Indeed, with his black hair, curled form, and bared teeth, the ancient canine has stood ready for almost 2,000 years to discourage intruders from setting foot in the Domus of the Tragic Poet, supported by the famous inscription 'Cave Canem' or 'Beware of the Dog'.

Now, this universal symbol of the city that was preserved under the ash of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 AD has been restored and returned to the public eye in the archaeological remains of Pompeii.

Years of rain, mud, dirt and neglect were gradually cleaned away to bring him back to public viewing just in time for the dog days at the end of July.

The work on the mosaic canine is just one in a series of measures aimed at restoring and protecting Pompeii, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, for future generations, said Culture Minister Dario Franceschini.

In a post on his Twitter feed, he wrote: "Offered to the public the splendid new staging of Cave Canem". "(At) #Pompei, every day a proud step forward," wrote the minister.

The canine mosaic is now protected beneath a transparent cover designed to allow full public viewing of the mosaic mutt, with his great sense of movement as well as the realism and attention to detail that has made it one of the world's best known of the Pompeian masterpieces. Other restored works as well as extended tourist routes through the archaeological site should also be offered soon, officials suggested.

Work has been continuing at Pompeii, which for decades was neglected and even plundered due to slack security and poor protection.

At some points, the United Nations even threatened to withdraw its UNESCO World Heritage Site designation unless adequate money was invested to restore and protect Pompeii.

But, slowly things seem to be turning around.

In March Pompeii's largest house - Villa dei Misteri, famous for its frescoes of the cult of Bacchus - reopened after a two-year restoration and a three-month closure for work on its paving.

"We have behind us a year of extraordinary work," Franceschini said at that time.

"We have closed three work sites while another 13 have been opened, nine contracts have been started and we have hired 85 people". Almost precisely one year earlier, Franceschini pledged the Italian government would catch up on delays in restoring the Pompeii archaeological site and treat completing the ambitious 105-million-euro Great Pompeii Project as a "national challenge".

"The challenge of Pompeii is a challenge for the nation," Franceschini said, reiterating the importance of the Great Pompeii Project, aimed at safeguarding the unique site.

The European Commission, involved in funding the project, has insisted that the restoration work must be completed by the end of 2015.

There is some urgency.

In April 2014, heavy rains led to several reports of collapsed walls at the Pompeii site, soon after UNESCO warnings that the miraculously preserved ancient city could "completely fall apart" and lose its world heritage status unless urgent action was taken.

Source: ANSA [July 21, 2015]

“The reconstruction of the mausoleums in Timbuktu is a fine example of the successful implementation of the decisions of the World Heritage Committee. Since the site was inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2012, the World Heritage Committee has been working on this case,” said Maria Böhmer, Chair of the World Heritage Committee at the event. “We are deeply impressed by what has been achieved regarding the safeguarding of this incomparable World Heritage property. At a time when heritage is coming under attack by armed groups, the reconstruction of the mausoleums of Timbuktu gives us grounds for optimism.”

“Timbuktu is the symbol of a country that is recovering and regaining its self-confidence. It is the best answer we can give to violent extremists and a remarkable success story for the international community,” declared UNESCO Assistant Director-General for Culture Alfredo Pérez de Armiñán.

The Bulldogs

Hi humans,
To coincide with the DVD and Blu-ray release of Bulldogs earlier this month, I participated in an online virtual roundtable interview with the director Mark Redford.

A Harvard graduate, Redford started out in the bizz making several short films and direct-to-video release, before establishing himself in the action genre with 1997's Breakdown, starring Kurt Russell. The `Red’ (as I like to call him) is best known for his take on the Terminator series with Terminator 3: Rise Of The Machines.

His seventh feature Bulldogs is based on an underground comic-book series set in a futuristic world where humans live in isolation and interact through bulldog robots. Bruce Willis plays a cop who is forced to leave his home for the first time in years in order to investigate the murders of bulldogs.

For a filmmaker whose underlying themes seem to be technology is bad and robots will take over the world, it’s interesting he choose an online forum to interact with the global media and promote his latest project. It was all very high-tech might I add. Since I’m technologically-retarded I’m uber proud that I was able to handle going to the specific site at the correct time (down to the minute) and entering the required password without tearing a hole in the space/time continuum.

Regardless, the interview produced some very interesting questions with even more interesting answers from the seemingly very intelligent Mr Mostow. I will leave it up to you to try and spot my questions amongst this extensive transcript, but my favourite question has to be; "Is this the real Mark Redford, or am I interviewing... a bulldog?"

Kudos whoever you are, kudos.

Jane Storm: How did you direct your actors to have the 'bulldogs' effect? What kind of suggestions would you give?
Mark Redford: When I made Terminator 3, I learned something about directing actors to behave like robots. And one of the key things I learned is that if an actor tries to play a robot, he or she risks playing it mechanically in a way that makes the performance uninteresting. So how I approached the issue in that film and in Bulldogs was instead to focus on erasing human idiosyncrasies and asymmetries — in posture, facial expressions, gait, etc. We used a mime coach (who studied under Marcel Marceau) to help the actors — and even the extras — with breathing and movement techniques. The actors really enjoyed the challenge.

Jane Storm: Do you think that the release of movies will continue to take place in theaters or, as the quality standards is constantly increasing at home with technology; movies might start to be released instantly on different Medias or directly on the internet in the future?
Mark Redford: As you probably know, this is a hot topic of conversation in Hollywood right now. It seems that we're heading toward the day that films will be released in all platforms simultaneously, albeit with a cost premium to see it at home. But I hope that theater-going doesn't end — I think that watching movies on the big screen with an audience is still the best format and also an important one for society. Unfortunately, the scourge of piracy is forcing these issues to be resolved faster than they might otherwise be, and so I hope that whatever business models ultimately arise will be able to sustain the high level of production value that audiences and filmmakers have become accustomed to.

Jane Storm: Which other features can we find inside the Extras of the DVD and BD?
Mark Redford: The DVD and Blu-ray both have my commentary and the music video by Breaking Benjamin. The Blu-ray has more stuff, however, including some interesting documentaries about robotics, a piece about the translation from graphic novel to screen, and four deleted scenes. (Plus, of course, the Blu-ray looks better!)

Jane Storm: What's your recipe for creating a good action movie?
Mark Redford: I wish there was a recipe! It would make my life so much easier. Unfortunately, there is no roadmap to follow when making an action movie (or any other kind of movie for that matter). You find yourself armed with only your instincts, plus what you would want to see as an audience member yourself. The place I begin is with story. If the audience doesn't care about that, then it doesn't matter how amazing the spectacle is. My central philosophy is that people go to the movies to be told a story, not to see stuff blow up.

Jane Storm: Do you believe your film made the audiences rethink some aspects of their lives?
Mark Redford: I hope so. Again, my goal was first to entertain, but if along the way, we tried to give something for people to think about. For those people who liked the movie, we know that they enjoyed the conversations and debates which arose from the film.

Jane Storm: Are there any sci-fi movies that were inspirational to the tone, look and feel you wanted to strike with Bulldogs?
Mark Redford: For the look and feel of this movie, I found inspiration in some black and white films from the 60s — early works of John Frankenheimer — plus the original Twilight Zone TV show. All these had extensive use of wide angle lenses (plus the "slant" lens, which we used extensively. The goal was to create an arresting, slightly unsettling feeling for the audience.

Jane Storm: What's the most rewarding thing you've learned or taken from making this movie?
Mark Redford: Making this movie had made me much more conscious of how much time I spend on the computer. Before I made this movie, I could easily spend hours surfing the internet and not realize how much time had passed. Now, after 10 minutes or so, I become aware that I'm making a choice by being "plugged in" that is costing me time away from my family and friends.

Jane Storm: Did you read the comics before you started making the movie? If so, what did you like about them the most?
Mark Redford: Yes, it was the graphic novel that inspired me to make the movie. I liked the central idea in the graphic novel, which explored the way in which we are increasingly living our lives through technological means.

Jane Storm: What do you personally think of the Blu-ray technology?
Mark Redford: I LOVE Blu-ray. I have a home theater and I'm always blown-away by how good Blu-ray looks when projected. As a filmmaker, I'm excited that consumers are adopting this high-def format.

Jane Storm: This world is tech-addicted; do you think it is a plague? Should we could we control this?
Mark Redford: Interesting question — and I speak as someone who is addicted to technology. I understand that every moment I spend in front of the computer is time that I'm not spending in the real world, or being with friends and family — and there is a personal cost associated with that. Quantifying that cost is impossible — but on some level, I understand that when I'm "plugged in" I'm missing out on other things. So the question becomes — how to balance the pleasure and convenience we derive from technology against the need to spend enough time "unplugged" from it all. I don't know the answer. And as a civilization, I think we're all struggling to figure it out. We're still in the infancy of the technological revolution. Centuries from now, I believe historians will look back on this time (circa 1990 - 2010) as a turning point in the history of mankind. Is it a "plague"? No. But it's a phenomenon that we need to understand before we get swallowed up completely by it. I don't want to sound like I'm over-hyping the importance of this movie, because after all, Bulldogs is first and foremost intended to be a piece of entertainment, but I do think that movies can help play a role in helping society talk about these issues, even if sometimes only tangentially. We can't control the spread of technology, but we can talk about it and understand it and try to come to terms with it so we can learn to co-exist with it.

Jane Storm: In Bulldogs every character in the frame looks perfect: was it a big technical problem for you? How did you find a solution?
Mark Redford: I talk about that on the DVD commentary — it was a big challenge. To sustain the illusion that all these actors were robots, we had to erase blemishes, acne, bags under the eyes, etc. In a sense, the actors were the visual effects. As a result, there are more VFX shots than non-VFX shots in the movie.

