Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni remain embroiled in a legal dispute after both sides reportedly rejected the latest effort to reach a settlement. The development comes days after most of Lively’s case was dismissed, which indicates the case will most likely go to trial as scheduled.

Blake Lively And Justin Baldoni Refuse To Settle

On April 6, counsel for Lively and Baldoni separately conferred with Magistrate Judge Sarah Cave in New York in the latest attempt to settle the case. As reported by the Daily Mail, Judge Lewis J. Liman, who is presiding over the case, allowed both parties to inform the court of their “updated settlement position” days after the two parties appeared in court.

On April 2, Judge Liman dismissed 10 of Lively’s 13 claims against the “It Ends With Us” director, including sexual harassment, leaving three remaining claims: retaliation, breach of contract, and aiding and abetting retaliation.

According to the report, however, the result was reportedly a stalemate, with both parties refusing to settle just over a month before the trial was scheduled to begin.

Blake Lively Is Reportedly Being Urged To Settle

With the majority of her claims tossed, those close to Lively are reportedly urging the “Gossip Girl” actress to settle. As previously reported by The Blast, those close to Lively aren’t certain she could win, with a source stating that they are “begging” her to settle.

Another insider alleged that even Lively’s husband, Ryan Reynolds, has reservations about moving forward with the trial, as the case has been affecting not only their careers but their personal lives and relationships as well.

However, it seems Lively is insistent on moving forward with the case despite the setback, as evidenced by the result of the latest settlement talks.

The Actress Said She’s ‘Grateful’ For The Court Ruling

Following the dismissal of most of Lively’s claims, one of her lawyers, Michael Gottlieb, released a statement saying that his client’s claims were tossed due to legal technicalities.

“Ms. Lively’s sexual harassment claims could not go to a jury because Ms. Lively did not sign a contract, that she is an independent contractor instead of an employee, and that the offensive conduct occurred in New Jersey instead of California,” he noted.

Lively also addressed the court’s decision on Instagram Stories, writing, “I’m grateful for the Court’s ruling which allows the heart of my case to be presented to a jury next month, and for the ability to finally tell my story in full at trial…”

The actress then talked about the dangers of “retaliation and digital warfare” and vowed not to stop fighting. “I know it’s a privilege to be able to stand up. I will not waste it,” she concluded.

Justin Baldoni Was Pleased With The Latest Outcome

Baldoni’s legal team was pleased with Judge Liman’s decision to dismiss the majority of Lively’s claims, saying that what remains “is a significantly narrowed case.” One of the actor’s attorneys, Bryan Freedman, said the defendants, including Baldoni and Wayfarer Studios President Jamey Heath, were “very good people who have not engaged in this sexual harassment as alleged.”

“It is gratifying to see that the courts ruling confirms what the legal team believed from day one,” Freedman said in a statement, adding that Baldoni’s team relied on transparency in their defence since the legal battle started in December 2024.

Lawyer Weighs In On The Blake Lively And Justin Baldoni Case

Both parties have their own reasons for pushing forward with the case and going to trial. Lawyer Neama Rahmani, who isn’t involved in the case, shared her opinion with Vulture, saying, “This is about her sending a message to Baldoni and standing up for herself. Then, on the other side, Baldoni was canceled. This is about clearing his name in Hollywood.”

According to Rahmani, 98 percent of civil lawsuits are resolved via a settlement. Despite the latest refusal of both parties to settle, there is still a chance that the case will not go to trial, as settlement can take place from now until then. “Lively and Baldoni could settle right now. They could also settle on the day their trial is supposed to start. They could settle mid-trial. They could even settle after the trial. The world is their settlement oyster,” Rahmani explained.

The trial is scheduled to begin on May 18 in New York.

By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 24 seconds ago

The James Bond franchise is famous for its bevy of beautiful babes, and it’s generally considered an honor to be one of them. After all, what actress wouldn’t want to have something as cool as “Bond Girl” on her resume? Sadly, other franchises don’t really have the equivalent of this elite group. However, one largely unknown actress gave herself a “Bond Girl” type nickname for the least likely IP of them all: Star Trek.

The actor in question is Jennifer Gatti, who had previously played a practically naked minor character in Star Trek: The Next Generation. Later, she played a completely different bit part in Voyager, and she was once again required to strip down for her scenes in the episode “Non-Sequitur.” She didn’t mind, though, boldly giving herself a title that nobody had given themselves before: “Star Trek Babe.”

The Naked Now

Veteran Star Trek fans know Jennifer Gatti best for her role as Ba’el in the two-part TNG episode “Birthright.” She’s got the hots for Worf, and she accidentally seduces him with the next best thing to Klingon opera: her naked body.

She serves as a temptation for Worf to embrace his own happily ever after in a Romulan prison compound. However, her charms were not enough to win Worf over, and he successfully returned to the Enterprise.

Later, in the Voyager episode “Non-Sequitur,” Gatti played a very different character: Libby, an old flame of Harry Kim’s. In the main timeline of the show, she’s the girl he keeps pining for, even though he’s on the other side of the galaxy.

In this episode, though, Kim wakes up in an alternate timeline where he never joined Voyager and gets to live happily ever after with his main squeeze. Libby is very different from Ba’el, but she does share one important quality: when she’s onscreen, she’s hardly wearing any clothing.

