By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 1 hour ago

Like many aging nerds, I am constantly revisiting my favorite childhood movies. This is mostly driven by nostalgia, but I also enjoy looking at old films through fresh eyes. Most of the time, I discover a few things about these beloved movies that I never noticed before. On a really good day, studying these films helps me learn a thing or two about how they helped shape my childhood. Those insights can be more than a bit sobering at times, which is what happened when I recently revisited 1989’s Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure, considered by many to be the best (or, at the very least, the silliest) ‘80s comedy of them all.

The movie is about the titular duo traveling back and forth through time, gathering famous figures so they can pass their history class. Should they fail, the future would fall apart because these two would-be rockers are inexplicably the key to transforming our dystopian world into a Star Trek-like utopia. The film never really explains how this is supposed to happen, which is part of the quirky charm I enjoyed so much as a child. As an adult, I realized that all of Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure’s hilarity is based on the comforting lie that parents have spent decades telling children: you can be anything you want when you grow up.

In case you’ve never seen it (bogus!), Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure focuses on two high school seniors in danger of failing a history class. The consequences of this (like Ted’s dad sending him to military school) would completely destroy their dreams of becoming a famous pair of rock’n’roll stars. Fortunately, they are given a time machine by a mentor from the future, allowing them to gather historical figures and deliver a history presentation good enough to save their grade. As for the time-traveling visitor, he is invested in Bill (Alex Winter) and Ted (Keanu Reeves) because their music has somehow transformed the future into a utopia where everyone is excellent to each other.

As a music-loving little kid, I loved the sheer simplicity of this premise: that the world is just one awesome song away from achieving global unity. War, famine, disease. What if all of it could be eliminated with a sweet tune and a few good vibes? Growing older, I realized the audacity of the premise, but I still enjoyed it as part of the film’s tongue-in-cheek humor. Once I became a parent, though, I realized that the narrative of the film rests firmly on a lie told to children by generations of parents. Namely, that kids can be anything they want to be when they grow up.

Party’s Over, Dudes

The parents telling children “you can be anything you want to be” are, of course, doing their best to avoid limiting their kids’ horizons. Youth is a time for curiosity and optimism, and this parental encouragement is an easy way to demonstrate both. Unfortunately, after watching movies like Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure, many of these children end up on a collision course for failure. That’s because their parents and favorite films are preaching that their greatness is assured. Like Bill and Ted, these kiddos must have an awesome destiny that is nothing less than preordained. And like Bill and Ted, they don’t need to worry about how to make their happy future happen.

In case you think I’m just being a cranky old fart, research backs me up on this. For example, a 2017 study from Digital Third Coast and C+R Research found that even though most people end up in some kind of administrative or office job, 0 percent of teenagers surveyed said this was the kind of job they wanted to do. The sad disparity here is obvious: if nobody wants to do the most common job when they grow up, we can tell that many (if not most) teens are going to be disappointed by their future career, and they’ll most likely blame themselves.

As psychologist Juli Fraga wrote in 2025, telling kids they can accomplish anything they put their minds to actually does them a disservice. First, they are likely to initially blame themselves when things don’t work out, internalizing that it is somehow their fault (obviously, they should have wanted it more and didn’t apply themselves enough!). Second, they are likely to grow cynical over time when they realize that working hard does not always lead to success or happiness. Fraga concluded that children would be much better off if their parents were simply honest and realistic about children’s goals, how achievable they are, and how to prepare today for a more successful tomorrow. 

You Can Never Go Home Again

That’s not exactly what happens in Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure. While the biological parents are pretty terrible in this movie, Rufus (George Carlin) serves as the titular boys’ joint father figure, and he’s the one who convinces them they are destined for greatness. In a very literal way, these boys are supposed to save the world with their awesome music! But the film ends by showing us that Bill and Ted are still awful at playing, though Rufus comedically reassures the viewers that “they do get better.”

We don’t see that, of course. In fact, in the sequel, the two only get better off-screen, using time-travel to finally master their craft before traveling back to the big concert. Even the final film in the trilogy never explains, mechanically, how playing a song (even a really great one) will magically make the world a better place. That’s because this has never been the point of the franchise. The point is that these two can achieve greatness by simply wanting it badly enough, which never really works out. But hey, it makes for a comforting message for those of us secretly streaming the first movie from our office job! 