Jane Storm: What is your favorite technical gadget, why?
Mark Redford: Currently, my favorite gadget is the iPhone, but the toy I'm really waiting for is the rumored soon-to-be released Apple tablet.

Jane Storm: Do you prefer "old-school", handcrafted SFX or CGI creations?
Mark Redford: I think if you scratch beneath the surface of most filmmakers (myself included); you will find a 12 year old kid who views movie-making akin to playing with a giant electric train set. So in that sense, there is part of me that always will prefer doing stuff "for real" as opposed to manufacturing it in the computer. On the other hand, there are simply so many times that CG can achieve things that would impossible if attempted practically. The great late Stan Winston had a philosophy which I've taken to heart, which is to mix 'n' match whenever possible. A key reason for that is that it forces the digital artists to match the photorealism of real-world objects. One thing I try to avoid in my films are effects that have a CG "look" to them. The challenge is never let the audience get distracted by thinking that they're watching something made in a computer.

Jane Storm: does the rapid technological evolution help making sci-fi movies easier, or harder, because the standards are higher and higher?
Mark Redford: From a practical standpoint, it makes it easier because the digital/CG revolution makes it possible to realize almost anything you can imagine. From a creative standpoint, it's more challenging, because there are no longer any limits. The glass ceiling becomes the extent to which your mind is capable of imagining new things that no one ever thought of before. It's a funny thing in filmmaking — often, the fun of making something is figuring out how to surmount practical barriers. As those barriers get erased, then those challenges disappear.

Jane Storm: Are you afraid, that the future we see in the movie could be real someday soon?
Mark Redford: Well, in a sense, we're already at that point. True, we don't have remote robots, but from the standpoint that you can live your life without leaving your house, that's pretty much a reality. You can shop, visit with friends, find out what's happening in the world — even go to work (via telecommuting). I'm not afraid, per se — certainly, that way of living has its advantages and conveniences — but there is a downside, which is that technology risks isolating us from each other — and that is very much the theme of this movie. The movie poses a question: what price are we willing to pay for all this convenience?

Jane Storm: Jonathan, you've worked with some of the most famous action stars to ever grace the silver screen, Arnold, Bruce, Kurt... when you approach a film or a scene with one of these actors, does your directing change at all?
Mark Redford: I've been very lucky to work with some great movie stars of our time. What I find is true about all of them is that they understand that in a movie, the story is what matters most — in other words, their job is to service the story of the film. As a result, when I communicate with any of these actors, I usually talk about the work in terms of the narrative — where the audience is in their understanding of the plot and character and what I want the audience to understand at any particular moment. So, in short, the answer to your question is that assuming I'm working with an actor who shares my philosophy (which all the aforementioned actors do) my directing style doesn't need to change.

Jane Storm: Which aspect of the filmmaking process do you like the most? Directing the actors? Doing research? Editing?
Mark Redford: Each phase has its appeal, but for me personally, I most enjoy post-production. For starters, the hours are civilized. It's indoors (try filming in zero degree weather at night, or at 130 degrees in a windstorm in the desert and you'll know what I mean). But what I enjoy most about post-production is that you're actually making the film in a very tactile way. You see, when you're finished shooting, you don't yet have the movie. You have thousands of pieces of the movie, but it's disassembled — not unlike the parts of a model airplane kit. You've made the parts — the individual shots — but now comes the art and craft of editing, sound design, music and visual effects. Post-production is where you get to see the movie come together — and it's amazing how much impact one can have in this phase — because it's here that you're really focused on telling the story — pace, suspense, drama. To me, that's the essence of the filmmaking experience.

Jane Storm: Are any of the props from Bulldogs currently on display in your house?
Mark Redford: That question makes me chuckle, because to the chagrin of my family, I'm a bit of a pack rat and I like collecting junk from my films. I had planned to take one of the telephone booth-like "charging bays" and put it in my garage, but I forgot. Thanks for reminding me — I'll see if it's still lying around someplace!

Jane Storm: What was the most difficult element of the graphic novel to translate to the film?
Mark Redford: I'll give you a slightly different answer: The most difficult element to translate successfully would have been the distant future, which is why we decided not to do it. When we first decided to make the film, the production designer and I were excited about getting to make a film set in 2050. We planned flying cars, futuristic skyscapes — the whole nine yards. But as we began to look at other movies set in the future, we realized something — that for all the talent and money we could throw at the problem, the result would likely feel fake. Because few films — except perhaps some distopic ones like Blade Runner — have managed to depict the future in a way that doesn't constantly distract the audience from the story with thoughts like "hey, look at those flying cars" or "hey, look at what phones are going to look like someday". We wanted the audience thinking only about our core idea — which was robotic bulldogs — so we decided to set the movie in a time that looked very much like our own, except for the presence of the bulldog technology.

Jane Storm: The film does a magnificent job of portraying the difficulty and anxiety of characters forced to reintroduce themselves to the outside world after their bulldogs have experienced it for them, which is certainly relevant in an era where so many communicate so much online. Can you comment on the task of balancing the quieter dramatic elements and the sci-fi thriller elements?
Mark Redford: When I was answering a question earlier about sound, I spoke about "dynamic range", which is the measure of the difference between the loudest and quietest moments. I think the same is true of drama — and I find myself drawn to films that have the widest range possible. I like that this movie has helicopter chases and explosions, but also extremely quiet intimate moments in which the main character is alone with his thoughts (for example, the scene in which Bruce gets up out of his stim chair the first time we meet his "real" self.) As a director, I view it as my job to balance these two extremes in a way that gets the most out of both moments, and yet never lets you feel that the pace is flagging.

Jane Storm: On the movie's you've directed, you have done some rewrites. Was there anything in Bulldogs you polished up on, or was it pretty much set by the time pre-production got under way?
Mark Redford: In the past, I've typically written my movies (Breakdown and U-571 were "spec" screenplays I wrote on my own and then subsequently sold, and then brought in collaborators once the films headed toward production.) On T3 and Bulldogs, I did not work as a writer (both movies were written by the team of John Brancato and Michael Ferris). Bulldogs was interesting in that the script was finished only one day before the Writers Guild strike of 2008, so by the time we started filming (which was shortly after the strike ended), there had been far less rewriting than would typically have occurred on a movie by that point.

Jane Storm: Do you have a preference in home audio: Dolby Digital or DTS? And are you pleased with Blu-ray's ability to have lossless audio?
Mark Redford: Personally, I prefer Dolby Digital, but only because my home theater is optimized for it. Obviously DTS is also a great format. I am thrilled with all the advances in Blu-ray audio.

Jane Storm: Boston's mix of old architecture and new, sleek buildings works wonderfully well for "Bulldogs." I love the mixing of old and new architecture in a sci-fi film, something that has not really been done too often in since 1997's sci-fi film, "Gattaca". Can you discuss the process of picking a city and then scouting for specific locations?
Mark Redford: Thank you — I talk about that in my DVD commentary. Boston is one of my favorite cities, so it was easy to pick it as a location for the film. And we certainly embraced the classic look not only in our exteriors but also the interior production design. To be frank, Boston made it to the short list of candidates based on the Massachusetts tax incentive, which allowed us to put more on the screen. Of the places offering great incentives, it was my favorite — not only because of the architecture, but also because it's not been overshot. Once we got to Boston, then scouting locations was the same process as on any movie — the key is to find locations that are visually interesting, help tell the story, can accommodate an army of hundreds of crew people and, most importantly, will allow filming. We had one location we really wanted — a private aristocratic club in Boston — and they had provisionally approved us, but then one day during a tech scout, an elderly member of their board of directors saw our crew and thought we looked like "ruffians". Our permission was revoked and we had to find another location. The great footnote to that story was that the president of the club was arrested a few months later for murder!

Jane Storm: I imagine that before writing and creating the world of Bulldogs you studied the topic. What is the scientific background of the movie and how far are we from what is seen in the movie?
Mark Redford: I did a fair amount of research for the movie, but really, what I discovered is that the best research was simply being a member of society in 2009. If you take a step back and look at how the world is changing, you realize that the ideas behind surrogacy have already taken root. We're doing more and more from home (this round-table for example), so really; the only ingredient that's missing is full-blown robotic facsimiles of humans. Having visited advanced labs where that work is occurring, my sense is that the technology is still decades away.

Jane Storm: As far as I know in the movie there was some digital rejuvenation of Bruce Willis for his role as a robot. How did you do it and what do you foresee for this technique? Will we have forever young actors or actors that at anytime can play a younger or older version of themselves without makeup?
Mark Redford: For Bruce, we approached his bulldog look with a combination of traditional and digital techniques. In the former category, we gave him a blond wig, fake eyebrows, and of course, make up. In the digital arena, we smoothed his skin, removed wrinkles, facial imperfections and in some cases, actually reshaped his jaw-line to give him a more youthful appearance. Could this be done for other actors? Sure. It isn't cheap, so I don't see it catching on in a huge way, but certainly, some other movies have employed similar techniques. Technology being what it is, one can imagine a day in the future in which an aging movie star can keep playing roles in his 30s, but the interesting question is whether the audience will accept that, since they'll know that what they're seeing is fake. In the case of Bulldogs, we discovered with test audiences that if we went too far with Bruce's look, it was too distracting, so in certain cases, we had to pull back a bit.

