Mama June
Pumpkin’s Risqué Move to OnlyFans Is Not For Me!!!

Published
March 12, 2026
3:00 AM PDT

By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 35 seconds ago

There’s an old, somewhat controversial statement about creative works often attributed to Pablo Picasso: “good artists copy, great artists steal.” The quote often ruffles the feathers of creative types because it seemingly glorifies the act of stealing from someone else’s ideas. However, the greatest sci-fi franchise ever created has been engaging in this practice for over 60 years.

The first Star Trek show was originally conceived of as “Wagon Train to the stars,” which meant it would take the style and sensibility of Western TV shows and adapt them to a sci-fi setting. Subsequent spinoffs adopted this same mentality and, inevitably enough, some of Trek’s best episodes ended up cannibalizing the best episodes of previous shows. For example, the writer of the fan-favorite Voyager episode “Projections” admitted that he created this seemingly original tale by mashing together two different episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation.

If You Glitch Him, Does He Not Bleed?

“Projections” is a Voyager episode with a very fascinating concept: after an attack on the ship, the holographic Doctor discovers that he is flesh and blood. As the episode unfolds, he starts to believe that he is actually a human being and that the rest of the crew are actually holograms. Thanks to a surprise appearance from minor TNG character Barclay, the Doctor is convinced he must destroy the ship in order to end the holographic program he is stuck inside. However, he realizes far too late that he is actually stuck on the holodeck, and listening to Barclay’s destructive orders will actually delete his own program.

This Voyager episode was written by Brannon Braga, the rockstar writer who helped transform The Next Generation into must-see TV. He was so well-versed in that earlier Star Trek show that he wasn’t afraid to borrow heavily from it when he was writing Voyager episodes. In an old interview with Star Trek Monthly, he admitted that the plot of “Projections” is a mashup of the plots from two very different THG episodes: “The Measure of a Man” and “Frame of Mind.”

Mixing And Matching Star Trek Stories

“The Measure of a Man” is, of course, the iconic TNG episode in which Lieutenant Commander Data had to prove in court that he was a sentient being rather than Starfleet property. Meanwhile, “Frame of Mind” (which Braga also wrote) has Riker trapped in an asylum after the completion of a recent covert mission. He has trouble telling what’s real and what is not, eventually discovering that he was captured by enemies during the mission, and all of the mind games he was experiencing were a side effect of these aliens probing his mind for Federation secrets. 

How does combining the plots from these two TNG episodes add up to Voyager’s “Projections?” Like Data in “The Measure of a Man,” the Doctor must prove that he is exactly who and what he thinks he is. But there’s an interesting inversion here: the artificial Data had to prove he had the same rights as humans like Riker and Picard, whereas the Doctor had to prove that he was completely artificial and not a flesh-and-blood human being.

The Ultimate Story Synthesis

The parallels between “Projections” and “Frame of Mind” are even easier to see: in each episode, the primary character had to decide which version of reality was authentic. The Doctor had to figure out whether he was actually an Emergency Medical Hologram or Lewis Zimmerman, the human scientist who created the EMH in his image. Riker, meanwhile, had to figure out if he was actually the first officer of the Federation flagship Enterprise or a crazy man trapped within an alien asylum.

Brannon Braga was the first to admit that “Projections” wasn’t the most original story because it mashed up the stories from two earlier Next Generation episodes. Nonetheless, he managed to synthesize two older stories into something that felt both fresh and innovative. The result was an episode that has thrilled fans for decades due to its cool concept, vaulting ambition, and pitch-perfect acting.

Since 1929, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) has been rewarding what it considers the best cinematic offerings of a given year with what are now known as the Oscars. These have become the most prestigious and coveted awards not just in Hollywood, but in the entire film industry. However, that doesn’t mean that every Oscar-winning film is great. In fact, some aren’t even good.

Even though more often than not, films that are rewarded with an Academy Award are serviceable, at the very least, there are more than a few Oscar winners that range from lackluster to absolutely abysmal. From modern failed blockbusters to some of the pretentious slop that the Academy loved to reward back in the ’30s, when they were still finding their footing, these are the worst of the worst when it comes to Oscar winners.

