TechCrunch

What We Do In The Shadows’ Nadja of Antipaxos (Natasia Demetriou) is bound to ascend to the Supreme Council of vampires. A 500-year-old vampire of Romani descent, Nadja had a very disadvantaged life as a human. But in What We Do In The Shadows season 3, Nadja – along with her roommates Nandor (Kayvan Novak), Laszlo (Matt Berry), and Colin (Mark Proksch) – are promoted to become the leaders of the local Vampiric Council.

In the final episode of What We Do In The Shadows season 2, the group is summoned by the Vampiric Council to be executed for killing Baron Afanas (Doug Jones). However, Guillermo (Harvey Guillén) breaks out his masters and kills the council members in the process. While this makes the vampires fear retaliation from the other elders, the Supreme Council instead recognizes the massacre as a sign of strength. And as a result, Nadja’s group was promoted into the new leaders of the local Vampiric Council.

While Laszlo and Colin are uninterested in their new leadership roles, Nadja and Nandor bicker over who gets to sit on the council’s throne, much to the chagrin of the Floating Woman, also known as the vampire council Guide (Kristen Schaal). Guillermo convinces Nadja and Nandor to let him sit on the throne to keep up appearances that the council is united by a single figure. However, this is only a temporary solution to the building tensions between Nadja and Nandor. And the evidence suggests that not only will Nadja take the local Vampiric Council throne; she will also eventually ascend the ranks to become a member of the Supreme Council.

Before the four vampires ascended to become the leaders of the local Vampiric Council, it was Nandor who primarily dealt with council matters. Nandor is the de facto leader who answers emails and deals with the vampire bureaucracy. However, it is Nadja who clearly has the most natural leadership ability. Even when the energy vampire Colin Robinson, along with Laszlo and Nandor, are adamant about their opinions on vampire matters, they often end up following Nadja’s lead, as her decisions are often congruent with the traditional dominating perspective that is expected of elder vampires. For instance, it was Nadja’s violently vocal objections to Baron Afanas’ orders that eventually led them to follow with the plan to kill him, which would’ve likely still happened had Guillermo not accidentally finished the job.

Nadja was also right about Laszlo’s witch-skin hat being cursed, and the entire group would’ve avoided all the trouble with Simon the Devious (Nick Kroll) had Laszlo heeded her advice about ditching the hat. Moreover, when Nadja and Nandor are called by the Guide to perform their duties of judging erring vampires for the council, Nadja is much more decisive than Nandor, whose bureaucratic tendencies tend to get in the way of decision making. And although Guillermo’s vampire-killing abilities give him the highest kill count in What We Do In The Shadows, the show’s most brutal vocal insults undoubtedly belong to Nadja. This strong penchant for insults will come in handy when she ascends to become a Supreme Council member, as it will allow her to dominate vampires that are much more assertive than her roommates and the remaining vampires of New York.

As the group’s recent promotion shows, the Supreme Council respects brutality. There’s no question that Nadja is the most brutal and dangerous vampire in the main cast. When it comes to brutality, her roommates pale in comparison. For instance, Laszlo only kills out of necessity, like when he murdered the owner of a Pennsylvania bar in order to take it over and assume the role of beloved human bartender Jackie Daytona. Meanwhile, the energy vampire Colin has never killed anyone, although the fate of his victims may be worse than death. As for Nandor, who was a mass-murdering military and political leader based on Vlad the Impaler, he has actually shown a disdain for violence. Instead, it is always Guillermo who does all the killing for Nandor. However, Guillermo, who will likely never become a vampire, is not a real contender for the throne.

Moreover, while Guillermo’s kill count is unrivaled, the most brutal kill still belongs to Nadja, when she tore out the heart of a vampire who refused to pay council dues, essentially putting a stop to a fledgling vampire rebellion with one move. Nadja also accidentally kills Nandor’s werewolf love interest, Gail (Aida Turturro), when she kicks a ball that hits her right in the head, which happened during the Twilight parody episode, in which the vampires played kickball with the werewolves. While Nadja has only killed humans for blood during previous seasons, What We Do In The Shadows season 3 seems to be exploring her knack for decisive violence, which will garner the favor of the Supreme Council.

Despite Nandor’s past of laying waste to countless lives over several centuries, he is mostly unwilling to do any actual violence and often focuses on the bureaucratic aspects of leadership. This is why Nandor will most likely step aside for the much more decisive Nadja to take the Vampiric Council throne. With Nadja as the leader, Nandor can do what he does best and let his familiar and bodyguard, vampire hunter Guillermo, do all the dirty and violent work for the council. Moreover, Nadja had already shown how easily she could manipulate Nandor when she made him take the blame for the Sire’s escape, which was really her fault. This incident will also no doubt factor into the debate on who deserves the throne more. Meanwhile, the recently resurrected Baron Afanas, who is already vampire royalty, is unlikely to threaten Nadja’s ascension. As for the Floating Woman, aka the Guide, she likely sees Nadja as a decisive leader – someone whom she can serve with loyalty.

On the other hand, these are the paths that would make the most sense for the show’s main characters. And if there’s anything certain about What We Do In The Shadows’ main characters, it is that they are highly unpredictable. Although Nadja’s ascent to the Vampiric Throne and the Supreme Council of Vampires makes sense, it might be funnier for Nandor, Laszlo, or even Colin to get the promotion and interact with more powerful and dominating vampires. For now, it remains to be seen whether or not What We Do In The Shadows is ready to make such a huge and uncharacteristically sensible leap for the show.

Jake Gyllenhaal says Tom Holland helped him cope with anxiety while filming 2019's Spider-Man: Far From Home. This December will see the release of the MCU's third and potentially final solo Spider-Man movie, titled No Way Home. The Jon Watts-directed film will pick up where Far From Home left off, with Peter Parker's (Holland) identity having just been revealed to the world. Now that everyone knows he's Spider-Man, Peter's life gets turned upside down, which prompts him to seek out Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) for assistance.

Not only is Peter's secret identity gone, but he's also been framed for the murder of Mysterio (Gyllenhaal). Spider-Man: Far From Home initially positioned Mysterio as a hero from another universe who was the only one with the ability to defeat destructive creatures known as the Elementals. However, as fans familiar with Spider-Man lore knew all too well, Mysterio was little more than a villainous charlatan who pretended to be a hero when in reality, he was creating fake chaos. Peter got the upper hand by the end, but Mysterio's reach will still be felt well into Spider-Man: No Way Home.

Gyllenhaal put on a memorable performance as Mysterio, particularly once the truth behind his motivations was revealed. However, the actor had a difficult time settling into the Marvel universe. Speaking on The Howard Stern Show earlier this week (via THR), Gyllenhaal admitted that on his first day of Spider-Man: Far From Home, he got so anxious he kept forgetting his lines. Luckily, Holland was able to help him through it. Gyllenhaal said:

“I was freaking out. It was a scene with [Samuel L.] Jackson, Tom … there were a number of actors in that scene. And I remember not being able to remember my lines. I was the wooden board. And they were like, ‘Whoa.’ And I went up to Tom Holland and was like, ‘Dude, help me out.’ He’s like, ‘It’s all good, man. Just relax.’ It was like he was me in so many situations. And I finally did. I just put a lot of pressure on [myself] because I love that world.”

Gyllenhaal is perhaps one of the most skilled character actors working today, yet even he gets overwhelmed by the sheer size of a Marvel production. Spider-Man: Far From Home was the 23rd movie in the long-running franchise, meaning it's probably bigger than before and also operating like a well-oiled machine. For newcomers like Gyllenhaal, it can be a lot to process. Thankfully, he worked through it with Holland's help, further solidifying the genuine friendship between them that has become something of a viral sensation among fans.