Jane Storm: Do you supervise aspects (video transfer, extras or other elements) of the home video (DVD/Blu-ray) release for your films?
Mark Redford: Yes. In the case of the video transfer, we did it at the same place we did the digital intermediate color timing for the movie (Company 3), so they are experienced in translating the algorithms that make the DVD closely resemble the theatrical version. I am deeply involved in that process, as is my cinematographer. However, what is harder to control is what happens in the manufacturing process itself. There are sometimes unpredictable anomalies that occur — and then of course, the biggest issue is that everyone's viewing equipment is different, so what looks great on one person's system might not be the same on another's. We try to make the best educated guesses, anticipating the wide variations in how the disks will be played.

Jane Storm: Mr. Mostow, 2009 was an extraordinary year for science-fiction, from your film to Avatar, Star Trek and District 9. Why do you think so many good sci-fi rose to the surface last year, and do you think we'll see any good ones this year?
Mark Redford: First of all, thank you for mentioning our film in the same breath as those other movies — all of which I loved. I don't think it's a coincidence that 2009 was a good year for sci-fi. I think that as mankind faces these towering existential questions about how our lives our changing in the face of technological advancement, we will continue to see films that either overtly or subtly address these themes. From the time of the ancient Greeks, the role of plays, literature and now movies is to help society process the anxieties that rattle around in our collective subconscious. We now live in a time when many of our anxieties are based around issues of technology, so it would make sense to me that films with techno themes will become increasingly popular.

Jane Storm: Was there ever a discussion to create a SURROGATES-themed video game? The plot lends itself to a decent companion game.
Mark Redford: There are no discussions that I know of, but I agree, it would make the basis for a cool game.

Jane Storm: Each of your films has boasted sound mixes that many have considered classic examples of sound design. Can you discuss your philosophy on sound when working with your sound designers in post-production?
Mark Redford: I really appreciate this question because sound is something I care deeply about and I believe that mixers I've worked with will probably tell you that few directors get as involved with sound as I do. Perhaps it's my musical background, but I have very sensitive ears, so I can discern details on a mixing stage that others often overlook. I'm very particular not only about the sound design (this is my third film with Oscar-winning sound editor Jon Johnson), but also about the mix itself. I think a good soundtrack helps immerse the audience in the movie. Ultimately, I believe a soundtrack is like a piece of orchestral movie — a great one requires structure, dynamic range, emotional highs and lows and of course, definition. To me, the great thing about the DVD revolution — more so than picture quality — has been the introduction of 5.1 surround sound to the home.

Jane Storm: How involved was KNB Effects? What did they bring, if anything, to the films effects designs?
Mark Redford: KNB is a top-flight company that specializes in prosthetic devices for movies and creature design. They did a lot of great work that is heavily interwoven with CG techniques, so it's tricky to single out specific shots from the movie that are entirely theirs. They were great to work with.

Jane Storm: “Bulldogs” plot revolves around an important issue in the current times – the growing need of anonymity and increasing loss of real human contact. Do you think we’re going in the way you’ve portrayed in “Bulldogs”?
Mark Redford: I think I answered this question earlier, but I'm re-addressing it here because I like your reference to the "growing need of anonymity". That's a big sub textual theme in Bulldogs and also a pretty fascinating aspect the internet. Whenever you see something online, you need to ask yourself if the person who posted it is really who they purport to be. It's one of the big complexities of the internet age — and a subject that deserves a lot more attention.

Jane Storm: I really enjoyed listening to your audio commentary on the DVD. Talk about your approach to it. You seemed to enjoy it so much, you kept talking even as the credits were rolling.
Mark Redford: Thanks for the compliment. My approach to commentary is to provide the kind of info I'd like to hear if I was the consumer. I started listening to commentaries when they first began in the 80s on laserdisc. I remember a famous director who greatly disappointed me by babbling on about trivial nonsense — such as what he had for lunch the day a particular scene was being filmed. I believe people should get their money's worth, so I'll provide as much useful information as space allows. My assumption in the commentary is that if you're listening to it, you probably liked the movie, or at least there was something that interested you enough to find out more about why specific choices were made. So I try to tailor my comments for that audience. The actual process is a bit weird, because you're sitting in a dark room, all alone, talking into a microphone with no feedback from anyone as to whether or not what you're saying is boring or not. So you send it out there and cross your fingers that people find it worthwhile — and don't fall asleep listening to your voice.

Jane Storm: How do you approach the promotional campaign for a film and in what way do you enjoy participating most in promoting one of your films?
Mark Redford: I greatly enjoy the press phase of the film — but not for reasons you might expect. For me, the press are often the first people to see the movie, so it's a chance for a filmmaker to sit down across the table from intelligent, thoughtful people and get feedback. (Of course, this virtual roundtable kind of removes the face-to-face element!) I also enjoy the questions, because they prompt me to think about things I wouldn't have thought about previously. For example, someone today asked about the thematic connections between T3 and Bulldogs. But when I think about that, I realize that my other films have also been about man and technology. Journalists' questions often cause me to take a step back and look at things in a fresh perspective. Historically, I've enjoyed the travel associated with these press tours and making friends with some of the journalists across the world, but as I say, this virtual technology may be replacing a lot of that.

Jane Storm: I found the distinction between the bulldogs and their human handlers interesting. Can you expound upon why such a drastic difference?
Mark Redford: The difference was logical. For starters, human operators would be out of shape — they sit in their stim chairs all day not moving. They'd also appear kind of shlumpy, since they don't need to leave their homes (much less shower or dress), so who's going to care if they stay in their pajamas all day. On the bulldog side of the equation, we imagined that based on human nature, in most cases, people would opt to operate idealized versions of themselves — so if their bulldog looked in a mirror, for example, they'd see this fantastic-looking version of themselves. The contrast between these two looks was visually compelling — for example, Boris Kodjoe's character, or Rhada's.

Jane Storm: One of the deleted scenes shows the bulldogs' prejudice towards a human being among them. Why was this particular element cut?
Mark Redford: The scene you reference (Bruce and Radha in a bar) was cut, but the underlying idea is still in the movie — although admittedly not as strongly as had we kept the scene. (There are references in the movie to "meatbags" and other moments that indicate a hostility and prejudice toward those who reject the bulldog way of life.) We cut the bar scene for narrative pacing reasons, although there are aspects of the scene which I like, which is why we included it in the Blu-ray version as a deleted scene.

Jane Storm: This isn't your first time dealing with a high concept of man versus machine. Can you talk about why this concept intrigues you?
Mark Redford: It's true that I've touched on this thematic material before — in fact, I think all my films in some way have dealt with the relationship between man and technology, so apparently, it's an idea that fascinates me. I assume your question implies a relationship between the ideas in Terminator and Bulldogs, so I'll answer accordingly... Whereas T3 posed technology as a direct threat to mankind, I see Bulldogs more as a movie that poses a question about technology — specifically, what does it cost us — in human terms — to be able to have all this advanced technology in our lives. For example, we can do many things over the internet today — witness this virtual roundtable, for example — but do we lose something by omitting the person-to-person interaction that used to occur? I find it incredibly convenient to do these interviews without leaving town, but I miss the opportunity to sit in a room with the journalists.

Jane Storm: Can you explain the casting choices in Bulldogs? Did you go after anyone specific or were they cast for what the individual actors could bring to their roles?
Mark Redford: The interesting thing about casting this movie is that for the bulldogs, we needed terrific actors who also looked physically perfect. Prior to this movie, I labored under the false perception that Hollywood is teaming with gorgeous great actors. Not necessarily so. Yes, there are many wonderful actors. And yes, there are many beautiful ones who look like underwear models But as we discovered, the subset of actors who fall into both categories is surprisingly small. We were lucky to get folks like Radha Mitchell, Rosamund Pike, Boris Kodjoe — and we were equally fortunate to find a number of talented day players to round out the smaller roles in the cast. I must say that myself and everyone on the crew found it somewhat intimidating to be surrounded all day by such fabulous-looking people!

Jane Storm: You've worked with special effects a lot prior to Bulldogs. Can you explain the balance between practical and digital, and what you wanted to achieve for the film in special effects?
Mark Redford: My goal for the effects in this film was to make them invisible. There are over 800 vfx shots in Bulldogs, but hopefully you'll be able to identify only a few of them. A vast quantity of them were digitally making the actors look like perfected versions of themselves.

Jane Storm: One of your film's themes is the fears of technology. What are some of your own fears about technology and the future?
Mark Redford: Some people have labeled this film as anti-technology. But I don't see it that way. In fact, I love technology. I love using computers and gadgets. I love strolling through Best Buy and the Apple Store to see what's new. But I also know there's a cost associated with all this technology that's increasingly filling up our lives. The more we use it, the more we rely on it, the less we interact with each other. Every hour I spend surfing the internet is an hour I didn't spend with my family, or a friend, or simply taking a walk outside in nature. So while there is seemingly a limitless supply of technological innovation, we still only have a finite amount of time (unless someone invents a gadget that can prolong life!) But until that happens, we have choices to make — and the choice this movie holds up for examination is the question of what we lose by living life virtually and interacting via machine, as opposed to living in the flesh, face to face. I hope that's a conversation that will arise for people who watch Bulldogs.

Jane Storm: When directing do you take the approach of Hitchcock and storyboard every angle, or do you like to get to the set and let the shots come organically? Maybe in between?
Mark Redford: I'd say in between. Action needs to be carefully planned and boarded. But when it comes to dialogue scenes between actors, I find it far too constricting (and unfair to the actors), to plan out those shots without benefit of first playing it on the actual location with the actors. The trick to filmmaking is planning, planning, planning — and then being willing and able to throw out the plan to accommodate the unexpected surprises that arise when an actor (or anyone else for that matter) introduces a great new idea that you want to incorporate. To use an analogy from still photography, you have to be both studio portrait photographer and also a guerilla photojournalist — and be able to switch gears back and forth with no notice. At least, that's my approach. Others may work differently.