A Star Trek Babe Is Born

As recorded in Captains’ Logs Supplemental-The Unauthorized Guide to the New Trek Voyages, Jennifer Gatti quickly realized the similarity between her two characters. “I always seem to have my clothes off,” she said with a laugh. “I guess now I’m a Star Trek babe, huh?” She then mulled over how Libby spends most of “Non-Sequitur” wearing things like a pajama top, a towel, and a dancer outfit. Rather than being offended, though, she had “to feel a little complimented…because apparently somebody likes me without my clothes on.”

She never found out who that somebody was, though my money is on Rick Berman. At any rate, her raunchy appearance in Star Trek: Voyager speaks to that show’s attempt to capture the verve of The Original Series, right down to featuring beautiful women with as little clothing as the network would allow. This concept would later reach its apex with Seven of Nine, a Borg beauty who walks around in a skintight catsuit. As beloved as Seven was, though, Jennifer Gatti has the distinction of being Voyager’s first Star Trek babe, one who walked so that Jeri Ryan could run.

Just, uh, not very fast. Have you seen those heels?

By TeeJay Small
| Published 1 hour ago

In these bizarre times, it almost feels like satire is dead. Even South Park has struggled to make sense of American politics and societal trends, with mixed results. If you’re concerned that topical comedy might never be funny ever again, there’s one film that you need to watch today: 2017’s The Death of Stalin.

Despite being a period piece centered on the fall of the Soviet Union’s most enigmatic leader, the movie manages to make some extremely prescient points about unchecked power, lines of succession, and the lack of consequences for wealthy oligarchs.

A True Story, Mostly

The Death of Stalin centers on, well, exactly what it sounds like. The film begins during the final days of Joseph Stalin’s life, as he presides over a nation gripped by fear. Over the course of three decades, Stalin has ruled as a totalitarian dictator, murdering anyone suspected of suspicious activity. In the Soviet leader’s endless paranoia, Stalin has created a council of sycophants who kiss up to him at every turn, each prepared to destroy the others if they dare to step out of line. So, when the supreme leader drops dead in the middle of his private quarters, there’s a massive power vacuum left in his absence.

History buffs will know going in that Nikita Khrushchev (played by Steve Buscemi) is destined to take on the mantle, but this isn’t obvious in the first act. In fact, most of the narrative of The Death of Stalin centers on other real life soviet politicians attempting vain power grabs, all while wrangling Stalin’s insufferable adult children. Though the film takes a lot of liberties to tell the actual true story of the USSR following Stalin’s death, the broad details are generally accurate, including some of the off-the-wall comedic beats. Somehow, The Death of Stalin manages to take this dark and twisted true story, and make it easy to watch, simple to grasp, and laugh-out-loud funny.

Politics Are Funnier In The Rear View

I won’t get too political here, but surely we can all admit that American politics have become a circus in the last decade or so. Whether you love Donald Trump more than life itself, or hate his guts like you’ve never hated anyone before, it’s hard to ignore how unusual things have become.

For that reason, it’s nearly impossible for comedians to lambast our politicians for any one gaffe, blunder, or controversy, as the media cycle struggles to keep up. Does anybody remember the “Covfefe” tweet, or the “little tiny rocket man” comments, or the entire existence of Anthony Scaramucci at this point? The Death of Stalin shows that sometimes, you need to wait for the absurdity to come and go before you make an attempt to comment on it, because you never know what will actually stick in the public consciousness.

The Death Of Stalin Is A Must See Movie

No matter your political leanings, I think The Death of Stalin is an excellent movie that everyone can enjoy. The movie is also based on a French graphic novel of the same name, which is a must-add to the bookshelf of any aspiring political satirist. For those interested in giving this one a spin, The Death of Stalin is currently streaming on Hulu.

Doc Brown from 1955 would hate to hear it, but there are some movies that are just too heavy. There are many things that can make a film feel that way: Perhaps it’s emotionally devastating, or overwhelmingly vast in its scale and scope, or hell-bent on shredding any bit of hope that the audience may have going into the story.

No matter the case, several of the best films of the last 30 years can very comfortably be described as “heavy.” From gut-wrenching tear-jerkers like Manchester by the Sea to hyper-long arthouse epics like An Elephant Sitting Still, these masterpieces may not be easy to get through all the way until the end, but they sure are worth the effort.

10

‘Synecdoche, New York’ (2008)

For a long time, Charlie Kaufman has made a name for himself as the single greatest screenwriter currently working in Hollywood. In 2008, after Spike Jonze dropped out of the project, Kaufman decided to make his directorial debut with Synecdoche, New York. The result couldn’t have possibly been better. This is, far and away, one of the boldest drama movies of the 21st century.

The film is filled to the brim with the same kind of impenetrable motifs, thought-provoking themes, and mind-bending bits of uniquely neurotic surrealism that characterize Kaufman’s work as a writer. For people who love films that fill them with profound existential dread, this one’s a must-see. The way Synecdoche explores the inevitability of mortality and the complicated nature of living should be enough to make anyone rethink their life choices.

9

‘Happiness’ (1998)

Image via Good Machine Releasing

Advertisement

It’s probably Todd Solondz‘s black dramedy Happiness that has the most misleading title of all time. This is one of those comedy movies that are hard to finish, exploring controversial themes in fittingly controversial ways through a rich visual style, a marvelously written scripts, and one of the best cast ensembles of any film from the ’90s.

