Spoilers are truly a thing of the modern era. Sure, nobody wanted to know the plot twist in The Empire Strikes Back when it came out, but they weren't nearly in as much danger of knowing Darth Vader was actually Luke's father because social media and the internet weren't around. These days, it's tough to go into anything fresh and with Avengers: Infinity War arriving soon, that's going to be a big deal for many Marvel fans. As such, the movie's directors, Joe Russo and Anthony Russo, have penned a letter requesting that fans don't spoil the movie. The Russo brothers have been hard at work on the latest Avengers sequel for two years now. This is an event that has literally been an entire decade in the making and, even for casual Marvel Cinematic Universe fans, it's a big deal. Nobody understands that better than the directors and, taking to Twitter, they penned a very sincere and heartfelt letter imploring fans not to spoil the movie for others. Here's what the letter has to say. "To the greatest fans in the world. We're about to embark on the Avengers: Infinity War press tour. We will be visiting fans all over the world screening only a limited amount of select footage from the film in order to avoid spoiling the story for future viewers. We will not screen the film in its entirety the Los Angeles premiere shortly before the film's global release. Everyone involved with the film has worked incredibly hard the past two years maintaining the highest level of secrecy. Only a handful of people know the film's true plot. We're asking that when you see Infinity War, in the coming months, that you maintain the same level of secrecy so that all fans can have an equal experience when they watch it for the first time. Don't spoil it for others, the same way you wouldn't want it spoiled for you. Good luck and happy viewing." They punctuated the letter rather delightfully with the hashtag, #ThanosDemandsYourSilence. There will be almost no way to avoid spoilers after a certain point, but going so far as to write a letter like this, for two guys who aren't very active on social media, shows just how much they care about the movie and the fans. It's clear that Infinity War is hiding some major secrets and they have done a great job so far about not letting them get out. Soon enough though, it's going to be up to fans and the honor system, and that typically isn't a great system in the modern age. Avengers: Infinity War arrives in theaters on April 27. With the press tour kicking off, that means we're going to be hearing a lot from the Russo brothers, the cast and Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige over the next few weeks. However, since most of the cast didn't get to read the entire script, and since Marvel has been extra careful to avoid spoilers in the marketing, don't expect them to let any cats out of any bags. Let's just hope the fans do the same once the movie arrives.

Ok, so Jar Jar Binks sounds like one of the Teletubbies' long lost junkyard friends, and Elan Sleazebaggano is just lazy writing on George Lucas' part. But a new Star Wars alien being introduced in this May's Solo may have just won the prize for dumbest Star Wars name yet. And that's no small feat. In Elan Sleazebaggano's defense, the death stick dealer from Coruscant is actually named Elan Sel'Sabagno and Sleazebaggano is just a nickname. Most fans were okay with Jar Jar before The Phantom Menace took a big dump on a lot of childhood memories. But this new guy? This is almost unforgivable. Until you realize what Ron Howard and his team are doing. Then you're like, yeah, okay, maybe. But dang, this is still pretty stupid. Yes, let us introduce you to Therm Scissorpunch. This new alien was introduced as part of Denny's new Solo tie-in campaign that was launched this week, which includes new Denny's food items on the menu. One look at the guy, and you might think Denny's is trying to tempt you into trying one of their Lobster omelettes. In actuality, this 'gender neutral' alien is actually more akin to a crawdad than he is a lobster. It has big fat pincher claws, and that's obviously where It gets his name from. It's a pretty big fat dumb lazy name for a new Star Wars movie. And it's being called out across social media, as the poor thing is met with boos and hisses. But wait, stop the noise. Some newer fans might not see what the deal is. This is actually kind of cool because the name is a throwback to the original 1977 Star Wars movie A New Hope. When George Lucas launched his epic sci-fi adventure that would change the world of cinema as we know it, he did not bother to name many of the aliens introduced in the movie. Especially those hiding inside the cantina. When it came time for the toys to be released, Kenner just threw a bunch of goofy names out to sell the action figures to kids. That's how we wound up with Hammerhead, Walrus Man and Snaggletooth. These characters were all later given proper alien names in the official Star Wars canon. Hammerhead became Momaw Nadon, Snaggletooth became known as Zutton and Walrus Man, they call him Ponda Baba across 9 systems. So you better watch yourself. The more recent Star Wars movies have completely bailed on giving their aliens nicknames. So no matter how dumb the name Scissorpunch may be, this is kind of a cool old school throwback to the 70s. And of course, Ron Howard is responsible. Another new alien unveiled yesterday is named Six Eyes, cause, you guessed it, he has Six Eyes. His real name is Argus Panox, though. Perhaps it's the young Han who is dolling these names out? Therm Scissorpunch was unveiled in a new Denny's commercial launched yesterday. Though he sounds like someone who's ready to climb into a galactic boxing ring, we get to see him either making or eating a big bowl of pasta. It's hard to tell which. He probably doesn't have a big role in the movie, and some might find him to be delicious looking. Which is part of the ruse. As this is Denny's after all. You can collect Therm as part of the new trading card set from Topps exclusive only to Denny's. Here's what the nationwide chain had to say in their press release. "Thanks to Denny's, America won't have to travel to a galaxy far, far away to experience its own taste of "Solo: A Star Wars Story." Starting today, Star Wars fans and guests across the country will be able to get their hands on a variety of movie-inspired items, including a bold new menu and exclusive Solo: A Star Wars Story trading cards only available at Denny's, all while helping a great cause in the process. Net proceeds from the sale of all trading card packs will benefit Denny's longtime partner, No Kid Hungry, to help kick childhood hunger into outer space." Each exclusive Solo: A Star Wars Story trading card pack, which is only available at Denny's in-store and via 'Denny's on Demand', includes two of 12 different character cards, featuring Han Solo, Chewbacca, Qi'ra, Lando Calrissian and more, in addition to a Denny's coupon for future use. A portion of all sales from the $3 trading card packs, with a minimum guaranteed donation of $1million, will be donated to No Kid Hungry to help provide meals to children in need. With two cards per pack, and 12 cards all together, odds are you may end up donating quite a lot of money to a worthy cause before you ever get your hands on one of those sure to be cutthroat collectable Therm cards. To kick off the promotional campaign, Denny's released its own Solo: A Star Wars Story inspired national TV spot call Hand of Sabacc. Set inside the lodge from Solo: A Star Wars Story, the spot features two young adversaries, who imagine that they are squared off in a high-stakes card game as characters from the Star Wars universe, including Chewbacca, watch from around the booth. Denny's worked closely with Lucasfilm and Skywalker Sound and enlisted the help of acclaimed production designer Neil Lamont and Oscar-winning creature and Special Makeup Effects Supervisor Neal Scanlan, both of whom worked on Star Wars films Rogue One and The Force Awakens, to create an authentic Star Wars environment for the spot. Star Wars fans can also fuel up with their crew with Denny's movie-inspired menu, featuring bold new items that will send guests' taste buds into hyperdrive. Available 24/7, Denny's new menu includes the Co-Reactor Pancakes, featuring fresh strawberries, strawberry sauce and whipped cream, plus a side of Crystal Crunch Rocks and a pitcher of warm citrus sauce to pour over the pancakes; the Blaster Fire Burger, which offers up chipotle gouda cheese, bacon and spicy Ghost Pepper sauce top a hand-pressed 100 percent beef patty; along with the new Two Moons Skillet and Denny's Lightspeed Slam. Guests can also activate their taste buds by adding a side of Crystal Crunch rocks to their favorite Milk Shake. If that wasn't enough, guests can also enjoy their favorite beverage in one of Denny's Limited Edition Solo: A Star Wars Story collector cups featuring characters from the film and topped with a Millennium Falcon lid. Fans will be able to experience Denny's promotional campaign with Solo: A Star Wars Story through June 26. You can check ol' Therm Scissorpunch out in the Denny's video and cards here.

Joaquin Phoenix's response to reports linking him to a Joker solo movie is about as cryptic as a clue from the Clown Prince of Crime himself. The Academy Award nominee is the latest Hollywood A-lister linked to a Martin Scorsese-produced Joker standalone film from Warner Bros and DC, which would explore how a failed stand-up comic was transformed into the most notorious villain in Gotham City. Phoenix is known for his love of pulling the wool over everyone's eyes — like when he spent a solid year pretending to launch a hip-hop career. It's certainly not unexpected that he's being just as cryptic about this latest role. Talking to Fandango, Phoenix flashed a Joker-esque grin as he said: "It could be an interesting character, I don't know." Phoenix has been linked to comic book roles before (like Doctor Strange, for example), and it sounds like he's not opposed to jumping into a blockbuster franchise like Batman. "If you have the ability to transcend the genre, then that's what you want to do," he argued. "So I wouldn't say, hands down, no – I wouldn't do that kind of movie. There are things where I've flirted with the possibility where there was the potential for this to be… something that's actually interesting to me. "But then for whatever reason they never got to that place where everyone else feels the same way. And that's key. Everyone has to want to explore the same thing or else it just doesn't f**king work. I'm not opposed to it. I don't make decisions on budget or things like that – it's really the filmmaker and the character." If he were to take the role of the Joker, he'd be following in the footsteps of Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger and Jared Leto, who most recently played the villain in the DCEU's Suicide Squad. There is no release date or even title announced yet for DC's Joker standalone film.