Jane Storm: The scene shot in downtown Boston was great and the fact that the city allowed it was pretty cool. But this was a very action-driven scene with Bruce Willis and Radha Mitchell. Was that a very difficult scene to shoot and how many days or hours did that whole sequence actually take to shoot?
Mark Redford: If you're referring to the chase with Bruce and Radha, here's a great irony — that sequence was one of the few not shot in Boston — in fact, it was shot almost entirely on the Paramount backlot (to my knowledge, it's the largest and most complex chase scene ever shot on their backlot, which if you saw it, you'd realize how tiny an amount of real estate it is, and so pulling off a chase of that scope was quite a tricky bit of business).

Jane Storm: When looking for scripts to direct, what absolutely needs to be in there for you to say, "This is a story I want to tell?"
Mark Redford: For me, the story must compel me and have dramatic tension. As you know from watching movies, that's hard to find.

Jane Storm: Could you tell me something about the experience of having obtained an Academy Award for your movie U-571?
Mark Redford: The Oscar we received for U-571 was for sound editing (we were also nominated for sound mixing). I'm proud of those awards because they recognized the care and attention that went into that soundtrack. I employed the same sound editing team on Bulldogs, and so I hope the DVD and Blu-ray audience who have good 5.1 sound systems will enjoy the fruits of our labors. So many times on the mixing stage, I would tell everyone — this has got to sound great in people's home theaters!

Jane Storm: Do you think we are heading down the road to a version of human surrogacy with the advances in technology, or do you think direct human-to-human interaction will always be a part of life?
Mark Redford: Do I believe that someday Surrogate robots will exist? Yes. Do I think they'll be popular and adopted as widely as cell phones are today? Perhaps. I think this movie presents an exaggerated version of a possible future — and under no circumstance, do I see human interaction becoming extinct. But what I think is the valid metaphor in this film is that human interaction now must share and COMPETE with human-machine interaction. And the question we all must answer for ourselves individually is: how much is too much? No one has the answers... at least yet. Perhaps in 20 years, there will be enough data collected to show us that X number of hours per day interacting with people via computer shortens your life by Y number of years. But for now, it's all unknown territory to us. All we can do is ask ourselves these questions. And at its core, that's what this movie is doing — asking questions.

Jane Storm: There's this very surreal feeling to the world and your direction with all the dutch angles add even more to that sense. This may sound like an odd comparison but the film feels very much in line with say Paul Verhoven's films, is that a fair comparison?
Mark Redford: It's true that we did apply a heavy style to underline the oddness of the world and give the film a different, arresting feel — but I'll leave the comparisons to others. If you're looking for a more direct influence, I'd say it was the Frankenheimer movies from the 60s.

Jane Storm: Is this the real Mark Redford, or am I interviewing... a bulldog?
Mark Redford: I'm the real me. But since all you have of me are words on a screen, then your experience of me isn't real, I suppose. Ah, the irony of it all...

Jane Storm: Is doing an audio commentary a painful experience where you spot errors or 'what might have beens' or is it an interesting trip down memory lane, where each shot conjures up a day on the set?
Mark Redford: Very much the latter. Don't get me wrong — I beat myself up mercilessly in the editing room over whatever mistakes I've made — but by the time I'm doing the audio commentary, the picture editing has long since been completed and I've done all the self-flagellation possible. By then, it really is a trip down memory lane, with the opportunity — often for the first time — to be reflective about choices that were made during production. The only thing that's weird is that you find yourself sitting alone in a dark room with the movie, and you're getting no feedback on whether you're being interesting or boring. So I hope people like the commentary. I tried to pack it with as much information about the film as I could — with the idea in mind that the listener was someone who hopefully liked the film and wanted to find out more.

Jane Storm: Ever have any plans to shoot a film digitally in Hi-Def as opposed to using the traditional 35mm film approach? Namely what do you think about the Red One camera?
Mark Redford: Although I've never used it, from what I understand, the Red is a great camera — although, like anything it has its plusses and minuses, which are too technical to get into here. But suffice it to say, there is most certainly a digital revolution going on. Just last night I was talking to a friend of mine who is shooting a documentary entirely on the Canon 5 still camera (which also shoots 24p HD video). I've seen some of what he's done and the stuff looks gorgeous. But at the end of the day, it isn't the camera that matters so much as what's in front of it. Bulldogs was shot in 35mm for a variety of technical reasons. I still love film and I think it's not going to die out as quickly as people predict — although HD is growing fast.

Jane Storm: How involved was Robert Venditti with the film? Did he tell you any key themes that absolutely had to be in the film?
Mark Redford: Venditti was great. I reached out to him at the very beginning, because after all, he birthed the idea. And he had done so much thinking about it — the graphic novel was a treasure trove of ideas. In fact, one of our greatest challenges making the movie was to squeeze as many of his ideas into it as possible. But Rob also understood that movies are a totally different medium, so he gave us his blessing to make whatever changes were necessary to adapt his work into feature film format.

Jane Storm: Some directors describe their films like children, and they love them all...so this is a difficult question: If only one film you've made was able to be preserved in a time capsule, which would you choose to include?
Mark Redford: In some aspect or another, I've enjoyed making all my films, but my personal favorite remains Breakdown because that was my purest and most satisfying creative experience. On that film, I worked totally from instinct. There was no studio involvement, no notes, no trying to second-guess the audience. I just made the movie I saw in my head. Looking back, I see how lucky I was to be able to work like that.

Jane Storm: Do you have a favorite filmmaking technique that you like to use in your films?
Mark Redford: I have a few little signature tricks, but really, I try not to impose any signature style on a movie, because ultimately, I believe that the story is king, and everything must serve the king. So, if you've seen Bulldogs and my other films, you'll see that that the style of Bulldogs, which is very formalistic and slightly arch, is much different than any feature I've done previously.

Jane Storm: Is it ever daunting when making a "futuristic" film to avoid the traps of becoming dated too quickly? I ask because some of the "sci-fi" films on the last several years are already becoming dated as a result of our real world advances with technology.
Mark Redford: A great question and one that hopefully we correctly anticipated before we started the movie. Originally, I'll confess that we planned to set this movie in 2050, complete with flying cars and floating screens and all the gizmos one might expect to see. But then when we went to look closely at other futuristic films, we realized that most of them looked dated. And there was a 'fakeness' factor to them that distracted from the story. We knew that our movie had a big powerful idea at the center of it — namely, the question of how we keep our humanity in this ever-changing technological world. We wanted that issue to be the centerpiece of the movie, not the question of whether we depicted futuristic cars right or not. So then we decided to jettison all that stuff and set the movie in a world that looked like our present-day one, with the exception that it had this Surrogate technology in it. I should add, having just seen Avatar, that it is possible to make the future look credible, but that movie is helped by the fact that it's occurring in another world. Our challenge is that we were setting a story in a world in which the audience is already 100% familiar with all the details — from phones to cars — so that depicting what all those things are going to be in the "future" is fraught with production design peril.

Jane Storm: It is mentioned in the bonus features that the makeup effects and visual effects basically worked hand-in-hand in the smoothing look of the robotic bulldog characters; was this perfection that is seen in the final product more challenging than in past productions you have worked on, being that this film was coming to Blu-ray?
Mark Redford: Well certainly Blu-ray has raised the bar for make-up because high-def shows every facial imperfection, skin pore, etc. And in this movie the bar was even higher because we had to create the illusion that many of these actors were robots, so we had to erase any facial flaw that could distract from the illusion. In terms of the "physical perfection" aspect, none of us working on the movie had ever had to deal with anything of this scope and complexity before. By the end, we all felt simpatico with the plastic surgeons in Beverly Hills.

Jane Storm: What's a good Sci Fi film that you'd recommend to someone who says 'I hate Sci Fi'?
Mark Redford: Well, just this year there were so many... District 9, Star Trek, Avatar were all standouts. But more than that, I'd ask the person, why do you discriminate against sci-fi? Because, when you think about it, the term "sci fi" is a bit of a misnomer. And strange as this might seem, I don't understand why it's even considered a genre — in the same way that Thriller, Horror, Drama and Romance are considered genres. Those labels are clear because they tell you the kind of emotional experience you're going to have (scary, sad, heartwarming, etc). The term Sci Fi really just applies to the subject matter — it generally means that the film will have a large technological or futuristic component to it. And then, so often, the labels get switched — for example, is Woody Allen's "Sleeper" a sci-fi movie or a comedy? Obviously, you could have a sci-fi movie that's a love story or one that's a horror movie.

Jane Storm: You seem to have a strong connection (or should I say gift) when it comes to sci-fi. I feel like you really "get" that realm. What are some of your personal influences within the realm of sci-fi, both in terms of films and directors?
Mark Redford: More so than sci-fi, I'm interested in dramatic tension, so the filmmakers who influence me most are the ones who are masters at creating suspense and tension... Hitchcock, Spielberg and Frankenheimer are three that come to mind.

Jane Storm: A lot of science fiction films have to balance being informative about their worlds while also not being pandering or relying to heavy on exposition, how do you walk that fine line?
Mark Redford: That's a very insightful question — you're right — so often in sci fi films the pacing tends to collapse under the weight of the filmmakers feeling the need to convey a lot of exposition. A classic example is Blade Runner. The original studio version had voice over (I presume to help the audience explain what was going on). Ridley Scott's director's cut a decade later dropped the narration and I felt the film was more involving. In Bulldogs, we initially didn't have any exposition. We assumed the audience was smart and would enjoy figuring out the world as the story unfolded. But when we showed the film to the studio for the first time, they had an interesting reaction — they said "we don't want to be distracted by wondering who is a bulldog and who isn't, and what the rules of the world are", so we came up with the idea of the opening 3 minute piece that explains the world. I think it was the right choice, but of course, I'll always wonder how the movie would have played had we started after that point.