Gyllenhaal is probably a pro at navigating Marvel productions by now, though he likely doesn't have a part in Spider-Man: No Way Home. There are theories about how Mysterio could return, but most signs so far point to him having a spiritual presence rather than a physical one. Nevertheless, Gyllenhaal managed to make his mark on the MCU with his signature go-for-broke style, even despite being riddled with nerves on his first day. If anything, Gyllenhaal's Spider-Man: Far From Home story is an inspirational one, because it shows that even Oscar nominees like him get anxious sometimes. Stars... they're just like us!

Source: The Howard Stern Show (via THR)

Released in late 2020, Sony’s PlayStation 5 has proven difficult to get hold of so far. Earlier this year, the company unveiled its latest 4K and 8K Bravia XR TV lineup, including the Z9J, A90J, A80J, X95J and X90J models. As to be expected with new Sony TVs, these models do come packed with a variety of next-generation improvements, upgrades and features, some of which make them perfect for gaming.

The company’s latest Bravia XR TVs are set to gain two new features in the opening months of 2022. The first is ‘Auto HDR Tone Mapping’ which Sony describes as the ability for the PS5 to automatically recognize the TV and set the optimal HDR setting. The second is ‘Auto Genre Picture Mode’ which is designed to ensure the TV detects when a game is being played and automatically switches the settings to Game Mode for a more optimal gaming experience. The opposite is also true as well, with the TV automatically switching to Standard Mode when watching a movie. Sony says the new Auto HDR Tone Mapping and Auto Genre Picture Mode features will arrive via software updates before the end of January 2022, and will need to be applied on both the TV and the PS5.

Sony is positioning these features as ‘perfect for PlayStation 5’ and they will no doubt help to make sure the experience is optimized for the content being displayed on the screen. However, that’s not necessarily to say that owners of other TVs won’t be able to benefit in a similar way. For example, the description of Auto Genre Picture Mode sounds a lot like the more general Auto Low Latency Mode (ALLM). Similar to Auto Genre Picture Mode, ALLM uses a signal sent over HDMI to tell a connected device that a game is being played. In other words, it too will help to make an automatic switch to Game Mode and help to reduce latency and so on. Likewise, HDR Gaming Interest Group (HGiG) is also a form of dynamic tone mapping which looks to adjust the HDR settings to better suit the content and devices involved, making it very similar to Auto HDR Tone Mapping.

Of course, this doesn’t mean Sony’s new TVs are not perfect for PS5 owners, as these technologies are perfect for gaming in general. Not to mention, HGiG and ALLM are only alternate solutions if the TV connected to the game console also supports them. What Sony is essentially saying here, is that its new Bravia XR TVs do support versions of ALLM and HGiG and that, in itself, makes them perfect for PlayStation 5.

Source: Sony

For a game that has become famous for its modding community, it should come as no surprise that there is a Witcher Mod available for the Skyrim Special Edition. Longtime Skyrim fans will be familiar with the process of finding and downloading mods for the game, but newer players might not have that same know-how. Follow this quick tutorial to download and play the Witcher Mod for Skyrim.

Since 2011, players have been creating mods that range from introducing new playable characters to mods that upgrade the user interface in Skyrim. Unlike other game developers, Bethesda Game Studios is happy to see the community create mods for their games. Bethesda’s game engine is even designed to allow for easy modding. In addition to game improvement, Skyrim fans have even modded characters and stories in from other games, most recently from The Witcher.

The Witcher Mod for Skyrim, also known as A Witcher’s Adventure, introduces a new playable character race, eight new quests, over 40 new weapons, new monsters, and tons of other content. The mod also brings new combat mechanics like signs and alchemy. Just like other mods for Skyrim that add characters and locations, the Witcher mod can be used alongside any other, so long as their total does not exceed 2 gigabytes.

To download The Witcher Mod for Skyrim, PC players must head over to Nexus Mods and create an account, if they do not already have one. After finding The Witcher Mod, download the file and any of its patches. For console players, the process is a bit different. First, players must go to Bethesda’s website and create an account there. Back in the game’s main menu, select the mod option and sign in. Once logged in, search for the mod and download it.

Once the Witcher Mod has been downloaded, players can view it in the library alongside any other Skyrim mods they may have downloaded. To play with the mod turned on, simply check it off in the library, then launch the game. For console players, it is important to note that playing with mods enabled prevents trophies or achievements from being earned.

One of the greatest parts of Skyrim is how vast the modding community is. In many ways, the myriad mods end up creating an entirely new game between adding in new playable characters, new designs and textures, and new missions. For those downloading The Witcher Mod for Skyrim, keep an eye out for additional content, as the creator has already promised updates in the future.

Skyrim is available on Windows, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PlayStation 4, Xbox One, Nintendo Switch, and will release on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X/S on November 11, 2021.

Google will no longer allow advertisers, publishers, and YouTube creators to monetize content that denies the existence of climate change. The company detailed the changes in a support document on Thursday.

“Today, we’re announcing a new monetization policy for Google advertisers, publishers and YouTube creators that will prohibit ads for, and monetization of, content that contradicts well-established scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change,” the Google Ads team said in the document. “This includes content referring to climate change as a hoax or a scam, claims denying that long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to...

long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to climate change.”

Google says it will use a mix of automated tools and human reviews to enforce the policy. “When evaluating content against this new policy, we’ll look carefully at the context in which claims are made, differentiating between content that states a false claim as fact, versus content that reports on or discusses that claim,” Google said. Ads will still be allowed on climate topics like public debates on climate policy, research, and more, according to Google

Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney, whose high-profile antitrust lawsuit against Apple is now under appeal, is today calling out the iPhone maker for giving itself access to an advertising slot its competitors don’t have: the iPhone’s Settings screen. Some iOS 15 users noticed Apple is now advertising its own services at the top of their Settings, just below their Apple ID. The services being suggested are personalized to the device owner, based on which ones they already subscribe to, it appears.

For example, those without an Apple Music subscription may see an ad offering a free six-month trial. However, current Apple Music subscribers may instead see a prompt to add on a service they don’t yet have, like AppleCare coverage for their devices.

Sweeney suggests this sort of first-party advertising is an anticompetitive risk for Apple, as some of the services it’s pushing here are those that directly compete with third-party apps published on its App Store. But those third-party apps can’t gain access to the iPhone’s Settings screen, of course — they can only bid for ad slots within the App Store itself.

Writes Sweeney: “New from the guys who banned Fortnite: settings-screen ads for their own music service, which come before the actual settings, and which aren’t available to other advertisers like Spotify or Sound Cloud.”

New from the guys who banned Fortnite: settings-screen ads for their own music service, which come before the actual settings, and which aren’t available to other advertisers like Spotify or Sound Cloud. “It’s all about the customers!” https://t.co/p9FNpXT1Rx

— Tim Sweeney (@TimSweeneyEpic) October 6, 2021

Sweeney had been retweeting another post by Mobile Dev Memo analyst Eric Seufert, who himself was sharing an image credited to Glassfy co-founder Francesco Zucchetta.

Zucchetta tells TechCrunch he spotted the ad on an iPhone 8 he owned which was running iOS 15. But others have seen the ads on newer devices, as well. And some respondents noted they were receiving Apple’s promotions as push notifications, too.

The issue here is tricky because the promotion isn’t always a situation where Apple is disadvantaging a rival to its own benefit.

For example, on an iPhone 13 Pro Max we have which is running iOS 15.1, the prompt was used to inform us we still had a certain number of days left to add AppleCare+ coverage. (We already have most of Apple’s other subscriptions.). But in this case, there aren’t third-party apps offering a direct competitor to AppleCare, in the same way that Spotify directly competes with Apple Music. Instead, warranty companies like Asurion partner with mobile carriers like AT&T and Verizon to sell their iPhone insurance plans, instead of selling direct to consumers through the App Store.

