One of the reasons that microtransactions and loot boxes have been so criticised of late is because they often make aspects that used to be free in games now cost money. Metal Gear Survive takes that to a whole new level. The game that I completely forgot was even happening apparently came out recently, and, as it turns out, one of the many things that you can purchase with the title's in-game currency is something that not only used to be free, it's a component at the fundamental core of nearly every game since the late 1980s, a save slot. You do get one save slot in Metal Gear Survive, but you can have up to four character slot in the game, if you're willing to pony up 1,000 SV Coins per slot. SV Coins are Survive's in-game currency, and 1,000 of them will set you back about $10, meaning that you need to spend $30 to get all of the game's available save slots. According to Polygon, Konami has been giving away some SV Coins as part of a game launch login bonus, but the max you'll be able to collect is 120 coins, and there does not appear to be any way to earn coins in-game. Save slots are something that has never been standardized across titles. Some games only ever have one, while some have three or even more. However, to charge money for additional slots certainly feels greedy. If having more than one is an option in Metal Gear Survive, then this basic aspect of gaming should be included in a game that costs $40. Any pretense that the title could get away with some microtransactions because it didn't cost as much as most console titles go away when the cost of adding all the possible save slots causes the game to cost more than $60. Konami has made it very clear in recent years that the video game business is no longer its focus. Ever since the studio fired Hideo Kojima and shipped an apparently incomplete Metal Gear Solid V, the company has been open and honest that it would rather put its popular gaming brands on pachinko machines than make new games. That's fine. It's a business, and if that is where the business wants to go, it has that right. However, if Konami is going to make a game, it might do well to consider not making its naked greed so obvious. There are plenty of other things you can spend in-game currency on in Metal gear Survive that, for better or worse, have become much more acceptable practices. Making save slots optional has nothing to do with "player choice" (the justification that is so often given for the existence of all microtransactions) because you're actually limiting the way the game can be played. Who would choose to not be able to save their game? I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. This is what happens as microtransactions become "normal" in the world of gaming. Perhaps we should be thankful that additional save slots aren't a potential reward in a randomized loot box. That's probably coming soon.

Bungie has not had the best of times in recent times. There's a litany of issues that the developers have gone through shortly after the release of Destiny 2. The sci-fi first-person shooter ran into a number of problems with microtransactions, XP scandals, and drop-rate issues, and this time there's an issue surrounding delayed features. Over on the official Bungie website the community manager updated the site with news about the roadmap for updates coming to Destiny 2. The roadmap shows that some of what was originally planned for release has been pushed back. Bungie wrote... With today's update we've moved a few items out to later releases -- this is because we are trying to ensure each feature we add hits a sufficiently high quality bar. The roadmap reveals that the next major update will arrive on February 27th following the 1.1.2 update. The 1.1.3 update will feature the all new Nightfall score tracking, along with destination Emblem variants, new Crucible Emblem variants, and Nightfall Emblem variants. Additionally, you'll be able to spot your fireteam on the destination map, so you'll be able to easily spot out where your teammates are and how to get to them in case you get separated or lost. Keep in mind that you might scoff at the idea of "getting lost" but unlike Destiny 1 the maps in Destiny 2 are quite huge and the game no longer has as many instanced areas, so losing track of your buddies can happen quite frequently. The 1.1.3 update for Destiny 2 will also add the ability to opt into viewing the public chat on PC, which will likely help those who want to get social on PC or those who would rather not see what other people have to say in public chat. Some people enjoy the kind of banter that would happen in open chats like the Barrens in World of Warcraft, whereas other people aren't fond of that at all. The last two pieces of content to arrive in the 1.1.3 update will be the companion mod and shader interactions, along with the Prestige version of the Nightfall challenge cards. However, much of what was planned for 1.1.3 has been pushed back into 1.1.4 and even further into the Season 3 content roll out for 1.2.0. The next major update for the game will focus around the sandbox and Bungie's overhaul of the Crucible in Destiny 2. The 1.1.4 update is scheduled to go live at the end of March on the 27th. This will include the 6-vs-6 Iron Banner event that was also going to be released earlier in Season 2 but was delayed, along with penalties for those who quit during the middle of Crucible matches, which many people probably thought should have been in the game at launch. The March update of 1.1.4 will round out the second season of content, which will have stretched on for a while after Destiny 2's release way back in September of 2017. The next update following the end of the second season won't arrive until the start of the third season all the way in May. So, there's going to be a sizable gap between the 1.1.4 release in March and the 1.2.0 update for the start of Season 3, which will bring all new seasonal content to the table that was originally planned for the 1.1.3 release, including an overhaul of the Exotics, private matches, and complete changes to the weapons and sandbox gameplay.

2017 could basically be summed up as the year of Nintendo. The company made a massive turnaround compared to what was going on with the Wii U from 2012 up until 2017. After introducing the Nintendo Switch to the world and a host of exclusives, the Big N has been cleaning up at the awards shows and DICE was no different. As reported by Polygon, Nintendo came out a big winner at the DICE Awards, with the Game of the Year award going to none other than Nintendo's own in-house developed Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild for the Wii U and Nintendo Switch. The Wii U version is obviously the lesser of the two, but it doesn't detract from the fact that the massive game was squeezed down to run in portable form while also running big and beautiful in the television mode. However, despite all the magical optimization wizardry that Nintendo's team pulled off to bring Breath of the Wild to life, it didn't detract from the sad but hopeful story that unfolded through the massive and adventure-ridden game, nor did it detract from the breathtaking art-style that was utilized to bring the gorgeous game to life. But, it didn't end there. Nintendo's open-air adventure title also walked away with Adventure Game of the Year, Outstanding Achievement in Game Direction, and Outstanding Achievement in Game Design. Nintendo also walked away with Racine Game of the Year thanks to the re-release of Mario Kart 8 in 2017 for the Nintendo Switch under the Mario Kart 8 Deluxe package. It's kind of a sad indicator that a game that originally came out back in 2014 was considered a better racing game than the likes of Gran Turismo Sport and Forza Motorsport 7, both of which respectively came out on the Xbox One and PS4. There were also titles like Project CARS 2 that also released for multiple systems, but the committee handing out the DICE Awards felt that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe was the better game of the bunch. Nintendo didn't end there, though. The company also picked up a Handheld Game of the Year when Metroid: Samus Returns, a remake of the Game Boy version of Metroid 2, was remade and released for the Nintendo 3DS last year. Of course, there was no way Nintendo was going to win a whole bunch of awards without receiving something for one of the most talked about and best selling games of 2017: Super Mario Odyssey. The multi-world, sandbox, 3D platformer themed around capturing objects, animals, monsters and entities ended up stepping away with the award for Outstanding Achievement in Sound Design. It's a lesser award compared to what was earned by its long-time brand compatriot in Legend of Zelda, but an award is an award after all. Even outside of Nintendo's own priority hardware the company still managed to earn awards on other platforms, more specifically earning Mobile Game of the Year for the release of Fire Emblem Heroes, despite the early launch day woes and network hiccups that the game suffered coming out of the gate. And finally, Nintendo picked up a Lifetime Achievement Award for veteran executive producer and game designer, Genyo Takeda. The DICE Awards proved to be a very worthwhile celebration of Nintendo's stellar 2017.