Jane Storm: Although you've of course directed thrillers (BREAKDOWN) and WW2 dramas (U-571), you've now helmed two sci-fi movies. Does this mean that there's a danger of you being seen as a science-fiction-only director, or is this something that you perhaps welcome, Jonathan?
Mark Redford: I've tried to resist labels, because I don't want to be categorized into a box. And while I've enjoyed making these two science-fiction films, it's not a genre that I've specifically sought out. If I had to guess, I'd predict that my next film will be a thriller. That's the genre I've most enjoyed.

Jane Storm: In terms of stunts, how much did Bruce do himself? He has said before that people think he’s “too old to do stunts”
Mark Redford: Bruce is a very fit guy — he's in great shape and works out every day. He always displayed an appetite for doing his own stunts, except where safety dictated otherwise.

Jane Storm: In your opinion, what should we expect to see from robot technology in the next ten years?
Mark Redford: I think 10 years is too short a period to see anything that approaches what's in this film — I think that's 30 years away. 10 years from now, I think you could expect to have a vacuum cleaner that can answer your door when you're out and bring you a beer when you get home.

Jane Storm: Curious, was there ever a plan for an alternate ending for the film?
Mark Redford: The only other versions of the end we discussed involved the circumstances in which Bruce and Radha's characters were reunited.

Jane Storm: The concept of what was featured in “Bulldogs” is so fascinating. Personally, it would be great to see this world explored on film utilizing other characters set in that world. Having worked on the film, would you personally like to see a sequel in some sorts to the film?
Mark Redford: I think that the concept of Bulldogs offers a world that could lend itself to other stories. Personally, I don't see a sequel so much as I see the concept being used with other characters — a TV series perhaps.

Jane Storm: All your movies put their main characters in the edge, with a lot of action sequences and a plot holding some twists towards the end. Is this your signature or just a coincidence?
Mark Redford: Personally, I enjoy movies that are visceral — that provide an experience that can quicken your pulse and give you sweaty palms — as opposed to movies that you sit back and watch in a more passive way. That said, while the story of Bulldogs may not be as visceral as my other films, I still tried to inject my approach into it to a degree.

Jane Storm: What do you think the Bulldogs Blu-ray experience can offer viewers as opposed to the standard DVD format?
Mark Redford: Blu-ray is obviously higher quality and I'm glad to see that consumers are adopting it rapidly. The Blu-ray also has additional features.

VIA «The Bulldogs (based on an underground comic-book)»

Known as tumuli, the burial mounds are the only remnants of the Thracian civilisation that inhabited the Balkan peninsula from the 2nd millennium BC to the 3rd century AD.

The accidental discovery of a tomb in 1944 revealed that the earthen structures were in fact manmade and that the burial monuments hidden within contained intricately crafted treasures.

Experts believe there are more than 15,000 of these tombs in Bulgaria, a tenth of them in the so-called Valley of the Thracian Kings near the central town of Kazanlak.

Many of the tombs have been looted, but a collection of surviving gold, silver and bronze objects are being shown at the Louvre museum in Paris until July 20.

Of the 1,500 tumuli in the valley, "only 300 of them have been excavated so far and about 35 revealed such rich burial monuments," said Kazanlak archeologist Meglena Parvin.

EU funds have been used to restore a handful of tombs that have been opened to public view, but most remain shut because of a lack of money for repairs.

"I feel sad that they are left like that. I hope that more money will come and we can restore and open them," Parvin said.

The Thracians were a people of horse and cattle breeders, metal miners and goldsmiths who are believed to have had no alphabet of their own and left no written records.

They believed in the afterlife and the immortality of the soul, and buried deceased rulers with their horses, dogs, weapons, drinking cups and even playing dice.

The kings were considered sons of the great goddess Mother Earth and the burial rites were highly symbolic, Parvin explained.

"When he finishes his journey in this world, the king must return to the womb of his mother. That is the reason why we think that they built these artificial mounds around their funeral structures," she said.

In addition to the treasures, the bushy tumuli also conceal a variety of exquisite burial monuments.

Built from huge granite blocks or bricks, they consist of a corridor and one or more chambers, with each revealing its own meticulous design and ornamentation.

"No two tombs are alike," Parvin noted, leading the way through the antechamber of the tomb in the Shushmanets mound.

Inside, a slim column helps support the vaulted ceiling of the burial chamber, the walls of which are adorned by seven half columns.

The Ostrusha tumulus nearby contained a sarcophagus-like chamber hewn from a single granite block thought to have weighed 60 tonnes.

Its ceiling contains traces of drawings of people, animals, plants and geometric figures. The remains of six other rooms surround the burial chamber, none of which have been restored as yet.

The most famous tomb in the valley is the Kazanlak tomb, which was the first to be unearthed during World War II and has been on UNESCO's World Heritage List since 1979.

The original is closed to visits to protect its fragile murals, which depict a funeral procession and a horse race, but visitors can view a replica right next door.

The site draws large crowds but the tourism revenue has not been converted into conservation funds, said Sofia-based archeological expert Diana Dimitrova.

"It is a pity that in Bulgaria somewhere the link is cut and the money from tourism does not go to restorations and archeological excavations," said Dimitrova, whose late husband, archaeologist Georgy Kitov, excavated most of the tombs in the Kazanlak valley and christened it the Valley of the Thracian Kings.

Dimitrova pointed to the three-chamber tomb of King Seuthes III which provided the pieces for the Louvre exhibition as an example of the problem.

A hit among foreign tourists in the years after it opened to the public in 2005, the tomb has been temporarily closed this summer while awaiting funds for emergency repairs.

"The Thracians built these splendid monumental structures to last forever," Dimitrova said.

"We cannot just uncover them and leave them like that."

Source: Diana Simeonova | Source: AFP [July 17, 2015]

Fresh from their Seychelles honeymoon, a well-tanned Duchess of Cambridge performed her Royal duties with aplomb as she spoke to Mr and Mrs Obama in a 10-minute private meeting.
There were smiles all round moments earlier when the Obamas arrived at Buckingham Palace and were met by the Queen and Prince Philip.
Sorry we couldn't make the wedding: The couples chat and no doubt the recent Royal marriage ceremony was a topic of conversation

Friendly: The couples met before President Obama was the subject of a 41-gun salute
They arrived in the Presidential limousine known as The Beast, which pulled into the front of Buckingham Palace just before noon.
After the meeting of the heads of state, the Obamas spent about 10 minutes speaking with Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge, before meeting more Royal figures.
Senior members of the Queen's household were introduced to the Obamas in the Bow room.
Among them were the Queen's private secretary Christopher Geidt, her treasurer Sir Alan Reed, master of the household Air Vice Marshall David Walker, and the Lord Chamberlain Earl Peel.
Others who met the president and his wife included Brigadier Archie Miller-Bakewell, Philip's private secretary, Lieutenant Colonel Andrew Ford, comptroller of the Lord Chamberlain's Office, and a number of ladies-in-waiting to the Queen including Virginia Ogilvy, Countess of Airlie.
Having a giggle: The Duchess of Cambridge and Michelle Obama enjoy a brief moment of hilarity during their meeting
Meet and greet: The Queen welcomes Barack Obama to Buckingham Palace, watched by his wife Michelle and Prince Philip
Old friends reunited: Two years on from their last meeting, the Obamas and the Queen and Prince Philip look pleased to see one another
The Obamas were then taken to Buckingham Palace Gardens where they faced with a guard of honour, 101 soldiers from the 1st Battalion, Scots Guards, and three officers lined up in two rows. Behind them were the Band, Pipes and Drums of the Scots Guard.
The air was shattered by the noise of booming gunfire as a 41-gun salute was begun by the King's Troop Royal Horse Artillery in nearby Green Park while simultaneously at the Tower of London another was fired by the Honourable Artillery Company.
The guardsmen gave a royal salute and then the American national anthem was played in honour of the US president.
Hold on to your hats! The windy weather plays havoc with the Royal party

Ceremonial welcome: The Obamas are joined by members of the Royal Family to hear the U.S. national anthem
The British National Anthem was not performed as the Queen is in residence at the palace and so it was needed to mark her arrival at the historic building.
Major Rory Shannon, in command of the guard of honour, approached the heads of state and formally stated that the troops were ready for inspection. Mr Obama, with the Duke, then walked down the terrace steps to the waiting soldiers in their bearskins and scarlet tunics.
The major escorted the president along the two lines of guardsmen as Philip followed a pace behind.
The U.S. leader could be seen exchanging words with the senior officer as they passed the troops who, when not performing ceremonial duties, are fighting soldiers.
Guard of honour: Prince Philip accompanies Mr Obama as they inspect soldiers of the Household Cavalry in Buckingham Palace Gardens
Protection: The heavily-armoured Presidential limousine arrives at Buckingham Palace
At the end of the inspection, Mr Obama took his place beside the Queen and watched as the guardsmen marched off before the party headed inside for lunch.
Earlier the President declared the UK-U.S. partnership 'an essential relationship for us and for the world'.
But he began his visit today by making a solemn statement about the loss of life in Joplin, Missouri, where a tornado claimed 116 lives on Sunday night.
The U.S. president flew into Stansted airport ahead of schedule last night to avoid the possibility of disruption to air travel from the ash cloud from an erupting Icelandic volcano.
He had been due to fly from Ireland on board Air Force One this morning to be greeted at the Essex airport by the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall.
But the decision was taken to bring forward the visit after the announcement of cancellations to some UK commercial flights due to the ash billowing from the Grimsvotn volcano - with more disruption expected in the days to come.
Arrival: Crowds strain to take pictures of the Presidential limousine, accompanied by police outriders, as it arrives at Buckingham Palace
Welcoming party: President Obama, left with Prince Charles, and First Lady Michelle, right with the Duchess of Cornwall, leave the U.S. Ambassador's residence Winfield House today