Often quite disturbing and unabashedly transgressive, Happiness revolves around deeply unpleasant characters who do deeply unpleasant things, taking a satirical look at their lives. The subject matter sure is unsavory, and more than enough to make the movie feel really heavy; but Solondz explores it with dramatic mastery and a level of comedic perfection that’s hard to take one’s eyes off of.

8

‘An Elephant Sitting Still’ (2018)

Image via KimStim

Advertisement

Clocking in at nearly four hours in length, An Elephant Sitting Still sure is one of the grandest and most ambitious arthouse dramas in recent memory. It was the first and only feature film by the novelist-turned-director Hu Bo, who tragically committed suicide soon after finishing the film at the age of 29. It becomes impossible not to read the film as the artist’s suicide note, which makes it even more depressing than it already would have been otherwise.

Absolutely nihilistic in tone, An Elephant Sitting Still may be a slow-burn, but its deep sense of despair and misery makes it one of the best drama movies of the last 50 years. It’s a masterful soap opera without a single dead spot throughout its entire runtime, armed with sharp sociopolitical critique and Bo’s incredible direction.

7

‘The Voice of Hind Rajab’ (2025)

Image via Plan B Entertainment

Advertisement

In 2024, five-year-old Palestinian girl Hind Rajab was killed by the Israel Defense Forces, along with six of her family members and two paramedics who came to her rescue. This horrific event is the subject of The Voice of Hind Rajab, far and away one of the most perfect war movies of the 21st century. This profoundly affecting Tunisian docudrama uses real recordings of Hind from the actual event, following the Red Crescent team who tried to save her.

This framing device turns a film that would have already been absolutely devastating into one of the timeliest, most powerful, and most pressingly important movies of our time. It’s incredibly heavy both emotionally and in terms of its fast pacing, but those with the stomach for it will be treated to one of the most admirable feats of filmmaking from recent years.

6

‘Manchester by the Sea’ (2016)

Image via Amazon MGM Studios

Advertisement

Kenneth Lonergan is another artist best known for his work as a screenwriter who has also sat on the director’s chair, perhaps never more notably than in 2016, when he made Manchester by the Sea. It’s one of the most disturbingly realistic movies ever made, that’s for sure (largely thanks to Casey Affleck‘s heartbreaking lead performance), but it’s also one of the best tear-jerking dramas of the 2010s.

As good as it may be, though, Manchester by the Sea is also guaranteed to continually pull out and step on the viewers’ hearts. It’s a gut-wrenching film, but without ever falling into sensationalism, Lonergan also makes sure to inject it with small bits of hope that somehow, things will get better. It helps, but this is still one of the heaviest films of the 2010s.

5

‘The Zone of Interest’ (2023)

Image via A24

Advertisement

A24 has been distributing a wide array of hugely entertaining bangers over the course of their history as an indie studio, but Jonathan Glazer’s The Zone of Interest isn’t designed to be entertaining. Instead, this deeply thought-provoking study of the banality of evil follows Auschwitz commandant Rudolf Höss and his family as they go through their boring daily lives as the horrors of the Holocaust take place off-screen.

Where the vast majority of Holocaust films portray the atrociousness of such events by displaying them directly, the screams of thousands upon thousands of people being murdered are but a distant echo in the background of The Zone of Interest‘s masterful sound design. Some flies in the distance, but our characters never even bother to look over at it. In this hugely unconventional way of framing the war movie genre, Glazer made one of the heaviest movies of the last 10 years.

4

‘Requiem for a Dream’ (2000)

Image via Artisan Entertainment

Darren Aronofsky is a filmmaker well-known for his ability to make some profoundly devastating films, but no movie he’s ever made has ever been more deeply affecting than his magnum opus, Requiem for a Dream. Though it’s a must-see, this soul-stirring tale of addiction is a genuine challenge to watch, no matter how much it’s worth the effort.

The tour-de-force performances (Ellen Burstyn‘s in particular), Clint Mansell‘s haunting score, Aronofsky’s energetic direction, the absolute gut-punch of an ending—it all amounts to one of the most scarring films of the 2000s. It’s a deeply bleak, thoroughly intense masterpiece that portrays the mental states of addicts in the rawest, most painfully realistic ways.

3

‘Amour’ (2012)

Image via Les Films du Losange

German-born Austrain auteur Michael Haneke is the kind of director who seems to exclusively make overwhelmingly heavy movies, and picking which one’s the most intense is a nearly impossible task. There’s one Haneke title, however, that’s perhaps easiest to pick as his most awfully devastating: Amour, one of the heaviest romance movies of all time.

Following the crumbling lives of an elderly couple after the woman has a stroke, Amour is as powerful as it is primarily thanks to Haneke’s exceptional direction and script and Jean-Louis Trintignant and Emmanuelle Riva‘s towering performances. There are no emotional escapes here, and Amour becomes a movie you have to endure, not particularly enjoy. Haneke taps into the most profoundly human aspect of this story in a way that makes aging seem terrifying in a way all-too realistic.

2

‘Irreversible’ (2002)

Image via Mars Distribution

For all those who look at Haneke’s filmography and think “I can go heavier than that!,” Gaspar Noé is right there, awaiting their sicko cinephile taste. And as far as heavy Gaspar Noé movies go, it doesn’t get any more horrific than Irréversible, easily one of the most controversial films of all time. After all, a story in reverse chronological order about two men attempting to avenge the brutal rape and beating of the woman they love isn’t exactly a breezy watch.