15

‘Disraeli’ (1929)

Won: Best Leading Actor (George Arliss)

Image via Warner Bros. Pictures

At the third Academy Awards in 1930, George Arliss became the first-ever actor to win an Oscar for a remake, as well as for reprising a role. He did so for playing British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli in Disraeli, a remake of the 1921 silent film of the same title, itself an adaptation of a Broadway play.

Disraeli was hugely praised upon release, but almost 100 years later, it has aged rather poorly. Arliss is admittedly fantastic in this early talkie, but nothing else holds up. The actors talk, sure, but they’re not really saying anything of value, and the story is about as by-the-numbers as biopics get. There’s historical significance in this picture, but that’s about it.

14

‘The Golden Compass’ (2007)

Won: Best Visual Effects

Image via New Line Cinema

Philip Pullman‘s His Dark Materials novel series is amazing, so it deserved a movie adaptation far better than whatever The Golden Compass was. But aside from being a terrible adaptation that waters down the source material’s every complex theme and story beat, this is also a pretty bad movie overall, no matter how you slice it.

The movie’s visuals are phenomenal and definitely deserving of their Best Visual Effects Oscar. That’s a relief, because visuals are all that The Golden Compass has going for it. The movie has no bite, no heat, and none of the boldness that makes the books it was based on iconic. It tries to do too much, yet it also has nothing to offer.

13

‘The Wolfman’ (2010)

Won: Best Makeup

Image via Universal Pictures

Back during Hollywood’s Golden Age, Universal Pictures ruled the horror genre with its now-iconic monster pictures. Years later, they’ve repeatedly tried—and often failed—to re-capture that same magic. One of their most notorious failures was 2010’s The Wolfman, a movie with a troubled production that unsurprisingly resulted in a fittingly disappointing film.

The visual effects are fantastic, and the makeup was definitely deserving of its Oscar victory, but the film itself is no good. There’s no true horror or even suspense here, but rather a tone so bland and an atmosphere so lacking that it almost feels like an achievement. It’s by no means an atrocious werewolf movie, but it’s also definitely not among the best.

12

‘One Night of Love’ (1934)

Won: Best Music (Scoring) and Best Sound Recording

A romantic musical set in the opera world, One Night of Love has none of the complexity or entertainment value of an actual opera. Though its audio recording system was so groundbreaking that it earned Columbia Pictures an Academy Scientific and Technical Award, the film has overall aged like milk.

There’s some beautiful singing, and the movie’s historical importance on the technical side is undeniable, but One Night of Love has very little to offer modern audiences. It’s incredibly clichéd, its character dynamics are disturbing at best, and the story lacks anything that would make anyone not get bored to death nowadays.

11

‘The Iron Lady’ (2011)

Won: Best Leading Actress (Meryl Streep) and Best Makeup

Image via 20th Century Studios

Margaret Thatcher is, to say the least, one of the most divisive — if not downright despised — public figures in British history, so it probably wasn’t the best idea to make a film that celebrated her as a flawed hero. Nevertheless, that’s precisely what The Iron Lady went ahead and did. It’s a biopic about an elderly Thatcher talking to the imagined presence of her recently-deceased husband, grappling with his death while scenes from her past life intervene.

The movie ended up winning two Academy Awards. One for its makeup work (a well-deserved victory, frankly), and the other for Meryl Streep‘s performance as Thatcher (a much less deserving win). What, from the premise alone, could have ended up being one of the most unique biopics of the 2010s instead ended up doing the blandest, least politically critical job it possibly could have. Its Oscar wins weren’t travesties, all things considered, but they also don’t make it any better a film.

10

‘The Nutty Professor’ (1996)

Won: Best Makeup

Image via Universal Pictures

Eddie Murphy was one of the biggest comedic stars of ’80s cinema, which made it even sadder when the quality of his work started to fall off during the mid-’90s. By the time The Nutty Professor came around, it was clear that something about the actor’s career choices had changed. It’s about an overweight yet good-hearted professor who takes a special chemical that turns him into the slim but obnoxious Buddy Love.