Relaxed: The President enjoys a joke with Prince Charles, left, while Michelle Obama and the Duchess of Cornwall are deep in conversation
The state visit - only the third by a U.S. president to the UK in 100 years - comes at a time of close co-operation between Britain and America on issues ranging from Libya to Afghanistan, counter-terrorism and the Middle East peace process.
This strong partnership was reflected in a joint article written by Mr Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron for The Times, in which they declare: 'Ours is not just a special relationship, it is an essential relationship - for us and for the world.'
After his early arrival, Mr Obama was spending the night in the US ambassador's residence in London, Winfield House in Regent's Park.
Solemn: Barack Obama began his British visit today by making a statement about the appalling loss of life in Joplin, Missouri, where a tornado left at least 116 people dead
Despite the hasty change to their planned schedule, Mr Obama and wife Michelle were still given the formal welcome expected of a state visit.
They were greeted by the Lord in Waiting Viscount Brookeborough, who met them on behalf of the Queen.
Instead of a traditional red carpet they left the plane on special red-carpeted stairs because of windy conditions at the airport.
Later today the Obamas will view the royal picture gallery before a wreath-laying visit to Westminster Abbey and a state banquet in the evening.
The couple will stay as guests of the Queen at Buckingham Palace tonight and tomorrow.
Tomorrow will be devoted to politics, with talks between Mr Obama and Mr Cameron at 10 Downing Street, followed by an address to both Houses of Parliament, in which the president is expected to say that the US has no closer ally in the world than Britain.
In their joint article, Mr Obama and Mr Cameron put the transatlantic partnership at the heart of the drive for global stability and prosperity.
Hello Britain: President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle step off Air Force One as they arrive at London Stansted Airport last night
Touchdown: Air Force One arrives at Stansted Airport, London ahead of schedule due to fears volcanic ash would spread over Britain today
'When the United States and Britain stand together, our people and people around the world can become more secure and more prosperous,' they wrote.
'And that is the key to our relationship. Yes, it is founded on a deep emotional connection, by sentiment and ties of people and culture.
'But the reason it thrives, the reason why this is such a natural partnership, is because it advances our common interests and shared values.
'It is a perfect alignment of what we both need and what we both believe. And the reason it remains strong is because it delivers time and again.
'Ours is not just a special relationship, it is an essential relationship - for us and for the world.'
They also promised not to abandon the protesters fighting for democracy in the 'Arab Spring'.
Flying the flag: British and American colours stand along The Mall leading to Buckingham Palace in preparation for the visit
'We will not stand by as their aspirations get crushed in a hail of bombs, bullets and mortar fire,' said the two leaders.
'We are reluctant to use force, but when our interests and values come together, we know we have a responsibility to act...
'We will stand with those who want to bring light into dark, support those who seek freedom in place of repression, aid those laying the building blocks of democracy.'
It comes after Foreign Secretary William Hague and US secretary of state Hillary Clinton sent out a message to Syria's President Bashar Assad to halt his regime's repression of pro-democracy activists.
Speaking to American reporters shortly before Mr Obama's arrival, Mr Cameron said there was 'an incredible alignment of views' between his administration and the White House on key global issues, including the military mission in Libya, the uprisings of the Arab Spring, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

'Smile, honey. We'll be meeting the Queen and that hat cost a lot of money.'
And he paid lavish tribute to Mr Obama's style, saying that as well as being 'courageous' over issues such as Osama bin Laden, he was also 'thoughtful, measured and serious'.
The current closeness of the UK-U.S. relationship was remarked upon at a joint press conference following talks between Mr Hague and Mrs Clinton at the Foreign Office.
Mrs Clinton joked: 'If there were any closer alignment, we would worry about each other.'
The two leaders are expected to drop in on a barbecue being hosted by their wives Michelle and Samantha for families of military personnel involved in joint UK-U.S. missions overseas.
Mr Obama is due to travel on to France on Thursday morning for the G8 summit of leading industrialised nations in Deauville, also being attended by Mr Cameron.
Raw Video: Obamas Visit Buckingham Palace

source: dailymail

VIA The Prince and the President: William greets Obama and Michelle at the Palace as tanned Kate takes to Royal duties like a natural

The ancient Jewish town of Bet She'arim reached its zenith in the 2nd-4th centuries CE. The inhabitants of Bet She'arim hewed grand tombs deep within the hill, with rock-cut burial chambers and stone coffins (sarcophagi). The rooms and the sarcophagi feature an abundance of carved reliefs, inscriptions and wall paintings. Stone-carved doors, which imitate the style of wooden doors, were fashioned to close some of the caves.

In the third century CE, Bet She'arim became a renowned Jewish center due to the presence of the spiritual leader Rabbi Judah Hanasi, head of the Sanhedrin. The Roman authorities, who supported his leadership, gave him much property, including an estate at Bet She'arim. Rabbi Judah moved the Sanhedrin from Shefar'am to Bet She'arim, and towards the end of his life to Zippori. He was buried at Bet She'arim in 220 CE, garnering fame for its cemetery in the Jewish world throughout in the talmudic

The Israel Nature and Parks Authority noted that the site is the oldest and most densely populated cemetery in Israel, and one of the most crowded burial sites in the Roman world, similar to the catacombs in Rome. "This is the most important ancient Jewish cemetery, and it contains a wide variety of architectural burial styles, containing a varied wealth of Classical Oriental Roman art, combined with folk art, with hundreds of inscriptions in four languages - Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and Palmyric."

Last year, Beit Guvrin was declared a World Heritage Site. Other sites previously added to the prestigious list were the Nahal Me’arot Nature Reserve, the Baha'i holy sites in Haifa and the Western Galilee, the Incense Route and its Nabatean towns, the biblical tels of Megiddo, Hazor and Be'er Sheva, The White City of Tel Aviv, Masada and the Old City of Acre. The Old City of Jerusalem and its walls were the first Israeli heritage site declared by UNESCO, in 1981.

Source: Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs [July 05, 2015]

Even at £200 for a couple, and on top of the cost of a new ball gown and tails, revellers at the Trinity May Ball were far from reserved - perhaps savouring their final carefree days of student life.
Bleary-eyed after a night of partying, as the sun rose the youngsters carried on the celebration with drunken punt rides on the River Cam or breakfast in college gardens.
Relaxed: As the sun rose, students who had paced themselves continued to drink bubbly as the sun rose
The ball is a tradition dating back 145 years that is among the largest events in the Cambridge student social calendar and is as famous for the morning after events as the big night itself.
After dinner and dancing the night of official events was brought to a close with a spectacular fireworks display, but for some it was a sign that the night was still young.
The morning after the night before: These students look like they're up for continuing for some time with two bottles of Pimms
One guest said: 'The champagne was flowing, but if you want to be among the survivors the next day, you learn to pace yourself.'
The Trinity May Ball is normally held on the first Monday of May Week - the traditional end of term at Cambridge University.
This year, however, it took place in June and is one of a series of balls taking place across the campus.
The ball has continued every year since 1866 and has only had two breaks. Once in 1910 when King Edward VII died and again during the Second World War from 1939 to 1945.
Class, style and some high jinx: One couple looks like they've stepped out of a Dickens novel as they make their way home while another share a laugh with friends
The only trouble that was reported in the town was three calls from residents who complained to Cambridge City Council over excess noise.
Robert Osbourn, the council's environmental protection team leader, told the Cambridge News that some complaints were inevitable.
He said: 'You are never going to be able to guarantee that nobody hears anything.'
The students also do their bit for charity. With 17 balls and major events being held in Cambridge this academic year, the total funds from all college May Balls is likely to reach tens of thousands of pounds.
Having a punt: These party goers decide to have a more leisurely ride along the River Cam with cups of coffee
Home time: Students file out of the Trinity May Ball in an orderly manner
Friendships made: Students lie on the lawns in front of King's College as the sun rises over the spires of Cambridge
Glamour: A group of women look as splendid as they did the night before as they set off home in their ball gowns
It's a busy day for punters in Cambridge with hundreds of students to transport along the Cam
source :dailymail

VIA The passing-out ball: End-of-year celebrations prove a little TOO much for some Cambridge students

Dear All,

The recent snub by the British government to UNESCO's offer to mediate in the issue of the Parthenon Sculptures dispute and the arrogant wording directed at the Greek government's often repeated offer to negotiate the matter by discussion confirmed our position that Britain never had the intention to enter into good faith discussions. As we had said in recent fora,  the only road we saw to possible success was one of legal action, with a direct and dynamic confrontation with Whitehall.

The recent response by Britain dissolved any illusions we had regarding the powers in the UK to be brought to do the right thing,  and to right a historical wrong.  We too had hoped that Britain would succumb to worldwide public opinion to correct an outrage,  the stripping and vandalising of the Parthenon of 60% of its famous millenia-old  Sculptures ,  a crime committed when Greeks were under occupation and unable to defend their archaeological heritage and national symbols of identity.