Some might even argue that a reminder to add warranty coverage is a useful feature, not an unwanted intrusion.

While Sweeney’s tweet has raised awareness of the first-party promotions in Settings, they are not new.

Apple has often used the iPhone’s Settings screen to market its services to its customers in much of the same way as it’s doing now.

Last year, for example, it was spotted running promotions for Apple Arcade, AppleCare and Apple TV+ in Settings. Outside of this screen, Apple has also promoted its own services in other unusual ways, including through the use of push notifications. And it has cross-promoted its services inside its own apps for years — like prompts to subscribe to Apple Music while using iTunes.

But regulators today are taking a closer look at platforms and how they’re using or abusing their market power. Google is currently appealing a record penalty in the EU for its requirement that device manufacturers preinstall Google’s suite of apps with the phones they sell. Samsung, meanwhile, said it would stop running ads in its first-party apps on Galaxy devices. (It had displayed ads for other companies and those that promoted its own products, at times.)

Epic Games didn’t have any further comments on Sweeney’s tweet, including whether or not the company would be using this latest bit of information in its upcoming appeal. Apple has been asked for comment but has not responded.

There is a small and easily missed detail included in Atreus’ God of War Ragnarök character design that hearkens back to 2018's God of War game. God of War Ragnarok has been one of the most anticipated titles for the new generation of gaming ever since it was first announced. After over a year of waiting, fans finally got treated to a new gameplay trailer for the upcoming sequel at Sony’s PlayStation Showcase in September, where the game’s official name of Ragnarok was confirmed.

This latest trailer for God of War Ragnarok certainly did not disappoint. Fans were presented with an impressive amount of gameplay footage as the trailer followed Kratos and his son Atreus traversing the snowy and enemy riddled vistas in search of Tyr, the Norse god of War. Along with the series’ heroes, other notable characters are also making a return in Ragnarok, such as Freya and Mimir. But, along with these God of War characters, there are other, more subtle details from the 2018 game that also appeared in the Ragnarok trailer.

One such detail was spotted by God of War fan BT_BlackThunder on Twitter. Using a cropped screenshot from the recent God of War Ragnarok trailer, BT_BlackThunder pointed out the small etchings that are marked into Atreus’ quiver. They appear to show two stick figures, equating to Kratos and Atreus, making their way to the mountain top from the first game. These etchings are an embellishment on the markings that were originally found on Atreus’ quiver in 2018's God of War.

This attention to detail within the character designs for God of War Ragnarok shows just how much work has been going into the game’s development. Little touches such as these quiver markings add an extra level of immersion for players; As Atreus has grown up between the games, so too have his possessions.

Along with his enhanced quiver etchings, Atreus is additionally sporting a new outfit in God of War Ragnarok, and a much broader frame. He is also shown to be keen to partake in battle – something that Kratos is eager to discourage. However, the revelation in God of War that Atreus is indeed Loki, the Norse god of mischief, has fueled Atreus’ thirst for answers. And it is more than likely that this newfound desire within Atreus will play a key part in Ragnarok’s narrative when the game releases next year.

God of War Ragnarök will be coming to PlayStation 5 and PlayStation 4 in 2022.

Source: BT_BlackThunder/Twitter (1 & 2)

Warning! Spoilers ahead for Marvel's What If...? season 1 finale.

The Watcher (Jeffrey Wright) explicitly turned down Iron Man (Mike Wingert) as a potential member of the Guardians of the Multiverse in Marvel's What If...? finale, why? Marvel Studios' first animated series wrapped up with a culmination of everything that transpired in its first season. Forced to intervene after Ultron (Ross Marquand) with all six Infinity Stones threatened the multiverse, the Watcher forged a partnership with Doctor Strange Supreme (Benedict Cumberbatch), and together, they hatched a plan on how to neutralize the unhinged villain.

That's where the idea of the Guardians of the Multiverse came from. Soon after, the Watcher scoured the multiverse to assemble his dream team. Heroes from previous episodes were recruited to the mission including Captain Carter (Hayley Atwell), T'Challa's Star-Lord (Chadwick Boseman), King Killmonger (Michael B. Jordan), Party Thor (Chris Hemsworth), a variant of Gamora (Cynthia McWilliams), and Doctor Strange Supreme. Meanwhile, Black Widow (Lake Bell) from Ultron's universe eventually joined the group. Each one of them has previously appeared in What If...? except for Gamora, who was with Iron Man in Nidavellir when the Watcher found her.

Not much is known regarding the pair's relationship as their episode has been bumped to What If...? season 2. Aside from their solo story, their brief interaction with the Watcher also posed some questions, particularly about the entity's decision to reject Iron Man as a potential member of the Guardians of the Galaxy. As the creator of Ultron, bringing in Tony could've helped them in finding a way to defeat the villain. But, that's not exactly how it was meant to be. The Watcher said that the mission required "the perfect combination of skills and experience that alone will triumph." This means that he needed a very specific group of people; it wasn't just about individual capabilities. As great as Iron Man is,  he could be a risky team member. Due to his strong personality, he might clash with others which would distract them from their goal and the Watcher couldn't risk that.

In relation to that, Tony joining the Guardians of the Multiverse could also mean that he would want to be involved in coming up with their plan of action. However, it's worth noting that by the time the Watcher recruited his picks, he and Doctor Strange Supreme had already settled on what they wanted to do. They only needed capable people to actually execute it. While some official members of the Guardians of the Multiverse were skeptical of their mission initially, everyone eventually boarded the scheme with very little to no qualms. Of course, there's a possibility that Iron Man could've come up with a more efficient way to defeat Ultron; after all, he created the corrupted robot. But the Watcher was pressed with time; they didn't have the wiggle room to re-assess and change their strategy while the villain move from one reality to another.

Admittedly, many are bummed not to learn more about this latest version of Iron Man, especially since the animated series has made a habit of killing variants of the character — at least in season 1. But there's more to his story than just a brief conversation with the Watcher. As previously mentioned, his and Gamora's episode will be released in What If...? season 2 instead.

Marvel's What If...? returns with season 2 on Disney+.

Warning: SPOILER for Star Trek: Lower Decks Season 2, Episode 9 - "weJ Duj (Three Ships)".

Captain Kirk's infamous opening scene in Star Trek V: The Final Frontier is parodied by Star Trek: Lower Decks with Ensign D'Vana Tendi and Dr. T'Ana potentially finishing the one mission Kirk never did. In Star Trek: Lower Decks season 2, episode 9, "weJ Duj (Three Ships)," the Lower Deckers aboard the USS Cerritos pair up with a "bridge buddy" for some rest and recreation during a long-haul warp flight. Tendi and T'Ana decide to recreate Kirk's Yosemite vacation gone wrong in Star Trek 5.

The William Shatner-directed Star Trek V ranks as least-loved of the movies starring the cast of Star Trek: The Orignal Series and scenes like Kirk at Yosemite National Park are partly why. After a prologue introduces Sybok (Laurence Luckinbill), the half-brother of Spock (Leonard Nimoy), the action turns to Kirk climbing El Capitan at Yosemite. The Captain's ascent is interrupted by Spock, who is wearing a pair of hover boots that allow him to fly. Kirk is so distracted by Spock that he loses his footing and ends up plummeting off the mountain. Of course, Spock saves his best friend. Kirk and Spock later join Dr. Leonard McCoy (DeForest Kelley) around the campfire later that night to sing "Row Row Row Your Boat" before they are summoned back aboard the Starship Enterprise.