Whether you’re at work, at home, or maybe even getting ready to play with your own band, you can now stream Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure for free on Tubi. It might be powered by the biggest lie of your childhood, but the movie is still filled with awesome performances, hilarious jokes, and absolutely immaculate ‘80s vibes. Throw in the fact that it was the breakout role for John Wick star Keanu Reeves, and you’ve got a movie that might (just might) fill the empty void left by your unfulfilled childhood dreams.

By Brian Myers
| Published 7 seconds ago

Between his stints as TV’s Batman in the 1960s and his recurring role as Mayor West on Family Guy, Adam West became a B-movie staple in low-budget action and horror films that are mostly unremarkable. However, one particular film from 1982 has grown in prominence among horror fans over the years, as it was one of the early vehicles that launched actress Meg Tilly’s career.

One Dark Night is now available for free streaming on multiple platforms. It’s a must-watch for anyone who wants to experience a different take on movie zombies.

One Dark Night begins with police and emergency responders in the apartment of an occultist named Karl Raymarseivich Raymar, recently reported as deceased. Police discover that Raymar had an apartment full of young, dead women in various states of decay.

Adding to the eerie scene are bolts of electricity that seem to shoot from Raymar’s fingers as he’s lifted onto a stretcher, punching a hole in the ceiling.

The elderly Raymar was telekinetic. He took his ability to move objects psychically to a new level when he began kidnapping young women as a source of fuel. One Dark Night introduces audiences to Raymar’s form of psychic vampirism, where he feeds off an innocent person’s energy.

Raymar tortured these women as they would feed him more energy based on how much agony they were experiencing. Farmer’s daughter Oliva (Melissa Newman) and her boyfriend Allan (Adam West) are approached by another occultist, who reveals Raymar’s plan to gain power and become immortal. Though Allan is dismissive, the estranged killer’s daughter seems to think it’s all plausible.

One Dark Night also follows Julie (Meg Tilly), a high school girl who’s undergoing an initiation ceremony into a club called “The Sisters.” To gain entry and the other girls’ respect, Julie must spend the night (where else) in the mausoleum where Raymar has recently been interred.

Armed with only her sleeping bag and her wits, Julie settles in for the evening after being dropped off and tries to sleep.

Julie is unaware of two things. First, her classmates plan to dress up in costumes and sneak in to scare her. The second and more key development that required her attention is that Raymar’s body is beginning to use its dormant powers to bring the serial murderer back from the grave. Electricity begins to shoot from his fingers as the walls begin to shake and the coffins of his dead mausoleum mates begin to rise.

One Dark Night opens strongly and conveys the horror experienced by Raymar’s victims through the corpses’ facial expressions. However, the film is overall a slow burn, taking its time to set up the prank pulled on Julie by the club and to take far too long to establish a reason for Raymar’s daughter to come to terms with her father’s unholy work.

With a budget of only $800,000, One Dark Night produced some pretty realistic special effects, and the makeup on the corpses and zombies was perfect. Many of the scenes were shot in an actual mausoleum, adding to the sense of realism.

One Dark Night also gets some points for taking a different approach to zombies. Rather than resurrected bodies with working brains that move in accordance with their animal instincts, the zombies in this film are all controlled by Raymar as inanimate objects, moved by a master puppeteer.

The acting is about as bad as you can imagine, with really only Meg Tilly deserving any mention of praise. While there are certainly better zombie films out there, One Dark Night deserves a watch.

Alex Murdaugh’s name became synonymous with one of the most stunning legal sagas in recent memory — a once-untouchable South Carolina attorney whose family dynasty crumbled under the weight of two life sentences, dozens of fraud charges and a murder trial that gripped the country. Now, with his murder convictions overturned and a new trial on the horizon, Us Weekly is breaking down exactly what Alex did, what he admitted to and where his sprawling legal mess stands today.

While the murder case remains in flux, one thing has not changed: Alex openly admitted to a years-long scheme of stealing millions of dollars from his clients and his own law firm. Those financial crimes are entirely separate from the murder charges — and they are the reason he is still behind bars even after the South Carolina Supreme Court tossed his murder convictions on May 13, 2026.