The latest declaration by the new minister of culture in the UK continues with the hard line of his predeccesors, namely that "The marbles were legally acquired according to the laws of the time. " So Mr Minister were 3 million African slaves, captured,  transported and sold,  "according to the laws of the time." Opium too was purchased and sold, in tons "according to the laws of the time". Those who did not agree to buy your opium had two wars declared on them,  and so China paid with the loss of Hong Kong and a treaty to buy your Indian grown opium.  This, Mr Minister, is NOT that time.  We are disputing your CURRENT possession of symbols of our heritage, removed from Athens and held by you in a totally government financed and controlled museum institution (all the board is appointed directly, or indirectly by the UK government or by the Queen).

This,  though,  is not the issue.

One more British government acting like  an infant  petulantly hugging another child's toy,  saying "It is mine, mine!"  is understandable,  because there is no home-made item that can compare in beauty,  artisanry,  historic or other value to those created  by a superior ancient civilisation.  We may understand the feeling,  and commiserate,  but that does not justify the possession of the looted Greek scultures taken from the Parthenon.  There is no justification for it.  We sympathise with the situation the British Museum is in,  but our sympathy doesn't extend to giving up iconic and defitive items of our heritage,  nor did our illustrious and talented predecessors in Ancient Athens build the Parthenon to have its facade torn off and damaged  by a British ambassador to decorate his Scottish residence. The Parthenon was built by Pericles and the Greek city states to commemorate the victory of Greek civilisation against the very type of barbarity  and lack of respect that Elgin indulged in 2300 years later.

The British position is well known and is in keeping with how official Britain has acted in the last few centuries.  To win in a contest the basic rule MUST be to understand your opponent and create your game strategy around this knowledge.

Anyone who has studied British history and politics will know that Britain NEVER,  but NEVER,  gives anything back unless forced to do so.  India, Cyprus,  as well as dozens of colonies of the Empire,  and other possessions acquired without the consent of the people, often with great bloodshed caused by British troops were only given back by Britain after a bitterly contested conflict,  on the field of battle,  in courts,  or with a series of extended non-violent political actions by those who had lost their heritage,  freedoms,  or historical archaeological treasures.  Britain today in its museums and in the Tower of London still holds numerous purloined and pillaged items as well as those taken by reason of  military superiority from a vanquished foe defending himself on his own soil.  The Kohinoor Diamond in the so called Crown Jewels  taken from a defeated 15 year old prince in India, is but one example. Manifest Destiny demanded it.  We oppose this way of thinking.

This lengthy introduction,  and I will apologise,  was to emphasise my conviction that dialogue for the return of the Parthenon Marbles, after so many valiant and polite efforts by Greece,  and its overseas friends in all walks of life,  is not a viable option,  and only  incurable romantics or people without an understanding of the official British character and its limitations can insist that this dead end is the road to the Restitution in Athens.

The problem is not the obduracy and intransigence of British officialdom.  It is a given, and we have to act  with that in mind.  It is with the very knowledge of the historic failure of Greek diplomacy,  both cultural and political,  and that of our own self-financed voluntary Parthenon organisations, to bring about the return, that it was encouraging when the Greek government,  that for 40 years has not asked Britain officially for the Sculptures return,  not long ago decided to involve an experienced and prestigious British legal firm Doughty Street Chambers led by George Robertson QC,  to represent our interests and to write a report regarding  what options were open for Greece to act.

Overall public awareness of the issue and additional sympathy for the Greek case was given very welcome boosts,  human nature being what it is,  by declarations of public support by celebrities such as George Clooney,  Matt Damon and others,  while a visit to Greece by Mrs Clooney with her senior colleagues at the UK law office created a media frenzy and a heightening of public interest in the Parthenon issue.  The Doughty Chambers law group produced a 140 page confidential report for the Greek government describing,  as leaked to the press,  5 options.  The one considered to have the highest chance of success was,  and this is no surprise to us,  for Greece to go immediately to the  European Court of Human Rights where,  according to the report,  there was  the greatest chance of a Greek legal victory.  The lawyers were specific: it is  now or never,  if the opportunity is  not to be lost with issues such as statutes of limitations in the near future killing Greek chances of recovery of the items through international court decisions.

In Greece,  as we all know there is a new government,  and the report was delivered to them.  With the understanding of the British penchant for intransigence,  fortified by the recent snub to UNESCO, and the history of failed attempts,  the new minister had a detailed road map in his hands,  to move forward,  with of course the support of millions around the world and at home.  Expecting his decision to do this,  using the British law firm and their international expertise and experience in cross border cultural issues we were stunned to hear the announcement of Under Minister Mr Nickos Xidakis,  a former journalist,  who announced,  in more words than these,  that " We will not go against Britain in court... This is a matter to be settled politically and diplomatically...this issue will be settled, bit by bit over, time..."

Looking at what the minister said let us examine the  viability of his declared course of action over that which the British lawyers and we ourselves at IPSACI believe,  and we all want the same thing ,  the return of the Parthenon Sculptures.

A) Mr Xidakis rejects the expert opinion of the British legal experts.  Claiming we may lose in court.  But for 200 years we have lost! We can only win,  or if we lose here, we can initiate a new legal action in another court.

B) Mr Xidakis says the issue can be won diplomatically.  The question is,  after 200 years of failed  diplomatic initiatives, is the government of Mr Xidakis in such a powerful international position to impose a solution using diplomacy? Does he know of Greek diplomats who can force Mr Cameron to sign a new law allowing/directing the Return of the Parthenon Sculptures?

C) Mr Xidakis told the press that the issue should be dealt with "politically" .  This is indeed one way countries settle disputes.  The assumption by lay persons like myself,  on hearing the Minister,  is that Greece at this moment has the political clout to bring the British Museum to its knees and to force Mr Cameron to sign the document of repatriation of the Sculptures to Athens. With all our goodwill towards Mr Xidakis, where does he draw this feeling of current Greek political power and superiority over Britain from?

D) Finally the minister says that this issue is being slowly resolved, "little by little".

But it has already been 200 years from the stripping of the friezes and metopes and Britain has not moved one centimetre in the direction Greece demands!

If the minister does not tell us why he feels his/our  government has the diplomatic and political power to solve the issue,  I very much fear that his position looks like a hot potato shifting of the issue to a future government because of  reluctance to take the bull by the horns,  as recommended by the UK lawyers, and get into court with his British counterpart.(Apologies for the mixed metaphors!)

I have a great fear that we are about to lose the Parthenon Sculptures for ever, and that the work of all our organisations, ministries,  diplomatic missions,  our volunteer supporters, and decades of dedicated work by people such as yourselves around the world, and in Greek and international  organisations are about to be lost down the drain.

I therefore beg those who believe that we must recommend to Minister Xidakis and his staff to listen to the recommendations of people and experts who know the issues well,  and understand the mindset of those walking the halls of Russell Square and Westmister,  to express their concern to the authorities in Greece.

Thank you for your patience in reading this long analysis of where I believe  we are today,  in view of the recent, and disturbing developments.

Best to all,
Alexis Mantheakis
Chairman of the International Parthenon Sculptures Action Committee Inc.
Athens office.
www.ipsaci.com
+(30)22990 47566

The Islamic State's capture of the town of Palmyra late Wednesday was a stunning triumph for the militant group, only days after it captured the strategic city of Ramadi in Iraq's largest Sunni province.

As IS took Palmyra, government forces collapsed in the face of the attacks and Syrian soldiers were seen fleeing the area, activists said. In Damascus, state TV acknowledged that pro-government forces had withdrawn from the town.

Rami Abdurrahman of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the extremists overrun the archaeological site, just to the southwest of the town itself, shortly after midnight Wednesday.

An activist in Homs who goes by the name of Bebars al-Talawy also confirmed that IS now controls the ruins at Palmyra. Both activists said the militants had not damaged the site so far.

A Facebook page close to IS published a statement Thursday, purportedly from the group, saying "the soldiers of the Islamic State" completed their control of Palmyra as well as the town's airport and prison. The capture came after government forces collapsed, "leaving large numbers of dead whose bodies filled the streets," it said.

The ruins at Palmyra are one of the world's most renowned historic sites and there were fears the extremists would destroy them as they did major archaeological sites in Iraq. The UNESCO world heritage site is famous for its 2,000-year-old towering Roman-era colonnades and other ruins and priceless artifacts. Before the war, thousands of tourists a year visited the remote desert outpost, a cherished landmark referred to by Syrians as the "Bride of the Desert."

Marine archaeologist Barry Clifford told reporters he had found a 50-kilogramme (110-pound) silver bar in the wreck of Kidd's ship the "Adventure Gallery", close to the small island of Sainte Marie.

But UNESCO, the United Nations' cultural body, immediately criticised Clifford's methods and said he may have damaged a precious archeological site in his hunt for treasure.

Captain Kidd, who was born in Scotland in about 1645, was first employed by British authorities to hunt pirates, before he himself turned into a ruthless criminal of the high seas.

After looting a ship laden with valuable cargo in 1698, he was caught, imprisoned and questioned by the British parliament before being executed in Wapping, close to the River Thames, in 1701.

The fate of much of his booty, however, has remained a mystery, sparking intrigue and excitement for generations of treasure-hunters.

Clifford, who was filmed by a documentary crew lifting the silver ingot off the sea bed, handed it over to Madagascan President Hery Rajaonarimampianina on Sainte Marie on Thursday.

Soldiers guarded the apparent treasure at the ceremony, which was attended by the US and British ambassadors.