When I heard that Hollywood was making a movie about Chappaquiddick, I said to myself, “Hallelujah. It’s about time.” Why did it take so long? A prominent politician with presidential ambitions drives off a rickety bridge late at night and drowns a young woman, leaves the scene of the accident, fails to report it to police, huddles with his handlers to decide how best to spin the debacle, waits seven days before he goes public … that kind of script writes itself. How is it possible that nobody filmed it during a span of nearly 50 years? Because Hollywood is predominantly liberal, and the Kennedys have many friends there. There is no other explanation, and the evidence — while circumstantial — is overwhelming. There have been numerous movies and TV treatments of the Watergate scandal, featuring Richard Nixon as a tragic figure undone by his demons. There have been zero dramatizations of Chappaquiddick featuring Edward Kennedy as a tragic figure undone by his demons. Until now, nobody wanted to touch that third rail and risk getting burned by Hollywood powers who believe the Kennedys’ worst failings should be exempt from scrutiny. Indeed, Bryon Allen, the executive producer of “Chappaquiddick” (in theaters starting this week), told Variety that he took some heat: “Unfortunately, there are some very powerful people who tried to put pressure on me not to release this movie. They went out of their way to try and influence me in a negative way. I made it very clear that I’m not about the right, I’m not about the left, I’m about the truth.” Allen didn’t name names, but he didn’t need to. What he experienced was nothing new. It had happened before. When the History Channel announced in 2010 that it was planning an eight-part dramatization called “The Kennedys,” Hollywood friends and allies of the family went ballistic. They put heat on the History Channel to kill the series; Ted Sorenson, a former JFK aide and one of the earliest Kennedy hagiographers, warned darkly that if the cable network didn’t surrender, “there will be hell to pay.” The censorship crusade was so intense that the network dumped the series. (It didn’t die, however. It was picked up by another cable network, Reelz, which aired it in 2011. Greg Kinnear played a great JFK.) And when Byron Allen insists that he’s “not about the right, I’m not about the left, I’m about the truth” — well, good for him. The truth should supersede all ideological labels. The truth requires that Kennedys be scrutinized, warts and all. There is much to admire about the Kennedys; I support the issues that Ted Kennedy relentlessly fought for during his fine Senate career. But Kennedy flamekeepers have long sought to minimize the family’s dark side, and that is no longer sustainable. Not in this era, when the exploitation of women is a top-tier issue. Allen refers to Mary Jo Kopechne as “one of the original #MeToo victims,” and that’s why this film fits the current zeitgeist. If Kennedy’s 1969 behavior had occurred in 2018, his Senate career would’ve crashed in an instant. Lest we forget, Al Franken’s Senate career crashed after he was outed for sins that were, by comparison, infinitesimal. Kennedy’s sins on the night of July 18, 1969 — excuse me, his criminal and political offenses — are factually beyond dispute: A notorious cruiser of women, he did some drinking at a cottage party on Chappaquiddick Island. He drove off with Kopechne, who had worked for brother Bob’s ’68 presidential campaign. He later claimed he was driving her to the ferry that connected the island to Edgartown (where she had a hotel room), but the last ferry had left at least an hour before he took the wheel. And Kopechene had left her purse and room keys back at the cottage. The left-bending road to the ferry was paved; instead, Kennedy took a sharp right turn onto a dirt track that led to a wooden bridge that led to a deserted beach. He knew that route well; he had visited the beach during the day. He never reached the beach. His car hit the water and flipped over. He escaped. After trying and failing to extricate Kopechne, he trudged back to the cottage. On the way, he passed a number of houses and an emergency fire station, but didn’t stop to report the accident. At the cottage, he told two of his flunkies (a cousin and a friend) about the accident. The three men returned to the scene and tried unsuccessfully to help Kopechne. Back at the cottage, none of them picked up the phone to call police. Instead, Kennedy swam the short distance to Edgartown and slept it off in his hotel room. He didn’t report the accident until after it was discovered 10 hours later. Ultimately, he pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident. He received a suspended sentence and probation. That’s the gist of what happened, though there was much more; Kennedy’s team of spinners and enablers overwhelmed the obsequious local authorities. Kennedy by that point in his Senate career was known for treating women like tissue, but he could do no wrong in Massachusetts; as the late great journalist Michael Kelly once quipped, “he’d have to hit the pope and pee on the Irish flag to lose his Senate seat.” He kept the seat until death did they part, in 2009. But the nagging questions about Kopechne’s death did kill his presidential ambitions; the scandal was baggage during his failed ’80 bid for the nomination. So it’s long past time that Chappaquiddick has been plucked from the mists of history — for the benefit of an audience newly sensitized to the mistreatment of women, especially those in the audience not yet born in 1969. The existence of this new film is proof that Kennedy hagiography is on the wane, even in Hollywood. And rightly so, because the truth demands it.

Lena Waithe fully appreciates that some people may not understand her passion project. "The Chi" creator is riding high in Hollywood right now. From her buzzed about Vanity Fair cover to her recent big-screen debut in Steven Spielberg's "Ready Player One," not to mention her critically acclaimed role in "Master of None" and her designation as the first African-American woman to win a writing Emmy for her work on that series, Waithe is garnering attention. She told The Hollywood Reporter that she'd next like to do a film about one of her heroes -- Mary Tyler Moore. "I don't think people are expecting that from a black lesbian from the South Side of Chicago," Waithe said. "But, I read her autobiography more times than I can count." Related: Papa from 'The Chi' is the modern male TV's been waiting for The actress said she became obsessed with "The Mary Tyler Moore" show and greatly admires the late actress, who died last year at the age of 80. "She was a feminist in every sense of the word, but she was also a functioning alcoholic. She was also extremely private," Waithe said. "She had MTM [Enterprises]. MTM produced 'St. Elsewhere,' 'Lou Grant' and all these other amazing shows. I feel like, I want to tell her story." Waithe said she's "still a queer black girl" who also wants to tell a James Baldwin story, but she glories in her varied interests. "I think the reason that people sometimes tend to be so fascinated about me is they're always surprised by the things that come out of my mouth," she said. "I'm going to keep surprising people."

Last week, I planned to post a list of the best sci-fi and fantasy movies of 2018 so far. We got started early here with first-quarter rankings of the best horror and best action movies, as well as the best films overall, as of this point in the year. The sci-fi/fantasy list would have joined them. At the start of 2018, I expected this to be a great and easy feature because the genres had so much promise back then. On the fantasy side, we were getting imports that had already done well overseas, namely Paddington 2 and Mary and the Witch’s Flower. And on the sci-fi side, we were getting new original works from Duncan Jones and Alex Garland, plus another cool-sounding Cloverfield installment, an adaptation of a classic novel from the great Ava DuVernay, and rounding out the three months, a nostalgic throwback from Steven Spielberg. Unfortunately, most of the sci-fi hopefuls were met with severe disappointment. Jones’s Mute turned out to be far from the second-coming of Moon we’d anticipated. And after all the hype over its surprise release on Netflix after the Super Bowl, The Cloverfield Paradox fumbled, to the point that it was sort of an embarrassment. DuVernay’s A Wrinkle in Time was received somewhat awkward, lukewarm in response but with a caveat of respect for its earnestness. Then there’s Wes Anderson’s stop-motion animated sci-fi effort Isle of Dogs, which was also made with utmost sincerity but still has some issues regarding its cultural appropriation that is complicating its chances for full-on love and appreciation (see Justin Chang’s enlightening review). And now Spielberg is also deservedly being censured for his latest, Ready Player One, for not being more woke in the wake of Gamergate. Meanwhile, Garland’s Annihilation is an incredible experience when watched theatrically, and quite substantial in its cancer allegory, but it’s hardly a landmark film. A lot of it seems conventional while also being, as is typical of Garland, very cold. There are memorable images, but the film left me with no emotional resonance. On the other hand, Ryan Coogler’s Black Panther was, and I’m telling the honest truth, the first Marvel movie to make my eyes well up. And it actually happened twice, once when a certain character dies midway and then again at the climax. Still, it’s a superhero movie with some imperfectly directed action sequences. For all its merits of (fantastically) complex politics, standout characters, and spectacular design, it’s still hard for me to say it’s one of the best movies of the year, even early on. With that, I realize I am nitpicking, as I can be faulted for doing especially with my favorite movie genres. It’s true that most of this year’s big sci-fi movies have disappointed. It’s true that some of them are even an absolute mess, as released. But I also realize that some of the disappointment has had to do with unfair expectations. Should Mute be better? Yes. Does it have some good moments? Sure. Did I have Moon too much on the brain while watching — especially when the film actually references Moon — and that adversely affected my experience? Definitely. Is A Wrinkle in Time a gorgeous-looking fantasy adventure that shouldn’t have been sold as something more than a simplistic kids’ movie? That’s right. Even The Cloverfield Paradox is entertaining if you fast forward through all the forced-in Cloverfield tie-in stuff. Maybe it’s because I finally watched Paddington 2 and it made me all warm and fuzzy inside. Or maybe it’s because I watched Pacific Rim Uprising and found no reason to malign such dumb fun so I went back and took the same approach to everything else. I didn’t even include the original Pacific Rim on my final year-end list of the best sci-fi and fantasy movies of 2013. Part of why I disliked the first movie is because I wanted it to be something more, something smarter and more interesting, especially because Guillermo del Toro being at the helm implied greater significance than what was delivered. With Uprising, I accept the sequel’s B-movie cheesiness, but I’m also genuinely impressed with its storytelling decisions and how the movie creatively builds off from the plot of the original instead of just easily and lazily repeating it. Basically, I just have to forgive that most sci-fi and fantasy isn’t going to be perfectly written or truly original anymore. The Maze Runner: Death Cure is a satisfying enough finish to a trilogy that starts out intriguing then scatters all over the place over the next two installments. But its main ensemble, the young actors who had me invested in the Lost-in-a-courtyard plot of the first movie, held my attention through some derivative yet well-executed set pieces involving trains, buses, and a citadel in need of tearing down. Even without the Cloverfield add-ons, if we were to rework The Cloverfield Paradox (similar to how 2016’s Passengers could be improved with a “rearranged” fan cut) so that it’s just God Particle again, its script is still totally preposterous yet the movie has some neat moments and fine performances. Really, I’m just down with anything in which a character’s arm is detached and then has a mind of its own. There is no forgiving the offenses of “willful ignorance” on the parts of Anderson and Spielberg, however, and that’s a shame for all of the joy and entertainment value that I, for one, found in Isle of Dogs and Ready Player One. It’s especially upsetting because Isle of Dogs could have been made without all the tribute to Japanese cinema and culture that winds up coming off as fetishization. And Ready Player One could have avoided controversy by being more careful with the way its fanboy protagonists act like gatekeepers of the internet’s arena of fandom. Sometimes not going for deeper dives in sci-fi — Ready Player One could also have certainly made stronger statements on Net Neutrality and nostalgia and remix culture and so much more — the result can be not so much mindless entertainment but a naive diversion. On top of its serious problems, Ready Player One is also part of a trend that’s getting old fast. Pop culture mashups are fun in small doses on YouTube and have worked in brief or limited groupings in animation going back to Who Framed Roger Rabbit and Toy Story. But Warner Bros. is overdoing it with the Lego Movie franchise and now Spielberg’s latest, where the studio is packing in as many familiar faces (and masks) as if just to keep the IPs in our consciousness. Their success is bleeding into other fantasy films with nothing better to do than cross public domain characters from Shakespeare and Doyle in Sherlock Gnomes or similarly go for broke like Disney’s upcoming sequel Ralph Breaks the Internet: Wreck-it Ralph 2, which will feature iconic video game characters, Disney Princesses, Marvel heroes, and Star Wars droids. Is there any hope for the rest of 2018’s upcoming sci-fi and fantasy releases? Will this year’s Star Wars installment be worth all the production changes? Will Jude Law as a young Dumbledore be enough for us to ignore Johnny Depp in the Fantastic Beasts sequel? Could the return of Mary Poppins do the character justice? Is Incredibles 2 going to be incredible, too? I’m going to keep expectations at bay for these major releases as well as even the already acclaimed works that have been seen at film festivals, such as Sorry to Bother You and I Think We’re Alone Now. Maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised by the handling of so many characters in Avengers: Infinity War and additional characters in Deadpool 2 and just the one character in Aquaman. Hopefully, there are also some amazing films on the horizon that aren’t on my radar. As for 2018 so far, only three sci-fi/fantasy films are exceptional enough for me to want to fully recommend them and feature them on a list of “the best.” As it turns out, they’re also the top three titles on our general list — albeit in a slightly different order. The rest, I’ve decided to rank as well, just to do it. And do so honestly in spite of feeling guilty now about enjoying and still mostly liking Isle of Dogs and Ready Player One for what they do right and well, and about not caring enough for the well-animated but overly familiar and unaffecting fantasy of Mary and the Witch’s Flower. Also, in the spirit of its alternate-universes plot, I’ve included multiple versions of The Cloverfield Paradox. Here goes: The Best Sci-Fi and Fantasy Films of 2018 (So Far): 1. Paddington 2 2. Black Panther 3. Annihilation The Rest of the Sci-Fi and Fantasy Films of 2018 (So Far), Ranked: 1. Isle of Dogs 2. A Wrinkle in Time 3. Ready Player One 4. Maze Runner: The Death Cure 5. Pacific Rim Uprising 6. Mary and the Witch’s Flower 7. God’s Particle (The Cloverfield Paradox Recut) 8. Sherlock Gnomes 9. Mute 10. The Cloverfield Paradox