That’s what makes Irréversible one of the heaviest movies of the 2000s, definitely not a film that everyone can tolerate. Whether the subject is even treated with the care it deserves isn’t uncontested, but one thing is certain: This movie’s almost impossible to get through, the reverse order of the narrative serving as the horrifying cherry on top of an already very cruel cake.

1

‘Dancer in the Dark’ (2000)

Image via Fine Line Features

All those who look at Haneke and Noe’s filmographies and think “I need something heavier” should first go to therapy. After that, if they’re still craving the kind of cinematic experience that will leave a knot in their stomachs for days, they could check out Lars von Trier, who made what may just be the single heaviest movie ever made: the gut-wrenching psychological drama musical Dancer in the Dark, starring Björk in what might be the best acting performance ever delivered by a musician on film.

A musical unlike any other, Dancer in the Dark is a must-see for all those interested in a movie that’s entirely composed of a chain of tragedies, miseries, and misfortunes. There’s no happiness here, no joy, no hope. Not even the songs provide any bit of whimsy to a film that ultimately serves as a critique of the escapism of the musical genre itself. Over the course of the last three decades, there hasn’t been a single movie heavier than this one.

Advertisement

Dancer in the Dark

Release Date

Advertisement

October 6, 2000

Runtime

140 Minutes

Advertisement

Director

Lars von Trier

Writers

Advertisement

Lars von Trier, Sjon

Advertisement

• 
• 

Advertisement

Advertisement

Between its launch and Episode 2, Saturday Night Live UK has seen its first ratings dip. As reported by Deadline, the second episode of SNL UK — hosted by the very good yet slightly confusing choice of Jamie Dornan — drew 205,000 viewers on Sky One, down around 9% from its 226,000 premiere. SNL UK captured a 3.2% audience share, still a solid performance for a subscription-based broadcaster and, crucially, it outperformed rival programming on Freeview channels in the same late-night slot. SNL UK losing viewers after Episode 1 may be making commissioners nervous, but a drop is to be expected once the initial curiosity wears off. It may also be a sign that the UK version is following the same slow-burn trajectory that turned the original Saturday Night Live into a cultural institution that has lasted 50 years.

A Dip in Ratings Between Episode 1 and 2 of ‘SNL UK’ Was Expected

There was a significant curiosity factor around SNL UK’s debut, with audiences tuning in largely to witness an experiment. Could a distinctly American format translate to British comedy? Live comedy on this scale—let alone live sketch comedy—hasn’t existed on UK screens for years. The format itself, with its fast turnaround, unpredictability, and weekly hosts, is a sharp detour from a schedule dominated by templated panel shows designed to be evergreen enough for endless repeats. With SNL UK’s launch, audiences were also tuning in to see whether an entirely new cast of largely unknown performers would stumble or thrive. That level of initial curiosity almost guarantees a drop in week two. Once the “event television” factor fades, audiences tend to settle back into habitual viewing patterns.

Related

‘Saturday Night Live UK’ Could Be The 1 Exact Thing That British Comedy Has Been Missing

Will this bold move pay off, or will it be met with the cold shoulder?

Saturday night TV in the UK has traditionally leaned toward earlier, family-oriented viewing — think Britain’s Got Talent, Saturday Night Takeaway, or Strictly Come Dancing — all designed to appeal to viewers from children to grandparents. A 10 PM live sketch show represents both a tonal and structural shift, asking audiences to engage with something later and markedly different. There’s also the issue of the platform itself. Sky is a paid subscription service, meaning SNL UK begins with a naturally smaller potential audience. Yet its free-to-air competitors aren’t putting up much of a fight. At the same time as Dornan’s turn on SNL UK, BBC One was airing the reliable News at Ten, BBC Two broadcast an unremarkable clip show of musical moments from the network’s archive, commercial rival ITV was repeating a 2025 episode of the game show The 1% Club, and Channel 4 aired another 2025 repeat of Bill Bailey in Vietnam. A yawnfest.

Freeview channels no longer prioritize edgy jokes or voices that reflect modern society across the full schedule, let alone at 10 PM on a weekend. While SNL UK’s ratings dipped in week two, audiences may well begin switching over from the repeated, bland, and boring once they know there is an alternative willing to take risks.

‘SNL UK’ May Be Entering the Same Slow-Burn Cycle of the Original SNL

If SNL UK’s numbers feel underwhelming, history offers reassurance. When Saturday Night Live first premiered in 1975, with George Carlin as host and a cast including Chevy Chase and John Belushi, it was far from an instant hit. It was messy, uneven, and (depending on who you asked) either the future of television or a late-night experiment that wouldn’t last a year. Sketches were short, the format shifted week-to-week, and entire episodes leaned heavily into music, like the second, hosted by Paul Simon, who performed 11 tracks. Even staple segments like “Weekend Update” — which now, in the UK version, brings bisexual panic via Ania Magliano and Paddy Young — xwere still finding their rhythm.

Network executives weren’t immediately convinced by SNL either, as ratings were modest, and complaints about controversial content were frequent. But what those numbers didn’t capture was the show’s growing appeal among younger audiences, a demographic that advertisers valued and that traditional television struggled to reach. Remind me, how many younger viewers are tuning in to watch Bill Bailey traverse Saigon?