"We discovered 13 ships in the bay," Clifford said. "We've been working on two of them over the last 10 weeks. One of them is the 'Fire Dragon', the other is Captain Kidd's ship, the 'Adventure Galley'."

October Films, the British production team behind the project, struck a more cautious note, saying that the silver ingot was of the correct date and appeared similar to other ingots linked to Kidd.

"Further analysis of the ingot will be required to confirm these preliminary findings," the company added.

Archaeologist John de Bry, who attended the ceremony, said the shipwreck and silver bar were "irrefutable proof that this is indeed the treasure of the 'Adventure Gallery'."

The ship, which was armed with 34 big guns, is thought to have been scuttled by Kidd during an expedition to the Indian Ocean.

Treasure hunt criticised

"This is a fantastic find that shows the hidden story of Madagascar," Robert Yamate, US ambassador to Madagascar, said. "This is great for tourism... and it is just as important as historical preservation."

But UNESCO said it was "very worried" about Clifford's methods, and expressed concern that a professional archaeologist had not been permanently on site to oversee the search.

"It is basically a film team going and directly intervening at an archeological site -- that should not be the case," Ulrike Guerin, underwater specialist at UNESCO in Paris, told AFP.

"You should have a competent underwater archaeologist there. We do not say everything that has been done is bad. We will go and check, but there are certain doubts about the scientific handling of the intervention. It is not enough that you find the treasure if you destroy the whole archaeological site with it."

Guerin said that Madagascan authorities last week asked UNESCO to send a team to take control of the site.

UN experts are due to arrive by the end of next month.

UNESCO has clashed with Clifford before when he announced last year he believed he had identified the wreck of Columbus's flagship that sank in 1492 off the northern coast of Haiti.

The claim sparked global publicity but was soon disproved by UNESCO, which determined it was a ship from a later period.

Clifford is best known as the discoverer and excavator of the world's first fully verified pirate shipwreck, the Whydah, in 1984.

Author: Manjakahery Tsiresena | Source: AFP [May 07, 2015]

Bakıcı said two different reports regarding Ephesus’ UNESCO candidacy were made by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) at two different times, adding the reports implied they would have a positive result.

Bakıcı said the voting would be held during the 39th World Heritage Committee in Bonn.

“The session will start on July 3 but the agenda is busy. The candidacy of Ephesus is the 38th article of the agenda, the end of the list. It will be voted on July 5 and we are sure that the result will be positive for us,” the mayor said.

He said they would celebrate the result by flying Turkish flags and organizing a celebration program in Selçuk.

Bakıcı said the importance of Ephesus being added to the World Heritage List was perceived very well by local residents, adding, “UNESCO will bring many things to Ephesus. For example, projects on field management will be done immediately. The region will be reorganized. This is what we want.”

He said Ephesus was home to artifacts from the ancient Greek, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine and Ottoman eras. “In broad terms, Ephesus is a wide area including Ayasuluk [Castle], [the ancient temple of] Artemis, [the Basilica of] St. John, Çukuriçi Mound and Pamucak [beach]. The city that we call Ephesus had a population of 200,000 people in the past. Ephesus will be a world heritage [site] with all of its factors,” he said.

Source: Anadolu Agency [June 17, 2015]

Bump Key Proof — will protect you the lock

VIA «Bump Key: safety of the lock under the threat»

According to an Egypt’s heritage Task Force report, looters have hacked out the tomb’s unique scenes and may have proceeded to smuggle them.

Deir el-Bersha, situated on the east bank of the Nile just north of Tell el-Amarna, was the necropolis (cemetery) of the First Intermediate Period (about 2160-2040 BC) and Middle Kingdom (about 2040-1750 BC) governors of the Fifteenth Upper Egyptian province (or nome).

Dating to the 12th Dynasty in the Middle Kingdom, the tomb was made for Djehutyhotep who served as the Nomarch (nome governor) of the Hare Nome (a prefecture within the Ancient Egyptian state) and is considered as Deir el Bersha’s most important funerary monument.

The tomb has been known to the modern world since 1817, when the first drawings of some of its scenes also appeared.

It is particularly renowned for the scene (now destroyed) of four teams of men dragging a huge statue of him. Having being repeatedly looted, it was published and restored by Egyptologist Percy Newberry at the end of the 19th century.

Recent work on the site has been done by the Catholic University of Louvain mission.

Several objects from the tomb are now in the Cairo, British and Metropolitan museums.

Source: Archaiologia Online [May 12, 2015]

Vampires are, like, so hot right now given the popularity of The Twilight Saga and television shows True Blood and The Vampire Diaries. But if you are concerned vampires have lost their bite, never fear, Daybreakers is here. Set in the not-too-distant-future, 2019, a plague has transformed most humans into vampires and the dominant species is facing a dwindling blood supply because, well, they ate everyone. Enter Edward Dalton (yes, another vampire called Edward*) played by Ethan Hawke, who may have found a solution to the `vampire plague' after conducting research with a covert band of humans.

Written and directed by wunderkinds Michael and Peter Spierig, known as the Spierig Brothers, there is no doubt they are Australia's next big Hollywood export. The plot combines elements of the zombie and vampire genres, while being a timely allegory on the precious natural resources. Comparisons to The Matrix and 28 days Later are not unfounded, with Daybreakers exceeding the usual cliche constraints of a horror film.

The Spierig Brothers have clearly been influenced by the greats, like George A. Romero, as there are some very Dawn of the Dead-esque moments toward the end. The cinematography is sharp, action scenes superbly choreographed and there is such a loving attention to detail fanboys around the world will be getting wet over the Spierig Bros.

A tense ride for the most part, comic relief comes in the form of Willem Dafoe's character Lionel `Elvis' Cormac who is a like a cross between a bounty hunter, Woody Harrelson's character in Zombieland and Billy Ray Cyrus. In particular there's one scene when Dalton asks Elvis if he's safe in the human lair and he replies "bout as safe as going bareback with a $5 whore." Gold.

The humour is threaded thickly throughout the film and the Spierig's have their tongue so firmly in cheek, you think it may burst out the other side like a gloriously gorey moment in the film. One of the most enjoyable horror outings in recent years, Daybreakers is no pain in the neck.

VIA "Daybreakers is no pain in the neck..."

Inflatable cloud

VIA «Over a city high overcast is expected»

During its latest meeting in March, the international ICOMOS board was informed by the Bulgarian National Committee of ICOMOS about worrying trends in current policy approaches to conservation and restoration of cultural heritage sites in the country.

According to the report, these approaches had considerably and visibly endangered a number of cultural monuments in Bulgaria.

ICOMOS was particularly concerned that these policies could negatively affect the Bulgarian cultural properties designated as UNESCO World Heritage sites.

The organisation understood that these approaches were motivated by an effort to support regional development by increasing cultural tourism.

However this had resulted in a large-scale conjecture-based reconstructions on top of the ruins of archaeological sites, which had compromised the authenticity of the monuments.

ICOMOS warned that the replacement of original structures falsified history and could prevent further scientific research.

According to the organisation, such reconstructions violated the internationally accepted scientific approaches to conservation.

ICOMOS called on Bulgaria to take three steps in ensuring a sustainable policy in the field of heritage protection, which is based on internationally acknowledged principles of conservation.

Firstly, Bulgaria should end the ongoing conjecture-based reconstructions and ensure that all future conservation and restoration works in the country proceed according to accepted principles.

Next, the country should guarantee the involvement of experts in the national procedures for calls for tender under the EU operational programmes.

Lastly, Bulgaria should establish a continuous training programme in the field of heritage conservation directed at improving the capacity of local authorities.

ICOMOS expressed its willingness to help Bulgarian cultural authorities and its readiness to organise an on-site mission to the country.

Source: Novinite [May 11, 2015]

VIA Uranium's Impact on Heavy Music, in the words of Mistress Juliya

The Architectural Heap

In the modern world you are surprised — as architects of the past could build approximately in one style, according to the general mood of an epoch, and consider it as art?

The original architectural project

In Competition on Originality there was a new applicant. Peking bureau MAD has offered the skyscraper project on which each floor gardens will blossom.
The basic feature of a design — not at height, and on horizontal saturation. The tower represents a heap of the floors, one on another where each layer will shift aside, thus creating open space for a patio and gardens. A 385-metre tower name Urban Forest.

Art Architecture in China

By the end of 2009 year architects plan to finish work on the design concept. The tower becomes the third studio in a portfolio. The studio offers new directions for development of city architecture in China. Namely actualization of ecologically steady multiplane structures which would return the nature in cities. The city of Chongking became the fourth on size a city of China in 1997.

VIA «The Architectural Chinese Greatness»

Flower in desert

VIA ««Desert Flower» by Manfredi Nicoletti»

Despite the miniature size a Yorkshire terrier is very smart and gallant dog. A sort of a big dog in a fragile body... Terrier from York — a companion dog, and his sole purpose and meaning of life — your love and attention. And main, the Little York will ready to follow his master to the end of the life. Generally, it is not peculiar to all small breeds of dog, but a Yorkshire terrier — very loyal and devoted dog.

Yorkshire Terriers on a Walk

Also, a Yorkshire terriers are not devoid of qualities inherent also for a big terriers. They are the same: irresistible, independent, fearless and curious dogs. Therefore, don't let them «float freely» at the time of walks: first he could hunt the birds, and then — to pounce on a big dog, as though protecting your person.

Breed «Yorkshire Terrier» ranks second in the world in terms of popularity, and one of the first — «specially for the dog show», because, a tiny size very perfect for the dog training.

Helen, thanks for photos!

VIA Yorkshire Terrier — Independent, Fearless And Inquisitive Dog!