Whoah...

News Bugonia Bugonia: Yorgos Lanthimos’ Next Film Confirms Release Date, Boasts a Familiar Cast Mr. Lanthimos is back (so soon!) to teach us the meaning of the word weird. By Vanessa Armstrong | Published on June 25, 2024 Screenshot: Searchlight Pictures Comment 0 Share New Share Screenshot: Searchlight Pictures Yorgos Lanthimos is keeping busy. The director’s film, Poor Things, picked up four Oscars this year, including Best Actress for Emma Stone. His next film, Kinds of Kindness, which again stars Stone (pictured above) along with Jesse Plemons, Willem Dafoe and others, is out in theaters this week, just six months after Poor Things. Lanthimos is already working on his next project, which we first heard about in February. The movie is a remake of the Korean film Save the Green Planet! And while it was deemed likely that Stone would return for her fifth collaboration with the director, we got confirmation that she and Plemons will star in the film, with a brand new baffling title, Bugonia. Here’s the official logline for Bugonia, per TheWrap: Two conspiracy-obsessed young men kidnap the high-powered CEO of a major company, convinced that she is an alien intent on destroying planet Earth. The premise appears to fit well with Lanthimos’ sensibilities. Poor Things is a Frankenstein-like tale centered on a woman (Stone) with the mind and emotional volatility of a child, but the body of an adult, who navigates the world as such, while Kinds of Kindness is, frankly, hard to explain but has been described by The Wrap as a “bonkers triptych.” The screenplay for the sci-fi comedy comes from The Menu and Succession alum Will Tracy, so odds are good that story will be good and also, odd. We’ll still have some time to wait to see Lanthimos’ next project; Bugonia is set to premiere in theaters on November 7, 2025. [end-mark] The post <i>Bugonia</i>: Yorgos Lanthimos’ Next Film Confirms Release Date, Boasts a Familiar Cast appeared first on Reactor.

Movies & TV Babylon 5 Babylon 5 Rewatch: “By Any Means Necessary” The station’s dock workers go on strike, and G’Kar tries to hold a Narn religious ceremony… By Keith R.A. DeCandido | Published on June 25, 2024 Credit: Warner Bros. Television Comment 0 Share New Share Credit: Warner Bros. Television “By Any Means Necessary”Written by Kathryn M. DrennanDirected by Jim JohnstonSeason 1, Episode 12Production episode 114Original air date: May 11, 1994 It was the dawn of the third age… B5 is having a traffic jam, as there are too many ships wanting to dock and not enough space, too few workers, and malfunctioning equipment. However, a Narn ship, the Tal’Quith, insists on docking immediately, as it has perishable cargo. Ivanova squeezes the Tal’Quith in, but a malfunction leads to another ship departing at the same time. The Tal’Quith captain panics, ignore’s Ivanova’s instructions, and there’s a big crash that kills one worker who is blown out into space, and badly injures two more, who are barely rescued by the dockworkers. Unfortunately, one of the people they rescue—Albert Delvientos, the brother of Eduardo Delvientos, one of the forepersons—is DOA. The perishable cargo is a G’Quan Eth—a flower that is used in a sacred ritual to Narn who worship G’Quan, of whom G’Kar is one—and it was lost in the crash. G’Kar is pissed and demands reparations, but the head of the dockworkers’ union, Neeoma Connoly, refuses to accept blame, as they’re understaffed, the equipment malfunctions half the time, and they’ve had to work extra shifts without a break. Garibaldi bolsters her argument when he announces that the culprit were some chips that malfunctioned and blew out. The equipment is substandard, and it cost two people their lives. G’Kar is distraught, as Na’Toth regretfully informs him that there’s no way a fresh G’Quan Eth can be sent in time for the ritual. However, there’s good news and bad news. The good is that there is one on the station. The bad is that Mollari owns it. Credit: Warner Bros. Television Sinclair speaks to Senator Hidoshi, who is of no help. The workers signed a contract, so they’re not entitled to any of the things Connoly says they need because that’s not in the contract. And going on strike is apparently illegal, so that isn’t an option. Hidoshi just tells Sinclair to deal with it. The dockworkers all start calling in sick, with the sick-out being an obvious prelude to a strike. The “sick” workers are gathered in a loading bay to discuss strategy. Garibaldi shows up to escort Connoly to talk to Sinclair. Sinclair passes on the senate’s complete lack of interest in helping, and also reminds Connoly that they could invoke the Rush Act. Connoly says she’ll call that bluff, as invoking that draconian law would turn public opinion squarely on