Video games based on Ghostbusters have come and gone over the years, some hit and some miss, but the studios have never given up on the franchise and that rings true with the all new Ghostbusters augmented reality mobile game, which is set to arrive on mobile devices later this year. IGN is reporting that during this year's upcoming Game Developers Conference an official announcement will be made revealing the new AR-themed Ghostbusters World title. The game will be available for Android users and for iOS owners. However, details on the specs required to run the game were not revealed at this time. Given the fact that a lot of newer augmented reality-focused games have required anything higher than iOS 10 or iOS 11 to run them, don't be surprised if the requirements are the same for the poltergeist-nabbing mobile title. And speaking of nabbing ghosts... IGN's brief report indicates that the game will be played very similar to the likes of Niantic Labs' 2016 release of Pokemon Go, which was themed around players using their smart device to go around and capture Pokemon. According to IGN the game will be developed by NextAge and will be called Ghostbusters World. A brief teaser trailer was released giving gamers a slight idea of what to expect from the upcoming game, and was published over on the Sony Pictures YouTube channel. The trailer doesn't reveal much, other than that we have a small idea as to how the gameplay will work. We see kids whipping out the proton blasters and using the streams to presumably capture ghosts. While obviously you won't be throwing your $700 cell phone onto the ground to work as a capture device, it does appear as if you'll have to use your phone to capture ghosts. A more detailed look at the gameplay will be present at the upcoming GDC event where publisher 4:33 will walk attendees through a demonstration of how the ghost capturing works in Ghostbusters World. In a way, having the game modeled on Pokemon Go seems pretty smart because it works well within the mythos of the Ghostbusters universe. Players will be able to capture ghosts from the televised cartoons, the previous video games, and all three of the live-action motion pictures. I imagine the AR technology will be used in very similar ways to Pokemon Go, and the ghosts will appear as 3D images set against real life backdrops. I do wonder if they'll have enough ghosts from the series to flesh out a long lasting run on the market. Player engagement is always a big issue with titles like this so we'll see what NextAge has planned for the long term growth of Ghostbusters World. The full release is set to take place later this year for iOS and Android devices.

For an upcoming episode of The Flash, the S.T.A.R. Labs team will take on a newly discovered metahuman with the very distinct ability to swap people's DNA. Said villain will be responsible for putting Barry and Iris through the old switcheroo, giving the latter superpowers for the first time. Such a plot will give Iris fans a thrill to see her dashing around in her new hero suit, but it might also offer a DNA-based explanation for this season's Mystery Woman portrayed by Jessica Parker Kennedy. What if Iris gets impregnated while she's a speedster? The Flash may have dropped its masked villain approach for Season 4, but the creative team introduced an intriguing new kind of mystery with this unknown woman, whose two sole appearances have given us a handful of notable qualities to speculate on. We know she's heavily invested in Barry and Iris' nuptials, though she doesn't actually meet Iris, and it spawned the theory that she's actually the comics' Dawn Allen, Barry and Iris daughter, or their granddaughter Jenni Ognats. After all, she shared Barry's awkwardness, his goofy demeanor, and his eagerness to be helpful, and she shares some of Iris' physical features. It could all be coincidental, of course, but that's not how things usually work on The Flash. And we did just have Cecile's pregnancy take an interesting turn, possibly as foreshadowing? Working with the assumption that the Mystery Woman is indeed a WestAllen descendant, the questions then center on how and when it could happen, since both Dawn and Jenni were conceived in the 30th century. We'd never suggest that The Flash couldn't introduce a 31st century jaunt for Barry and Iris, but it's not that likely. So what about in the here and now? Barry and Iris did just get married, so extending the immediate family would potentially be the next item on the life goal docket, and with Barry's DNA coursing through Iris' body, it's possibly Iris' maternal instincts will go into overdrive. Which could lead to a situation where Iris can straight-up ask Barry if he wants to have kids. And it's at this point where the Mystery Woman's wedding advice could legitimately come into play. Whenever she first appeared in the "Crisis on Earth-X" crossover, she told the tuxedo-wearing Barry to be sure to say "I do" when the time came, but neither his Nazi-interrupted wedding nor his Olicity-interrupted wedding allowed him the chance to do so. But having him say "I do" to the concept of having children would justify why Mystery Woman was so serious about that request. Of course, Iris getting pregnant while she's a speedster would be an interesting way to explain how her offspring exists in the first place -- we're actually hoping for twins here, to tie into Barry's diapers line from the premiere -- but it wouldn't really explain why Mystery Woman is a fully grown adult now. We know that time travel could in play here, since Barry's terrible impulses would probably be passed down through DNA, but we're not yet certain why Mystery Woman would have gone back to that specific time. The obvious guess would be that The Thinker is involved somehow, since we did see Mystery Woman jotting down some of those doodles that we saw on DeVoe's original face; Barry was also drawing them in his post-Speed Force return. But does Thinker know about her yet? He claims to know everything, so it can be lightly assumed that she has appeared in at least one of his many foreseen outcomes, but does he consider her a threat or just another cog in the machine? Also, how will DeVoe's increasingly perturbed wife factor into it all? For one last bit of fire-building fuel, it's worth pointing out that Iris' new super-suit does not have much in common with Team Flash's other costumes by way of color scheme, with the normal reds and yellows replaced by a darker blue. It's not just different for difference's sake though, at least seemingly, since Iris' costume does resemble those worn by Dawn Allen and Jenni Ognats in the comics. It basically just shares the same darker color scheme as Dawn's, though not the actual look. Jenni's costume design rocks the same kind of collar, though, and also has a white central stripe surrounded on both sides by purplish-blue, so that's pretty convincing. Convincing of what? I'm not sure just yet. As it usually goes with The Flash, each potential answer unlocks a series of new questions, and while we're still not sure when we're going to learn anything further about the Mystery Woman, The Flash is all new on The CW on Tuesday nights at 8:00 p.m. ET. To see what other heroes and villains will be rocking the small screen in the near future, head to our midseason premiere schedule.

David Attenborough is largely responsible for exposing a majority of the modern world to remote locations and the creatures that live within them. Audiences have responded well to the work, which is likely why the world is about to get yet another Attenborough led look at wildlife. That's right the Planet Earth host will again collaborate with The BBC to bring another TV show that's set to blow your mind. The series' working title is called Dynasty, and will seek to tell tales of the animal kingdom in ways Planet Earth or The Blue Planet have not. While the "lion's share," of David Attenborough's past projects have focused on regions and the animals living within them, Dynasty will focus on specific species of animals at critical moments in their lives. Each episode will feature a different animal: lions, chimpanzees, hunting dogs, tigers, and emperor penguins will all be seen doing whatever they can to maintain order and protect their land and family. Deadline reports the five-part series is set to air later this year, although no exact time frame has been provided on when to expect the nature series. Dynasty is a production of BBC Studios' Natural History Unit for BBC One in association with BBC America and France Télévisions and is executive produced by Mike Gunton. The series is produced by Rupert Barrington and commissioned by BBC Director of Content Charlotte Moore and Head of Commissioning Natural History and Specialist Factual Tom McDonald. Of course, all those names come second to David Attenborough when it comes to viewers, as his narration has become the staple of premiere nature documentaries. David Attenborough is the draw, but The BBC also deserves a ton of credit for the breathtaking nature documentaries it consistently pushes out to mass audiences. Dynasty looks as though it will continue that tradition of stunning documentaries, as the five-part series took around four years to create. The subject matter of animals protecting their family and territory almost guarantee a lot of fights between other predators, so nature doc lovers who love a good smackdown will do well to keep an eye out for this upcoming series. Whether any of those fights will be as climactic as that iguana chase scene from Planet Earth II though remains to be seen. The David Attenborough presented series Dynasty will arrive on BBC America at some point later this year. For a look at some other shows set to make a splash in 2018 that have set premiere dates, head on over to CinemaBlend's midseason premiere guide. For more on exotic animals and why they're best viewed on your television screen, read up on this incident in which a zookeeper lost her life after a Tiger attacked her while she was in its pen.