Disney's surprise megahit "Black Panther" continued to climb to new heights this week, earning a place in the top 10 movies of all time. The box-office haul for the superhero flick rose to $1.28 billion worldwide through Monday. That was enough to knock Disney's animated musical "Frozen" — itself a cultural phenomenon — out of the top 10. "Black Panther" also surpassed Universal's "Jurassic World" to become the fourth highest-earning movie ever at U.S. theaters. Its domestic sales now stand at $652.5 million, just barely edging out the earnings for the "Jurassic Park" sequel. "Yet another milestone for Disney/Marvel's 'Black Panther' as the blockbuster superhero hit continues to climb the global box office chart at a breakneck pace and takes its rightful place in the rarefied air of the top 10 earners of all-time in theaters worldwide," said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst at comScore. The movie from Disney-owned Marvel Studios follows the exploits of T'Challa, the king and guardian of a highly advanced fictional African country. "Black Panther" is the first of Marvel's 18 interconnected films to feature an African-American leading man, Chadwick Boseman, and a majority black cast. The film has shattered conventional wisdom among Hollywood gatekeepers that superhero blockbusters have to be anchored by white male leads. Disney won't have to wait long to leverage the massive appeal of "Black Panther." The character will return in this month's "Avengers: Infinity War."

A Metal Gear Solid movie is coming. It's being directed by Kong Skull Island director Jordan Vogt-Roberts, who is saying all the right things about making the movie the right away. It's too early to say if it'll break the video game movie curse, but it sounds like Vogt-Roberts gets it. And it's encouraging to know he's been working alongside--or at least consulting with--Metal Gear creator Hideo Kojima on the film early in the production process. That can only help. He recently held a video meeting Kojima to presumably discuss the film, and yeah, that's all well and good. But the bigger, more important story here is the mug that Kojima brought to the meeting. Vogt-Roberts shared a screencap of his video session with Kojima, and this includes the odd-looking mug. We thought about it, and are wondering if that is some kind of crazy lid on top? To keep the drink hot? And the design itself--what's that all about? Please help us understand. If you have any thoughts on this Very Serious And Important Topic, please leave them in the comments below. We'll update this post accordingly as new information becomes available. On a more serious note, in August last year, Vogt-Roberts told GameSpot that the Metal Gear movie was undergoing a re-working of the script to make it more in line with what fans want to see. He recalled an important meeting with Sony Pictures executives where they took on board his thoughts about how the movie, at the time, might have been going down the wrong path. "I was able to go to them and say, 'Let's stop where we are, because I think we're heading down a direction that doesn't fully capture why people love this game, what Kojima's voice is, why people who have played this game for decades love it, why people who have never played this game will love it,'" Vogt-Roberts said. "I was able to say, 'Let's really think about whether we're making the truest, most balls-to-the-wall Metal Gear version of this--the most Kojima version of this. And even if that means we make it for a little bit less money, let's make the version of this that's true to what it is, fully committed to what Kojima's voice is.'" Vogt-Roberts, who is clearly passionate and knowledgable about the Metal Gear Solid franchise, also told GameSpot about why he thinks video game movies have come up short over the years. "I think that [filmmakers] have looked at a video game movie and said, 'Oh, that's flashy! That's cool!'...and there's very little desire to really understand the tone and the atmosphere," he said. "A big part of it is not fully committing to the source material, being able to say 'No, this is what makes this great, so let's figure out how we translate it.'" It is still early days for the Metal Gear solid movie. There is no word on a release date or cast, but of course we will be covering all the news about it, so keep checking back for more. Vogt-Roberts has some familiarity with video game productions, as he directed the Destiny 2 New Legends Will Rise live-action video. As for the Metal Gear series, the latest installment is Metal Gear Survive, which launched in February to a tepid critical reception. It was the first new release in the long-running series following Kojima's departure from Konami. Kojima is now working on the PS4 game Death Stranding with the new version of his studio Kojima Productions.

The chances of seeing another Saw movie hitting theaters has taken another small step forward, as the writers of Jigsaw are reportedly hard at work penning Saw 9. As ever, the critical reception for the eighth film in the enduring horror franchise was lukewarm to say the least, but it was a solid box-office hit and laid the groundworks for future sequels, and this certainly appears to be happening. Seven years after Saw 3D, Jigsaw was released in October of last year. Despite moralistic serial-killer John Kramer actually dying in Saw 3, the subsequent sequels have always found ways to continue his legacy and explore his character in flashbacks. This was also the case with Jigsaw, which was intended to revive the franchise and provide further thrills and twists for horror fans. The co-directors, brothers Michael Spierig and Peter Spierig, sought to ‘honor‘ the original movie and also make it accessible to new audiences. During the opening weekend, the box-office takings in the US did seem disappointing, and the second-lowest for the franchise. However the film went on to gross over $102m worldwide, from a modest budget of only $10m, which made plans for further films much more possible. Unsurprisingly there were rumors that Twisted Pictures were having ‘conversations‘ about the production of Saw 9 in January. Things have now apparently progressed beyond that point though, as Bloody Disgusting reports that the Jigsaw writers – Pete Goldfinger and Josh Stolberg – are currently in the process of developing it for the production company. It is understood that the Spierig Brothers will not be returning to helm the follow-up, and that the directors seat will remain vacant for the moment. That isn’t entirely unexpected, as they revealed in an interview with Screen Rant previously that they were almost ‘directors for hire’ on the project, and that they knew they wouldn’t be involved in future Saw movies. Nonetheless, they were happy that they laid the right foundations for the franchise to continue. If the report is accurate, Goldfinger and Stolberg (who also previously worked on Piranha 3D and the remake of the slasher Sorority Row), will now have to decide how to take the story forward. There’s plenty of potential for a straightforward continuation of the plot-strands left hanging at the climax of Jigsaw. There’s also scope for re-winding slightly and maybe include some of the surviving characters from Saw 3D. The continued presence of actor Tobin Bell as Kramer is an absolute must – albeit in flashback mode – as he has been for every single Saw movie. Bell himself actually suggested an idea for a future film, where the origin of Billy the Puppet and his significance to Kramer could be explored. Assuming development on the project continues, we can expect to hear more news about the production shortly. It wouldn’t be far-fetched to expect a planned release date for Halloween, although 2019 would be far more likely than this year, even with a quick turnaround. Hopefully the writers will take onboard some of the feedback from Jigsaw and give horror fans something to get excited about again.

There's a fundamental disconnect between the trailer for Blockers and the actual movie. The trailer shows an all-too familiar story: After finding out that their daughters have pledged to lose their virginity on prom night, a group of protective parents decide to do everything in their power to stop them. In all fairness, the idea of parents as ill-equipped to deal with their daughters' burgeoning sexuality isn't all that hard to buy. But the fact that the preview appears to frame their cause as morally righteous feels distinctly out of touch in today's cultural landscape, to the point that the initial reaction to the preview was one of dubious caution. Really? Another movie about the importance of female purity? After all, one John Cena butt-chugging scene does not a subversive film make. But in reality, Kay Cannon's directorial debut goes far beyond the usual virginity scare trope (and that butt-chugging scene in question, it must be said, is masterfully done). The film is far more concerned with the intent and agency of its teenage protagonists — who, unlike what their parents believe, are very aware of the consequences of the choice they've made — than it is with reinforcing a message of puritan abstinence. It's almost as though the people in charge of marketing the film didn't know how to deal with its progressive messaging, and reverted to what they knew best. But this isn't a movie about virginity; it's a movie about sexual choice. And when the movie in question is an R-rated comedy about teenage girls from a major studio, directed by a woman, that feels downright revolutionary. The real key to Blockers is the way in which the film takes the time to zoom in on the motivations of each of its distinct characters, rather than mashing them all together in a protective parents vs. promiscuous teens divide. Take our three best friends: The more girly-girl of the trio, Julie (Kathryn Newton), has been dating her boyfriend Austin (Graham Phillips) for six whole months (practically a lifetime in high school). They've passed the "I love you stage," and are ready to consummate. And while her candy and rose petals fantasy of losing virginity might seem old school, don't be fooled — she knows what she wants, and how she wants it. Soccer star Kayla (Geraldine Viswanthan), on the other hand, is more pragmatic than romantic: she just wants to get the virginity thing over and done with so she can move on, and informs her lab partner that he's the lucky chosen one. And perhaps most compelling of all is Sam (Gideon Adlon), who buys into the pact as a way to remain connected to her best friends with college separation looming, even as she struggles to tell them that she's actually into girls. (In a Gen-Z twist that also showed up in this year's Love, Simon, it's not so much that she's worried about their judgment than she is about the status quo changing.) And then there's the parents, thrown together in a circumstantial friendship of their own: Julie's single "cool mom" Lisa (Leslie Mann), who really just wants to protect her daughter from the bad experiences she's had with sex; Sam's degenerate deadbeat dad Hunter (Ike Barinholtz), who, having long guessed that his daughter is gay, wants to shield her from peer pressure; and finally Kayla's sensitive beefcake dad Mitchell (John Cena), the more traditional of the bunch who's struggling to come to terms with the idea of his daughter as a sexual person. ("I can't even hug her anymore without feeling her boobs!" he laments at one point.) The saving grace where they're concerned is how self-aware they are about this whole thing. They know that they're playing into a double standard that demands that women remain innocent while men are encouraged to experiment. That's all fine in theory — but we're talking about their kids, damn it! Fuck progressive. Oh, and about John Cena — the casting in Blockers is phenomenal. Mann is almost manic in her best role in years, grounding the more boorish comedy of her male co-stars. (The scene shown in the trailer of them trying to decipher teen emoji speak is the rare time that's actually worked). Cena is basically what every dad pictures himself as when fantasizing about beating up a daughter's suitor, while Barinholtz vacillates between lovable doofus and, somewhat astonishingly, the voice of reason. Newton and Adlon are both great, but it's Viswanathan who emerges as a true comic find. Her timing is spot-on, and she injects some boyish swagger in a power dynamic that would traditionally have her simpering. (In one scene towards the end, she demands oral sex from her date, the first time I've ever seen anything like it onscreen.) The script by Brian and Jim Kehoe feels fresh, and reinvigorates a genre that's been put through its paces since Knocked Up hit the scene in 2007 (unsurprisingly, both were produced by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg). The film also owes much to the successes of Bridesmaids and Girls' Trip, both of which proved that there is an audience for women being raunchy. Still, that theory's never been tested in a teen-focused comedy, and that's where Cannon's expertise as writer of the Pitch Perfect franchise really shines through: in the many small details that make these girls feel real. Most cinematic portrayals of young women relegate them to the roles of shy prude or bitchy slut. These girls are assertive, yes, but they're not mean. They value their friendships. They talk about sex and make dick jokes because — shocker — women do that. But more importantly, they are the product of a generation who have been taught that they're entitled to make their own decisions when it comes to their sexuality, but also that they must listen to each other, and, crucially, consent. There's no one-sided pleading from a sex-starved boy trying to bargain with his girlfriend, and definitely no coercion. In fact, this movie is as much a positive example for how young men should act, as it is for young women. And those parents could learn a thing or two as well.

Sometimes you just don’t want to watch a movie based on a comic book, reboot, or three-quel. No, sometimes you just want to go back to basics and watch a classic movie. But since there are so many classic movies out there, which one should you choose to add to your Netflix queue? Thankfully, you can turn to the stars for guidance and choose a classic movie based on your zodiac sign. Whether you’re a big rom-com fan or prefer a feel-good drama, there are a number of must-sees out there for you. But with such a long list of titles — some of which might sound unfamiliar — it’s easy to get overwhelmed with the choices. Should you make it a Scorsese or Spielberg night? Luckily, you can let your zodiac sign do the choosing for you — at least to get you started. Here’s the classic movie you should watch based on your zodiac sign: ARIES Since Aries is a fire sign, you naturally like movies that let you channel your aggressive and passionate energy, which is why you’d prefer a high-energy thriller like Martin Scorcese’s Goodfellas. Nominated for a boatload of Oscars and starring Robert DeNiro, the film about the high-stakes Italian American crime syndicate, aka the Mafia, is your go-to. TAURUS Taurses love to laze around on the couch and have anything light, frothy, and super funny distract them from their own reality. You’ll love the comedy Some Like It Hot, starring Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon as two musicians posing as women to escape from the mob. Marilyn Monroe co-stars and is, of course, perfect. GEMINI Geminis love anything that keeps their minds moving, so they’ll enjoy a good mystery or thriller with a twisty plot. Cue the Alfred Hitchcock classic North By Northwest, starring Cary Grant as a man who’s mistaken for a government spy. CANCER Cancers prefer anything that is light on the drama and heavy on the glitz, glam, and feel-good vibes. If you haven’t watched My Fair Lady starring Audrey Hepburn as Eliza Doolittle in a musical version of Pygmalion, you haven’t experienced life yet. LEO Leos secretly (or not) dream of being the star of their own show, which is why they’ll love to catch A Star is Born with Judy Garland, hailed by many as the greatest musical of all time. (P.S. Lady Gaga will star in the remake later this year.) VIRGO Virgos prefer to be wowed by anything science fiction or, conversely, anything rooted in reality. Although Steven Spielberg’s Close Encounters of the Third Kind isn’t exactly based on true events…we don’t know if we’re truly alone, do we? LIBRA Libras love anything light-hearted, charming, and filled with love — much like themselves. If that sounds like you, then you need to check out When Harry Met Sally… and then everyone will “want to have what you’re having” (watch the movie, you’ll get it). SCORPIO The mysterious Scorpio loves anything scary — from gory thrillers to cheesy horror movies — because they actually like to be scared. Which is why if you haven’t watched the Oscar-winning Silence of the Lambs yet, then what are you waiting for? SAGITTARIUS Sagittarians love, love, and also love anything related to travel and lands far, far away. They’ll adore the fantasy love story The Princess Bride starring Cary Elwes and Robin Wright, and the romance between their respective characters, Westley and Princess Buttercup. CAPRICORN Capricorns are secretly animation lovers. They love the flashy characters, the music, the colors, and the witty dialogue. Watch Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, and see where the Disney magic all started. AQUARIUS Anything that is true to life is what an Aquarius really wants to watch. They love to think while also looking at the world in a different way. Watch Sally Field in Norma Rae, a film about a North Carolina textile factory worker who becomes involved in the labor union activities, and prepare to be inspired. PISCES Pisces are the natural dreamers of the zodiac. They love to escape their reality but also love rainbows, happy endings, and anything that puts a pep in their step. Their go-to movie is obviously The Wizard of Oz.

At one time the Flash movie was supposed to be released in early 2018, just a few months after Ezra Miller's full introduction as the Scarlet Speedster in Justice League, but a number of behind-the-scenes setbacks resulted in the movie being set aside and retooled. Last summer at San Diego Comic-Con, it was announced that The Flash was now being called Flashpoint, meaning that it would adapt the 2011 storyline of the same name. However, a new tidbit of information has us wondering if DC and Warner Bros have decided not to have Flash's first movie be Flashpoint-related anymore. Buried in its report about Dan Mazeau being hired to pen the screenplay for Armada, an adaptation of the 2015 novel written by Ready Player One author Ernest Cline, THR mentioned that Mazaeu worked on the Flash movie "when it was titled Flashpoint." Making this even more curious is that Borys Kit, who wrote the article, said on Twitter that all he noted was that the Flash movie is no longer being called Flashpoint, not that the movie itself won't adapt that storyline. For those unfamiliar with the original Flashpoint, it saw Barry Allen waking up in a radically different version of the main DC Comics timeline, with changes including Thomas Wayne being Batman, Aquaman and Wonder Woman being at war with one another, and Superman having been imprisoned by the U.S. government since infancy. Flashpoint was later adapted as the Justice League: The Flashpoint Paradox animated movie and within Season 3 of The Flash TV series. While certain updates, from Gal Gadot reportedly reprising Wonder Woman in the movie to DC president Geoff Johns saying that the movie would contain Batman elements, have indicated that this Flashpoint could be a relatively faithful adaptation of the original story, in February it was rumored that the movie would make some radical changes, which included Captain Cold, Heat Wave and Dr. Light being the main villains. Regardless, in the wake of Justice League's underwhelming critical and commercial performance, the DC films division has been going through restructuring, and it's possible that as a result, it was decided to make the Flash movie a more conventional standalone story rather than a massive event on the same level as Justice League, if not bigger. As things stand now, all we officially know about the Flash movie's current development is that Game Night directors John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein have officially signed on as the directors, the position previously held by Seth Grahame-Smith and Rick Famuyiwa. Assuming the Flash movie is indeed not adapting Flashpoint anymore, it's also possible that Daley and Goldstein were the catalyst for this change, as they preferred to helm a movie firmly centered on Barry Allen rather than involving other major DC heroes. Stay tuned to CinemaBlend for more updates concerning the Flash movie, including when it's expected to come out. For now, you can look forward to the next chapter of the DCEU unfolding when Aquaman swims into theaters on December 21.

Marvel's Ghost Rider movies didn't have the warmest of receptions. Not even Nicolas Cage is a fan, and he starred in them! Cage played the flaming vigilante Johnny Blaze in a 2007 film and a 2011 sequel — neither of which gave the actor the creative freedom he'd hoped for, it seems. During a chat with JoBlo, Nicolas Cage claimed that his and writer David S Goyer's vision for a grittier, R-rated story was blocked by producers. "Ghost Rider was a movie that always should've been an R-rated movie," Cage explained. "David Goyer had a brilliant script which I wanted to do with David, and for whatever reason they just didn't let us make the movie." Given the success of R-rated Deadpool, Cage remains hopeful that Ghost Rider will eventually get the gruesome big-screen adaptation it deserves — although the actor thinks his time in the role has passed. "That movie is a still a movie that should be made, not with me obviously, but it should be an R-rated movie," he argued. "Heck, Deadpool was R-rated and that did great. Ghost Rider was designed to be a scary superhero with an R-rating and edge, and they just didn't have it worked out back then." Since the release of Cage's Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, the rights to the character have reverted to Marvel Studios. This has resulted in the Robbie Reyes version of the character recently turning up in Agents of SHIELD, as played by Gabriel Luna. There's even been talk of SHIELD's version of Ghost Rider getting his own gritty spin-off at some point.

Once it comes out, Hollywood can just stop trying, because it doesn't get any better than this. There were a few 2018 movies that really grabbed our attention. The Hurricane Heist was one, which was basically Twister meets Ocean's 11, from the director of The Fast & The Furious. Amazing. There was also Rampage, in which The Rock fights giant monsters in the city because... plot? Also amazing. But ever since The Meg was first announced, there was never going to be any competition for Best Movie of 2018, if not the best movie of all time. While it does sound like the spin-off movie for the daughter from Family Guy, it is actually about... no, you know what? We're going to let the official synopsis do the talking for us... In the film, a deep-sea submersible — part of an international undersea observation program — has been attacked by a massive creature, previously thought to be extinct, and now lies disabled at the bottom of the deepest trench in the Pacific… with its crew trapped inside. With time running out, expert deep-sea rescue diver Jonas Taylor (Jason Statham) is recruited by a visionary Chinese oceanographer (Winston Chao), against the wishes of his daughter Suyin (Li Bingbing), to save the crew —and the ocean itself — from this unstoppable threat: a pre-historic 75-foot-long shark known as the Megalodon. What no one could have imagined is that, years before, Taylor had encountered this same terrifying creature. Now, teamed with Suyin, he must confront his fears and risk his own life to save everyone trapped below…bringing him face to face once more with the greatest and largest predator of all time.” Yep, The Meg is short for the Megalodon shark, a giant, ancient shark that Jason Statham has to kill. The Meg is a movie about Jason Statham fighting a giant shark. Do you understand now why this is the greatest movie of all time? Oh, and did we mention the budget for this movie is $150,000,000? This is a HUGE blockbuster, and we might finally be getting some kind of spiritual sequel to Deep Blue Sea, and we are 100% here for that. Statham, Bingbing and Chao are joined by Cliff Curtis (Die Hard 4.0), Rainn Wilson (The US Office), Ólafur Darris Ólafsson (Lady Dynamite) and Ruby Rose (John Wick Chapter 2), and is all directed by Jon Turteltaub (National Treasure, While You Were Sleeping). Oh, and we totally forgot the best bit. The movie is based on a 1997 book (yes, seriously) titled Meg: A Novel Of Deep Terror, which is the first of EIGHT novels about the giant killer shark. So if The Meg is a hit, which it definitely will be because it involves Jason Statham fighting a giant shark, then we can potentially expect at least seven more movies in this franchise. The Meg is due to arrive in Irish cinemas on Friday 10 August, and we will be checking back in each and every month until it comes in, because a movie of this magnitude (Meg-nitude?) deserves all the attention we can give it.

Fox has cast “Riverdale” star K.J. Apa in its drama “The Hate U Give,” two months after the studio dropped Kian Lawley from the project over videos that surfaced in which he uttered racist slurs. Fox 2000 has authorized more than a week of re-shoots in Atlanta. Lawley was set to play the boyfriend of the film’s star, Amandla Stenberg, in the movie based on Angela Thomas’ novel of the same name, which centers on race and police brutality. He was fired from the project on Feb. 5. Lawley apologized at the time, saying, “I respect Fox’s decision to recast this role for ‘The Hate U Give’ as it is an important story, and it would not be appropriate for me to be involved considering the actions of my past. I understand the impact and I have grown and learned since then. From now on I plan to use my voice for positive change.” The role of the boyfriend is a key component of “The Hate U Give,” which also stars Regina Hall, Russell Hornsby, Algee Smith, Lamar Johnson, and Common. Stenberg plays a 16-year-old girl named Starr who grew up in a poverty-stricken area, but now attends a suburban prep school. After she witnesses a police officer shoot her unarmed best friend, she’s torn between her two very different worlds as she tries to speak her truth. Bob Teitel and Marty Bowen are producing. George Tillman Jr. is directing from Audrey Wells’ script. Apa, a native of New Zealand, stars as Archie Andrews in the CW’s “Riverdale,” which has been renewed for a third season. He is also starring in “The Last Summer,” a drama about a group of high schoolers who spend a final summer together before college, for Gulfstream Pictures. Apa is repped by UTA, Red11 Management, and Luber Roklin Entertainment. The news was first reported by Deadline.

Perhaps the most surprising moment in God’s Not Dead: A Light in the Darkness — the third installment in the wildly popular and commercially successful Christian movie franchise — comes when the beleaguered Pastor Dave (David A.R. White) goes to visit Pastor Roland (Gregory Alan Williams), the minister at the nearby predominantly black church, and Roland reads him the riot act. It’s a startling moment because it’s one of several in the movie in which it seems that the God’s Not Dead series might have become self-aware. Dave is certain that his church, St. James, is under attack from people who harbor an anti-religious political agenda against Christians. When Roland counsels him to pray and be patient, Dave is not having any of it, telling Roland that he might feel differently if it were his church being attacked. Roland looks at him in disbelief, and for just a moment, his voice gets heated. “Brother, who do you think you’re talking to?” he says to Dave. “I’m a black preacher in the Deep South. I could build a church with all the bricks that have been thrown through my windows.” In this moment and a few others, it seems like A Light in the Darkness is about to reevaluate the God’s Not Dead series’ own narrative about Christians in America, one that’s been far more interested in bolstering a certain sort of persecution complex than in encouraging its audience toward Christlike behavior. But in the end, this God’s Not Dead installment is just like the others: putting on a pious face but failing to imagine what real sacrifice might look like. God’s Not Dead has never been warmly welcomed by mainstream critics. The problem isn’t really the production value (which is mostly fine), or even the statement in the title, a contradiction of a willful misreading of Nietzsche that’s so generic and bland that few people would find it offensive. But the movies are offensive, and not only to those who aren’t in their target audience. (This is where I state my bona fides: I’m a lifelong Christian who was raised in a conservative evangelical home, and I’ve been writing about these movies since I was the chief film critic at Christianity Today, the evangelical magazine started by Billy Graham.) Most people outside the series’ target bubble notice its outsize, navel-gazing persecution complex right off the bat. The thesis of the God’s Not Dead series is that Christians and Christianity are under attack in America, and that the way to fight back is through exercising First Amendment rights, mostly in educational settings. In the first film, a college freshman named Josh Wheaton (Shane Harper, who returns as a campus minister in the new film) intellectually conquers his caustically atheistic philosophy professor in three classroom rounds of debates about the existence of God. The professor gets hit by a car at the end and dies, but not before he becomes a Christian. In the second, a high school teacher named Grace Wesley (Melissa Joan Hart) lands in court after answering a student’s question about Jesus by quoting the Bible. She wins the case, defeating the ACLU lawyer (Ray Wise) who vows to prove that God really is dead. In this third installment, the historic building in which the St. James congregation meets was damaged in a fire caused by an act of vandalism that killed Dave’s co-pastor, Pastor Jude (Benjamin A. Onyango). Following the fire, the board of Hadleigh University, on whose campus the St. James building has been located for 150 years, has been trying to seize the property under eminent domain laws in order to build a student center. Hadleigh argues that it’s unfair to favor one religion over another — that some student religious groups can’t even get funding, while the one hosted by St. James gets support from the university — but Pastor Dave thinks it’s because the university wants the public Christian presence off the campus. (And, privately, some of the board members think that would be best for the students and the university’s image as well.)

Following the box office success of “Ready Player One,” Universal has hired Dan Mazeau to write a new draft of its sci-fi thriller “Armada,” based on Ernest Cline’s 2015 novel. Cline, who authored “Ready Player One” and co-wrote the screenplay, wrote an earlier draft of the “Armada” screenplay. Universal said Tuesday that Cline will remain in collaboration with Mazeau and producers on the forthcoming draft. “Armada” centers on a teenage player of an online video game in which players defend against an alien invasion. He discovers that the game is actually simulator to prepare him and others to defend against an actual alien invasion. Dylan Clark (“Planet of the Apes”) and Dan Farah, one of the “Ready Player One” producers, are producing “Armada” through their Dylan Clark Productions and Farah Films banners, respectively. Scott Stuber will executive produce. “Ready Player One,” directed by Steven Spielberg, launched last weekend with a solid $181 million worldwide, eight years after Warner Bros. and De Line Pictures bought the movie rights before the novel was published. Universal acquired the “Armada” movie rights in 2012. Mazeau’s credits include “Wrath of the Titans,” “World’s Most Wanted,” “Section 6” and “Van Helsing.” Jon Mone and Jay Polidoro will oversee the project on behalf of Universal. Beau Bauman will oversee for Dylan Clark Productions. Mazeau is represented by CAA, Circle of Confusion, and Lee Rosenbaum at Katz Golden Rosenman, LLP. The news was first reported by Deadline.