In Star Trek: Lower Decks, Ensign Tendi (Noël Wells) and Dr. T'Ana (Gillian Vigman) climb El Capitan together in a holodeck simulation of Yosemite National Park and they are interrupted by Ensign Brad Boimler (Jack Quaid), who wears hover boots like Spock and the same "Go climb a rock" sweatshirt that Kirk is wearing aboard the bridge of the Enterprise in Star Trek V. In Lower Decks, Boimler's flying footwear malfunctions and he plummets hundreds of feet, although Bradward's life is saved by tree branches. Meanwhile, it's implied that the Orion Ensign and the Caitian Starfleet doctor finished their climb because they weren't far from El Capitan's summit and they weren't particularly concerned about Boimer since they assumed the holodeck's safety protocols were on. If Tendi and T'Ana did make it to the top of El Capitan, then they finished the climb Kirk never did.

Star Trek V never made it clear whether Kirk ever actually made it to the top of El Capitan. At the end of Star Trek V, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy returned to Yosemite to resume their shore leave, but the film ends with the Enterprise trio once again singing "Row Row Row Your Boat" around the campfire. It's possible that Kirk didn't go back to climb that giant rock, especially since Bones was furious that Kirk nearly died the first time he tried it. Not that Kirk always heeds his doctor's advice, but the captain of the Enterprise could have just settled for enjoying camping on terra firma with his best friends instead of risking his life ascending El Capitan once again.

Despite Star Trek V's less than stellar reputation among Trekkers, William Shatner's The Final Frontier continues to have an indelible influence on Star Trek and there's a reason why Lower Decks loves to reference it. Star Trek V has its flaws but at the core of the film is the reaffirmation of the friendship between Kirk, Spock, and Bones. Sybok tests the bond of the Enterprise trio but they emerged from their encounter with "God" as steadfast as ever.

Similarly, Star Trek: Lower Decks is a testament to the friendship of the Cerritos' junior officers, Ensigns Beckett Mariner (Tawney Newsome), Boimler, Tendi, and Sam Rutherford (Eugene Cordero). The weird aspects of Star Trek V: The Final Frontier are natural fodder for Star Trek: Lower Decks' comedy, which celebrates everything strange but wonderful about being in Starfleet. Star Trek: Lower Decks also reveres Kirk and Spock, and the Captain of the Enterprise might be amused that his climbing El Capitan is now mimicked by others in Starfleet, even if they get to finish the ascent Kirk didn't.

Star Trek: Lower Decks streams Thursdays on Paramount+.

The upcoming Hellraiser reboot has cast actress Jamie Clayton as lead villain Pinhead. This new film will be the 11th in the long-running Hellraiser film franchise, which began with the original film in 1987. The new film is being directed by The Night House's David Bruckner, and will be released on Hulu in 2022. Producer David S. Goyer promises that this new Hellraiser will be "terrifying and amazing."

The series' central villain is Pinhead, the leader of the Cenobites, which are extradimensional beings of pain and pleasure. Pinhead was originally played by English actor Doug Bradley, who reprised the role in the first seven sequels. He was replaced by Stephan Smith Collins in 2011's Hellraiser: Revelations and Paul T. Taylor in 2018's Hellraiser: Judgment.

Per THR, Hellraiser, which was filming in Serbia, has officially wrapped production and announced its cast. Leading the film as Pinhead is Jamie Clayton, an actress who is best known for starring in the Netflix series Sense8. This will mark the first time that Pinhead has been played by a woman, as well as the first time a trans actress has led a major horror franchise. Also appearing are Odessa A’zion (Grand Army), Brandon Flynn (13 Reasons Why), Goran Visnjic (The Boys), Drew Starkey (Scream: The TV Series), Adam Faison (Everything’s Gonna Be Okay), Aoife Hinds (Normal People), and Hiam Abbass (Succession) in as-yet-unspecified roles. Check out Jamie Clayton's tweet announcing the casting below:

This will be Jamie Clayton's third film after appearing on TV series for several years (she has previously appeared in The Snowman and Chain of Death). On Sense8, which was co-created by the Wachowski sisters, she made a name for herself as the intrepid hacker and political activist Nomi Marks. After Sense8, Clayton also appeared on Designated Survivor, Roswell, New Mexico, and The L Word: Generation Q.

In addition to Jamie Clayton's casting making history in and of itself, it also shows that the producers are engaging with the long LGBTQ+ history of Hellraiser. The original film was directed by Clive Barker adapting his own novella "The Hellbound Heart." Barker is a gay man whose work is constantly in conversation with LGBTQ+ themes and the idea of The Other, and Jamie Clayton's casting rings true to the nature of his inimitable universe. Although he was not involved with the film when she was originally cast, Clive Barker has since been brought on as a producer, giving his ultimate seal of approval to the project.

Source: THR

Aye, Mateys! Time to sail the seven seas and search for adventure with these classic pirate movies. The life of a pirate is a life of freedom, danger, and debauchery that make for perfect entertainment. Pirate films are fun and exciting adventure movies that provide a little bit of everything.

There are usually great fight scenes, ship battles, and even some romance. Audiences can have a great time with these movies, and most critics can't deny their joy at getting the chance to become invested in the world of pirates.

Updated October 7th, 2021 by Rose Graceling-Moore - Pirates continue to be a source of fascination for audiences, with recent offerings including Netflix's mini-series The Lost Pirate Kingdom (which managed an impressive 100% on Rotten Tomatoes itself). The Pirates of the Caribbean pirate movie franchise also continues to grow, with reports of a female-fronted installment in the works. In the meantime, these classics, twists, and new favorites are enough to keep any pirate happy! 

Muppet Treasure Island is a retelling of the classic novel, but with The Muppets. The Muppets fit very well in this movie, with Kermit the Frog as the captain and Gonzo as a member of the crew. However, the star of this movie is Tim Curry as Long John Silver, who is clearly having the time of his life portraying a pirate alongside Muppet characters.

One of the most enjoyable aspects of this film is the creative and memorable musical numbers that are guaranteed to get stuck in fans' heads. It's got a lot of humor, heart, and family-friendly pirate entertainment. While many pirate films are certainly not appropriate for younger viewers, this is a sanitized version of piracy that anyone can enjoy.

The Goonies is the definition of a good time. It follows a group of curious kids who search for lost pirate treasure after stumbling upon a treasure map. Along the way, they face dangerous foes and obstacles that they will have to get through in order to find the treasure, in a classic treasure hunt.

The Goonies has lots of pirate moments, including a treasure room on a ship that was owned by a character named One-Eyed Willy. Critics really enjoyed this family adventure and it is considered a classic movie from the '80s. It's hard to watch this movie and not be sucked into the adventure.

When it comes to movies that tell the tale of Peter Pan, most people think of the Disney animated classic and Hook. However, many overlooked this 2003 version of the classic story, yet it is considered to be one of the better versions by critics who found it to be a faithful adaptation that still manages to be a great fantasy story.

Captain Hook is a legendary pirate character who is on a mission to get his revenge on Peter. Here, he is played by Jason Isaacs, who always loves to play the villainous characters. This version of Peter Pan may have forgotten about, but it deserves more attention.

While it is not the highest-rated film on this list, Pirates of the Caribbean is one of the most famous pirate films. Based on the popular attraction at Disney Parks around the world, Pirates of the Caribbean is incredibly enjoyable. It has an amazing swordfight, a cool story with a unique mythology, and a world enraptured by its swashbuckling atmosphere.

Jack Sparrow is the most iconic pirate character ever put to film, helmed by a great performance from Johnny Depp. However, Geoffrey Rush as Barbossa also competes for the best cinema pirate. It's one of the biggest franchises ever and people love revisiting these characters. Also, Hans Zimmer's incredible score is the theme music for anything pirate-related, forever. Surprisingly, though, the rest of the franchise doesn't do so well on the aggregate site, with many of the films managing a 'rotten' rating.

The Pirates of Penzance is a romantic musical comedy from 1983. Based on the Broadway play, the film appears as though it straight from Broadway. as the sets are very obvious and the musical atmosphere is in every frame of this movie. It does have a lot of entertaining pirate moments, but the musical numbers are also clever, catchy, and fit in with the world of pirates.

It still manages to be a pirate adventure while also being a great musical. The action may not be as exciting as other pirate movies, but there is still a lot that critics love about this goofy, pirate musical.

Disney's Peter Pan is an animated classic that makes viewers wish they could stay kids forever. While there are moments in Peter Pan that have aged incredibly poorly, there is still a lot to love here. The animation is colorful, bright, and beautiful throughout. Peter Pan also has wonderful songs that will make any fan want to fly to the second star to the right.

Captain Hook is one of Disney's best villains, and it's just as easy to love his goofy sidekick, Mr. Smee. Hook and his pirate crew turn this animated fantasy into an imaginative pirate tale.

Blackbeard's Ghost is another pirate adventure from Disney in 1968. This movie is about a track coach who has a supernatural encounter with the ghost of the infamous pirate, Blackbeard. This sounds like a bizarre concept, but critics really enjoyed the movie and found it to be solid family entertainment that delivers some laughs and is immensely creative.

It's an intriguing concept, as it mixes modern day with the world of pirates. It turns out that these two worlds meld much better than expected.

This pirate flick is an absolute classic, from 1942 - and an Academy Award winner (for Best Cinematography). The plot revolves around Henry Morgan, rogue pirates, the Jamaican governor, and a beautiful daughter... all the classic ingredients for a swashbuckler.

While elements of the film may appear outdated today, it's a pirate movie that still deserves the rating it has, not least because it is simply an excellent straightforward adventure movie. This isn't a film that will appeal to those wanting twists and turns, or historical accuracy, but anyone who wants swordfights and romance will be thrilled.

The Pirates: Band of Misfits is a 2012 stop-motion animated film about a band of pirate scoundrels. This movie has a tremendous voice cast, including Hugh Jackman, Salma Hayek, Brendan Gleeson, and Martin Freeman.

The animation is also impressive, especially since stop-motion is a difficult form of animation that takes a lot of time to complete. However, the effort was worth it here, as critics appear to love this movie. While it is a goofy film, critics praised the movie for having a lot of smart and clever humor mixed with a wonderful cast and beautiful animation.

The true classic from 1940 stars Errol Flynn as Geoffrey Thorpe, Queen Elizabeth's man on the high seas. Focusing on the conflict between Queen Elizabeth and the Spanish (and her famous 'sea dogs' of the time period), there are plenty of swordfights to be found here - enough that the film was nominated for four Oscars.

Spies, pirates, adventure, battle and more is set against a stunning soundtrack, and although the film is in black and white (and many aspects of it may be considered outdated today) it remains a classic... and a film to prove just how long pirates have been popular on the big screen.

Unlike most pirate movies, Captain Phillips isn't a romanticized look at piracy or set in the Golden Age of Piracy, either. Instead, this modern-day movie looks at piracy as it still exists, a violent and frightening part of shipping and sailing. Based on a real-life story, the film centers on a merchant vessel taken hostage by pirates in 2009.

This is not the film for anyone seeking family-friendly swashbuckling adventures, but for those looking for an action film with real depth and intensity. The film was nominated for six Oscars.

This recent 'pirate' film is an incredibly wholesome look at children playing at pirates and sailors in the Lake District, in the 1930s. Based on the novel of the same name, it is a sweet adventure about a simpler time... while also being a surprising adventure, when the children band together to take down a real-life criminal. There may be no swordfights, but there are some incredible action scenes involving a float plane which more than make up for it.

Treasure maps, imagination, and the power of friendship take center stage in this sweet pirate film appropriate for all ages.

The Princess Bride is an iconic film, filled with memorable moments and quotes that stand the test of time. The characters are equally as memorable, from Buttercup and Westley to Fezzik and Inigo Montoya. Directed by Rob Reiner, The Princess Bride is a hilarious film that blends together action, comedy, and romance.

It's a great fantasy adventure that critics and audiences loved when it first came out and still love today. It is more of a fantasy film than a pirate film, but there are some great swordfights that make for some swashbuckling entertainment. Watching The Princess Bride without a smile is inconceivable.

With a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, The Crimson Pirate is a near-perfect pirate movie (for its time, of course). Made in 1952, the film stars Burt Lancaster as the pirate Captain Vallo, a classic swashbuckler who falls in love with a beautiful woman, and must save her from an odious marriage.

This may be something of a predictable film, as it fulfils so many of the tropes of classic Hollywood movies, but that doesn't make it any less enjoyable.

Disney is the king of pirate-themed entertainment. Treasure Island is a classic pirate tale about Jim Hawkins who encounters Long John Silver on a journey to recover lost pirate treasure. This adaptation of the classic novel is much more faithful to the novel than Muppet Treasure Island and critics praised it for bringing the novel to life.

It has a lot of great pirate action but still manages to capture the family fun that Disney is so well-known for. Disney did give Treasure Island a sci-fi spin with the animated Treasure Planet, but this version from 1950 is the most beloved by critics.

Let’s be really generous to Facebook and assume that 50% of what Frances Haugen just testified to before Congress was misconstrued in some way.

Regardless, Facebook will argue their case (as they always do), deny everything (as they always do) and claim that no one really understands them (as they always do). Everyone will view whatever they say with extreme skepticism, and nothing will change.

Maybe Facebook doesn’t care. Maybe the possibility of a repeal of their liability protection from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, the threat of antitrust prosecutions, the implementation of a U.S. privacy framework akin to what exists in Europe and the inability to get Washington to authorize Libra (Facebook’s digital payment system) all don’t matter.

Facebook is rich and powerful. They may think they can handle anything that comes their way. But the United States government and the media combined are a lot more powerful. And that’s why Facebook needs to change their strategy on just about everything related to politics, regulation and media.

While Facebook’s lawyers and lobbyists dig in for the next phase of an epic, costly confrontation, they should instead be charting an alternative course of humility, introspection and transparency as their best and only strategy for sustaining growth.

What does this look like? Well, it starts with an apology.

It’s incredible that someone as smart as Mark Zuckerberg can have so much difficulty expressing genuine contrition when it’s called for. Not every mistake will obligate the CEO to drag himself over the coals. But right now? He’s got to change his posture and start accepting responsibility and then actually implement real change.

For example, take Haugen’s testimony about an internal study finding that Instagram has a negative impact on teenage girls’ mental health.

That’s a problem Facebook has to own. They should want to own it. Because even if the federal government is unlikely to step in and censor Instagram, parents probably will. As much as my wife and I try to let our teenage daughter make her own decisions, the more we know about Instagram, the more convinced we are that its negative effects vastly outweigh any useful purpose it serves in her life. And we’re not alone. At some point soon, we could be the majority.

Second, it’s time for Facebook to be a lot more straightforward about its underlying business model. Consumers aren’t stupid; we know we don’t get something for nothing. So rather than pretend they don’t monetize people’s data in every way possible, Facebook should just be honest about it.

“If you want to keep using Facebook/Instagram/WhatsApp for free, we’re going to sell ads based on your data.” And then give the public an alternative: “If you want your data protected, then you have to pay the platform a monthly fee to make up for the lost revenue.” People may not like that at first, but they’ll understand it and they’ll appreciate being treated like adults.

Third, Facebook needs to admit the truth about content moderation: “We thought we knew better than everyone else about everything; we dug in when we should have been honestly examining and changing our practices and policies. We’re genuinely, truly sorry for it. We’re willing to change.”

Some of that may mean sharing oversight responsibilities with third parties like regulators and academics. It probably means eliminating some content that generates clicks and ad revenue. It may even mean removing some of the top executives responsible for doggedly implementing the deny-reality strategy over the past 10 years. Of course, that will hurt. They still need to do it.

Finally, if Facebook is going to engage in federal legislation around issues like privacy restrictions, new antitrust standards or the repeal of Section 230, they should stop trying to outsmart and outspend everyone.

Instead, Facebook should engage with their critics — in both parties and in both chambers of Congress — to work toward a solution that embraces the ideals of existing privacy frameworks like Europe’s GDPR and California’s CCPA and recognizes that having full immunity from anything said on your platform has to change. Be part of the change, not the roadblock to it.

This isn’t China. Our government won’t just one day outlaw Facebook or Instagram. But that doesn’t mean Facebook won’t be subjected to new laws, regulations, standards and social norms.

Facebook has alienated the media. They’ve lost the progressives. They’ve lost the conservatives. They’ve infuriated the center. And even if revenue keeps growing, they’ve lost the faith and trust of the public, too.

Executives may worry that once the legislative flywheel starts turning, it will never stop. But we’re way beyond that point. If Facebook doesn’t start expressing remorse, accountability and openness to change, they’re at risk of losing everything else they’ve built, too.

Reuters – Pfizer Inc said on Monday its experimental COVID-19 vaccine was more than 90% effective, a major victory in the fight against a pandemic that has killed more than a million people, battered the world’s economy and upended daily life.

Pfizer and German partner BioNTech SE are the first drugmakers to release successful data from a large-scale clinical trial of a coronavirus vaccine. The companies said they have so far found no serious safety concerns and expect to seek U.S. authorization this month for emergency use of the vaccine.
Health experts said Pfizer‘s results were positive for all COVID-19 vaccines currently in development since they show the shots are going after the right target and are a proof of concept that the disease can be halted with vaccination.

“Today is a great day for science and humanity,” Albert Bourla, Pfizer‘s chairman and chief executive, said.
“We are reaching this critical milestone in our vaccine development program at a time when the world needs it most with infection rates setting new records, hospitals nearing over-capacity and economies struggling to reopen.”

If Pfizer‘s vaccine is authorized, the number of doses will initially be limited and many questions remain, including how long the vaccine will provide protection.
BioNTech Chief Executive Ugur Sahin told Reuters he was optimistic the immunisation effect of the vaccine would last for a year although that was not certain yet.

“This news made me smile from ear to ear. It is a relief to see such positive results on this vaccine and bodes well for COVID-19 vaccines in general,” said Peter Horby, professor of emerging infectious diseases at the University of Oxford.
 
MARKETS SURGE
The prospect of a vaccine electrified world markets with S&P 500 futures hitting a record high and tourism and travel shares surging. Pfizer shares were indicated 14.2% higher in pre-market trading in New York, while BioNTech’s stock was up nearly 23% in Frankfurt.
“Light at the end of the tunnel. Let’s just hope the vaccine deniers won’t get in the way, but 2021 just got a lot brighter,” said Neil Wilson, chief market analyst at Markets.com
Shares of other vaccine developers in the final stage of testing also rose with Johnson & Johnson up 4% in pre-market trading and Moderna 7.4% stronger. Britain’s AstraZeneca was down 0.5%.
“The efficacy data are really impressive. This is better than most of us anticipated,” said William Schaffner, infectious diseases expert at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee. “The study isn’t completed yet, but nonetheless the data look very solid.”
U.S. President Donald Trump welcomed the test results, and the market boost: “STOCK MARKET UP BIG, VACCINE COMING SOON. REPORT 90% EFFECTIVE. SUCH GREAT NEWS!” he said on Twitter.
President-elect Joe Biden said the news was excellent but did not change the fact that face masks, social distancing and other health measures would be needed well into next year.
 
1.3 BILLION DOSES
Pfizer expects to seek broad U.S. authorization for emergency use of the vaccine for people aged 16 to 85. To do so, it will need two months of safety data from about half the study’s 44,000 participants, which is expected late this month.
“I’m near ecstatic,” Bill Gruber, one of Pfizer‘s top vaccine scientists, said in an interview. “This is a great day for public health and for the potential to get us all out of the circumstances we’re now in.”
Pfizer and BioNTech have a $1.95 billion contract with the U.S. government to deliver 100 million vaccine doses beginning this year. They have also reached supply agreements with the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada and Japan.
To save time, the companies began manufacturing the vaccine before they knew whether it would be effective. They now expect to produce up to 50 million doses, or enough to protect 25 million people this year.
Pfizer said it expects to produce up to 1.3 billion doses of the vaccine in 2021.
The U.S. pharmaceutical giant said the interim analysis was conducted after 94 participants in the trial developed COVID-19, examining how many of them had received the vaccine versus a placebo.
The company did not break down exactly how many of those who fell ill received the vaccine. Still, over 90% effectiveness implies that no more than 8 of the 94 people who caught COVID-19 had been given the vaccine, which was administered in two shots about three weeks apart.
The efficacy rate is well above the 50% effectiveness required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for a coronavirus vaccine.
 
MORE DATA NEEDED
To confirm the efficacy rate, Pfizer said it would continue the trial until there are 164 COVID-19 cases among participants. Bourla told CNBC on Monday that based on rising infection rates, the trial could be completed before the end of November.
The data have yet to be peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal. Pfizer said it would do so once it has results from the entire trial.
“These are interesting first signals, but again they are only communicated in press releases,” said Marylyn Addo, head of tropical medicine at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf in Germany.
“Primary data are not yet available and a peer-reviewed publication is still pending. We still have to wait for the exact data before we can make a final assessment.”
The global race for a vaccine has seen wealthier countries forge multibillion-dollar supply deals with drugmakers like Pfizer, AstraZeneca Plc and Johnson & Johnson, raising questions over when middle income and poorer nations will get access to inoculations.
The U.S. quest for a vaccine has been the Trump administration’s central response to the pandemic. The United States has the world’s highest known number of COVID-19 cases and deaths with more than 10 million infections and over 237,000 fatalities.
Trump repeatedly assured the public that his administration would likely identify a successful vaccine in time for the presidential election, held last Tuesday. On Saturday, Democratic rival Biden was declared the winner.
 
ESSENTIAL TOOLS
Vaccines are seen as essential tools to help end the health crisis that has shuttered businesses and left millions out of work. Millions of children whose schools were closed in March remain in remote learning programs.
Dozens of drugmakers and research groups around the globe have been racing to develop vaccines against COVID-19, which on Sunday exceeded 50 million infections since the new coronavirus first emerged late last year in China.
The Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine uses messenger RNA (mRNA) technology, which relies on synthetic genes that can be generated and manufactured in weeks, and produced at scale more rapidly than conventional vaccines.
Moderna Inc, whose vaccine candidate employs similar technology, is expected to report results from its large-scale trial later this month.
The mRNA technology is designed to trigger an immune response without using pathogens, such as actual virus particles.
Pfizer alone will not have the capacity to immediately provide enough vaccines for the United States. The Trump administration has said it will have enough supply for all of the 330 million U.S. residents who wish to be vaccinated by the middle of 2021.
The U.S. government has said the vaccines will be provided free to Americans, including the insured, uninsured and those in government health programs such as Medicare.