Manhunt: Unabomber was one of Discovery Channel's big hits of 2017. A strong cast that consisted of Sam Worthington, Jane Lynch and Paul Bettany paired with the story of the FBI's hunt for the Unabomber found universal acclaim amongst critics and audiences, though some have come forward to share their gripes with the series. Ted Kaczynski, the actual Unabomber, recently penned a response to how he felt about the show. And he's not a fan. I haven't seen the series myself, but to judge from what people have written to me about it, it's mostly fiction. This does not surprise me in the least. Media reports about me have generally been loaded with bull manure. Not surprisingly, Ted Kaczynski is not a fan of how his story is portrayed in Manhunt: Unabomber. Though Kaczynski admitted he had not seen the series personally, he said the letters he received since the show's airing led him to believe that Manhunt: Unabomber is more fiction than fact. Specifically, Kaczynski noted that much of what is reported about the study he underwent at Harvard that was led by psychologist Henry Murray was not nearly as unpleasant as the general public has been led to believe. Some in the past have suggested that Kaczynski's experience in the Murray study could be tied to his bombing spree later in life, which is why the study has become such a point on interest in telling the story of the Unabomber. Ted Kaczynski doesn't appear to buy into that theory, and told CNN's Andrew Kaczynski (no relation) in a letter the whole event was "wildly, wildly, exaggerated." Kaczynski also took the opportunity to advertise his new book, and point the reporter in the direction of another person's take on the accuracy of Manhunt: Unabomber, ex-FBI agent Greg Stejskal: Greg Stejskal's main issue with Discovery's Manhunt: Unabomber was the show's overstating the role of FBI agent Jim Fitzgerald, who he claimed was only a minor player in the hunt for Ted Kaczynski. Stejskal also said that Fitzgerald never interviewed Kaczynski, though the series made it look as though he was the sole player who brought the Unabomber to justice. Fitzgerald didn't deny the claims made by Stejskal, and while he stated the series was largely accurate, he stated his portrayal in the series was definitely a composite character to connect various events. Manhunt: Unabomber is currently available to stream on Netflix. For a list of other Netflix titles that are worth streaming, be sure to head over to CinemaBlend's Netflix premiere guide to see what new shows and films are on the horizon. For a look at what's coming down the pipeline for television in general in 2018, check out our midseason premiere guide.

The last couple of years have delivered a whole lot of Stephen King on both the big screen and the small screen. Now, another Stephen King story will be adapted for TV, and it sounds like one of the weirdest to date. A television version of The Bone Church is in the works courtesy of King and the Cedar Park Entertainment production studio. If you haven't heard of The Bone Church, don't feel too bad. Unlike Stephen King's famous works like IT, The Shining, and Carrie, The Bone Church isn't even a novel. Rather, it's a narrative poem penned by the author back in the 60s. It was ultimately published in the Bazaar of Bad Dreams anthology after revisions. In the poem, an expedition journeys into a the depth of a massive jungle on a quest to find the legendary Bone Church. Led by a bold adventurer, the party finds a secret that was never meant to be discovered by strangers. Of the 32 people who embarked on the journey, only three survived, and one of them is narrating the poem. The work is formatted in a way that the survivor tells his story in a bar to anybody who will buy him a drink and listen. Basically, The Bone Church probably won't feature any creepy clowns or be able to continue indefinitely unless the TV show takes some serious liberties with the source material. After all, there won't be a whole lot of suspense about the fates of the travelers if we already know that only a few of them will survive. That said, plenty of Stephen King adaptations have taken major liberties with his writing, and it's possible that the Bone Church show could be designed as an ongoing project instead of a limited series. The Bone Church will be adapted by the Cedar Park Entertainment production studio, according to Deadline. The company is headed up Chris Long and David Ayer. This new project marks the second on which Long helps adapt a Stephen King project, as he was an executive producer on Audience Network's hit series Mr. Mercedes. Long left Audience to form the Cedar Park production company with Ayer, who is best known recently for his directing work on Bright and Suicide Squad. Both men have experience with genre stories and King clearly approves of how Long handles his material; The Bone Church could turn out to be one of the most intriguing Stephen King adaptations to date. Interestingly, the announcement of The Bone Church as an adaptation comes shortly before the premiere of Castle Rock on Hulu, which will borrow bits and pieces from various Stephen King projects to form an anthology series. Perhaps the separate series means that we won't get any elements of The Bone Church in Castle Rock. That said, there are no details currently available about when The Bone Church will premiere or on what platform it will be found, so we may not want to rule anything out. For what you can watch while we wait for more news on The Bone Church, be sure to swing by our midseason TV premiere schedule and our 2018 Netflix premiere guide.

Arsenal is headed back to Arrow, and CinemaBlend has a first look at the hero's dangerous decision to return. Star City is currently in a state of disarray, and while we're not sure if Roy Harper was completely aware of that before he made his way back into town, he definitely finds out before too long, as he gets intercepted by two none too friendly looking officers of the S.C.P.D.: Given the current state of Star City, one has to wonder why these officers are using a phonebook to rough up Roy Harper. Ricardo Diaz doesn't seem like the type of guy who will bring an officer to justice for leaving bruises on a guy, so maybe they're just using whatever's handy to inflict the most damage and spare their hands? Whatever these officers' reasoning is, it would seem like Roy did something to get himself in this situation, and while the episode description for "Doppelganger" said Oliver and Thea know why Roy's back in town, Arrow fans will have to wait for that answer. Marc Guggenheim said back when Roy's return was announced that his presence in town is tied to a "high-stakes matter," which makes sense, because just about everything in Arrow Season 6 has been a high-stakes situation. Oliver and Thea's discovery leads to her coming to the rescue of her ex-boo. Thea appears to be successful in her rescue and managed to get to Roy before that pretty mug of his got roughed up by a phonebook. Unfortunately, his ribs weren't so lucky: Roy and Thea will be reunited, and Marc Guggenheim teased this reunion will have a big impact on both of their lives. That sounds like Arrow is working towards writing Thea off the show, which isn't that surprising, considering the series has made concerted efforts over the years to give Willa Holland a break from Arrow's rampant filming schedule. If Thea ran away with Roy, the show would stop having to come up with reasons why she isn't around, and Holland would have the freedom to pursue other interests and return to the show at her own leisure. That said, we have no guarantee this is happening, and it's looked like Arrow has tried to write off Thea before and those instances turned out to be nothing. If Thea isn't leaving Arrow, though, what could happen to impact both of these characters? Arrow returns to The CW Thursday, March 1 at 9:00 p.m. ET. For more on the premieres and returns of other superhero shows, check out CinemaBlend's superhero premiere guide. For more information on new television in general, head over to our midseason premiere guide.

A certain galaxy far, far away is going to keep expanding in the near future. In addition to the current Star Wars feature trilogy that just saw the release of The Last Jedi, we're getting a new trilogy and another set of films developed by the Game of Thrones showrunners. Then there's the TV world, in which Disney and Lucasfilm will reportedly invest quite a bit of time and money. We may have our first indication of where Star Wars TV will go after the conclusion of Star Wars Rebels, as Lucasfilm has just filed a slew of trademarks for a potential new project called Star Wars Resistance. Big things may be in the works in the realm of Star Wars television, folks. According to Star Wars fan website Yakface, Lucasfilm has registered four new merchandising trademarks for the brand Star Wars Resistance. This report doesn't officially confirm what the filing is for, to be clear. But given the fact that Star Wars Rebels is coming to the end of its preconceived four-season run, not to mention the widespread rumors of a current-era animated series being developed, it would make plenty of sense for the folks at Lucasfilm and Disney to announce a new series to carry on the television mantle. Of course, this development also raises the question of whether Star Wars Resistance will take the form of an animated series or a live-action show. Either option stands out as a possibility, since live-action projects are being conjured up for Disney's streaming service, but recent reports have suggested that Lucasfilm execs have been looking to bolster the size of their animation staff. Given the broadening mythology of the new slate of films that started with The Force Awakens, it's entirely plausible that Star Wars Resistance is intended to be an animated counterpart that fills in the gaps between the films of the current trilogy, not unlike how Star Wars Rebels shared parallels with the original trilogy. If that's how things shake out, then characters like the late Amilyn Holdo or The Broom Kid could become considerably more important to the overarching Star Wars mythology, even if it doesn't necessarily happen in live-action. The end of The Last Jedi emphasizes the idea that Luke Skywalker serves as "the spark that will light the fire that will burn the First Order down." Star Wars Resistance could show us how that spark turns into a flame. As far as platforms for a show like Star Wars Resistance go, there's a strong case to be made for it ending up on a Disney network like Disney XD, particularly when we consider the fact that Disney XD is the current home of Star Wars Rebels, which has been a bit win for the company. That option also makes sense when we consider the timeline of this possible show's development. The highly-anticipated Disney streaming service is still almost two years away from debuting, so a network home would make sense, assuming the project has been in the works since the rumors started. Then again, given how little we know about the project beyond the fact that the name can show up on party favors and shoes, the streaming service is always a possibility. Speaking of party favors and things, it's also a possibility that Star Wars Resistance is nothing but a mobile app or a new exercise regime, since the brand knows no bounds where marketing is concerned. But given the variety of items that Disney and Lucasfilm are potentially interested in branding with Resistance logos, we're optimistic that this will be a much larger and attention-worthy project. We will bring you more information related to Star Wars Resistance as more details associated with the potential project become available to us. For now, make sure to catch the latest episode of Star Wars Rebels on Monday at 9 p.m. ET on Disney XD and hop over to our midseason premiere guide for more information on all of the shows set to debut this spring!