The X-Men film franchise has been going for nearly 20 years, and X-Men: Dark Phoenix will make the seventh installment in the main series of movies. That means it's not only important for Dark Phoenix to be too similar to its predecessors, but also distinguish itself among the numerous other superhero movies that are coming out each year. To help accomplish that, Tye Sheridan, a.k.a. Scott Summers/Cyclops, says that those involved with Dark Phoenix saw the movie as being more of a drama rather than a conventional superhero movie. As Sheridan explained: Everyone was on the same page with the idea that we were approaching it as much more of a grounded drama versus a superhero movie. Something that's getting old with those universes and all the Marvel movies is that they all look the same and they're all doing the same thing. We really wanted to shake it up, in that sense, and take a different approach to this. Simon Kinberg, who wrote the past three X-Men, directed Dark Phoenix, and I'm super, super excited about it. I think it will turn out well and that it will be a different X-Men than we've ever seen before, so that's exciting. While the Marvel Cinematic Universe is still a box office powerhouse year after year, as Tye Sheridan noted, one criticism that's been directed towards that particular superhero franchise is that its movies feel too similar to one another. That's not something that X-Men: Dark Phoenixwanted to suffer from, hence why Simon Kinberg (who is making his directorial debut after years of writing and producing) and the other creative talents are making sure that Dark Phoenix is framed in a more dramatic lens, as Sheridan told Collider. Given that there will still be mutants running about using their special abilities, it will be interesting to see just what steps Dark Phoenix has taken to feel like a "grounded drama," as the earlier X-Men movies certainly had their fair share of dramatic moments. Of course, it would be foolish not to point out that one way in which X-Men: Dark Phoenix will feel similar to an earlier X-Men movie is the fact that it's adapting The Dark Phoenix Saga. 2006's X-Men: The Last Stand already did that, and the end result was not received well critically. This time around, Dark Phoenix will be following the source material more closely, although it won't be quite as "intergalactic" as the original story. Nevertheless, with Sophie Turner's Jean Grey losing control of her Phoenix abilities and her X-Men teammates desperately trying to stop her from wreaking havoc on Earth, you can bet that's going to be emotionally exhausting for all involved, and some will even die in the process. X-Men: Dark Phoenix was originally supposed to be released on November 2, but last week it was pushed back to February 14, 2019, reportedly due to scheduling involving the reshoots.

Finn was one of the many new protagonists introduced in Star Wars: The Force Awakens, and going into Star Wars: The Last Jedi, he continued to be an important player in the story revolving around the conflict between The First Order and The Resistance. However, if you look through The Last Jedi's deleted scenes, you'll notice that a lot of them include Finn. Lest some of you might think that means that Rian Johnson doesn't care for John Boyega's character, the director/writer set the record straight and explained that many of the cut Finn scenes were removed because they simply helped with transitioning from one moment to another. As Johnson put it: A lot of the Finn scenes that were cut are connective material. For instance, there's a scene where he's on the ship, and BB-8 comes in and shows him... basically, BB-8 shows him a recording he made of Rey saying goodbye to him. That's when he decides, 'Oh my God, I'm going to go save Rey'. In a scene like that, it was totally lovely. But once we realised that we could take it out and the audience would know he's holding Rey's beacon, and 'oh, he's going to save her', and they would make that leap -- suddenly, you can't justify that scene being there. Putting a movie together is difficult, and sometimes even if a director likes a scene, it becomes necessary to remove it for the betterment of the final product. In the case of these deleted Finn scenes in Star Wars: The Last Jedi, it sounds like while they were certainly well shot, in the end they were redundant, and there were other moments that helped move the story along at a more efficient pace. As Rian Johnson noted to Digital Spy, these quick Finn moments contrasted with the extended moments featuring Daisy Ridley's Rey. Johnson continued: I think as opposed to Rey, where somebody like Rey had longer sequences on the island that were with Luke -- with Finn, because his was a little more plotty in terms of it, there were more little scenes like that where we were like, 'Oh, we can do without this, we can do without that', and have his character arc still hold up. Among the notable Finn scenes that didn't make Star Wars: The Last Jedi's final version was the extended sequence of him infiltrating Supreme Leader Snoke's ship with Rose Tico and DJ, as well as the alternate fight between him and Captain Phasma. However, even with so many of his scenes cut out, Finn still had a strong presence during the movie, and Rian Johnson made sure to compliment John Boyega for his work on the movie, saying that the actor "at his worst is better than most people at their best." Besides, it's not like Finn was the only character in The Last Jedi who had one or more of their scenes cut out due to redundancy. As an example, Johnson removed an emotional moment between Luke Skywalker and Leia Organa because he felt the same beat was being hit in the scene between Luke and R2-D2 aboard the Millennium Falcon. Star Wars: The Last Jedi is now available one Blu-ray, DVD and Digital HD. Finn, Rey, Poe Dameron and the rest of the current trilogy gang will return when Episode IX is released on December 20, 2019. But before that, you can travel back to a galaxy far, far away when Solo: A Star Wars Story hits theaters on May 25.

According to the latest report, Woody Harrelson will play Carnage in Venom. Sony’s own venture in building a new cinematic universe starts later this year with the Ruben Fleischer-directed flick. Featuring Tom Hardy as Eddie Brock aka. Venom, the project also stars Michelle Williams as Anne Weying, Riz Ahmed as Dr. Carlton Drake, Scott Haze as Roland Treece, and Jenny Slate as Dora Skirth. Story details are still scant at the moment, in fact, it’s still uncertain if the film will connect to the MCU considering rumors of Tom Holland’s Peter Parker/Spider-Man having a cameo in the movie. Nonetheless, filming on Venom already wrapped. Harrelson joined Venom quite late in its production, and Sony still has not confirmed which character he’s playing in the movie. Before his casting, word was that Ahmed was playing Carnage, but with news suggesting that he’ll take on a different role, all eyes quickly shifted on the Cheers alum as the best candidate to bring Cletus Kasady to life. A sadistic killer in the pages of the comics, the villain is usually pitted against Spider-Man and Venom after his reformation to become the lethal protector. A new report from Bleeding Cool sourcing an anonymous tipster reveals that Harrelson will indeed play Carnage in Venom. No other information was given aside from the aforementioned detail, but this corroborates persistent speculations that the Solo: A Star Wars Story actor will take on the role of the serial killer psychopath. Rumors of Harrelson playing Carnage in the Hardy-starrer have been going on for months now. In early February, a report circulated online revealing the casting and how Carnage fits into the story of Venom. As it turns out, while Kasady will be introduced in the forthcoming Sony superhero production, he won’t be one of the main players in the narrative. Instead, his appearance is more of a set-up for the sequel, in which he would be the primary antagonist. Chances are that we won’t even see him as Carnage. If anything, we will only get a tease of his villainous nature. What’s tricky here is if Venom isn’t well-received enough to merit a follow-up, Harrelson’s set-up for the sequel will go to waste and that would be a shame considering the actor’s talent. The first Venom teaser trailer was divisive and barely revealed anything that could get fans hyped up for what could be the dark horse comic book movie of 2018. That said, it’s not wise to bet against Hardy. The actor has done a great job meticulously choosing his projects in the last several years, and everything he’s appeared in so far has been at least good. If he chose to come back to the superhero genre via the Sony production, perhaps the upcoming R-rated flick has something special to offer.