the dockworkers’ side. And she won’t let her people continue to work in unsafe conditions. Going back to Hidoshi, the senator offers to send a well-regarded negotiator, Orin Zento—and he’ll have the power to invoke the Rush Act if negotiations go badly. G’Kar goes begging to Mollari, who enjoys watching G’Kar squirm. Mollari points out that the flower, when crushed, is a powerful narcotic that he enjoys. G’Kar is disgusted by that notion. Mollari asks an absurdly high price for the G’Quan Eth, which G’Kar—reluctantly and bitching and moaning about it the entire time—goes off to gather. However, by the time he pulls the cash together, Mollari says he’s changed his mind, and he won’t sell it for any price. At this point the other shoe drops: Mollari has not forgiven the Narn in general or G’Kar in particular for the invasion of Ragesh III or the treatment of his nephew. Credit: Warner Bros. Television Zento arrives, but his “negotiating” consists of the same stonewalling Hidoshi did to Sinclair: there’s no money, you signed a contract, suck it up, or it’s the Rush Act for you. Tensions run high, and Sinclair declares a recess before the dockworkers string Zento up. The next morning, Zento angrily informs Sinclair that the dockworkers have gone on strike, and also G’Kar demands an immediate meeting with Sinclair. The Narn ambassador explains the significance of the G’Quan Eth and how Mollari is putting the screws to him. Sinclair promises to talk to Mollari, but that’s the best he can offer. The meeting with Zento and the dockworkers goes poorly as well, with Zento promising to have confirmation of the Rush Act within the hour and with Connoly not budging. Zento tells Sinclair to have security ready to make arrests as soon as word comes in from the senate. Sinclair is ambushed in CnC by Mary Ann Cramer of ISN, who wants a quote about the strike, and by Mollari, who accuses G’Kar of stealing a statue from the Centauri temple, which G’Kar denies knowing anything about, even though everyone on the station knows he did it. Sinclair has Ivanova throw all three of them out. Hidoshi then tells Sinclair that the Rush Act is now in effect, and the commander reluctantly tells Garibaldi to have his people head to the docks in riot gear. He then takes Zento down to meet with Connoly and the rest, gets multiple confirmations from Zento that the Rush Act gives Sinclair latitude to end the strike by any means necessary, and then uses the following means to do so: diverting money from the military budget to meet the dockworkers’ demands, and also to grant amnesty to all the dockworkers for any illegal actions they took during the recent negotiations. Zento is livid, as this is not the spirit of the law. But Sinclair is 100% within the letter of the law, which is all that matters. The dockworkers all happily go to work. Credit: Warner Bros. Television Sinclair meets with G’Kar and Mollari. He demands that G’Kar return the statue (G’Kar continues to deny knowing anything about it), but also orders Mollari to hand over the G’Quan Eth, as it’s a controlled substance. Mollari agrees and leaves. G’Kar is distraught, as the time for the ritual has passed; Mollari knows this, which is why he agreed to turn the flower over. The ritual must be performed when the sun rises above a particular mountain. Sinclair points out that the Narn homeworld is ten light-years away, so the light from the sunrise a decade ago is only just hitting the station. G’Kar is pleased, and goes off to prepare. Hidoshi contacts Sinclair, and—with uncharacteristically genuine appreciation—congratulates him on his solution to the strike. He also warns Sinclair that he’s made some enemies with his actions: Zento, for one, and his friends in the senate for another. Sinclair is unconcerned, figuring they can get in line with all his other enemies. Nothing’s the same anymore. Sinclair goes for the hat trick, solving three unsolvable problems with clever solutions: stopping the strike peacefully and benevolently, getting the G’Quan Eth back from Mollari, and coming up with a way for G’Kar to celebrate his religion. Ivanova is God. Ivanova’s streak of kicking people out of CnC continues—in fact, it’s the second time she’s kicked Cramer out! The houshold god of frustration. Garibaldi is baited by the dockworkers, who are angry at him for not supporting them, as he’s blue-collar like the rest of them. The security chief refuses to rise to the bait, though he also shows restraint when ordered to arrest the workers. Credit: Warner Bros. Television In the glorious days of the Centauri Republic… Mollari takes great glee is tormenting G’Kar with the G’Quan Eth (I particularly love his jaunty wave to G’Kar just as the latter is informed that Mollari owns one of