Alex Murdaugh’s Financial Crimes Explained

Not only was Alex accused of killing his wife, Maggie Murdaugh, and son Paul Murdaugh, but he also drowned in legal trouble related to financial and drug crimes. The former civil litigation lawyer was hit with a staggering 102 grand jury criminal charges and 19 indictments tied to fraud and drug offenses.

The charges painted a portrait of a years-long scheme involving embezzlement, wire fraud and money laundering. Alex ultimately pleaded guilty to 22 federal charges — including wire fraud and money laundering — and was hit with 40 years in federal prison for those crimes alone. On top of that, he received a 27-year state-level sentence for separate financial crimes, bringing his total non-murder punishment to a jaw-dropping 67 years behind bars.

As part of the fallout, Alex was disbarred and had his assets seized. The money he stole was funneled away from clients and his former law firm — a betrayal that shocked the South Carolina legal community and dismantled the Murdaugh family’s decades-long influence in the region.

Alex Murdaugh’s Admissions on the Witness Stand

When Alex took the stand during his six-week murder trial in early 2023, he did something most legal experts called a high-stakes gamble: he openly conceded to the financial wrongdoing while maintaining his innocence in the killings.

Alex admitted that he had stolen millions of dollars from his clients and his own law firm. He also acknowledged that he lied to investigators about his whereabouts on the night Maggie, 52, and Paul, 22, were killed near the dog kennels on the family’s South Carolina property in June 2021.

The former attorney later apologized to jurors for that lie, telling them he hadn’t been “thinking clearly” and didn’t believe he had been “capable of reason” at the time. Still, he insisted he “didn’t shoot” Maggie or Paul “anytime, ever.”

His attorney, Dick Harpootlian, has continued to draw a sharp line between the two sets of crimes. “I think Alex understands he did a bad thing in stealing all that money,” Harpootlian told the Daily Mail in January 2026. “He is adamant he didn’t kill Paul and Maggie. He always has been … and when we get a fair trial, I think the jury will determine he didn’t do it.”

Related: Alex Murdaugh’s Lawyers Slam ‘Inaccuracies’ in Hulu’s ‘Death in the Family’

Alex Murdaugh’s legal team is speaking out about how he is depicted in Hulu’s Murdaugh: Death in the Family. His attorneys issued a statement to The New York Post on Wednesday, November 5, calling out what they claimed were “numerous inaccuracies and misleading portrayals that distort the truth” about the Murdaugh family. Murdaugh’s lawyers noted […]

Advertisement

Alex Murdaugh’s Murder Convictions and Sentence

The financial admissions did little to soften the jury, which found Alex guilty on March 2, 2023, of murdering Maggie and Paul. The judge handed down two consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole — one for each victim — meaning Alex was expected to die in prison even before factoring in his fraud sentences.

In total, Alex was serving two consecutive life sentences plus 67 additional years for the financial offenses. Since August 2023, he had been working as a wardkeeper’s assistant inside the South Carolina Department of Corrections, a job that reportedly involves helping run day-to-day operations at a correctional facility, per the New York Post.

When he wasn’t working his prison job, Alex was deeply involved in his own appeal. “You can talk to him, unlike normal clients who have no concept of the appellate process or how all this works,” Harpootlian said in the January 2026 interview. “He is interested because he is a lawyer, so we talk about where we’re at and what we think the grave issues are with the case and what our weaknesses are.”

Alex Murdaugh’s Murder Convictions Overturned

On May 13, 2026, the South Carolina Supreme Court delivered a bombshell ruling, unanimously overturning Alex’s murder convictions in a 5-0 vote and ordering a new trial. The justices ruled that the original proceedings had been tainted by “improper external influences” from former county clerk Becky Hill.

“Although we are aware of the time, money and effort expended for this lengthy trial, we have no choice but to reverse the denial of Murdaugh’s motion for a new trial due to Hill’s improper external influences on the jury and remand for a new trial,” the justices wrote, according to CNN.

Related: Looking Back on Todd and Julie Chrisley’s Bank Fraud and Tax Evasion Case

More than two years after Todd and Julie Chrisley were charged with several counts of bank and wire fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy, the Chrisley Knows Best stars’ trial got underway in May 2022. Todd, 53, and Julie, 49, arrived in an Atlanta court on May 17 for opening statements, during which Assistant U.S. Attorney Annalise […]

Advertisement

The appeal centered on allegations that Hill had improperly influenced jurors — including by telling them to “watch his body language” — and implied Alex was guilty. A handful of jurors confirmed Hill’s comments in affidavits and testimony, though most said they did not hear the remarks.

