Ghostbusters 2016 is a terrible film. Part of that is of course the toxic nature of the people responsible for it, but the film itself is crap regardless of the culture-eroding behavior of those responsible. If the universe was a good and just place, GB16 would be utterly forgotten by now… but here we are, in a world filled with famine and disease and earthquakes and Bernie Bros, so GB16 remains a blight on the ass of society. Fortunately, when it is discussed these days, it is largely discussed in terms of just how awful it is and what makes it awful. The following two-part video does a good job of breaking down the terrible decisions that led to that cinematic trainwreck. It is vastly more entertaining than the movie itself.
I have hopes that at least some of these – Star Wars and Star Trek – can be returned from the dead. But to do so would require both a virtually complete change in “leadership” (i.e. those who are currently in charge of the IP’s) and an adequate passage of time. They should be left to sit quietly for a few years, in which time the hatred that recent misadventures have engendered in the fandom could cool off, and better ideas could be gathered.
I remain of the opinion that what the owners of Star Trek need to do are two main things:
1) Gather all the rights back into one place, allowing *real,* and not “25% different,” Star Trek to be made.
2) Create an anthology series. But *not* one helmed by a bunch of suits. Instead, open it to the fandom. Have anything from lone writers to whole amateur production teams (“Axanar,” “Continues,” etc) give them pitches. Those that seem pretty good get funded to make a small number of episodes… one to four, say. Something that could be a series. Then make a season with up to perhaps ten wildly different stories. One set on a ship at the same time as TOS, using actual TOS designs. One set in the movie era. A Klingon or Vulcan-specific yarn. A post-Voyager show. What-the-frell-ever. If, out of those ten shows, one is a smash hit? It gets turned into a full series. If three or four of the stories are wildly popular? Then great, now you can have four series that are popular right out of the gate.
Sure, there are counter-arguments. One big one is that ten wildly different stories would require ten wildly different sets of costumes and props and actors and starship bridge sets. Granted. But: do them sequentially and repurpose as much as possible. Do as much as you reasonably can with virtual sets. Don’t go nuts with the budget; let it be known right up front that the budget for these sort of things is limited. The fandom will accept that, and perhaps embrace it: I will die on the hill that TOS 1701 is the best starship design to date, and that both DS9 and Enterprise showed that the old-school bridge – which can be rented in New York State, IIRC – still looks awesome. You don’t need STD-level production standards for these little mini-shows. Because what you’re selling isn’t the effects; nobody complains that STD or STP have crappy effects and production standards – you’re selling the concept, the characters, the plots. If just one of these lower-budget short subjects knocks the viewers socks off with characters on par with Kirk and Spock and McCoy, *then* you can lavish an effects budget on it reasonably secure in the knowledge that things should go well.
Hell, I even wrote a short story a year or so ago set on a Klingon tugboat. Is it good? Dunno. Probably not. But if those in charge of Star trek seemed like they actually cared about Star Trek again… hell yeah I’d turn it in. There’s even my odd little “Artifact L-374-Alpha” thing from… holy crap, exactly one year ago today. Weird. OK… Anyway, that would likely make a poor basis for an ongoing series, but a season-long miniseries? Maybe.
Is such a thing likely? Sadly, no. So we’ll have to live with murdered franchises for a while, being dangled before us on strings like marionette zombies.
The “Galactic Starcruiser” at Disneyworld pretends to be a Star Wars themed “cruise” that runs several thousand dollars for two days and nights of… “fun,” I guess? Honestly it looks kinda halfassed, and it doesn’t really look so much “Star Wars” as “Generic Space Conflict.” YouTube is replete with videos talking smack about it; no need to rehash them. So the video below seems to be a *positive* review of one particular area of the attraction. It’s… huh. Disney is certainly not only skilled at the art of resource extraction, but bound and determined to do it. I’m all for capitalism, but this seems a little… I dunno, desperate.
Given Disney’s recent determination to come out in support of child-grooming, my chances of splurging on a trip to Disneyworld have plummeted from zero to some arbitrary negative number.
In short: CBS had a pilot and decided not to go forward with the show, but Netflix picked it up. The pilot was helmed by one Jordon Nardino, a “co-executive producer” on Star Trek: Discovery. This show now to be produced by Netflix is described thusly:
Coming to Netflix: Miss Benny (they/them/theirs) will star in GLAMOROUS as Marco Mejia (he/him/his), a young gender non-conforming queer man whose life seems to be stuck in place until he lands a job working for a legendary makeup mogul.
Uh huh. This explains a *lot* about modern Star Trek and why it sucks so badly and is so unlike actual Star Trek. In Star Trek: TOS, it was made abundantly clear that mental illness was almost entirely eliminated, with the Federation having something like 15 incurable nutballs until some new medicine comes along that cures even them. In all actual Star Trek, what is celebrated is someone trying to actually do something meaningful and useful with their lives. This new Netflix show is the polar opposite… as are modern debased Star Trek.
A scene from “Best of Both Worlds” rendered in the style of “Star Trek The Animated Series.” It’s *really* well done. I wonder about the legality of doing whole episodes like this for anything like a profit… but I bet that decent collections would sell.
April 4, 2011, I posted a link to the YouTube video of Orbital’s “The Box” originally from 1996. Through random chance, today (April 12, 2022) I stumbled across another copy of the video, this one at twice the resolution, posted onto YouTube almost exactly one year ago (April 15, 2021). Huh. Well, the commentary I posted way back when still applies: this is an interesting video that shows an unsettling Tilda Swinton moving through a city at a *really* slow pace. The effect being “alienation” or some such.
I first saw this at a weird time in my life, back when MTV still tried to be about music, and it drilled itself directly into my brain where it’s sat ever since. If you haven’t seen it, give it a watch.
Driverless taxis operate on certain streets in San Francisco during specific hours and weather conditions. But despite the fact that the cars have no human drivers, they are still subject to the laws of the road, including the need to drive with headlights at night. So the police are tasked with stopping these taxis if their headlights are out. But it seems the robots have different ideas about being pulled over…
Checking out the “science” section on Google News brings up this headline:
*Science,* people. This is what “decolonized” science, stripped of “white supremacy” and “patriarchy” looks like: friggen’ horoscopes.
If you’re interested in astrology, you’re likely more than familiar with your Sun sign, which directly relates to your personality. Maybe your ‘scope-obsessed self is also well-versed in your Moon sign, which aligns with your emotions and moods.
Your Venus sign is something different altogether, although for most people, it can be the same sign as their Sun sign, or one of its neighboring signs, says Alice Alta, resident astrologer for the Futurio app. And as with any planetary sign, this one is determined by where Venus was in the sky at the time of your birth. To find your Venus sign, all you need is your birth date, time, and location to create your natal chart via an astrology app or website like CafeAstrology.com, explains Alta.
What is my Venus sign, and how does it impact me?
“Venus is the planet of love, beauty, harmony, money, material values,” she notes. So, Venus in the natal chart is responsible for the development of your sense of style and taste, determining your preferences in everything from clothes to romantic partners.
At its core, Venus is huge in helping to understand your personality and how you express yourself. It impacts how you show your desires, passions, and what’s important to you. It can also determine how you interact with others and the energy you give off in those interactions.