Source:Reuters

Netflix is today officially launching a new feature for its Android users that will make it easier to find something to watch when you can’t make a decision. The feature, called “Play Something,” is a shuffle mode option that will play another movie or show Netflix believes you may like, based on your interests and your prior viewing behavior.

These selections may include a movie or show you’re already watching but haven’t completed, a movie or show on your watch list or a brand-new series or film that Netflix’s personalization algorithms suggest, among other things.

The feature had been in development for some time before its public release. Last year, for example, Netflix was testing it as “Shuffle Play.” And in its Q4 2020 earnings, Netflix said it would roll out its shuffle mode to users worldwide during the first half of 2021, describing it as a way to “instantly watch a title” that was chosen just for the user.

That rollout schedule was partially realized.

“Play Something,” as the feature was rebranded to, officially launched to worldwide users on Netflix’s TV app back in April. Here, the option can be found in several places, including on the profile selection screen underneath your profile name, on the navigation menu to the left of your screen and on the tenth row on your Netflix homepage — a location that’s meant to appear right at the point where you’re beginning to get frustrated with browsing and may have otherwise exited the app. In addition, Netflix users with screen-readers could also use Text-to-Speech (TTS) to use “Play Something.”

The company said at the time it would soon start testing the feature on mobile devices, starting with Android. It then began those tests in late May.

In other words, you may very well have had the feature on your own Android device long before this “official” debut — but not all Netflix users globally have been able to try it yet.

That’s now changing, as Netflix is officially bringing “Play Something” to all Android mobile devices worldwide, with the rollout that starts today. The company says it will test the feature on iOS in the “coming months.”

On mobile, the “Play Something” button hovers over the content at the bottom of the phone’s screen as you scroll and also has its own dedicated tab in the app.

User response to the addition, so far, has been positive, Netflix noted — even pointing to a few tweets where people praised the feature.

But for Netflix, the shuffle mode feature isn’t only about giving users another, easier way to watch — it’s a means of retaining users in the app before they jump to another entertainment option, whether that’s a rival streamer or even a social media app for video, like TikTok.

In fact, the threat from short-form video is serious enough that Netflix recently built its own TikTok-like feature for its mobile app called “Fast Laughs,” which shows a feed of comedy videos meant to drive users to its content. Putting harder numbers to this potential threat, TikTok, at an event last week, noted that 35% of its users were watching less TV due to TikTok, citing data from its own research.

“Play Something” joins other newer additions as well, including a smart downloads feature called “Downloads for You” and support for partial play downloads, as well as last year’s addition of the Top 10 list.

 Apple's newsroom and leadership pages are both currently experiencing some errors, leading to the appearance of some changes to Apple's leadership.

From our knowledge, Apple's leadership and newsroom pages have been throwing up errors for the past two hours or so, and it seems to be that Apple is making server-side changes. In an oddity of those changes, Apple mistakenly listed Phil Schiller as Apple's senior vice president of worldwide marketing, a role he stepped down from in August of last year to become an Apple Fellow. Apple moments later took down Schiller's biography and the entirety of the leadership page.

Apple's newsroom is where the company issues press releases, updates, and more, while the leadership page lists all of Apple's executives. No other pages on Apple's website currently seem to be impacted, and it remains unclear whether this is simply an error or telling of something more coming soon. We'll update this post when there are any changes.

Update: Moments after we published this article, Apple's newsroom and leadership pages were reverted back to their normal states, correctly listing Greg Joswiak as the SVP of marketing and ‌Phil Schiller‌ as an Apple Fellow.

 Robert Pattinson's Batman is a badass, says The Batman star Jeffery Wright. The upcoming DC Extended Universe film from director Matt Reeves (Dawn of the Planet of the Apes) is the first to feature Pattinson's version of the iconic superhero. After suffering from pandemic-related delays that caused principal photography to take a year, The Batman will release on March 4, 2022.

The coveted role of Bruce Wayne had been solely occupied in the DCEU by Ben Affleck, who was originally set to not only star in The Batman, but write and direct as well. When Reeves took over, he expressed a desire to explore a younger version of the character, and Affleck left the project in early 2019. Pattinson's casting was somewhat of a surprise, since he had largely avoided blockbuster roles after his experience on the Twilight films, becoming known in the meantime as a highly acclaimed, versatile performer in the indie scene.

In an interview with ET, Wright, who plays Gotham PD's James Gordon in The Batman, gives the English actor's version of the Dark Knight his seal of approval. He describes Pattinson's personal performance style as meshing well with Reeves' directorial vision, which should make for a quality final product. Wright also says he thoroughly enjoyed their time on screen together:

"Robert is gonna do his thing, and we were working within a Matt Reeves vision, so you know, Robert is doing what Robert does and it's gonna be pretty badass I think. [...] I loved working with him, I love his take and his energy and the way that he kind of brought different levels to different parts of the story. And we work off of one another".

Pattinson is reportedly playing Batman in just his second year of vigilantism, and from the promotional material released so far, Reeves' film looks to be taking the character to particularly dark places. Paul Dano's serial-killer take on Riddler seems to be the movie's main villain, though several of Gotham's big-bads are on the cast list, including Catwoman (Zoë Kravitz), Penguin (Colin Farrell), and Carmine Falcone (John Turturro). Wright becomes the first actor of color to portray Batman's ally in the police department, while Reeves' former Planet of the Apes collaborator Andy Serkis plays Bruce's loyal butler, Alfred Pennyworth.

As is customary whenever a new Batman is cast, fans are divided, and not just because many still associate Pattinson with sparkly vampires. The release of Zack Snyder's Justice League reignited appreciation for Affleck's interpretation of the character, and that the effects of Warner Bros. decision to abandon Snyder's vision for the DCEU are so obvious in this film might create an inherent bias against it. However, Reeves' track record and the immense talent he's assembled in front of the camera, Pattinson especially, suggest The Batman has a real chance of overcoming these reservations.

Source: ET

 In May, Google announced plans to enable two-factor authentication (or two-step verification as it’s referring to the setup) by default to enable more security for many accounts. Now it’s Cybersecurity Awareness Month, and Google is once again reminding us of that plan, saying in a blog post that it will enable two-factor for 150 million more accounts by the end of this year.

In 2018, Google said that only 10 percent of its active accounts were using two-factor authentication. It has been pushing, prodding, and encouraging people to enable the setting ever since. Another prong of the effort will require more than 2 million YouTube creators to turn on two-factor authentication to protect their channels from takeover. Google says it has partnered with organizations to give away more than 10,000 hardware security keys every year. Its push for two-factor has made the technology readily available on your phone whether you use Android or iPhone.

A tool that also helps users keep their accounts secure is using a password manager, and Google now says that it checks over a billion passwords a day via its built-in manager for Chrome, Android, and the Google app. The password manager is also available on iOS, where Chrome can autofill logins for other apps. Google says that soon it will help you generate passwords for other apps, making things even more straightforward. Also coming soon is the ability to see all of your saved passwords directly from the Google app menu.

Last but not least, Google is highlighting its Inactive Account Manager. This is a set of decisions to make about what happens to your account if you decide to stop using it or are no longer around and able to make those decisions.

Google added the feature in 2013 so that you can set a timeout period for your account between three and 18 months of disuse before the Inactive Account Manager protocols take effect. Just in case you only switched accounts or forgot about your login, Google will send an email a month before the limit is up. At that point, you can choose to have your information deleted or have it forwarded to whatever trusted contacts you want to have handling things on your behalf. Google’s blog post notes that an inactive account led to the massive Colonial Pipeline attack earlier this year, and just for security’s sake, you probably don’t want your digital life simply hanging around unused for whatever hackers are bored in the future

 The pauses come amid reports of possible rare side effects from the Moderna jab, including heart inflammation.

Sweden and Denmark have said they will pause the use of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine for younger age groups after reports of possible rare side effects, such as myocarditis.

The Swedish health agency said on Wednesday it would pause using the shot for people born in 1991 and after as data pointed to an increase of myocarditis and pericarditis among youths and young adults that had been vaccinated. Those conditions involve an inflammation of the heart or its lining.

“The connection is especially clear when it comes to Moderna’s vaccine Spikevax, especially after the second dose,” the health agency said in a statement, adding the risk of being affected was very small.

Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s chief epidemiologist, said the health agency would continue to “follow the situation closely and act quickly to ensure that vaccinations against COVID-19 are always as safe as possible and at the same time provide effective protection” against the disease.

In Denmark, people under the age of 18 will not be offered the Moderna vaccine out of precaution, the Danish Health Authority said on Wednesday.

It said that data, collected from four Nordic countries, shows there is a suspicion of an increased risk of heart inflammation when vaccinated with Moderna shots, although the number of cases of heart inflammation remains very low.

The preliminary data from the Nordic study have been sent to the European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) adverse reaction committee and will now be assessed.

Sweden and Denmark said they now recommended the Comirnaty vaccine, from Pfizer/BioNTech, instead.

Norway already recommends the Cominarty vaccine to minors and said on Wednesday that it was reiterating this, underlining that the rare side effects may be more frequent for boys and young men, and mainly after receiving a second dose.

“Men under the age of 30 should also consider choosing Cominarty when they get vaccinated,” Geir Bukholm, head of infection control at the Norwegian Institute of Publica Health, said in a statement.

A Finnish health official said Finland expected to publish a decision on Thursday.

The EMA approved the use of Comirnaty in May, while Spikevax was given the nod for children over 12 years old in July.

After the backlash to Game of Thrones season 8, prequel show House of the Dragon will have to overcome a problem that's similar to the one seen after Star Wars: The Last Jedi. When Game of Thrones ended in 2019, it did so as the biggest TV show in the world. Many had long expected it to go out in a blaze of glory, but instead it simply sparked fires across the internet; to say it was divisive would perhaps be an understatement, as the final run of episodes were mauled by critics and audiences alike.

HBO, however, is undeterred. Even before Game of Thrones ended, ideas for spinoffs set in Westeros and beyond were being explored, which will first come to fruition with House of the Dragon. The network has major plans for this universe, with multiple projects in various stages of development, but House of the Dragon will be the initial and biggest test not only of its viability as a true franchise, but of how much it has survived the backlash.

Related: House Of The Dragon Is Fixing Game Of Thrones' Iron Throne Mistake

This puts House of the Dragon in the same position the Star Wars sequel trilogy found itself in, with The Last Jedi quickly becoming one of the most divisive movies of the 21st Century. While it's not an exact parallel, given this is a prequel rather than a sequel, there are similar hurdles to overcome, and certainly mistakes to be avoided in terms of how it approaches things.

When Star Wars: The Last Jedi released in 2017, it soon became one of if not the most divisive entry in the entire saga, even accounting for the much-maligned prequel trilogy (which is now looked upon more favorably). There were a range of criticisms, but at the core of them was the idea that this fundamentally misunderstood or ruined what made Star Wars and its characters so great. Luke Skywalker, the greatest hero in the galaxy, was a hermit who not only wouldn't join the fight, but had even been tempted to kill his nephew. Supreme Leader Snoke, the ostensible big bad of the sequel trilogy, was cut down without anything being revealed about his past. Rey, who many had speculated on the parentage of, turned out to be a nobody. This sparked huge ire, which remains to this day.

It's easy to see the parallels in this with Game of Thrones season 8. For Luke, see Daenerys Targaryen: the great hero who has a fall many believed to be completely out of character or at least unearned. For Snoke, there's the Night King - an overarching, mysterious villain who is killed off sooner than anticipated, with little of his backstory revealed. Where there's Rey's parentage, there's Jon Snow's, as critics argue the confirmation that R+L=J did not amount to anything of significance. The major difference is that The Last Jedi's reviews were mostly positive, whereas critics and audiences both disliked Game of Thrones season 8, but that only gives House of the Dragon even more difficult because it has more to build back against.

When looking at how House of the Dragon can overcome the backlash to Game of Thrones season 8, then Disney's response to Star Wars: The Last Jedi is a lesson in what not to do. With the major controversy then followed up by Solo: A Star Wars Story's box office failure, the Mouse House went into full course correct mode with Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker. The returning J.J. Abrams brought back Emperor Palpatine, and decided to try and go against The Last Jedi. He brought back many of the elements The Last Jedi had either ignored or given answers many deemed unsatisfactory - Rey is now a Palpatine, Snoke is a clone, Luke Skywalker is a Force Ghost who does catch the lightsaber. Unfortunately, The Rise of Skywalker also ended up being a mess. It was a film so crammed full of retcons, of bringing back half-baked, long-forgotten ideas, and of fan service, as well as the sheer weight of trying to end a 40-year-old saga, that it ended up in a worst of both worlds scenario. The Last Jedi had already made things hard, but The Rise Of Skywalker ended up struggling to please either its fans or its detractors, only serving to make the backlash worse and more to Disney's Star Wars sequel trilogy as a whole.

Related: House Of The Dragon Trailer Hints At Connection To Night King's Death

To that sense, House of the Dragon moving beyond Game of Thrones' own failings is perhaps an easier task. At the very least, it does not have to continue that specific story, and nor is it being challenged with wrapping-up a narrative that has been years in the making. Indeed, that was where Game of Thrones season 8 itself was charged with falling down, and so House of the Dragon does have something of a cleaner slate than any Star Wars movie coming after The Last Jedi could have had. Still, while it may be easier, that doesn't make it easy. This is a show centered around House Targaryen, which means there will likely be the looming shadow of Daenerys Targaryen's descent and death. It is still, after all, a show based on the same world as Game of Thrones, even if it is long before the likes of Jon Snow and Tyrion Lannister's parents had been born, let alone them. House of the Dragon's success will depend, to some degree at least, on how much people are willing to step back into this universe after Game of Thrones' ending.

It will have had the benefit of more time, with around three years by the time of House of the Dragon's 2022 release from Game of Thrones' series finale; that's a contrast to the two years between The Last Jedi and The Rise of Skywalker, which also had Solo sandwiched in between. The distance should help as well. As the House of the Dragon trailer shows, this series is far removed from Game of Thrones, and so people can - perhaps - put their ill-feeling towards the finale aside. That it comes from George R.R. Martin himself is a big bonus as well. No one received more criticism for Game of Thrones season 8 than showrunners David Benioff and D.B. Weiss, neither of whom are involved with this. As Martin has already written or at least fleshed out much of the story, then there's less room for an adaptation to veer of course, and it can instead, hopefully, provide the kind of quality that made Game of Thrones so beloved in the first place. And that last point might be the most important.

Despite problems with Game of Thrones season 8, it did not become a bad show because of a disappointing or divisive ending; for multiple seasons - mileage may vary on how many exactly - it was and still is one of the greatest TV shows produced, with a level of scale and spectacle hardly ever seen, but that is matched step-for-step by its writing, performances, and every other area. That's the kind of thing people should come to remember, especially as time goes on, wounds heal, and rewatches begin, and which stands House of the Dragon in good stead. This is not a course correction for a hated property that needs to be fixed, but a prequel to an excellent show, that is also very much its own thing and should be judged on its own merits.

Next: House Of The Dragon Trailer Breakdown: 17 Story Reveals & Secrets