All in all, Murphy does a pretty solid job with the material he’s given, getting to play a surprising number of characters in all sorts of impressive makeup and prosthetics. It was precisely a Best Makeup award that the film ended up getting, and although some might consider this one of the least-liked Oscar wins purely because it makes it so that such a bafflingly childish and silly movie can be called “Oscar-winning,” the makeup is something that definitely can’t be criticized.

9

‘Earthquake’ (1974)

Won: Best Sound and Special Achievement Award for Visual Effects

Image via Universal Pictures

One of the worst disaster movies of the 20th century, Earthquake is a huge ensemble film featuring actors of the stature of Charlton Heston, Ava Gardner, and George Kennedy. It’s a dark comedy about various interconnected stories of people struggling to survive when an earthquake of unimaginable magnitude hits Los Angeles.

The sets are great, and the visual effects (which earned the movie a Special Achievement Oscar) are even better, but technical excellence is pretty much the only thing that Earthquake has going for it. There’s not much charm in watching these huge stars playing clichéd characters walking around destroyed sets, servicing a horribly melodramatic narrative. Everything is one-note, which immediately renders the stakes pointless.

8

‘Army of the Dead’ (2021)

Won: Oscars Fan Favorite

Image via Netflix

For the 2022 Oscars, the Academy introduced a Fan Favorite category where fans could vote on social media for their favorite film of the year. The fact that the category never came back (and perhaps never will) is pretty telling. The winner ended up being Zack Snyder‘s Army of the Dead, a zombie heist film where, following a zombie outbreak in Las Vegas, a group of mercenaries ventures into the quarantine zone to pull off the greatest robbery in history.

Zack Snyder definitely has worse movies, but that doesn’t at all mean that Army of the Dead is anything less than mediocre. Terribly overlong, lacking in creativity, and an attack on the senses with its CGI-heavy action, it has plenty of fun moments and cool genre twists going for it, but the cons somewhat outweigh the pros. There was more than enough backlash against the Fan Favorite category, making Army of the Dead an Oscar winner, that the Academy canceled the category for 2023.

7

‘In Old Arizona’ (1928)

Won: Best Leading Actor (Warner Baxter)

Image via Fox Film Corporation

The second-ever Academy Awards had plenty of questionable winners, but few have aged worse than the Western drama In Old Arizona. It’s about a charming, happy-go-lucky bandit from Arizona playing cat-and-mouse with the sheriff that’s trying to catch him, all while he romances a local beauty. The movie’s sole Oscar win came for Warner Baxter’s brownface performance as the protagonist, the Mexican outlaw Cisco Kid.

According to Letterboxd, this is one of the worst movies that have ever won an Academy Award. Aside from Baxter’s campy performance aging like milk, In Old Arizona presents pretty much all the problems that a lot of early talkies had: It can’t quite figure out how to execute its genre with sound, the acting is a cringey relic of the past, and everything about the story feels fake and over-the-top.

6

‘Cavalcade’ (1933)

Won: Best Picture, Best Director (Frank Lloyd), and Best Art Direction

Image via 20th Century Studios

As the Academy was just figuring out the Oscars’ rules and what kinds of artistic merit they wanted to reward, the ’30s had more than a few Oscar winners that were, to be kind, quite bad. This includes Best Picture recipients like Cavalcade, a drama portraying the triumphs and tragedies of two English families from different social classes between 1899 and 1933.

One of the worst Best Picture winners of all time, Cavalcade is painfully boring, uncomfortably mawkish, and really poorly paced and written. There is some merit in its cast, its visuals (it also won Art Direction), and even in Frank Lloyd‘s direction here and there (he won Best Director), but the themes are so infantilizing and on-the-nose, the drama is so exaggerated, and the characters are so uninteresting that all of its strengths pale in comparison to its weaknesses.