In January 2024, retired South Carolina Chief Justice Jean Toal initially denied Alex’s request for a new trial, concluding that Hill’s comments had not influenced the verdict. Toal did, however, find the comments improper and said she believed Hill had been “attracted by the siren call of celebrity” because of the high-profile nature of the case.

Hill herself faced consequences for her conduct. She was charged with perjury, obstruction of justice and misconduct in May 2025, per WLOS. After pleading guilty in December 2025, she was sentenced to three years of probation.

Alex Murdaugh’s Lawsuit Against Becky Hill

Just four days after his murder convictions were overturned, Alex sued Hill in federal court, claiming she rigged the trial so she could profit from a book about the case.

According to the lawsuit obtained by TMZ and filed on May 17, 2026, Alex argued that Hill secretly worked jurors during his 2023 double-murder trial and pushed them to convict. Hill has been accused of telling jurors not to be “fooled,” “confused” or “convinced” by Alex’s defense team.

Related: Alex Murdaugh Is Asked If He Is a Family Annihilator on ‘Death in the Family’

Murdaugh: Death in the Family is coming to an end with a glimpse at Alex Murdaugh‘s high-profile trial. In Us Weekly‘s exclusive clip from the Wednesday, November 19, finale, Alex (Jason Clarke) takes the stand after being accused of Maggie Murdaugh (Patricia Arquette) and Paul Murdaugh‘s (Johnny Berchtold) deaths. “Do you think you lived a […]

Advertisement

In the filing, Alex claimed Hill repeatedly pulled the jury’s leader aside for private conversations and pushed jurors to wrap up deliberations quickly, allegedly telling them it “shouldn’t take us long” and implying they could become famous following the verdict. He alleged her actions cost him at least $600,000 in legal fees and destroyed his right to a fair trial.

Hill and Neil R. Gordon released their book, Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders, in August 2023.

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

Advertisement

Hill’s attorney, Will Lewis, did not immediately respond to Us’ request for comment regarding the lawsuit.

What’s Next for Alex Murdaugh?

Even with the murder convictions tossed, Alex is not walking free. He remains incarcerated, serving the 27-year state sentence and 40-year federal sentence for his financial crimes — punishment that adds up to 67 years and is entirely separate from the murder case. A new murder trial will be scheduled, giving prosecutors another chance to make their case and giving Alex another shot at proving he did not kill Maggie or Paul.

This story was compiled with the help of AI tools and edited by journalists.

The NBA Playoffs have reached the conference finals, but the real excitement seems to be happening off the court.

After ESPN personality Stephen A. Smith took multiple shots at Boston Celtics forward Jaylen Brown, the five-time All-Star unloaded with a lengthy Twitch rant on Sunday, May 17, that included him saying, “f*** Stephen A., Stephen B., Stephen C.”

Earlier this month, Smith, 58, told Brown, 29, to “be quiet” after he criticized the league’s officiating. Brown took to X in response, writing, “I’ll ‘be quiet’ [or] stop streaming if you ‘be quiet’ and retire. Let’s give the people what they want.”

On Sunday, Brown unleashed a tirade against Smith, First Take and Smith’s brand of journalism.

Related: NBA’s Jaylen Brown Reacts to Being 1st Celtic on ‘Time’ Cover in 40 Years

It’s been a summer of history-making achievements for Boston Celtics star Jaylen Brown.  Brown, 27, was named NBA Finals MVP in June, earning his first ring while helping the Celtics win their record-breaking 18th NBA Championship.  Earlier this month, he appeared on the cover of Time as part of the magazine’s Time100 Next 2024 list, […]

“Tell this motherf***** to retire, because he’s the face of clickbait media,” Brown said. “And maybe with his retirement, we could spark a movement to get the rest of these motherf*****s out of here. Or to also have some type of, forget journalistic integrity, actual integrity in order to hold themselves accountable to the bulls*** takes they put out…Just for the sake of just pushing a weak narrative. Just purely out of that.”

Brown then played a clip from First Take where Smith questioned why Celtics superstar Jayson Tatum hadn’t appeared on Brown’s Twitch streams, seeming to imply that Tatum, 28, was upset with him.

“What type of journalism is this?” Brown asked. “Jayson Tatum hasn’t been on my stream, and this is what we’re talking about on First Take? What if [Tatum] just don’t like being somewhere in an uncontrolled environment? Why are you doing journalism on me having guests on my stream? And this is a part of the reason why I started streaming. This is a part of the reason why people use the term ‘clown,’ and it synchronizes with someone like Stephen A. Smith. Because this is what you’re using your platform for.”

Related: NBA’s Kevin Durant Says ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith Has ‘Always Been a Clown’

Advertisement

Phoenix Suns star Kevin Durant made his feelings about Stephen A. Smith crystal clear after the ESPN personality questioned his leadership skills.  Following the Suns’ 103-97 victory over the Portland Trail Blazers on Saturday, November 2, Durant, 36, was asked about the ongoing conversation surrounding his locker room authority, which was first brought to the […]

Brown continued the clip, which showed Smith blasting him for saying that 2025-26 was his favorite season in the pros, despite the Celtics blowing a 3-1 lead in their first round playoff series.

“This is a narrative that he’s creating. This isn’t journalism.” Brown said. “This is him making his own opinion and formulizing it about what I have to say, on his platform.”

He then listed other reasons why this was his favorite season, including the team exceeding preseason expectations and watching younger Celtics players come into their own in the NBA.

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

“My offer still stands,” Brown continued. “You want me to be quiet and stop streaming? Well, I want you to be quiet and get off these networks. Because you’re not using your platform to do real journalism. You’re using your platform to use clickbait.”

Smith responded to Brown’s rant during the Monday, May 18, episode of First Take.

“Jaylen Brown, be careful what you wish for,” Smith said. “You really want me to start reporting on that level? Locker room? How the organization might think about you? How the city may feel about you? How Jayson Tatum may or may not feel about you? Sneaker deals? Endorsement deals? The list goes on and on. The season is over, bro. You are on Twitch, doing what I do and talking about me needing to step away. It makes no sense.”

Prince Harry is reportedly reflecting on the choices that led him away from royal life, with experts suggesting he has “regrets,” even though a return to official duties is seen as unlikely.

As he and his wife, Meghan Markle, approach their eighth wedding anniversary, attention has shifted to their life in California and what the future holds for them.

The upcoming 2027 Invictus Games in Birmingham is also being seen as a possible moment for Prince Harry and Meghan to reconcile with the royal family despite the growing strain.

Royal commentators claim Harry now carries significant regrets about leaving the royal family, even as the possibility of an official royal return remains highly unlikely.

As the Duke and Duchess of Sussex near their eighth wedding anniversary on May 19, their journey since stepping away from royal life continues to draw attention.

After marrying in a globally watched ceremony at Windsor Castle in 2018, Harry and Meghan traded palace traditions for a new life in California, building a more independent and commercial path away from the monarchy.

But the transition from royal life to Montecito was far from seamless. Royal analyst Richard Fitzwilliams described the move as “destructive,” suggesting the separation from Britain may not have unfolded the way Harry originally imagined.

Fitzwilliams believes the duke still wants stronger ties to the UK, especially with King Charles and his longtime friends.

He suggested Harry may be hoping to reconnect, particularly “depending on the security decision which we still await, closer ties with Britain and certainly with his father and with his friends.”

Invictus Games In Birmingham Sparks Speculation Over Prince Harry’s Plans To Make His Way Back Into The Royal Family

Attention has now turned toward the 2027 Invictus Games in Birmingham, where Harry is expected to play a major role. Some royal commentators believe the event could also serve as an opportunity for the Duke of Sussex to slowly repair damaged ties with the royal family.

Commentator Hilary Fitzpatrick suggested that Harry’s continued involvement with major UK events may signal a desire to reconnect with his former life.

“I mean, if he didn’t (regret his decisions), we wouldn’t have Birmingham coming up next year,” Fitzpatrick claimed, per GB News. “We wouldn’t have the plan so obvious to try and in one way or another to persuade King Charles to open (the door to a return).”

The relationship between Harry and the monarchy has remained deeply strained since his royal exit. Reports suggest contact between Harry and his father has been minimal in recent years, fueling continued speculation over whether reconciliation is realistic.

The Duke Of Sussex Has ‘Many Regrets’ About His Life Choices

According to insiders, Harry has not seen Charles since last September, following an earlier stretch of nearly two years without meeting.

There have also been claims that the duke floated the idea of appearing alongside Charles during the Birmingham games as a symbolic gesture toward healing family divisions.

Royal commentator Rafe Heydel-Mankoo believes Harry is still searching for the sense of purpose he once had within royal life.

He pointed to the prince’s recent appearances overseas, including visits to Australia and Ukraine, as signs that Harry is attempting to maintain a public image closely tied to his former royal role.

“I think it’s quite clear that Prince Harry has many regrets about the life choices that have ended up with him being estranged from his homeland and from his family and from the role he most enjoyed: being a royal prince,” Heydel-Mankoo said.

He added that Harry’s recent international appearances resemble unofficial royal tours, suggesting the duke may still be trying to demonstrate that he can operate in a royal-style capacity despite stepping away from official duties.

Expert Claims Prince Harry And Meghan’s Public Relevance ‘Depends On Their Proximity To Royal Family’

Heydel-Mankoo also argued that both Harry and Meghan likely understand how closely their “prominence, their status, depends on their proximity to the royal family.”

He argued that as the pair have moved further away from “the royal world,” public interest in them has gradually declined, not just in their roles, but in them as individuals.

The commentator claimed the couple has, in various ways, continued to “style themselves and carry on activities as if they were still working members of the royal family.”

Heydel-Mankoo’s remarks come after the royal couple’s Australia trip, where they engaged in various activities associated with a typical royal tour, including visiting a hospital.

A Prince Harry Royal Return Is ‘Inconceivable’ For King Charles And Prince William, Expert Claims

Royal commentator Heydel-Mankoo further argued that Harry’s recent international appearances may be an attempt to demonstrate that he remains capable of performing public-facing duties at a royal level, should an opportunity for reconciliation ever arise.

However, he firmly dismissed the idea of any formal return to royal life due to how much had happened since he and his wife turned their backs on their roles as working royals.

“There’s a world of difference,” he said, “between what Harry hopes will happen and what has any chance of happening.”

He added that it was “inconceivable” that either Charles or Prince William would reopen the door for Harry to rejoin the royal fold.

By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 16 seconds ago

In Star Trek, the most famous technology isn’t the awe-inspiring starships or the game-changing replicators. No, the most famous tech is the transporter. It’s the ultimate sci-fi idea because,  at the press of a button, you disappear from one spot and reappear somewhere else. This futuristic technology became so synonymous with Star Trek that it spawned a famous phrase that was never even said on The Original Series: “Beam me up, Scotty!” However, this cool technology was a real boogeyman in the first episode of the TOS prequel series Enterprise.

In the Enterprise premiere episode “Broken Bow,” the transporter is a new and relatively fearsome technology. The producers thought that it would humorously subvert our expectations by showing Star Trek characters who are genuinely spooked by the franchise’s most famous technology. However, the producers learned to fear the transporter for entirely different reasons: thanks to a major complication, the scene of Archer beaming up became the most difficult shot in an episode with over 300 effects shots.

Scream Me Up, Scotty

In the Enterprise premiere episode “Broken Bow,” characters like Archer and Tucker are wary of the transporter, which is (in the 22nd century) relatively new technology. Once you watch enough Star Trek, you’ll know those fears are well-founded. On a bad day, the transporter can melt your body, split you into twins, merge you with someone else, turn you into a child, or send you to an evil Mirror Universe. On a good day, the core technology still involves vaporizing your original self and reassembling your body and mind in a new location. It’s freaky to the extreme, which is why Dr. McCoy never trusted the transporter.

In the first episode of Enterprise, the crew of the titular ship is similarly fearful of this new technology. Nonetheless, Tucker uses it to rescue Archer from certain death in one of the coolest moments of the entire episode. However, director James L. Conway found this scene more frustrating than cool. That’s because the effects team setting up the transporter effect had to work with the live footage of Archer running from his Suliban pursuer. As you might imagine, this is far more difficult than a normal beaming sequence, which used blue screens to make things easier for themselves.

Your Atoms: Scrambled Or Over Easy?