the flowers). At first it seems to be just one enemy tweaking another, but his litany about Ragesh III makes it clear that it runs deeper than that. Though it take a thousand years, we will be free. G’Kar’s religious beliefs, and devotion to G’Quan, is first seen here, and will continue to be an important part of his character going forward. Looking ahead. At one point, G’Kar rants that he wants to strangle Mollari with his bare hands—which is how Mollari has already been established as foreseeing how the two of them meet their ends, strangling each other. Welcome aboard. John Snyder returns, having previously played one of the two title characters in “Soul Hunter,” this time playing the human Zento. Katy Boyer plays Connoly, while José Rey makes the first of two appearances as Delvientos (he’ll be back in “And Now for a Word”). Aki Aleong is back from “Deathwalker” to make Hidoshi officially a recurring character; he’ll be back in “A Voice in the Wilderness, Part II.” And Patricia Healy returns from “Infection” for a second and final appearance as Cramer. Trivial matters. This is the only script by Kathryn M. Drennan, who was the wife of show creator J. Michael Straczynski at the time. According to his online posts, Straczynski showed the opposite of favoritism, making her go through a much more grueling process than any other freelancer (which may be why this is her only script for the show). While she would not write again for the show, she did pen one of the B5 novels, To Dream in the City of Shadows, one of the tie-in novels that was considered to be part of the overall continuity by Straczynski (which was not true of all of them). While this Katy Boyer’s only appearance as Connoly, the character will be referenced again in her capacity as head of the dockworkers’ guild. The Rush Act was a “tribute” to right-wing radio commentator Rush Limbaugh, who often railed against unions. Straczynski said online in 1994 of this episode: “The premise is one that ST [Star Trek] would never, EVER do.” Two years later, Deep Space Nine proved him wrong. (To be fair, I’m sure Straczynski meant that we’d never see this with the Federation, and he was right. “Bar Association” was about the Ferengi, not humans.) The echoes of all of our conversations. “Fifty thousand commercial credits, in cash, in advance.”“That’s an outrage!”“Of course it’s an outrage! The question is: how important is your religious ceremony to you?” —Mollari and G’Kar negotiating. Credit: Warner Bros. Television The name of the place is Babylon 5. “There are no happily-ever-afters, just new battles.” It’s funny, I have absolutely no memory of watching this one the first time back in 1994, which is disheartening only insofar as I really really really like it a lot. Indeed, it only has one flaw, and it’s one I saw coming in the guest list: John Snyder is completely not up to the task of playing a skilled negotiator. Snyder has a very limited range, and any time a role requires charisma (here and also Star Trek: The Next Generation’s “The Masterpiece Society”), he utterly fails. But Snyder is the episode’s only real flaw. The conflict is one that’s familiar to viewers, reminding us why unions exist, and how governments continue to do everything they can to break and damage unions. Katy Boyer does excellent work as the plucky union rep, putting a human face on the dockworkers, though a big chunk of the credit should go to scripter Kathryn M. Drennan and actors José Rey and Claudia Christian, as the exhausted banter between Ivanova and Delvientos at the top of the episode sets the tone for the rest of it, showing that B5 is a machine that is not nearly as well-oiled as it should be, but at the very least the parts work. The B-plot is guaranteed to be wonderful because it focuses on the heart and soul of B5: Mollari and G’Kar. Peter Jurasik beautifully plays Mollari’s playful tweaking, which modulates effectively into righteous anger when the real reason for his torments comes out. Meanwhile, the scripting finally catches up to Andreas Katsulas’ performance, as G’Kar’s religious devotion adds layers to the character, and the mess that his political situation makes of his religious observances is very compelling viewing. But the rock star here is Michael O’Hare who, for the second time in three episodes, puts in a bravura performance, aided, once again, by a great script by Drennan. You feel his frustration and his exhaustion, which makes his actions in the climax all the more wonderful. I honestly think of this as the Loophole Episode, and it’s glorious. One of the gags Sir Arthur Conan Doyle does in his Sherlock Holmes stories is have Holmes make a deduction about someone, the person is shocked, thinking Holmes must be psychic or something, and