By TeeJay Small
| Published 21 seconds ago

In 2026, The Simpsons feels as ubiquitous as the air that we breathe, the water we drink, and the crushing, existentialist dread that engulfs our every waking moment. For anyone under the age of 37, The Simpsons has existed before us, and it will probably continue existing long after we’re gone. And while I’m as appreciative of the 800+ episode saga as anyone, I think it’s worth admitting that the show is vastly overdue for a major change. Much like the infrastructure that keeps our cities functional, The Simpsons should undergo regular maintenance to ensure that we’re not ingesting lead, or having heart attacks at the notion of aging past Grampa.

Here’s my pitch: please, for the love of god, let these characters age. Bart Simpson has been 10-years-old since 1987. He came of age during the era of Pogs, and now he’s following TikTok trends and letting CheatGPT do his homework for him. Homer’s father was supposed to be a World War 2 veteran, but since he can’t age, the series has subtly adjusted his backstory to place him in Korea, Vietnam, and now the Gulf War. Jokes about his geriatric ramblings have gone from critiques of the early 20th century, to things I can personally remember happening in my lifetime. I am 29.

We Get Older, They Stay The Same Age

The concept of aging is not completely foreign to the Simpsons family. In fact, they’ve aged up in numerous episodes over the years as one-off flash-forward adventures. Like all things in the Simpsons universe, the canon of these episodes are highly contested. Sometimes Bart grows up to be an unemployable stuck-at-home loser, while other times he evolves to become an upbeat father of two who owns a BMX workshop. Likewise, Lisa could either marry Milhouse, colonize Mars, or become the first female president of the United States, and inherit a major budget crunch from President Trump.

Recently, however, The Simpsons experimented with age in a way that felt very natural, and served as a breath of fresh air for viewers who have grown tired of the status quo. Season 37 Episode 11 “Parahormonal Activity” aired on December 14, 2025, and followed the Simpsons family as they aged roughly five years into the future. It’s not a massive leap from the characters we’ve followed since the invention of the Nintendo Game Boy, but it allowed room for tons of fresh gags, and a lot of personal growth.

Specifically, Marge enters the early stages of perimenopause, while Homer struggles with heart health, medication scheduling, and ED. Meanwhile, Bart and Lisa have become hormonal maniacs, grappling with the world of eating disorders, beauty standards, and social anxiety. Even though the episode should feel like a major upheaval of the usual format, it goes down as smooth as a nerd taking a punch from Nelson Muntz. Sure, hearing Marge Simpson use the words “incel” and “manosphere” made my spine compress, but at least I wasn’t so jarred by her noticeably aged voice.

Long Overdue For An Update

Aging the characters just makes sense from a voice acting perspective as well. The core cast of The Simpsons have been performing for nearly four decades, and their vocal cords have undergone a lot of changes in that time. Producers of the show clearly take no issue with swapping out voice actors based on racial casting, so why can’t we age up the characters so their existing voices line up with their looks?

I’m not saying Marge and Homer have to become elderly and senile, or that the family should be aging every week or even every year. But, jumping five years ahead after 40 years on the air feels like a pretty fair adjustment, and it would help to keep things fresh in the long run. Even the South Park kids graduated from third grade to fourth grade over the course of their decades-long run.

I think the best course of action would be to implement a time-skip after the release of the upcoming movie, which is slated to hit theaters in July of 2027. The movie is bound to bring a lot of new and returning eyes onto The Simpsons, and attract attention from fans who may have abandoned the series in the last decade or so. Opening the following season with a leap forward would be a major refresh, and help to clearly establish the time before the film and the time after. The Simpsons used their previous film to trojan horse HD animation and widescreen into the series, so there’s already a precedent for this sort of thing.

Jack Osbourne and his wife, Aree Gearhart, have welcomed their second child together and named her in honor of Jack’s late father, Ozzy Osbourne.

“Introducing Ozzy Matilda Osbourne,” the couple announced via a joint Instagram post on Wednesday, March 11.

An accompanying video of Ozzy Matilda in her cradle confirmed that the little one was born at 8:49 a.m. on March 5. The newborn weighed 7 lbs, 12 oz and was 19 inches at the time of her birth.