Unfortunately, Conway had not used any blue screens when filming Archer’s exciting run-and-gun fight with his pursuer. On the special features for the Enterprise Season 1 Blu-ray, Visual Effects Supervisor Ronald B. Moore (not to be confused with Trek writer and producer Ronald D. Moore) admitted that his team “took so much time setting up that shot” precisely because it “took a lot of time to make it work right.” Even though it was “simply a transporter,” Moore told (as mentioned in the introduction to “Flying Starships”) Archer actor Scott Bakula that the transporter was the most difficult shot out of more than 300 effects shots.

Franchise executive producer Rick Berman was exceedingly pleased with “Broken Bow,” but he and writer Brannon Braga later agreed that they jumped the gun (or should that be phase pistol?) by introducing transporter technology so quickly. Nonetheless, this introduction ripped the Band-Aid off by giving them the most difficult transporter shot in Star Trek history. After that, no special effect could challenge them ever again. Plus, Ronald B. Moore and his team deserve special credit for pulling it off. Not only did they execute a dramatic and awesome-looking effects shot, but they did something that once seemed impossible: they made the transporter seem cool again!

A father in Florida has been arrested after his 9-year-old son found his gun and shot his 5-year-old brother in the chest.

Robert Giles has been charged with one count of culpable negligence by leaving a firearm within easy reach of a minor, according to Manatee County court records viewed by Us Weekly.

The incident took place at a residence in Palmetto on March 25. Deputies reported to the home after they received a report about a “shooting with injuries,” according to an arrest warrant obtained by Law & Crime. When law enforcement entered the home, they allegedly found a 5-year-old boy “suffering from a gunshot wound to the upper chest.”

The charging documents stated that a bullet “traveled through his body, striking his clavicle and piercing his lung before exiting.”

Investigators ultimately determined that Giles’ son “located a firearm inside the primary bedroom” and then accidentally “discharged” the weapon, “striking [a boy with a different last name] in the chest.”

It was also concluded that the 9-year-old boy never intended to find the gun. Instead, the older boy “stated he entered his father’s bedroom while searching for Pokemon pens,” according to the warrant complaint. “While searching, he located a firearm on the floor under the bed.”

Giles, 36, told deputies that the gun, which was identified as a Canik 9 mm, had been stored in a nightstand next to his bed. Additionally, he said that the weapon was stored with “a round in the chamber but without a magazine inserted.”

The defendant allegedly said he was in the kitchen when “he heard a loud ‘pop’” and discovered the younger boy had been shot in his chest near his right shoulder.

Giles then “stated he subsequently secured the firearm by placing it in a safe.”

As the officers walked through the home, they observed blood in the hallway that appeared to have originated “from the primary bedroom,” per the warrant.

It’s believed the bullet traveled through a wall of the bedroom, into an outer wall and out of the residence, per the warrant. As the search of the home continued, investigators found the gun in a safe within the home.

“Inside the residence, a large gun safe was located in a secured condition,” the charging document stated. “Upon opening the safe, deputies observed a Canik 9mm handgun lying on a shelf with a magazine next to it. Multiple additional firearms were also present inside the safe. This safe was within the same room in which the shooting occurred, and within ten feet of where [Giles’ son] located the firearm.”

Related: Florida Man Kills Stepdaughter After She Allegedly Criticized His Manners

A Florida man has been arrested for fatally shooting his stepdaughter after she allegedly criticized his manners. James Pelzer was taken into custody on Sunday, April 19, and was charged with one count of dangerous and depraved murder without premeditation in the death of Alanda Cuffee, according to online jail records viewed by Us Weekly. […]

Investigators determined a spent casing was still in the chamber and the gun was collected as evidence.

“The firearm was not secured in a manner that would prevent access by a minor,” the charging document said. “[Giles son] described in his interview to have located the firearm under the bed and mentioned nothing about removing it from holster or any other secured location.”

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

The warrant stated that the accidental discharge of the gun caused “serious bodily injury” to the 5-year-old, stating he “was intubated for approximately five days and remains hospitalized while recovering from his injuries.”

Giles was arrested on April 2 and booked in the Manatee County Jail. He was later released after he posted a $2,500 bond.

He appeared in court on Friday, May 15, and entered a not guilty plea, Us can confirm. Giles’ next court date has not yet been scheduled.