SNL turned into something bigger than its initial overnight ratings suggested. By 1978, it had become essential viewing. It was counter cultural and redefined what late-night television could be. There’s every reason to hope for a similar trajectory on the other side of the Atlantic. For now, SNL UK requires less focus on ratings week-by-week and more attention paid to its cultural capital and accompanying social media frenzy. It needs space for sketches to fail, for the cast to develop chemistry, and for audiences to decide what they actually like about the show.

A 9% drop after a heavily anticipated premiere is simply part of the process. If anything, it suggests SNL UK is beginning to settle into the same slow-burn growth cycle that defined the American original. And with a format that has already proven its longevity over five decades, that’s hardly a bad place to be. The real test now is whether SNL UK can build an audience that returns each week, not because it’s new, but because it’s worth watching.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

October 11, 1975

Showrunner

Lorne Michaels

Advertisement

Directors

Dave Wilson, Don Roy King, Liz Patrick, Andy Warhol, Linda Lee Cadwell, Matthew Meshekoff, Paul Miller, Robert Altman, Robert Smigel

Advertisement

Writers

Will Forte, Bill Hader, Tina Fey, Kristen Wiig, Chris Parnell, Asa Taccone, John Lutz, Tom Schiller, Simon Rich, Michael Patrick O’Brien, Nicki Minaj, Herbert Sargent, Matt Piedmont, John Solomon, Chris Kelly, Alan Zweibel, Kent Sublette, Ari Katcher, Marika Sawyer, Sarah Schnedier, Scott Jung, Justin Franks, Jerrod Bettis, Rhiannon Bryan

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

By Joshua Tyler
| Updated 5 seconds ago

NASA is in the midst of completing one of the most momentous achievements in human history. This week, four humans went further out into space than anyone has before, as part of a flyby of the moon. It’s the first time mankind has even attempted to approach the moon since the termination of the Apollo program more than fifty years ago. 

And it’s a total failure.

The astronauts got there and will likely get back, and that’s good, but the larger goal in doing something like this is to get people to care enough about it so they can do more. They didn’t do that at all. Worse, they didn’t even seem to try. Everything NASA did was completely and totally wrong. 

Branding The Mission As A Prank

First, they launched the mission on April first. For you non-Americans, that’s April Fool’s Day, a holiday dedicated to pulling pranks. This went over well with all flat-earthers out there, and only strengthened skepticism that moon missions are faked.

That NASA could have launched on April 2nd, but chose April Fools’ Day on purpose, should probably get everyone in charge of the agency fired. However, that was only the start of their epic string of failures.

It’s 2026 And We Still Can’t Take Pictures In Space

Next, as always seems to happen, NASA’s team of geniuses has been unable to find a way to send any decent cameras on the Artemis II mission. Or if they did, they weren’t used.

The Astronauts had their iPhones with them, which was a good idea, so presumably they could have just pointed them out the window and then tweeted the result. If they did that, NASA chose not to highlight any of their pictures. You won’t see many astronaut selfies going viral.

Instead of an endless stream of cool videos and photos of our planet as Orion left, NASA has released three photos that their crew took of the Earth.

Photo one (above) is of the Sahara Desert, where no one lives. Also, it’s upside down from our normal orientation. NASA could have simply rotated it, but didn’t.

Photo two (above) is of the Australian Outback, where virtually no one lives.

Photo three (above) is of the Earth in darkness, filtered so that even city lights aren’t visible. As a result, it looks like a dark circle with a sliver of light on it. In other words, it looks like nothing.

You Can’t See Your House From There

Then there was the approach to the moon, where we saw a vague gray shape. The astronauts claim the stars out their windows are impressive, but apparently no one has figured out how to photograph them. And then the capsule was past the moon and on its way back to Earth, having shown us nothing.

Now the mission is on its way home, having shown the people of Earth emptiness. Empty space, empty desert land, empty gray circle of dust. Not even an image we could point at and say: I can see my house from here!

The astronauts did give some awkward, pre-written speeches that they probably didn’t even write themselves. It’s not their fault; making this interesting isn’t their job.

NASA will now mumble excuses about why they can’t get any good pictures, and then throw in some technical jargon about why the mission was important to science despite how boring it looked. They’ll say it matters because it sets up future missions. Doubtless, those missions will also be unable to do basic photography and social media marketing.

Space Travel’s Chief Value Is In What It Teaches Us About Ourselves

Unlike age of sail exploration, in which brave men in ships traveled vast distances and returned with gold and exotic fruits as proof of their journey’s value, space travel has no real, tangible benefit to most of the people funding it. Its chief value to humanity is in what it can teach us about ourselves. 

When NASA can’t even show people a picture of North America, the continent funding its missions, it has abandoned the real reason for its existence. 

NASA Just Made Every Kid Hate Space

I tried to tune in with my 9-year-old son, who was excited about space travel. We watched the rocket launch, which was badly filmed. He tried to be excited about it, but it was just a two-second burst of fire. Then the camera malfunctioned and cut out. It came back on in an extreme close-up, and then the rocket was gone.