then Holmes explains the very rational reasoning, at which point the person is no longer shocked, and actually disappointed at how simple it was for Holmes to figure all that stuff out. That’s the vibe I got from Sinclair’s three great solutions here: they’re all actually fairly obvious and reasonable, for all that they’re truly obscure and (at least by some characters’ lights) unreasonable. In particular, I love that his solution for both obtaining the G’Quan Eth and ending the strike are going for the letter of the law over the spirit, while his suggestion to G’Kar for how to perform the ceremony is the other way around. The vague wording of the Rush Act also reminded me of the various laws that allow business to discriminate for “religious reasons.” I’m just waiting for someone to discriminate because of their belief in Buddha or the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Satan and cite the law, which doesn’t actually say it’s only for Christians, even though that’s really what the lawmakers meant. Ditto the Rush Act—the titular phrase was meant to apply to violent solutions, but it doesn’t say that, and while sometimes in the spirit of the law is more important, the letter of the law is really the only part that’s enforceable… Next Week: “Signs and Portents.”[end-mark] The post <i>Babylon 5</i> Rewatch: “By Any Means Necessary” appeared first on Reactor.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Australia’s chief censor, eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, by her own admission already lives in “a dystopia.” Namely, in an era of the internet where allegedly, and to sum her sentiment up, “nobody’s thinking of the children.” And so to make both the dystopia and the internet worse, Grant is sticking to her guns, at least when it comes to continued anti-encryption rhetoric. This, is despite the fact that Australia’s proposed new rules have seemingly gotten “watered down” after strong pushback. It’s a dangerous game Grant and her ilk are playing, considering that encryption is the best currently known protection people of any age (and businesses and governments) currently have on the internet. But this big picture is just something various jurisdictions, like the EU and Australia, refuse to acknowledge, and would rather essentially break the internet instead. Critics say that’s because the real goal is not to target surveillance at child abusers, but to facilitate mass surveillance of everybody. And Grant has just made another admission. “Resistance from industry (to proposed anti-encryption measures) during the public consultation this year was more robust than we expected,” she said, noting that a reason for this resistance was fear of widespread government surveillance. But she dismissed it saying that “the world we live in today” is already dystopian because adults (such as, law enforcement) allegedly have no tools to stop online abuse of children or promotion of terrorism. These comments come after the new standards originally announced in Australia in November underwent changes before the final draft was submitted to parliament last Friday. Namely, it “improves” on the vague language by stating, “companies will not be required to break encryption and will not be required to undertake measures not technically feasible or reasonably practical,” reports say. At least, this applies to building whatever is considered “a systemic weakness” into the service, and specifically concerning end-to-end encryption, it applies to building “a new” decryption capability. This is seen by the industry behind messaging platforms, from Apple to Signal, as a win, but Grant’s subsequent reaction via an op-ed clearly shows she is unhappy with the outcome. And there is nothing to stop the commissioner from, going forward, introducing another proposal, perhaps attacking encryption from another angle, or just amplifying the child safety narrative. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Australia’s eSafety Chief Doubles Down on Anti-Encryption Push Despite Industry Backlash appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

First Wave of Kenyan Police Arrive in Haiti

Reunited And It Feels so Good: Obama Works to Save Biden from a Loss to Trump

Gagging Trump Again, This Time in Florida

Donkeys, known for their affectionate and loyal nature, have a special place in the hearts of many animal lovers. This is the case with a remarkable donkey named Diesel who went on an unexpected journey. Terrie Drewry, a dedicated donkey owner, recounts the heart-wrenching story of losing her beloved donkey, Diesel, five years ago. While... The post Couple searches for lost donkey for 5 years and then learns of ‘impostor’ in herd of elk appeared first on Animal Channel.

Making his second appearance in less than a week on the Fox News Channel’s Fox News @ Night, NewsBusters managing editor Curtis Houck ripped CNN for both its “arrogance” and “petulance” ahead of its Thursday night presidential debate as well as the legal trouble the network has found itself in with allegations of defamation (reported by our own Nick Fondacaro). Houck and former longtime local news anchor Dee Sarton began with the viral outburst of CNN This Morning host Kasie Hunt abruptly ending her interview with lead Trump campaign press secretary Karoline Leavitt when the Trump aide merely pointed out former President Trump is heading into the debate against not only President Biden, but biased debate moderators.     Sarton told host Trace Gallagher what stood out was Hunt’s “body language, everything that was happening there was something that I was surprised to see from” someone who’s “been in the business a long, long time and I think that it kind of reveals the pressure cooker that maybe is happening there at CNN that she would get so defensive and get so angry”. Houck concurred this was “shock[ing]” for even Leavitt to have seen considering “she was trying to move on...to the preparations of the former President for the debate” and Hunt was hung up on Leavitt (accurately) pointing out one of the moderators — Jake Tapper — had recently compared Trump to Adolf Hitler. “And it just showed petulance, and it showed an arrogance from Kasie Hunt. She wasn’t around for the days of Jeff Zucker, but it really harkened back to those kinds of days of Jim Acosta in the briefing room and the like, making snarky commentaries. I think she defended her colleagues because, if she didn’t, she would have heard from Jake Tapper,” Houck added. Houck later weighed in on HBO’s Real Time host Bill Maher slamming Biden for pandering to black voters about “democracy” and racism despite polls showing he’s hemorrhaging voters in that demographic: He is a straight shooter...[H]e is going to tell his side things that they don’t want to hear...He recognizes that for black voters and young voters, things like the economy and the border, those are things that happen to people of all races and those are things that are right in front of them. You can’t deny that gas prices are where they are. You can’t deny that things are expensive — is where they are.  Houck closed by tying this to the Tapper (and Dana Bash) debate: “It’s a question of whether CNN and Jake Tapper — to tie back to our previous discussion about whether they make things like the economy, the focus of this debate, or do they stick to the Biden agenda of focusing on abortion, and claims — fearmongering about democracy.” The two stuck around for the show’s closing segment, “The Nightcap”, with the question posed to panelists was whether Trump should be nice or “nasty” during the debate.     For his part, Houck said Trump should “[l]et Biden talk” and either let him wilt on the vine or stand out the way if he’s bouncing off the walls like he was during the State of the Union. Houck then worked in the CNN lawsuit for a segment that aired on Tapper’s show, The Lead: Someone’s going to slip up here and if the moderators start getting agitated, maybe Trump brings up the fact that Jake Tapper’s in some legal trouble facing a defamation case. [GALLAGHER LAUGHS] But I look for a funny Trump. You know, if Trump’s going to talk, he should tell some jokes. To see the relevant FNC transcript from June 25, click here.

Now it looks like a one-two punch with kid-gloves. Vice President Kamala Harris drew puffballs from Mika Brzezinski on Morning Joe after CBS's Sunday Morning aired a soft-serve scoop of her hubby, "Second Gentleman" Douglas Emhoff. This show has been on a streak of puffball interviews with liberals this year.  CBS reporter Rita Braver offered no questions about Kamala's viral "word salads" or inquiries on why so many of her staff have quit over the last four years. There were no questions about Trump or the Republicans. This segment seemed designed just to warm up the image of Kamala and Doug.  The exchange CBS touted at the top was Emhoff denying he's an adviser to his wife. Oh come on! Nobody should believe the denials.  RITA BRAVER: I'll ask you the question that all political wives get and that is, are you also an advisor to your wife? DOUGLAS EMHOFF: No. BRAVER: No?? EMHOFF: I am her husband. She has plenty of people around her giving her advice on her role. I'm just there to support her, to be there for her. BRAVER: When she gets classified briefings, aren't you curious? EMHOFF: No. It`s surreal sometimes when I know she's in the Situation Room and I'll see something on the news, like, "Hmm, I wonder what's happening?" And then when it's not classified it could be, "Hey, you know, that might have been what was happening." Back in 2010 on this program, Jim Axelrod interviewed George and Laura Bush, and she readily admitted she was a sounding board in tough times, like after Hurricane Katrina:  AXELROD: The long knives were out, which is when the White House can be at its loneliest. How does it work, Mrs. Bush? Do you offer a point of view, criticism, when you're in the heat of it? LAURA BUSH: Sure. All of those things. But not a lot of criticism. Braver then turned to First Lady Jill Biden for her gushing over how Emhoff "connects with people." Smooch smooch. Painting by numbers, Braver touted how Emhoff's Jewish background, and avoided Emhoff's harsh attack on Trump in May as "a known antisemite, who’s had dinner with antisemites, who said there was good people on both sides after Charlottesville." BRAVER: Emhoff is not only the first second gentleman, he`s also the first Jewish person ever to be in the "big four," as the top two national couples are called. Emhoff and Harris proudly showed us a mezuzah, traditionally hung on doorposts of Jewish homes, that they placed on the Vice President`s house; and Emhoff has taken a leading role in fighting antisemitism. KAMALA HARRIS: The work that Doug is doing is really extraordinary. I mean, fighting antisemitism, especially at this moment in time when so many people are living in fear and also just, you know, concerned about what's happening in our country. EMHOFF: She said this issue found me -- HARRIS: It did EMHOFF: -- and she literally said, "And now you've got to step up." BRAVER: That was all before the October 7th Hamas attacks on Israelis. Now, Emhoff is front and center, standing in the Rose Garden with the President and Vice President.' EMHOFF (May 20): I know a lot of us are feeling alone, afraid, and in pain. There is an epidemic of hate, including a crisis of antisemitism in our country and around the world.  [To Braver] I process that to this day as a Jewish person -- the impact, the emotional, the rage, all those things that so many of us feel. Braver did not ask about pro-Hamas protests on campus or anti-Israel Democrats like AOC or Jamaal Bowman. This was the only time Braver threw a moderately challenging question -- on behalf of the pro-Hamas Palestinians:  BRAVER: What about Palestinian and Muslim Americans who say, "We`re hurting, too"? EMHOFF: All hate is bad. The work I`ve been doing has centered not only on fighting antisemitism, but fighting hate of all kinds, letting people know that a hate against one is a hate against all. That's pitch perfect with Karine Jean-Pierre talking points, always matching anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Braver ended with a question that could be seen as tricky. Have you thought about moving to California? Politicians (and their spouses) never suggest they're pondering defeat. Emhoff gave the usual "democracy is on the line" guff from the Democrats: More than a little hyperbolic? But in tune with the press corps. Second Gentleman @DouglasEmhoff to Rita Braver on @CBSSunday: “We have to win this election. Literally, our country and our world depends on us winning this election.” pic.twitter.com/F4TCl4wdAJ — Brent Baker ?? ?? (@BrentHBaker) June 23, 2024