Jack, 40, and Aree, 34, are already parents to 3-year-old daughter Maple. The Osbournes star also shares three older children — Pearl, 13, Andy, 10, and Minnie, 7 — with ex-wife Lisa Stelly.

Jack revealed to The Sun on Sunday in December 2025 that he and Aree were expecting a baby. In that interview, Jack described the pregnancy as a blessing amid his grieving over Ozzy, who died at age 76 following a battle with Parkinson’s disease in July 2025.

“It’s awesome,” Jack explained at the time. “I think it’s been partly a healthy distraction, partly healing – probably in that kind of ‘full cycle’ category, in a weird way.”

He went on, “​​It’s very much taken energy out of the grieving side of things and parked in a bit more hopefulness. It’s been easy for me – I think it’s been a lot harder for my wife!”

Jack confirmed that he and Aree were able to tell Ozzy he was going to be grandfather once again shortly before his death.

The Osbournes made the stunning announcement last July that Ozzy had died 17 days after he performed his final Back to the Beginning concert in his hometown of Birmingham, England.

“It is with more sadness than mere words can convey that we have to report that our beloved Ozzy Osbourne has passed away this morning,” Ozzzy’s family said in a statement to Us Weekly on July 22, 2025. “He was with his family and surrounded by love. We ask everyone to respect our family privacy at this time.”

In an October 2025 vlog, Jack reflected on his immediate reaction when a family friend came to his L.A. home in the middle of the night to break the news of Ozzy’s death.

“Immediately, I don’t know … [I felt] just pain. Sadness and pain,” he recalled. “So many thoughts. You go through this of like, feeling sad and frustrated and angry. … But there was a level of like, OK, he’s not suffering anymore, he’s not struggling, and that is something.”

Jack admitted that his family had been concerned about Ozzy’s health in the final weeks of his life. (Ozzy went public with his Parkinson’s diagnosis in 2020. He retired from touring in 2023 after suffering a serious spinal injury.)

“I just think he was done,” Jack explained on the “Hate to Break It to Ya” podcast in February. “I’d just left England to come home after the show. I went to the Back to the Beginning gig with the family and we all hung around England for a few weeks. [Then,] I had to come back with [my] kids.”

He went on, “Right before I left, I was putting [my dad] to bed and he was brushing his teeth or whatever. He was looking at himself in the mirror, and he goes, ‘I think I’m going to cut my hair off.’ He’s, like, ‘I’ve retired. I’m not a rockstar anymore.’”

Jack suggested that “people do have a choice to a degree” in terms of when they die.

Related: Ozzy Osbourne’s Kids Jessica and Louis Quietly Honor Dad After His Death

Ozzy Osbourne’s lesser-known kids, Jessica and Louis Osbourne, quietly honored their father following his death at age 76 after a battle with Parkinson’s disease. Multiple outlets have reported that Jessica, 45, and Louis, 50, kept their tributes subtle after news broke on Tuesday, July 22, that Ozzy had died. Jessica took to social media and […]

“I think if you’re sick and your body’s primed and in a place where it’s, like, ‘Hey, you got a choice here.’ On a deep, spiritual level, I do think either consciously or subconsciously you’re, like, ‘OK, I’m ready to move on,’” he said. “You see it all the time with elderly couples where one will pass and then, two days later, the perfectly healthy partner will pass just ‘cause they are, like, ‘No, I don’t want to be here.’”

Jack, his mother, Sharon Osbourne, sister Kelly Osbourne and her partner Sid Wilson were present for a tribute to Ozzy’s life and legacy at the Grammy Awards in February. The star-studded segment featured Post Malone, Duff McKagan and Slash of Guns N’ Roses, Red Hot Chili Peppers drummer Chad Smith and Andrew Watt performing the Black Sabbath track “War Pigs.”

Glass Skin
GLAZED & GLOWING
Luminous Products

Published
March 12, 2026
12:05 AM PDT

MVP CEO Nakisa Bidarian
Pitches Jake Paul Vs. Conor McGregor
… 2 Fights, MMA & Boxing

Published
March 12, 2026
12:30 AM PDT