Later space footage of it separating was grainy and hard to make out. By the way, when SpaceX has done launches like this, their videos of the rocket are always pristine and beautiful. You see it all. Somehow, despite billions in tax dollars, that’s not something that can be accomplished by NASA.

When the mission arrived at the moon a few days later, we watched the flyby live feed, which largely consisted of two women sitting in front of the camera spouting word salad and occasionally explaining why we can’t see anything. When Orion came around the dark side of the moon and returned to contact with Earth, we saw nothing. While looking at nothing, we had to sit through a crew member reading a boring, grandiose, pre-prepared speech. 

I tried to spice it up for my son by showing him pictures from NASA’s X feed. Except, well, there were only those three. Also, there was a video of some floating Nutella, which was almost certainly a paid, space-faring native ad.

The only interesting footage in the entire endeavor was posted on X by Elon Musk, who seems to understand the assignment, even if NASA doesn’t. Here it is…

By Jonathan Klotz
| Published 32 seconds ago

Battlestar Galactica is the most successful reboot of a series in history. The change from the horrible Galactica 1980 with its reliance on stock footage and annoying characters to the dark, grim tone of Ronald D. Moore’s reboot was a hit.

It also helped that the more mature series was able to tap directly into the state of American politics of the early 2000’s and managed to turn the Cylons into an obvious metaphor for the rampant paranoia that reshaped society. Episode 6, “Litmus” is when the subtle metaphor was delivered to the audience with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer as the colonists trade freedom for safety and security. 

The Paranoia Of Battlestar Galactica’s Skinjob Cylons

Following the water-tank sabotage in Episode 2, “Water,” and a Cylon suicide bombing by a copy of Number Five (Matthew Bennett), Commander William Adama (Edward James Olmos) orders Sergeant Hadrian (Jill Teed, a guest star on every 90’s/00’s sci-fi series) to launch an investigation that, at her urging, is an independent tribunal. The news that the Cylons can now appear in human form can’t be kept a secret any longer. President Roslin (Mary McDonnell) makes the announcement to the Colonial Fleet, hoping that while it’s going to stoke paranoia, it will ultimately lead to the capture of any more Number Two and Number Five models hiding in plain sight. 

Roslin’s announcement is a large, neon sign that might as well point directly to the Bush administration’s actions after 9/11, when, in an effort to protect the public, the TSA was created as an extra layer of security at all airports, and a large, nationwide campaign was set up asking for civilians to share tips with the FBI on anything strange and suspicious they see. Countless shows and films tapped into the political movement of the time to either show how its punishing citizens, or is a necessary evil. It’s a complex question, how can you protect a society without informing them of a very real danger, but then again, that danger may or may not actually be there, and if anyone can be a Cylon, isn’t that setting up a witch hunt? 

Battlestar Galactica Showed There Are No Easy Answers

Hadrian’s tribunal comes across as a witch hunt in-universe, but to the viewer, we know how close she came to finding out the truth. Focusing on a hanger hatch that was found open, which led to a room with a dead marine and the missing explosive cache, Hadrian questions Chief T yrol (Aaron Douglas), who tries to turn the security failure back on her, when Hadrian lays a verbal reverse-UNO and says the real security concern is Boomer (Grace Park). Unknown to her, Hadrian is able to piece the entire puzzle together, from Tyrol and Boomer’s relationship to the pilot’s true nature as a Cylon.

Adama shutting down the Tribunal and declaring it a witch hunt is both satisfying, as Tyrol and Boomer are sympathetic characters, and horrifying since Hadrian was on the cusp of putting Boomer, an actual Cylon, away. Instead, Hadrian’s the one arrested, and Socinus, a low-ranked specialist on the flight deck, takes the fall for the hatch being opened. Tyrol argues that his friend is covering for him, and comes clean about the relationship with Boomer, but Adama forces the Chief to leave with the consequences of his actions. 

“Litmus” was written by Jeff Vlaming, a name you might not know, but he wrote for The Adventures of Brisco County Jr., NCIS, Xena, Stargate Universe, The X-Files, Fringe, and even more sci-fi hits during his long career. It’s a testament to his skill that Battlestar Galactica’s sixth episode wasn’t subtle at all in what it was really about, but managed to leave open the question of which path, Hadrian’s or Adama’s, was the correct one to take. It comes down to the viewer’s personal politics and philosophy, but as with most of the questions that the series raises, there’s no easy answer.

General Hospital 2-week spoilers for April 06 – 17, 2026 have Sonny Corinthos (Maurice Benard) threatening and Willow Corinthos (Katelyn MacMullen) panicking.

General Hospital Spoilers Monday, April 6th: Jordan Updates Justine

On Monday, April 6th, we’ve got Jordan Ashford (Tanisha Harper) telling Justine Turner (Nazneen Contractor) that Jenz Sidwell (Carlo Rota) is on the warpath. That’s when Jordan and Justine are at yoga and she’s complaining to Jordan about the smackdown she got from the WSB’s lawyers.

She was pushing into the Jason Morgan (Steve Burton) warrant thing and all that. So, she tells Justine that Marco Rios‘s (Adrian Anchondo) funeral got really tense because Sonny and Ric Lansing (Rick Hearst) showed up. Brook Lynn Quartermaine (Amanda Setton) is super excited that she and Harrison Chase (Josh Swickard) are about to find out if they will be Phoebe’s foster parents.