Only 24 percent of Dutch people have downloaded video content such as films and series, music or games for free during the past year, according to the latest study from Telecompaper. In 2013, 41 percent did so regularly. Streaming video and music services such as Netflix and Spotify have grown strongly since then, while anti-piracy group Brein has become increasingly tougher on illegal downloads. Men still download a lot more than women. According to Telecompaper’s Consumer Insights Panel, it seems that different download methods such as peer-to-peer (P2P) have fallen sharply in their use: 6 percent of the Dutch used this method in the past year, against 8 percent in 2016 and 18 percent in 2013. The use of newsgroups was unchanged at 6 percent in October 2017, while 2 percent of Dutch people suggest they have used a FTP server over the past year to download free content. Tough approach to illegal content, affordable alternatives The fact that the number of people downloading freely available content has gone down over the past few years should not be a surprise. Authorities are taking a tough approach to illegally offered content and there are more affordable alternatives offered with high quality content. For example, in April 2014, the European Court of Justice ruled that the Netherlands had to introduce a download ban. Brein’s tough approach is getting more successful. Free, illegal downloading has also become less interesting because video content and music are increasingly becolming more affordable alternatives. For films, series and TV programmes, providers include Netflix, Videoland, NLZiet and Amazon. In the music field there is a range of services such as Spotify, Apple Music, Deezer, Soundcloud and Pandora. Paid content more easily available There are many reasons why people are downloading less compared to the year before. For example, 12 percent indicate that it is now easier to get paid content. There seem to be enough people who want to pay for an alternative, provided that it is easier to use and offers good quality. About 8 percent indicated that they download less because content was harder to find. In 2013, 4 percent indicated this as a reason. In itself, this is not surprising, given the growing approach to illegal uploading. Also, internet providers are blocking certain download sites. In November 2015, this was significantly less, at 1 percent.

BRAM COHEN, THE mastermind behind BitTorrent, claims he didn’t set out to build a pirate ship when he launched the file-sharing product in 2003. All he wanted to do was make it easier to move big stuff around the web—video­game updates, maybe, or the Linux distros that developers liked to swap. But within a year of starting the company, files shared on BitTorrent made up more than a third of all traffic on the internet. While Netflix was still stuck in the mail-order business, BitTorrent was changing how and why we watch things online. At first, Cohen was simply solving a puzzle: There was this logistical problem of how to move large files around, he says. “I figured out how to make it happen.” Unlike other peer-to-peer platforms, where downloaders had to rely on one person’s computer and their sharing largesse to access a file—remember Napster?—BitTorrent divided the uploading work among the masses, with each “seed” computer providing only a small part of the total file. Suddenly files moved faster, and uploaders could share files without killing their bandwidth or raising eyebrows at Comcast. Many early BitTorrent users had perfectly legit and legal goals, like the Phishheads and Deadheads who grabbed entire concerts with the bands’ blessings. But shaky, low-res versions of summer blockbusters and Must See TV soon started flying around the web, and Cohen’s tech became synonymous with the illegal-download industry. Didn’t want to pay for a new movie? Torrent it. Missed last week’s episode? It’s already up on KickassTorrents. Hollywood executives, who had been spared the existential threat of Napster only because video files are much bigger and more annoying to transmit than music files, saw their own bogeyman approaching. The execs sicced their lawyers on BitTorrent users, hoping to sue the pirates into oblivion. In 2012, industry lobbyists even pushed for a bill called the Stop Online Piracy Act, which would have let the government essentially shut down any website hosting pirated content. But these efforts failed, in part because “breaking big files into smaller, more distributed pieces and tracking their assembly” is not itself illegal, and BitTorrent Inc. couldn’t be held responsible for how its platform was being used. BitTorrent survived the worst that Hollywood could throw at it, and Hollywood realized it couldn’t stop anyone from torrenting—it could only hope to learn from those who had come before. The music industry had concluded in the early aughts that the only way to compete with free is better. So just as record companies worked with Apple et al. to sell high-quality audio files free of the glitches and viruses that marred so much Napster content, entertainment executives countered BitTorrent by creating or partnering with platforms where people could pay for crisp, trouble-free HD video. Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime Video all owe at least part of their existence to BitTorrent and its messy, malware-lousy downloads. Piracy remains a massively popular global pastime—BitTorrent Inc. tells potential advertisers it has 170 million users per month. And entertainment execs have more or less made peace with its inevitability: When top brass at HBO see that Game of Thrones is the internet’s most pirated show, they wear the distinction like a badge of honor (while sending out perfunctory cease-and-desist letters). Then they make sure HBO Go’s back-end streaming tech serves up dragons that are brighter, sharper, and more terrifying than anything you could see for free. Fast broadband and cheap server space largely have rendered Cohen’s original problem irrelevant, and most users have plenty of legal ways to download or stream video. But BitTorrent continues to shape how we think about storing and moving big things around the web. It’s easy to draw a straight line between BitTorrent’s decentralization of file-sharing and today’s blockchain-based cryptocurrencies—different technologies trying to spread control so wide that no single entity can break the system. Meanwhile, BitTorrent and its fellow pirate ships still loom as quality-control phantoms, hovering over the entertainment world and reminding those in charge what’ll happen if they stop doing right by viewers. Free content is just a download away.

As many of you noticed in forum discussion there were recently certain vulnerabilities found in old and new versions of uTorrent. The latest version 3.5.3 fixes them but considering its usability problems (that all 3.x versions have to some extent) such as speed or stability issues, many users prefer to use older versions 2.0.4 or 2.2.1 or 3.4.5. The exploits are divided to 2 groups - exploit of WebUI listening port and incoming connections port. You can and should mitigate the first by disabling WebUI and setting net.discoverable setting to false in uTorrent's settings. Doing these steps prevents majority of harmful action that could be done such as getting access to your PC. The remaining unfixed exploit of incoming port could allegedly make your client crash when someone attacked it, but there reports that even this cannot be replicated so we don't think there is enough reasons or need to ban all older versions of uTorrent. Be careful about sites that you visit. We can recommend using JavaScript blocking plugins such as NoScript or others and whitelist only trusted sites. This would prevent these exploits and also various other possible online attacks. If you are using old versions of uTorrent, make sure that you use the latest builds made for that version such as 2.0.4 build 22967 or 2.2.1 build 25302. Do not use other builds of these versions! You can find more information in this topic

There are certain rivalries that feel like they'll last forever. There's the Yankees and the Red Sox, Coke or Pepsi, and Marvel vs DC. The two comics book competitors have been trying to outdo the other for years, and it's now translated to their respective shared universes. But while the DC Extended Universe attempted to play catch up with big ensemble projects like Suicide Squad and Justice League, the Marvel Cinematic Universe has remained the top dog in the genre. Comic book writer Mark Millar, who has worked with both studios, seems to have a reason why. I think it's really simple the characters aren't cinematic and I say this as a massive DC fan who much prefers their characters to Marvel's. Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman are some of my favorites but I think these characters, with the exception of Batman, they aren't based around their secret identity they are based around their super power. Whereas the Marvel characters tend to be based around the personality of Matt Murdock or Peter Parker or the individual X-Men, it's all about the character. It looks like the heart of the matter is that Marvel's characters are simply more human and relatable. This can help audiences feel connected to the studios' movies and TV shows. Meanwhile, the DC heroes are a bit more simple and primarily focused on saving the day. That is, except Batman. Mark Millar's comments to Yahoo Movies points to Batman as the exception to this rule. The Dark Knight's superheroics is rooted in his deep personal pain, after seeing his parents gunned down as a child. Bruce Wayne constantly struggles with letting his alter ego take over, while also holding himself to a strict moral code. Batman's internal struggles are what makes him so fascinating and beloved. When Stan Lee was creating the various characters from Marvel comics, he placed a focus on creating flawed figures. The X-Men, while superpowered, were ostracized from the world due to their mutant abilities. Conversely, the Justice League can operate in plain sight, with the entirety of the planet thankful for their contributions. It's because of this disconnect that Mark Millar thinks DC's character simply aren't relatable enough. He went on to say, DC, outside of Batman, is not about the character. With Batman, you can understand him and you can worry about him but someone like Green Lantern, he has this ring that allows him to create 3D physical manifestations and green plasma with the thoughts in his head but he's allergic to the color yellow! How do you make a movie with that? In 1952 that made perfect sense but now the audience have no idea what that's all about. He makes a fair point. If its expected to thrive, the DC Extended Universe is going to have to find ways to make its heroes vulnerable and relatable. Finding quirks and flaws will allow its comic book movies to strike a personal chord for viewers, and hopefully help the shared universe get to place that DC Studios wants it to be. Marvel's Black Panther is in theaters now, and the DCEU's next installment will be James Wan's Aquaman on December 21, 2018. In the meantime, check out our 2018 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Recognizable IPs are getting snatched up left and right to get the movie treatment, but the road to the theater can sometimes be a long one. Case in point: the theatrical adaptation of the beloved Battlestar Galactica. The project has been in development for at least three years, but it does have some impressive talent developing it in the form of director Francis Lawrence, perhaps best known for the Hunger Games franchise. Lawrence recently gave an update on the film, and was able to confirm that he is still involved and that it's a franchise close to his heart. Here's what he said: Yeah, I'm working on that, that's something I'm developing. I'm working on that with Lisa Joy, who is one of the creators of Westworld. The original series was actually one of the first sets that I ever went on. I remember being a kid and loving that show and they were filming near my house and my mom took me down there and I got to try on a Cylon helmet. Fans of Battlestar Galactica can rest a little easier knowing that a movie is still currently in development. Francis Lawrence told Coming Soon that he was still working on the project with writer Lisa Joy (Westworld). But due to it still being early, he was unable to give any sort of release window. Battlestar Galactica is a classic sci-fi television series that first premiered in 1978 and was created by Glen A. Larson. The series followed the last survivors of the human race, decimated in a millennia-long war with the robotic Cylons, as they journey for the mythical planet Earth on the Galactica. Galactica is the last remaining war vessel. Though the series only aired for one season, it became a cult classic. Years later, it spawned an arguably more well-known TV reboot series of the same name created by Ronald D. Moore and David Eick in 2004. While Lawrence's movie will strive to stand on its own, he's too much of a fan not to include some nods to the original series. Oh of course! There will definitely be visual nods. We're all fans of both series so there will definitely be nods, but for it to be worth doing for us we have to have our own take on it. Without getting into too much detail, there is thematic kind of stuff to make it relevant today. What makes something interesting to do is if there's a relevance to the world we live in now. For fans of either series, it sounds look a project well worth looking forward to. It's always nice having a genuine fan in the director's chair. Hopefully, more updates on the movie will be more rapidly forthcoming from now on, so stick with CinemaBlend and we'll keep you updated with new information as soon as it becomes available.

Ava Duvernay has become the first African-American female director to helm a movie with a budget over $100 million. How did she end up as the one to set such as a record? It turns out, it wasn't that hard for her at all. Why not? Because she never had to sell the idea to Disney, Disney sold it to her. Duvarney recently revealed that Disney came to her with the idea to have her direct A Wrinkle in Time. It appears recruiting her was part of a larger plan at Disney to bring in more diverse filmmakers. According to Duvernay... The interesting thing about this movie is that I did not pitch them, they pitched me. That's a rare thing. It happened because there were people at Disney that were forward thinking, so I have to tip my hat to them. It's the same company that asked Taika Waititi to make Thor, that had Ryan Coogler make Panther, and that has Niki Caro as the next woman with a $100 million budget, making Mulan. They're really doing some interesting things there, so I tip my hat to them. While the world of film directing has been overwhelmingly white and male, it seems that Disney had made a decision on their own to change that with at least some of their projects. It's understandable why Disney might want to bring in an African-American director to direct Black Panther and while Ava Duvernay tells Collider she's not entirely sure why Disney wanted her specifically to direct A Wrinkle in Time, she does suggest that the fact that the lead character of the book is female, might have meant they were looking for a female director. With Niki Caro on board to direct Disney live-action Mulan remake, the idea certainly makes sense. As far as why Ava Duvarney herself was chosen, the director credits a Disney executive named Tendo Nagenda who apparently saw Duvernay's movie Selma and saw something in that he thought would work for A Wrinkle in Time. From there, getting the job was apparently quite easy, as Duvernay knew many of the executives in her initial meeting with Disney, which meant she didn't need to sell herself, as everybody already knew what she could do. Thor: Ragnarok had the biggest box office success of any film in the franchise when it opened last year and last weekend Black Panther had one of the biggest openings in movie history. Disney's decision to be inclusive in its directorial decisions is clearly working so far. In a couple of weeks, we'll get to see Ava Duvernay's A Wrinkle in Time, which, considering how popular the source material is, could be absolutely massive.

Massive spoilers ahead for Black Panther. If you want to go into the movie surprised, check out one of our other stories. It's been a little over a week since Ryan Coogler's Black Panther arrived in theaters, and cinephiles and Marvel fans alike are still reeling from the wild ride. The newest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe greatly expanded it, showing the technologically advanced country of Wakanda in all its glory. One of the strongest points of Black Panther has been Michael B. Jordan's performance as Erik Killmonger. While the MCU has had problem with villains, Jordan played his role with equal parts vulnerability and rage. And while he perished in the film's final moments, rapper Kendrick Lamar is ready to step into his shoes, or at least similar ones. When asked if the musician would like to play a role in Black Panther 2, he said: I really enjoy Killmonger's character, just off the simple fact that he was a villain but he came with some real [talk]. He was a villain but he was loved and misunderstood. So if I could, I'd play a Killmonger, for sure. While not an experienced actor, it looks like Kendrick Lamar may be convinced to join the forces of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The problem: he most wants to play a character who seems to have bit the dust at the end of Black Panther. Kendrik Lamar's comments to BBC are sure to strike a cord with the millions of folks who have seen Black Panther, and haven't stopped exclaiming "Wakanda foreer!" since leaving the theater. Killmonger has already been named one of the best villains in the entire shared universe, already being compared to complicated characters like Tom Hiddleston's Loki. While fans would love to see Killmonger somehow return to the shared universe, they'd probably want him actually played by Michael B. Jordan. While Kendrick Lamar likely won't end up showing up onscreen in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, he's already influenced the MCU. Lamar curated the soundtrack forBlack Panther. After being shown a cut of the movie, Lamar put together a soundtrack that mixes traditional african sounds, modern hip hop, and the sweeping sounds of the cinematic universe. Lamar performed a number of the movie's signature songs, including "Black Panther", "King's Dead", and "Pray for Me". Lamar clearly knows the Black Panther world and brand well, so he wouldn't be the worst choice for a possible cameo in Black Panther's inevitable sequel. If Ryan Coogler ends up helming the film's sequel, it wouldn't surprise me to see Kendrick Lamar pop up as a denizen of Wakanda, or someone utilizing T'Challa's outreach center in the states. We'll just have to wait and see how it all pans out. Black Panther is in theaters now, complete with Kendrik Lamar's already acclaimed soundtrack. Be sure to check out our 2018 release list to plan your next trips to the movies this year.

In 2015, a classic horror series got rebooted when Goosebumps debuted on the big screen. Now the franchise is looking to return later this year, and it is assembling an entirely new cast to bring its classic, kid-friendly monsters to life. Fresh details related to the Goosebumps 2 ensemble have started to flow in, and it looks like the film has officially enlisted the acting chops of IT's Jeremy Ray Taylor, among others. After delving into the hard-R horror world for Andy Muschietti's IT, it looks like Jeremy Ray Taylor is about to approach the horror genre from another angle. The young actor has officially signed on for an unspecified role in Goosebumps 2, making him one of four new leads brought onboard for the sequel's story. Goosebumps 2 might not be the only sequel currently on Jeremy Ray Taylor's radar. In addition to the family-friendly take on the horror genre, he also recently spoke to CinemaBlend about the development of IT: Chapter 2, and expressed an interest in getting onboard for the sequel to Andy Muschietti's 2017 horror hit. That said, we still don't know if he will return to the R-rated fright fest when all is said and done. IT's Jeremy Ray Taylor isn't the only young actor who has signed on for Goosebumps 2. The Variety report revealing his involvement in the project has also confirmed the presence of Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle's Madison Iseman, as well as Castle Rock's Caleel Harris and Manchester by the Sea's Ben O'Brien. With Jack Black possibly not returning to reprise his role as R.L. Stine from the first movie (though it's rumored that he will return to provide the voice of Slappy), it looks like the sequel could skew younger by placing the focus more squarely on a group of kids. Despite how much we now know about the cast of Goosebumps 2, we still don't know much about the film itself. The plot remains under wraps at this stage of the sequels' development, and all we really know is that the sequel intends to focus more heavily on iconic characters from the Goosebumps stories. Although we still do not know much about the actual movie yet, it generally sounds like the burgeoning series is potentially shifting away from the more meta approach of the first movie to emphasize some of the classic tales that many 1990s kids grew up loving. CinemaBlend will bring you more information related to the development of Goosebumps 2 as more details related to the film become available to us. The film is currently slated to debut in theaters later this year on October 12, 2018, just in time for the creepy 2018 Halloween horror movie season.

Another Star Wars movie has come and gone in the form of Star Wars: The Last Jedi, and while we've got another one coming out in just a few months (Solo: A Star Wars Story), you might be feeling a Jedi sized hole in your heart. Though the digital and home releases of The Last Jedi are due to arrive soon, there's another way that fans can enjoy the movie before then. A documentary about how director Rian Johnson filmed Star Wars: The Last Jedi is set to premiere, and will disclose behind-the-scenes details how the massive blockbuster was made. The documentary, titled The Director and the Jedi, will premiere at the SXSW film festival on March 12, 2018. Directed by Anthony Wonke (Ronaldo, Syria: Children on the Frontline), the documentary follows Rian Johnson and his process as he comes in as the director of a new Star Wars film. The documentary will show how Johnson navigated the mammoth production, introduce cast and crew, see their individual challenges in putting the movies together, say goodbye to Carrie Fisher, and "explore the significance of some of Rian's more surprising decisions." This definitely sounds like a very interesting watch for Star Wars fans. There's always been something deeply fascinating behind the making of Star Wars movies and there have been documentaries in the past that have tackled the subject. This one sounds like it uses Rian Johnson as the main character, so hopefully the documentary actually addresses the real challenges of making the movie. There's nothing more boring than watching a Making Of documentary that only shows how great and fun everything was. Plus, I'm extremely interested to learn if the doc will dig into the more critical of Johnson's choices like the reveal of Rey's parents. For his part, Rian Johnson promises that this isn't the everyday documentary feature that you'd normally find on a DVD. The director took to Twitter to share his excitement, and revealed that Anthony Wonke and his crew were filming on set every day with people always mic'd up. The doc will actually get into what the making of the movie was like. If you aren't attending SXSW next month, The Director and The Jedi will also be included on the home release of Star Wars: The Last Jedi. The movie releases on 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray, and Blu-ray disc on March 27, 2018, and releases digitally on March 13.

The horror genre is in the midst of a renaissance at the moment. New and exciting projects have hit theaters in the past few years, making money and becoming critical successes in the process. In fact, Jordan Peele's Get Out is even nominated for a bevy of Academy Awards, proving that audiences and critics alike are paying real attention to the genre. And with the trend of nostalgia influencing the film world, it seems only a matter of time before all the classic slasher properties are brought back. Halloween has a new movie coming out in October, so could Friday the 13th follow? Actor Kane Hodder, who has played Jason Voorhees in four different sequels, seems to think so. He recently said: You've gotta do one more Friday movie, too. It'll be the thirteenth one. Does anybody else have chills? Horror fans would no doubt love for Jason to return to the silver screen, and the fact that it would be the 13th movie in the franchise makes it even more exciting. Now we just have to get a studio like Blumhouse involved. Kane Hodder's comments to We Got This Covered highlight what good timing it would be to create another Friday the 13th movie. The most recent outing came in 2009, so it's been nearly a decade since the last time we saw Jason swing his machete to chop down some unsuspecting teenagers. It could be especially impactful for being the whopping 13th film in the franchise. This type of event could allow for some new and interesting storytelling, rather than simply continuing the franchise, and Jason's never ending thirst for blood. Considering how well the horror genre is currently resonating with audiences, it seems like only a matter of time before Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, and all the other classic franchises return to the silver screen. These possibly sequels all seem to depend on the performance of the new Halloween movie. In celebration of the franchise's 40 year anniversary, the new movie will be a direct sequel to John Carpenter's original film. If the film ends up being anywhere near the success of IT, then we should expect the classic horror franchises of the past to once again return. Considering the fact that Carpenter, Jamie Lee Curtis, and Nick Castle are all involved in the new Halloween, odds seem in the upcoming sequel's favor. Regarding Friday the 13th's future, the franchise will have to find a way to emotionally affect people in order for it to come back. Since there are no series protagonists to bring back besides Jason, it's going to take an original script to bring the slasher back to theaters. For now, we'll just have to settle for playing the very successful Friday the 13th video game. Do you think that Friday the 13th should come back? Sound off in the comments below. In the meantime, check out our 2018 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

When people like to talk about how bad comic book movies were once upon a time, one of the popular targets is 2004's Catwoman starring Halle Barry. Now, one of the film's writers is speaking out about why it's so bad. John Rogers is one of three who shares a screenplay credit on the film and he recently took to Twitter in response to a question and explained that he knew that studio changes being made were going to make the movie suck, he even tried to explain that, but nobody was listening. According to Rogers... Full disclosure: I was fired off the movie after writing the green light draft because I kept arguing with notes that'd make the movie "very, very bad." Which I said out loud. At meetings. I got fired a lot in my 30's. If you've seen Catwoman you don't even really need to guess at what sorts of changes John Rogers is referring to, because they're pretty evident on screen. There's almost nothing that resembles the comic book character that fans love anywhere in the film. Rogers says his main goal with the script was simply to turn it into something that fans might enjoy. He was not successful. Rogers goes on to explain that the Catwoman movie had been through multiple hands for a decade before he ever touched it, but it seems he must have had some sort of an idea about what the movie needed since the studio greenlit his version of the script. Having said that, once they did, they apparently weren't interested in his thoughts on the changes that were being made. Previously, Rogers had described Catwoman as a movie that was being "dumped by the studio" so the impression is that nobody was necessarily looking for Catwoman to be a great movie, instead, they likely were just trying to figure out how to make something that would successfully recoup the investment. Catwoman has gone on to become one of those movies that people only watch if they're looking to do their own Mystery Science Theater 3000 in the living room with a bunch of friends and just as much alcohol. Those people have done something that John Rogers himself has never done as, since the studio had fired him, he never attended the premiere and has never actually watched the entire movie from start to finish. I've never watched the movie all the way through in one sitting. I skipped premiere night to shoot Jenni Baird audition footage for Global Frequency. And they'd fired me anyway for, y'know, snark. Apparently, John Rogers is a lot smarter than the rest of us. Catwoman is terrible but at least most people who made the movie realize that. Halle Berry famously accepted her Razzie Award for Worst Actress for the role in person, something few have had the courage to do. She took it in stride, clearly accepting that the film sucked. Today, we at least have the benefit of some great comic book movies, which has the benefit of raising the bar for everybody else. We'll still get bad movies now and then, but hopefully, they won't be quite that bad ever again.

Being an almost indestructible killing machine that can recover from any injury, there probably isn't much that Wolverine is afraid of. Live for a couple hundred years, and there really isn't much that can bother you. That was one of the challenges James Mangold was facing when he co-wrote the now Oscar-nominated screenplay for the critically acclaimed Logan. It's hard to write a character-driven movie if your character is always fearless, but Mangold eventually released that Logan isn't afraid of anything mortal -- he's afraid of intimacy. Here's how Mangold cracked the code: Given that this was Hugh Jackman's last Wolverine movie, the question I needed to answer was, 'What is Logan most frightened of?' He's not frightened of the end of the world, he might welcome it. He's not frightened of his own death, he might welcome it. He's not consumed with vengeance for a specific villain, he'd rather live life in isolation. But it dawned on me: Logan is completely phobic about intimacy. Logan may not have gotten the Best Picture nomination that some were hoping for, but the movie did break serious ground by being the first superhero movie to be nominated for Best Screenplay. Considering that most superhero films aren't exactly praised for their writing, this is a pretty major deal and it's thanks to the hard work put in by James Mangold and co-writers Scott Frank and Michael Green. The group crafted a well-paced, compelling, and character-driven script, but it wasn't without its challenges. Obviously, a movie where the main character isn't afraid of anything isn't particularly exciting to watch, so part of the job was finding what this centuries-old warrior was afraid of. James Mangold told The Credits that because Logan was Hugh Jackman's final stint as the character, he knew he really had to push the script and go in a direction that previous Wolverine movies hadn't. I would say that he accomplished this on several levels, with an Oscar nomination as proof. Part of the challenge was finding Logan's fears and confronting them, and for Logan nothing is worse than suddenly having to be an emotional anchor for a little girl. One of the best parts of Logan is his growing relationship with his kinda-sorta daughter, Laura. It's really compelling to watch as Logan is forcibly thrust into a family unit and must take care of both Laura and Professor Xavier. It's some really good emotional stuff that pays off in a big way. The jury's still out on if Logan will actually take the Academy Award, but it definitely deserves to. For more movie news and updates, make sure to keep it right here at CinemaBlend and we'll keep you updated with more information as soon as it is available.

Adapting any successful story from another medium to film is always a tricky proposition. Finding the balance between being faithful to a fault versus being the same story 'in name only' is quite the tightrope to walk. Adapting Jeff VanderMeer's Annihilation to the big screen is something else entirely. The acclaimed novel is surreal and nightmarish and borderline un-filmable. But director Alex Garland was able to take a story that pushes the bounds of imagination and make it work in the film medium. For author Jeff VanderMeer, much of the film's success has to do with the way it maintains the tone and spirit of the book, as he affirmed: I think that the movie does that. The visual language of the movie is very faithful, I think, to the books. It's interesting too, because I like the fact there are these points of commonality, and the book and the movie share DNA, but I can still be surprised by the movie myself, as a viewer, which is a nice thing. The movie definitely ties into the book, and vice versa, but I don't think they spoil each other, so to speak. I think of it almost as another expedition into Area X in a sense, if that makes any sense. Annihilation is such an interesting case of adaptation because the film is wildly different from the book, but it still feels like Jeff VanderMeer's novel. Part of this has to do with the aesthetics of the film. The visuals of Annihilation manage to evoke the dreamlike, intangible quality of Area X in order to give the viewer that same unsettling feeling that haunted readers throughout the novel. As the author mentioned to Syfy Wire, the book and the movie share DNA (an extremely apt analogy) and this is the same story, just told differently. It also works like the author says, to just think of the film as a separate expedition into Area X with a different team and different outcomes from the one in the book. Indeed, the book and the film do not spoil one another either, at least not in the traditional sense. There are points of commonality, but also huge differences between the narrative of the two. In fact, I would be very curious to see how those who like the film would react to reading the book for the first time. The two are such different yet similar experiences, like a reflection distorted in restless pond. I imagine there may be many who prefer one to the other and not necessarily the one they experienced first. Warning! Spoilers to follow for Annihilation and Jeff VanderMeer's novel of the same name. It is always interesting to see how authors react to their work being adapted by someone else into another medium. The written word is only limited by the author's imagination, while film is bound by the constraints of budget and the power of technology. Inevitably, this adaptation process often forces changes and omissions from the original work. Not everything that came across well on the page succeeds on screen and sometimes; precious elements have to be cut. For Jeff VanderMeer, there was one thing he really wanted the film to include that wasn't meant to be, as he recalled: It was quite funny because initially, just because I find wild boar very frightening in North Florida when I'm hiking, I was very committed to there being a boar in there. Alex was very kind in trying with the boar, but the boar just wasn't working. The boar kind of got cut, and the moaning creature got kind of combined into the bear, which makes a lot of sense for the movie. It is kind of funny that Jeff VanderMeer is so fearful of wild boars that, like Batman, he wanted others to share his dread by including a boar in Annihilation. The only confirmed boar in the novel is in the beginning of the book, when the expedition is making its way to base camp after crossing the border into Area X. A wild boar charges the group before turning away. There is also a point where the biologist (Lena in the film) is walking through the marshes and she is chased by a moaning creature that might have been a boar, although she never fully sees it. This moaning creature gave off an eerily human sound. So clearly Alex Garland took some of these disparate elements and came up with the bear-like creature in the film. The bear moaned in horrific fashion and cried out with the voices of its victims as it terrorized the expedition and thinned its ranks. The beast had qualities of a bear and a boar and moaned like the creature in the book, while also providing a visual terror not present in the novel. I thought adapting Annihilation into a feature film was a seemingly impossible task, but Alex Garland managed to take a story, not well suited to the screen and make it work while still maintaining the spirit, tone and nightmarish qualities that made the book so memorable. Annihilation is in theaters now. After you've seen it come back and let us know what you think, and maybe give the book a try. This film is just one of many exciting science fiction films hitting theaters this year, check out the rest in our guide.