CBS submitted an initial offer today to acquire Viacom in an all-stock deal that values its corporate cousin at below its current market value of $12.3 billion. The special committee of CBS board members proposed installing CBS CEO Leslie Moonves and Joe Ianniello, the network’s chief operating officer, to run the merged companies, sources confirmed. That sets the bar and ushers in a period of more intensive deal talks this month. From the Justice Department’s antitrust battle against a proposed AT&T-Time Warner merger, to the high-stakes bidding war over British pay TV giant Sky that threatens to spoil Disney’s planned acquisition of 21st Century Fox assets, the mash-up of two conglomerates is never a simple process. Wall Street saw it as a sign of strength for CBS, whose shares rose 4% on the day to $52.86, while Viacom’s tumbled 4% to $29.42. The point of the planned recombination is to create scale by joining CBS’s valuable broadcast assets with Viacom’s cable networks and Paramount Pictures. But compared with all of the other major M&A deals lately, it brings complexity all its own. Here are the major questions, going in. Even though Viacom’s waning fortunes were self-inflicted by past management, do its shareholders deserve better than a lowball offer that has put its share price in a downward spiral since it was first revealed Monday and again today? Will the re-combining of CBS and Viacom result in layoffs at a time when the media business will be drowning in pink slips after Disney cherry-picks the pieces of Fox and rids itself of potentially thousands of people? Would the discussed two year-deal for Les Moonves to sit atop the fused CBS-Viacom afford enough time for him to re-integrate two large companies, and can the Redstones afford to lose an executive who has been a winner for so long at Warner Bros Television and CBS? Can Viacom Chief Executive Bob Bakish aid his own turnaround with the extra muscle that CBS brings? How will it help Jim Gianopulos’ efforts to restore luster to Paramount Pictures? Why is this marriage a better idea now than in 2016, when Shari Redstone explored the merger and Moonves made it clear he wasn’t in favor of it? And finally, will government regulators allow the whole thing to happen? Investment banker Lloyd Greif says CBS’s initial below-market bid is not as crazy as it sounds. “This is equivalent to Disney offering less in a stock-for-stock deal for Fox than Comcast was offering and yet winning the bid,” Greif told Deadline. “Just as Rupert [Murdoch] wanted Bob Iger and Disney, Shari [Redstone] wants Leslie Moonves and CBS.” The initial offer is a signal of Moonves playing hardball, Greif says. He’s telegraphing that he’ll only do the Viacom merger on his terms, and he’ll be calling the shots if and when the deal closes. It’s also sign that he feels Viacom is overvalued in the marketplace, perhaps because of investor reaction to rumors last fall about a possible deal that drove up the company’s stock price. “The argument that Leslie is making is, ‘I’m bringing all this value to the table, therefore my shareholders, my management team and I deserve a bigger slice of the pie,’” Greif said. In terms of the question “why now?” the clear answer is size. Viacom’s market capitalization stands at $12.7 billion, while CBS is at $19.4 billion. Together, CBS-Viacom (one interesting matter, of course, will be what name would go on a re-merged entity) would be valued at $32 billion, a level that is dwarfed by many traditional media rivals and certainly by Silicon Valley. “Our point of view is you can’t be a $15 billion company, the way each of CBS and Viacom are,” said Needham & Co. media analyst Laura Martin. “You must scale up to compete against a $500 billion Facebook.” While it remains unclear whether a merger of CBS and Viacom ultimately will be consummated, analysts estimate that Viacom could fetch a 15-30% premium in an all-stock deal. Steven Cahall at RBC Capital Markets wrote that Viacom likely will command a premium because CBS management cares more about control than price and wants to get the deal done, it would help avoid shareholder lawsuits and it would compensate Viacom for its turnaround efforts. A hypothetical 20% premium would yield $500 million in annual cost savings, observes Bank of America Merrill Lynch analyst Jessica Reif. (The Discovery-Scripps combo netted $350 million, by comparison.) Plus, there are potentially hundreds of millions more in synergies from bundling film and television content sales, deploying more over-the-top products or tapping into Viacom’s international footprint to boost distribution of CBS shows. While many analysts agree with Reif that some kind of premium is likely, even many bulls aren’t certain. In a report in February in which he upgraded Viacom’s stock to “sector perform” from “sector underperform,” RBC’s Cahall predicted an ultimate deal price “at or near market prices.” Despite abundant upside for Viacom in a CBS get-together, he added, “getting to long-term operating income growth is a bit of a leap of faith.” CBS’s aggressive posturing is said to disappoint Shari Redstone, who is pushing for the merger. She believes that combining CBS and Viacom makes the most sense for the future, especially at a time when the media landscape dominated by giants. Any deal that gets done must benefit both sets of shareholders. The Redstone family’s holding company, National Amusements, might not back a deal that tilts too heavily in favor of CBS, or hands over control solely to the network’s top executives — as CBS’s initial offer proposes. The combined company won’t look like a broadcast network, but rather a media conglomerate with diversified holdings in film, television and online. The executive team should have the expertise in leveraging all the company’s assets, the thinking goes. At 94, Sumner Redstone has kept the faith for many a decade. Since building a global media operation out of a handful of movie theaters still run by Boston-based holding company, National Amusements, the Redstone family controls CBS and Viacom with a nearly 80% share of voting stock. The media mogul, who is in failing health, will cast only one vote among the seven National Amusements directors in deciding the fate of CBS and Viacom, The Wall Street Journal reported. The Department of Justice and Federal Communications Commission treat the two media companies as if they are the same, from the point of view of granting broadcast licenses and cross-ownership restrictions, Martin notes. “The good news here is that if CBS and Viacom decide to merge, we foresee no regulatory hurdles,” Martin wrote in a recent analyst note. Reporters don’t interact these days with the senior Redstone, whose title has been chairman emeritus since an epic legal struggle over control of the companies that put cringe-inducing details about Redstone’s mistresses and medical condition out in the open. Sources who do talk to him frequently today insist he is aware of the latest discussions about his onetime empire. He now communicates with the aid of an iPad loaded with short responses — “yes,” “no” and “f— you” — recorded in his voice, the Journal reports. Shari Redstone, his once-estranged daughter, has reconciled and focused on leading the charge to get the companies back together. The key motivation, as Martin noted, is how dramatically the media landscape has changed since the last time these two companies were last at the altar in 2016. The industry is undergoing a dramatic period of consolidation. AT&T is pursuing an $85 billion merger with Time Warner. The Walt Disney Co. proposed a $52.4 billion deal for 21st Century Fox film and TV assets. Discovery Communications just closed its $14.8 billion acquisition of Scripps Networks interactive. Meanwhile, technology companies like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu and Facebook are investing billions of dollars in original content that competes directly with television programming. Skinny-bundle services, beginning at $20 a month for an array of channels with no annual contract, are allowing consumers new choices in terms of how much they watch and pay. Traditional video subscriptions, which have been called “the cash cow” by many distributors testifying and email evidence introduced in Washington in the AT&T-Department of Justice trial, are dropping as a result. It’s now a race to see who can most effectively make up the difference on the streaming side. Martin said a CBS acquisition of Viacom would advance the network’s aggressive streaming strategy. CBS already has attracted 5 million subscribers to its CBS All Access and Showtime streaming services, and expanded its portfolio of digital offerings to include CBS News, CBS Sports HQ and a celebrity-rich Entertainment Tonight product to launch this fall. Paramount Pictures’ deep, rich film library, which includes such classics as the The African Queen and It’s a Wonderful Life and poplar franchises like Mission Impossible—would increase the popularity of these streaming services. Some analysts have appraised it at north of $1 billion given the streaming economy and the lack of comparable assets. Paramount Television has grown its production output dramatically by tapping into the library with shows like Shooter for USA or Jack Ryan for Amazon. “You’re going to have better over-the-top subscription adoption if you have deep libraries,” Martin said. “Another thing that adds value: if you have a hit movie and you put it on CBS. That’s a cool thing.” Combining CBS’s top-rated broadcast network with Viacom’s two-dozen cable networks would strengthen its negotiating position with traditional pay TV distributors, as well as with the new crop of internet TV providers. “If there’s an anchor tenant called CBS that everybody must carry, CBS is going to be in every skinny bundle,” Martin said. “Every skinny bundle, they’re going to say, ‘If you want us in the bundle you’ve got to talk to us about the other 24 channels.” The long, tangled saga of the two Redstone-controlled entities would provide more than enough material for a long-running serialized drama on CBS. Or at times, maybe Paramount’s Friday the 13th slasher-movie franchise. In 2005, after the company had operated as one large entity for five years, Sumner Redstone decided to split it in two. The move was seen as a way to appease investors and Wall Street analysts, who saw AOL’s disastrous combination with Time Warner as a cautionary tale. Bigger, the feeling was then, wasn’t necessarily better. A funny thing happened soon after the conscious uncoupling—Viacom’s fortunes drifted south while CBS kept powering its way to more broadcast TV dominance and a more cohesive story for investors. The drags on Viacom then, as now, were faltering cable network ratings. Plus, while many would associate this knock with the era of Philippe Dauman, compensation started raising questions about Dauman’s predecessor, Tom Freston. Despite Freston’s bona fides as one of the principal architects of MTV and a magnet for creative people, some critics felt the CEO was lining his pockets even as the company was floundering. Freston’s 25-year run at Viacom ended in a bizarre Labor Day episode in 2006, when he was summoned to Redstone’s Beverly Hills mansion and summarily fired. Ironically, one cause of the shocking move was Freston “missing out” on buying MySpace, which Rupert Murdoch had swooped in to acquire (much to his later regret). The ouster followed soon after Redstone ended Tom Cruise’s long and fruitful association with the studio due to an array of factors, but not helped by his “couch jumping” episode with Oprah Winfrey. (They later patched things up.) Former Viacom executives recall the rationale for the split, which became official in 2006. Internally, CBS was viewed as the value stock, the stodgier of the two media companies, one that would grow slowly and pay predictable dividends. Viacom, with its youth-focused cable networks, was considered the growth play. Insiders expected it would grow like mad, fueled by such buzzy shows as MTV’s Laguna Beach: The Real Orange County. With turmoil marking Viacom’s first year as a stand-alone business (turmoil that would reach operatic levels in the years to come), CBS got on a hot streak and turned the tables, becoming the more appealing stock to Wall Street. Under Moonves, a onetime actor and producer known for his programming savvy, CBS launched a string of hits including The Big Bang Theory, How I Met Your Mother, NCIS: Los Angeles and The Good Wife and profited around the world from its productions. It also invested $1.8 billion building a web presence with its acquisition of CNET, started its own film studio and, eventually, adapted to changing consumer viewing habits with the introduction of streaming subscription services, starting with CBS All Access. Along the way, it shed non-core assets like outdoor advertising and radio to become even more of a pure-play operation. Viacom, meanwhile, became the conservative player under Dauman, who rose to power as Redstone’s personal attorney. It emphasized stock buybacks over acquiring assets that could grow the studio’s business, taking a pass on Marvel Entertainment even through its Paramount Pictures unit distributed Marvel’s first four films (it sold the rights to The Avengers and Iron Man 3 to Disney). The film studio was further hampered by severed ties with CBS-owned Showtime. Without a lucrative premium-cable output deal, Paramount teamed with Lionsgate and MGM on the launch of Epix, an enterprise that came out of the gate slowly, though it has since matured. Dauman, meanwhile, was widely seen as enriching himself (he commanded some of the top paydays of any corporate CEO earlier this decade) while starving the film studio and cable television networks of resources needed to develop fresh programming or innovate online. Talent also started a mass exodus—first top executives and then on-air talent like John Oliver and Stephen Colbert (who, with an extra twist of the knife, decamped Comedy Central for a top-rated run as David Letterman’s successor on CBS). Jon Stewart, probably the biggest star who ever walked on a Viacom set during his run at The Daily Show, has described feeling that Dauman treated him indifferently. Soon after Trevor Noah was named the show’s host, Stewart announced a new animated project at HBO. That show later fizzled but in any case a cornerstone star had officially left the Viacom fold, making a statement about Viacom’s culture at the time. “Culture is everything in a media company,” former MTV executive Jason Hirshhorn once told Vanity Fair, in a profile of Dauman. “Because what culture breeds is a subconscious sense of working harder, because you care. When you don’t like your C.E.O., when you don’t hear from him, when you read all these terrible things, when your friends get fired, when you don’t get the bonuses, when the stock has dropped . . . and you have a guy that doesn’t even talk about the programming . . .” At that point, according to the story, Hirschhorn’s voice trailed off in disgust. Bakish, the seasoned company veteran who has been CEO of Viacom since December 2016, is well regarded internally and on Wall Street. One area where he has stabilized things is distribution. Dauman alienated many MVPDs by pushing hard for increased carriage fees and found some big players – like Suddenlink, now owned by Altice USA – dropping Viacom channels. Bakish has worked to mend a lot of fences, negotiating a peace treaty with Altice and ending the Suddenlink outage after nearly two years of darkness. With former Fox Studio chairman Gianopulos setting Paramount on a more promising course (at least by 2019, the studio vows) and some upticks in ratings at MTV and VH1, “People are excited to work there again,” said one former executive said. Still, there is plenty of work to be done. During the AT&T trial in Washington, Warren Schlichting, head of Dish Network’s Sling TV skinny bundle service, was asked which network groups offered “must-have” programming. He rattled off the names of those he considered “the five families” – Turner, Disney-ABC, NBCUniversal, CBS and 21st Century Fox. A government lawyer asked him why Viacom wasn’t on the list. “They would have been considered ‘must-have’ 5-6-7 years ago,” he replied. “But they generally stopped investing in their product.”

Anonymous Content has acquired screen rights to Foe, the upcoming thriller novel by Iain Reid which drew other bids. Reid’s previous novel I’m Thinking Of Ending Things is in the works at Netflix with Charlie Kaufman attached to direct and write. Anonymous Content’s Kerry Kohansky-Roberts and Steve Golin will produce and the author will be exec producer. The novel is set slightly in the future, after severe climate change has ruined the farmlands across the north and created devastating fires that has scarred the landscape. A farmer and his wife live a solitary life, struggling on one of the last remaining farms, where they raise cattle and harvest grain. A knock on the door changes things. A stranger tells the farmer he has been selected to travel far from the farm, with a group of settlers looking to relocate. Arrangements have been made so that when he leaves, his wife won’t miss him because a “replacement” has been arranged, who’ll join the wife on the farm while he’s gone. Anonymous Content’s VP of Literary Affairs Kevin Cotter brought in the project. Simon & Schuster publishes the book in North America this Fall. S&S UK and multiple other foreign territory publications will follow. The author is repped by Paradigm on behalf of Samantha Haywood of Transatlantic Agency.