Plus, Willow presses Chase about something. Obviously, right now, Willow’s in a panic because she knows that Kai and Trina Robinson (Tabyana Ali) know that she shot Drew Cain (Cameron Mathison). So, Willow might push Chase to see if they’ve been seen up at the PCPD.

GH Spoilers: Sonny Warns Someone

Sonny issues a warning to someone and it’s most likely Sidwell because the tense scene at the chapel picks back up where we left off on Friday’s episode. Ric is standing by his brother’s side as Sidwell tells Sonny that he’s gotten away with way too much for way too long. So, it looks like Sidwell and Sonny are going to swap threats.

And I wonder if he’ll tell him for what it’s worth, I didn’t do this to Marco. Not that it matters. Sidwell won’t believe him. Jacinda Bracken (Paige Herschell) starts poking around and she may be snooping for Jack Brennan (Chris McKenna) since he teased that he had something that would help Michael Corinthos (Rory Gibson). So, Jacinda may try and get info out of Charlotte Cassadine (Bluesy Burke).

Or maybe spying on Nina Reeves (Cynthia Watros) or maybe a little bit of both. Plus, Michael tells Jacinda that something’s not sitting right with him. And this may be his feeling from sitting with Drew and seeing him helpless or maybe about Jack. If Jacinda tells Michael what Jack wants and what he dangled.

Stella Henry (Vernee Watson) asks Portia Robinson (Brook Kerr) for something and it might be about the baby or maybe about Trina. And Isaiah Gannon (Sawandi Wilson) wants to know if Portia is really okay with this. So, this might tie back to Stella’s request.

And Charlotte’s hanging out with Danny Morgan (Asher Antonyzyn) on Monday and she’s very supportive about the Jason situation and really wants to be there. And of course Danny’s feeling like he’ll never see his dad again.

Tuesday, April 7th on General Hospital:

Tuesday, April 7th, we’ve got Dante Falconeri (Dominic Zamprogna) demanding an explanation. Now, maybe he sees Rocco Falconeri‘s hand and realizes that is inconsistent with the burn injury that he and Lulu Spencer (Alexa Havins Bruening) are claiming. Or it may have something to do with Ross Cullum’s (Andrew Hawkes) shooting or Jason’s rendition.

Two people are out on a date and it ends terribly. Lots of choices. Could be Lulu and Nathan. Could be Ric and Liz. Somebody hits Britt Westbourne (Kelly Thiebaud) with an ultimatum and Cullum may have the chance to chat with her at General Hospital where he’s recovering.

I’m sure that he or Sidwell are going to demand that Britt finish the cold fusion project before she gets more medication and her symptoms seem to be getting much worse by the day. Brook Lynn catches up with Lucy Coe (Lynn Herring). We’ll see if it’s about the deception stuff they need to talk about or Maxie Jones‘s (Kirsten Storms) issues with Sidwell.

General Hospital Spoilers Wednesday, April 8th:

Then on Wednesday, April 8th, we’ve got Isaiah agreeing to keep a secret. Now, it might be for Portia or it might be for Britt if he notices her Huntington’s symptoms when they flare up because she hasn’t had the suppression meds that she needs.

Somebody gets an apology from Gio Palmieri (Giovanni Mazza). Could be Brook Lynn. I wonder if she’s worried that he’ll be upset if she fosters the kid because Gio wasn’t very happy about the idea that she would be adopting and he felt cast aside.

Plus, Cassius Faison (Ryan Paevey) tells Britt she needs to be cautious and Cassius may let her know that Sidwell wants her punished and this is her last chance to complete the prototype. I wonder if Britt will call him Cassius. I mean, clearly she knows he’s not Nathan West.

Also on Wednesday, Ava Jerome (Maura West) listens as Sidwell opens up. I wonder if he’ll share his suspicions that Sonny did this thing. And Carly Spencer (Laura Wright) takes action. And it may be about Valentin Cassadine (James Patrick Stuart) or it may be against Jack over the Jason stuff.

Thursday, April 9th on GH: Brennan Makes a Revelation

Thursday, April 9th, we’ve got Brennan revealing something. I wonder if he circles back around to Jacinda. You know, if Jack hinted that what he has is on Willow and that Michael will really, really want it. You know, photos aren’t going to get her arrested because of double jeopardy, but it absolutely could help Michael strip custody away from her forever.

And Curtis Ashford (Donnell Turner) is beside himself. He’s really anxious. This may involve Jordan continuing to be around Sidwell, who’s absolutely unhinged right now. And Kristina Corinthos (Kate Mansi) opens up about her past, and I would expect that that might be with Justine. Gio is grateful for Emma Scorpio-Drake (Brayden Bruner) being in his life and Carly is cautious and this may have to do with the whole Jack and Valentin thing or on the Jason issue.

Friday, April 10th on General Hospital: Nina Reaches Her Limit

Friday, April 10th, we have got Nina reaching her tipping point and she may snap. I expect it’s with Jack because he is her main source of stress right now. Also this week, we are going to see Trina and Kai Taylor (Jens Austin Astrup) hanging out with Curtis over at Jordan’s place.

Trina is looking really happy and that may be about her singing at the Charlie’s relaunch. Carly hits back as hard as somebody comes at her and Sonny needs something from Ric and I wonder if it’s a promise that he something he wants Ric to do in case Sidwell goes ahead and kills him.