It's no secret that superhero movies are everywhere. With three shared universes dueling it out for box office supremacy, there is no shortage of comic book adaptations hitting theaters. While critics fear the genre will eventually become overly saturated, 2016's Deadpool was a game changer. An R-Rated romp starring a non-traditional character, the film shattered expectations when it first arrived. The post-credits scene set up the highly anticipated sequel, with newcomers like Zazie Beetz joining the fun. Beetz is playing the mutant Domino, and recently teased what to expect when Deadpool 2 finally arrives, In Deadpool 2 I think we go heavier than the first one did. Like Atlanta, the themes are darker. I liked playing this woman who could meet Deadpool face-to-face and toe-to-toe. In terms of our wit and our banter, we match. It really was nice to play that. This is certainly exciting. While Deadpool had its fair amount of serious material, it always handled it all with plenty of jokes and fourth wall breaking shenanigans. While that will continue with Deadpool 2, it appears that the overall film will be a bit darker than its predecessor. Zazie Beetz's comments to Comic Book is sure to titillate all the Deadpool fans out there. While the overall information about the sequel is minimal, we now have a clue as to where Deadpool 2 will be going. Following the wild success of the first film, it looks like director David Leitch and producer Ryan Reynolds wanted to switch things up. Now that the audience is there and invested in the character, the sequel can make different choices, including making the entire franchise just a bit darker. The question is: how? There seems like a few possibilities for Deadpool 2's darker material. Perhaps the most obvious is the inclusion of Josh Brolin's Cable. From the sequel's first trailer, it's clear that there's an emphasis on the time traveling mutant, and the terrors he grew up around. There's also Beetz's character Domino, who usually gets her powers in horrifying experiments similar to what was done to Deadpool in the first film. Their shared trauma may bond the two, possibly forming a love triangle alongside Morena Baccarin's Vanessa. After all, the two have dated on an off in quite a few comic plot lines. Aside from the darker tone, Zazie Beetz also teased the banter between Domino and Deadpool. While Ryan Reynolds' wit and Wade Wilson's fourth wall breaking is certainly enough to carry a movie, it'll be fun to see Deadpool have yet another character to play off of. Beetz's personal wit and improv abilities are largely what landed her the role in Deadpool 2, as they needed someone to keep up with Reynolds. All will be revealed when Deadpool 2 arrives in theaters May 18, 2018. In the meantime, check out our 2018 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Warning! Spoilers to follow for Annihilation. Come back later if you haven't seen it yet. Writer/director Alex Garland has long been one of the most fascinating sci-fi storytellers in the film industry. He was brought into the medium when Danny Boyle adapted his first novel, The Beach, back in 2000, but he has since left an indelible mark with scripts for movies like 28 Days Later, Sunshine, Never Let Me Go, and Dredd. In 2013 he made his fascinating directorial debut with Ex Machina, showcasing an ending that still has us talking today, but now he has stirred up a whole new conversation among cinefiles with his sophomore effort, Annihilation. The new film is an adaptation of the novel of the same name by author Jeff VanderMeer -- but Alex Garland has notably taken some liberties with the source material, particularly with the end of the story. There are many things that go down in the third act of Annihilation that are not only very different than the book, but have the effect of changing how you see the events in the first two acts. So what is The Shimmer? What is the ultimate fate of Lena and Kane? That's exactly what we're here to break down today. What Happens At The End Of The Film The beginning of the end starts at The Lighthouse. After a long journey through The Shimmer, Lena (Natalie Portman) is the only remaining member of her team, and goes into the ground zero location by herself. Upon entering, she sees a charred body propped up against a wall, and a video camera pointing directly at it. Hitting play on the recording, she watches what she eventually learns are the final moments in the life of her husband, Kane (Oscar Isaac). After a few shots of the area surrounding The Lighthouse, the video has the Army sergeant talking about losing his sense of self in The Shimmer, and telling a figure off-camera to find Lena. He then pulls the pin on a phosphorous grenade and kills himself -- leading the off-camera figure to reveal itself as Kane's duplicate. At this moment, Lena realizes that her husband never actually ever came back from his mission -- but she is determined to complete her own. She finds the hole that was created by the crashing meteor that brought The Shimmer, and follows it down into the ground. It's in a cavern that she finds Dr. Ventress (Jennifer Jason Leigh) sitting and muttering to herself. When the team leader notices Lena's presence, she asks about the last thing they discussed: needing to know what it was that was inside The Lighthouse. Like Kane, Ventress has lost herself within The Shimmer, recognizing the deterioration her body and mind, and dubs the spread of the extraterrestrial force, "Annihilation." Before Lena's eyes Ventress' form comes apart, and we see the energy that remains absorb blood from a cut on the protagonist's face. With this DNA a new form is created, featureless and reflective. Scared, Lena fires her gun into the creature, but it appears to have no effect. Lena crawls back up to The Lighthouse, but is shocked to find the alien already there waiting. She attempts to escape, but finds that her efforts are thwarted by the being mirroring her every move. When she begins to understand the pattern, it begins to morph into her duplicate, but it's a process that is interrupted. Lena gives the entity one of the remaining phosphorous grenades, and it explodes after she leaves -- leading the duplicate to set fire to the core of The Shimmer and destroy it. Back in the present, Lomax (Benedict Wong) wraps up his interrogation with Lena, trying to grasp the details of what happened in The Lighthouse. Lena can't speak to what the extraterrestrial force wanted, but notes that it wasn't destroying anything; it was creating something new. She is told not only that The Shimmer is gone, but that Kane has stabilized and that she can see him. Lena goes to Kane's room in quarantine, but she approaches him like a stranger. "You aren't Kane, are you?" she asks. "I don't think so," he replies. "Are you Lena?" Without answering, Lena embraces the duplicate of her husband, and we see in his eyes that the Shimmer has not entirely gone away -- still left floating in his irises. He is not alone, however, as it's revealed that the Shimmer is still present in Lena's eyes as well. So what does this all mean? What exactly happened? Let's dive in... What Was The Shimmer? As clearly stated by Benedict Wong's Lomax, the cause of the event known as The Shimmer was extraterrestrial. It landed with a meteor that crashed to Earth at The Lighthouse, and slowly began to alter the environment around it at a cellular level. That said, the movie also never assigns a specific intention to its presence, and because it can't exactly articulate, the goals are never made explicit. This is not vague-ness for the sake of vague-ness, however. There is no clear mission to interpret from The Shimmer because there is no clear mission. Annihilation isn't the story of a destructive alien invasion, but rather the introduction of an entirely new nature that takes what exists, refracts it, and changes it. And while annihilation of the old is necessary in the forging of the new, it itself is an altered reflection of humanity's own self-destructive nature. The entire film is a meditation on our existence, and it starts laying down its heaviest themes early -- beginning with the classroom lecture about the ever-splitting cell, and continuing into the bedroom flashback with the discussion of the fallibility of god. Our cells are constantly dividing and refreshing, and yet we age and die, which Lena posits isn't logical. Going further, the movie argues this flaw extends to a natural impulse in our humanity -- specifically an impulse that drives us to self-destruction. In terms of illustrating this in the characters, Alex Garland is far from subtle in this arena, with Tuva Novotny's Cass Sheppard laying out most of it during the boat ride through the swamp, and the rest coming out naturally in the story. Cass lost her daughter and sense of self; Gina Rodriguez's Anya Thorensen is an addict; Tessa Thompson's Josie Radek cuts herself; Jennifer Jason Leigh's Dr. Ventress needs answers before cancer kills her; and Lena is an adulterer. These are flaws and tendencies not only carried into The Shimmer by the women, but what brings them there in the first place. As Josie points out in the second act, though, none of them are the same after they cross the pearlescent walls of The Shimmer, now always in constant mutation with the environment around them. We ultimately see this manifest in multiple ways in the area, like tattoos shifting between characters and the "malignancy" on the wall, but the most significant and fascinating are the concepts of life and death (The ouroboros that appears on Lena's forearm halfway through the movie isn't just a cool design). Within The Shimmer, it's presented that there is harmoniousness between the two states -- beautifully represented in the duplicated deer with flowered antlers that Lena spots while searching for Cass' body -- but also clear extremes. On one end of the spectrum there is the horror of the decomposing-yet-living bear, practically the embodiment of violent slaughter that even absorbs Cass' sheer terror as it is ripping her throat out. On the opposite end there is Josie, who chooses not to fight or resist the nature of the environment. Relieving herself of her self-destructive impulses literally leads beautiful flowers to erupt from her scars. There is no alien insidiousness or aggression -- everything is simply a refraction of what already exists. This is all perceptible within the events at The Lighthouse as well, and furthermore it's part of Lena's account during her interrogation. After the "annihilation" of Dr. Ventress, the core of The Shimmer creates a duplicate of Lena from her own DNA -- but it's an echo that doesn't do anything more than imitate every move that she makes. Because Lena attacks the duplicate, the duplicate attacks her, which is not only another perfectly literal illustration of self-destruction, but serves to illustrate the nature of the alien as part of the environment around it. She makes a different choice than Kane, using the phosphorous grenade to burn the duplicate and by extension the entire Shimmer... but not every remnant of the incident is turned to ash. Who Are Lena And Kane Now? Before their individual experiences in The Shimmer, Lena and Kane were a mostly happy couple, first meeting in the military and living a good life together. Lena having an affair with her colleague (David Gyasi) caused them to start drifting apart, and drove Kane to take the mysterious assignment at Area X. Because of these events, they were already well on the road towards changing as a couple and individuals, but the end of Annihilation they go through much more than just emotional growth. For starters, Kane -- the man that Lena fell in love with and married -- dies. As seen on the video camera left inside The Lighthouse, he lost his sense of self, and committed suicide my detonating a phosphorous grenade in his lap. As part of this, it's revealed that the post-Shimmer Kane we first met in Lena's house at the start of the film isn't actually Kane, but instead his duplicate. Based on what we see, it appears that he initially struggles to adapt to the world outside the alien environment, but following Lena's return and the destruction of The Shimmer is able to stabilize and function properly. A different case entirely is Lena, who is still herself, and not the duplicate that was created in The Lighthouse. That said, the final shot of Annihilation clearly shows that she has not left the experience behind. While The Shimmer has disappeared and all traces appear to be gone, Lena's cellular modification has continued, as seen within her eyes. The implications of this are left to be interpreted (Alex Garland has said he has no interest in making a sequel), but it's pretty easy to guess that her life with Kane won't just continue on as though the whole ordeal didn't happen. It's hard to determine the full effect of her transformation, but one might imagine that she spends the rest of her life with swirling fingerprints and maybe even squirming guts. Annihilation is a film that was specifically designed to stir conversation and debate within its audiences, and surely there will be those with thoughts different than mine. Hit the comments section below to leave your own perspective on the film, and tell us what you think about the existence of The Shimmer and the ultimate fate of Lena and Kane.