Horror films might have not lost their popularity, but a vast majority of them these days prove the well-worn genre is losing its mojo. Heightened sound effects and music cues are all-too-predictable ways to try to scare audiences, but truly innovative or classic contemporary examples — with the occasional exception of a not easily defined hybrid that comes along to break the mold like Get Out — are not easy to find. Well, I have found one. A Quiet Place is a genuinely effective, brilliantly executed piece of horror, a truly terrifying movie that earns its screams by essentially turning off the sound. Not since a blind Audrey Hepburn turned off the lights in Wait Until Dark a half-century ago have I had this kind of anxiety watching a movie. Director John Krasinski — who also co-wrote with Bryan Woods and Scott Beck, co-produced, and co-stars with wife Emily Blunt — has delivered an edge-of-your-seat nail-biter that just might be too intense for some, so be warned. As I say in my video review (click the link above to watch), it is essentially a silent film where the silence is cranked up to deafening levels. I had lost hope for original studio horror masterpieces on the level of The Exorcist, Alien and a few others, but in following its own unique path, A Quiet Place is one for the ages. It will freak you out and set off nightmares. Set after an apocalyptic nightmare in which ugly-ass blind giant insect-y creatures (looking like atomic grasshoppers) have done in most of the planet, Krasinski’s film focuses on one family in rural New York who have abandoned their farmhouse to live in the barn where it is easier to control the sounds they make. The gist is these creatures, which reside just out of sight, pop up and eat their prey at the slightest hint of noise of any kind. Their hearing is sensitively attuned to the highest possible levels, and they have no hesitance to attack if even a pin drops. I promise you that you will not hear a pin drop in theaters when watching this play out. Krasinski and Blunt play Lee and Evelyn, a couple with three kids. Unfortunately, one of them doesn’t last long when his toy goes off at the wrong place and the wrong time. The other two are nicely played by young British actor Noah Jupe and the hearing-impaired actress Millicent Simmonds, so fine in the recent Wonderstruck. Their daily lives consist of sign language and keeping communication down to a whisper. Any movement can be life threatening, though Lee discovered huge waterfalls nearby where he takes his son and explains that loud, overwhelming sounds like that make it OK to talk. A complication is thrown into the mix with Evelyn’s pregnancy and the impending birth of another child. The sequence where she has the baby, alone, is a master class in acting on the part of Blunt, who has never been better. It’s a helluva role, and it is all in her eyes. For much of the movie the creatures are just seen in the distance or lurking around corners, but if you think Krasinski is going to keep them completely hidden, think again. Just like Hitchcock did in his own way in The Birds, once the battle between this family and their stalkers intensifies, he sticks the hideous creations right in our face. I have seen a ton of movie aliens and creatures of all sorts, but these things — which appear to be all teeth and no face — are truly horrific. I can’t get them out my head, but I need to. Bravo to the effects team, and really bravo to the sound team, which have created a brilliant sound design that appears deceptively to be devoid of sound or music at all. But it’s there, if not in obvious ways (Marco Beltrami’s unobtrusive score is one of his best and most restrained works). The horror of it all aside, A Quiet Place is first and foremost a family story, a tale of survival, resilience and the will to stay together against all odds. On that level, this is as powerful a story of human perseverance as you are likely to see. In a world that seems to devalue life a little more every day, this film proves inspirational. In addition to exceptional onscreen work from Blunt and Krasinski, both Jupe and particularly Simmonds are riveting. The technical credits are superior down the line including sharp editing from Christopher Tellefsen, economically inventive production design from Jeffrey Beecroft and team, as well as the cinematography that doesn’t miss a beat from Charlotte Bruus Christensen. Krasinski, who is emerging as a strong filmmaking talent after also delivering a different sort of family story with the underrated The Hollars, knows exactly what he is doing here and exactly how to do it. Producers are Michael Bay (!), Andrew Form, and Bradley Fuller. Paramount Pictures releases it Friday.

It’s strange to call an essentially tragic limited series magical, but the word applies to “National Treasure: Kiri.” The four-part series fits squarely into the top tier of U.K. crime dramas, which means few characters start out with any contentment, and things deteriorate from there. But Jack Thorne’s writing for both seasons of “National Treasure” never slides into the lazy habits of misery porn. “Kiri,” like its predecessor, is both brisk and illuminating, providing compassionate and honest character studies. Each character in the latest incarnation of “National Treasure,” as was the case with the stellar first version, feels alive and specific and believably capable of a great many things. Wondering what each person might do next gives the drama a thrumming undercurrent of suspense, but Euros Lyn’s direction allows “Kiri” to breathe at the right moments, too. It’s well-paced and contemplative, a tough combination to pull off, but “Kiri” makes it look easy. It helps that each edition of “National Treasure” has featured a stellar cast. There’s no plot overlap between the first season and the second, but the production values and acting are of a similar high caliber. “Kiri,” which follows the fallout of a momentous decision of an English social worker, may recall “Happy Valley” for those who saw Sarah Lancashire in that Netflix crime series. In “Kiri,” the great Lancashire plays Miriam Grayson, a veteran social worker who has a young girl named Kiri Akindele in her care. Kiri (Felicia Mukasa) has a Nigerian grandfather, Oluwatobi “Tobi” Akindele, who dotes on her. But the girl’s father, Nathaniel, is a former jail inmate with a violent past, and her mother, a former drug addict, is dead. For years, Kiri has lived with an upscale, white foster family who loves her deeply. But Alice (Lia Williams) and Jim Warner (Steven Mackintosh) have a host of problems in their lives, not least a teenage son, Simon (Finn Bennett), who is more than a little strange. The couple’s final adoption paperwork is about to go through when Miriam decides to let Kiri have an unsupervised visit with her grandfather and his wife. A crime follows, and much of the story of “Kiri” is told through the lens of race and class. The Warners, who are given a press liaison by the police, go on a media tour that makes them momentarily famous. The sympathy for them is as bountiful as is the hatred for the prickly (and relatively poor) Miriam, who thought it important to allow Kiri to spend time with family members who look like her. As a black girl, she would “othered” all her life, Miriam explains angrily to the reporters who wait on her doorstep after the case becomes national news. Miriam, who is white but has a multi-racial client pool, asks her bosses and media critics why Kiri shouldn’t be allowed to have a space in which that othering would not occur. Shouldn’t her biological family’s culture and values inform the girl’s life? Some call Miriam’s decision — which conformed to social work protocols in her department — “anti-white.” And though she is partly to blame — and Lancashire depicts her regret with indelible, heart-rending precision — the system turns Miriam into a culprit, in large part so her superiors can avoid a series of thorny questions they would rather not contemplate. But “Kiri” does not only examine its central crime from the perspective of white characters. The series’ revelation is an intense, complicated performance from Lucian Msamati as Tobi. His relationship with his son, his past mistakes, and his own soul-altering grief are all explored in mesmerizing ways. Though he is a very proper, religious man and no one’s idea of a radical, he slowly begins to accept the idea that the police are railroading his son — about whom he has his own doubts. Both seasons of “National Treasure” explore the idea that family relationships can be the most treacherous terrain of all. Most characters in “Kiri” start to believe that they don’t really know the people closest to them, and the questions they have scare them. Miriam begins to seem exceptional because, despite having spent three decades seeing the worst of human behavior as a social worker, she still possesses a few scraps of optimism. She is innately kind, quick with a quip, and still visits those who were in her care decades ago, simply because she’s curious about how they’re doing. As was the case with the first installment of “National Treasure,” a few story paths would have benefited from more exploration. In particular, the Warner family’s troubles probably needed a little more set-up, but that said, Williams, Bennett and Mackintosh are all exceptional in their roles. Also deserving of mention is Wunmi Mosaku as the lead detective on the Kiri case; like Miriam, she’s in a no-win situation. She is navigating a system that favors families like the Warners, and is also under pressure to find the tidy, predictable solution that the media clearly wants. But the narrative of the case — and of “Kiri” — is as unexpected and contradictory as life itself, and that is its chief selling point. Executive producers, Jack Thorne, George Ormond, George Faber. TV Review: 'National Treasure: Kiri' on Hulu Limited series; Four episodes (four reviewed); Hulu, Weds. April 4. Cast: Sarah Lancashire, Lucian Msamati, Steven Mackintosh, Lia Williams, Finn Bennett, Wunmi Mosaku, Felicia Mukasa, Paapa Essiedu, Andi Osho, Sue Johnston

The NCAA mens’ basketball championship game between Michigan and Villanova saw significant declines in the ratings compared to last year. Airing on TBS, TNT, and truTV, the game averaged 16.5 million viewers, down approximately 28% from 2017’s 23 million when the game aired on CBS. In addition, this year’s game pulled in a 10.3 rating in Nielsen metered market households, the lowest such rating ever recorded for a college basketball national championship game. Such viewership declines are not uncommon as the championship game alternates between broadcast and cable. 2017’s viewership was up 29% compared to the 17.8 million who watched on the Turner networks in 2016. 2016’s game was itself down 37% from the 2015 game on CBS, which drew an 18-year high 28.3 million viewers. In terms of household ratings, this year’s game was down approximately 29% from the 14.5 rating in 2017. 2016 saw a 12.0 household rating for the game on cable. This year’s game also likely suffered due to its one-sided nature, with Villanova dominating Michigan with a 79-62 victory. Despite the declines, this year’s game was easily the most-watched telecast of the night, with the closest competition on broadcast being NBC’s “The Voice” with 9.9 million viewers. Fox aired no original programming against the championship game, while CBS aired only one: the freshman sitcom “Living Biblically” at 9:30 p.m. The nearest competition on cable was the first hour of WWE’s “Monday Night Raw,” which averaged 3.4 million viewers in the hour.