Also, this week at Sonny’s he and Ric are looking tense as somebody comes in the door. Could be Carly, could be Justine. Also, we have Laura Spencer (Genie Francis) looking for Curtis. And this may be about Sidwell and her having to come out against Sonny, come out against Jason. Things she doesn’t want to do, but she’s been advised to do.

General Hospital Spoilers Week of April 13th-17th:

The week of April 13th through the 17th, we’re going to see Brennan amping up his efforts to find Valentin. He’s pushing Nina. He’s tempting Jacinda .. But Carly has a lot of anger over Jason, and that remains a major source of distraction for Jack. Plus, Willow’s desperate to keep her secret. And I wonder if she’ll confide in Sidwell that Trina and Kai know.

Rocco’s guilt is eating at him. He absolutely hates that Jason took the fall for him. Meanwhile, Britt and Brad Cooper (Parry Shen) are trying to figure out who is Jason protecting and who he would protect that might have been down there and might have shot Cullum because it’s kind of a short list of candidates. I wonder if Rocco is going to slip up and say something and Britt will figure out that it’s him.

We’ve also got Lulu and Cassius getting closer. Certainly him protecting Rocco means a lot to Lulu, but I think she’s going to have some questions. His attitude about Jason and Britt are a little problematic for her. Justine and Sonny keep getting closer, and that could prove dangerous for her considering what’s going on with Sidwell. Valentin and Carly carve out a new agreement.

General Hospital Spoilers: Elizabeth & Ric Heat Up & Major Guest Appearance

Plus, Elizabeth Webber (Rebecca Herbst) and Ric have a really close moment. And I’m wondering if Liz and Ric are going to make love soon. I’m a big shipper of these two. Gio and Emma take a romantic trip to New York City soon. It turns out that Gio used to play violin in a Broadway orchestra and that’s how he knows Michael James Scott who is going to appear as himself. He plays Genie in Aladdin on Broadway.

So, on April 24th he and Gio run into each other when Gio takes Emma to New York City on a romantic trip. And then on May 4th, Michael James Scott is going to cross over and head to Port Charles and he’s going to perform Friend Like Me from Aladdin and he’s going to do it at The Savoy. So you might have also seen Michael on the reboot of Scrubs. He plays a nurse on there and is hilarious. So he’s not only a talented singer, but very, very funny.

General Hospital Casting News

Also, some casting news. Kirsten Storms, who had been on contract as Maxie when she came back, now is apparently in recurring status. So, there’s some backstage gossip over some dressing room drama because Kirsten’s was given away while she was on hiatus. Something like that. Just some interesting gossip. But the recurring stuff, that’s where she is in the credits now.

It seems movie fans have been increasingly interested in apocalyptic movies lately. Last week, it was Armageddon getting the spotlight on the streaming charts, as the Ben Affleck-starring feature rose among Tubi’s rankings. Nearly a week later, another sci-fi disaster film has emerged after it found its new streaming home this month.

In the same year that Armageddon was released, Paramount Pictures and DreamWorks released Deep Impact, a movie with a similar premise. The feature starred Elijah Wood, years before he appeared in The Lord of the Rings, as well as other notable cast members, including Morgan Freeman and Jon Favreau. For those who have yet to see it, Deep Impact follows Leo Biederman (Wood), a high school student who discovers a comet heading straight towards Earth, and its impact on the planet may trigger an “Extinction-level Event.” As a last-ditch effort to save humanity, astronauts were sent into space in a mission to blow up the comet. Meanwhile, in preparation for the worst-case scenario, the government implements a last-resort plan to ensure humanity’s survival.

At the start of April, Deep Impact made Paramount+ its new streaming home, and the film ranked #10 on Paramount+’s Top 10 Movies in the United States on this weekend, sitting behind Jim Carrey‘s The Truman Show. During Deep Impact‘s theatrical release, it grossed only $140.6 million worldwide, ranking it the 6th-highest-grossing film of 1998, between A Bug’s Life and Mulan. Its reception was mediocre, earning only 45% from critics and 43% from the audience on Rotten Tomatoes. But despite its ratings, Deep Impact entering the streaming charts isn’t new — the film has earned a cult following over the years and it also appeared on Tubi’s charts back in February.

What To Watch If You Like ‘Deep Impact’?

Deep Impact is one of many sci-fi disaster movies that have come out over the years, and there are other titles like it worth a watch after you finish streaming this on Paramount+. One notable example is Armageddon, which recently made waves on streaming platforms like Tubi and features an asteroid heading towards Earth, thus threatening life on the planet. What made Deep Impact stand out from Armageddon in 1998 was how it told a story about everyday people, how they would react if they knew the world was about to end, and what they would do to ensure their survival.

If you’re after an apocalyptic film that features a similar every-man premise, then Volcano is worth a watch. Released a year prior, this film follows Mike Roark (Tommy Lee Jones), who learns that a volcano is erupting in Los Angeles, so he and many emergency service members team up to redirect the lava in hopes of minimizing the damage, while also attempting to save as many lives as possible due to a new natural threat.

Deep Impact is available to stream on Paramount+. Follow Collider for more updates.

Advertisement

Release Date

May 8, 1998

Advertisement

Runtime

120 minutes

Director

Advertisement

Mimi Leder

Writers

Michael Tolkin, Bruce Joel Rubin

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement