giants alike - would react to instantly finding themselves lower on the food chain. How would they protect humanity from the new monsters in their midst? "Suicide Squad," meanwhile, asked how the government might respond to such an invasion, while "Wonder Woman" was all about the need for gods (or, at least, a demigod) to understand that free will sometimes leads to death and destruction.

These questions were often lost or muddied in the course of corporate tampering. While Marvel honcho Kevin Feige has hired a series of directors who will conform to the house style and has built up a universe slowly but surely, Snyder always seemed to be pushing for more and was saddled with a corporate giant that demanded an Avenger-style cinematic universe created in half the time. As Armond White put it in his review of "Black Panther," "Coogler's attempt at genre revision is part of Marvel indoctrination, so it's less interesting than Snyder's battle with Warner Bros. over artistic expression in the D.C. Comics Universe. Snyder turns moral conflicts into sensual kinetics."*

Perhaps "Justice League," which asks how the world would respond to losing its newfound god, is a logical endpoint to the question first raised in "Man of Steel." It's too bad that we'll likely never get to see what Snyder truly wanted to do with the movie; he was reportedly fired last year and was definitely replaced in the director's chair by Joss Whedon for reshoots. Fans thirsting online for the #SnyderCut will likely go unsated. We'll just have to wait and see what Snyder has in store for us next.
*As an aside, I would pay a great deal of money for a "Hitchcock/Truffaut"-style book in which White interviewed Snyder. The iconoclastic critic has long been one of Snyder's most devoted defenders, and I think it would be a fascinating glimpse into critic and filmmaker alike.

Today's Headlines

Free daily updates delivered just for you

By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | The Zack Snyder era of superhero movies is over. You should be sorry to see it go.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The weekend belonged to "Black Panther," the Marvel Cinematic Universe's latest offering, and rightly so: Ryan Coogler's solid introduction to the kingdom of Wakanda wowed critics (97 percent fresh on Rotten Tomatoes) and audiences (A-plus CinemaScore) alike, racking up an estimated $235 million in its first four days of release.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It is a populous country, yet there are few major Brazilian communities in the United States. Only parts of Massachusetts, Queens, and Newark, New Jersey come to mind. The U.S. Census estimates about 250,000 Brazilians living in the United States, which is many fewer than come from El Salvador, namely about two million. Why is there such a difference? The Brazilian number may well be an undercount but unofficial estimates still lie well below those of El Salvador.

1. Could it be that Brazil is too much fun to leave? Or too much fun to generate the norms of upward mobility which encourage poorer people to leave for greater ambition? If you live on the beach in northeastern Brazil, what exactly do you aspire to?

2. Do inhabitants of large, populous countries face larger cultural costs in leaving and adjusting their perspective?

3. Has Brazil had so much construction (including Brasilia), in its fairly wealthy sectors, that internal migration is a good enough substitute for external migration?

4. Brazil has a particular history of viewing the United States as a rival; El Salvador does not.

5. It seems that most Brazilian emigrants are ashamed to admit that they are emigrating to the United States, instead they claim they are simply "passing through," or something similar.

What other points are relevant? Here is a study (pdf) of Brazilian migrants to Massachusetts.

Brazil also does not attract many (recent) migrants, even though in some sectors the economic opportunities are strong. It could be that external migrants have to compete too strongly with internal migrants from the poorer regions of Brazil.

Leonardo Monasterio restates the initial question in Portuguese.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why do Brazilians emigrate so infrequently? - Marginal REVOLUTION

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is a populous country, yet there are few major Brazilian communities in the United States. Only parts of Massachusetts, Queens, and Newark, New Jersey come to mind. The U.S. Census estimates about 250,000 Brazilians living in the United States, which is many fewer than come from El Salvador, namely about two million.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - The Free Dictionary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The World's most comprehensive free online dictionary, thesaurus, and encyclopedia with synonyms, definitions, idioms, abbreviations, and medical, financial, legal specialized dictionaries