Sister Wives star Tony Padron had a rough start when he first came home with Mykelti Brown to meet her parents, Kody Brown and Christine Brown. He didn’t make a good impression on his pending in-laws or for some of the fans as well.

It was all caught on camera for the TLC series. But something happened along the way to depict Tony Padron in a different light both on and off the Sister Wives screen.

Sister Wives: Did Tony Padron Insult Christine Brown’s Cooking?

Tony Padron made a remark when discussing wedding plans with Kody and Christine that many Sister Wives fans remember today. Tony wanted 10 tacos available for each of the 400 wedding guests they planned on inviting. And Mykelti went along with this.

He then insisted on “street tacos” and not the kind that Christine makes. Yep, and he said this outloud on the show. The Sister Wives fans know how much Christine prides herself on her cooking, so at some level this seemed to bother the mother of the bride.

Fans found this insulting to Christine, which put Tony in a less favorable light with many viewers. Still, fans got a kick out of watching Kody squirm as the dollar signs grew for Mykelti and Tony’s wedding venue.

Bad Money Vibes for Kody Brown?

The prospective Sister Wives son-in-law was adamant that 10 street tacos be available for each guest. So, if you do the math, that is 4,000 tacos. At the time this aired, fans jumped on social media to comment on how Tony seems to have no problem spending Kody’s money. After all, his future father-in-law was footing the bill for the wedding.

During the wedding planning, Kody looked worn down, as this marriage event came with a high price tag. Since Tony seemed to know how to push Kody’s buttons, fans requested seeing more of him on screen.

But once the wedding was over, Tony showed up now and then on the series. Then fans started to see something different in Mykelti’s new groom. They also saw a change in the couple through their social media posts.

Sister Wives: Will the Real Tony Please Stand Up…

The Sister Wives cameras first showed the viewers a Tony Padron who looked like he was about to ride on the coattails of this famous family. The show depicted him as a guy with an expectation of getting what he wanted for his wedding, regardless of the cost to Mykelti’s family.

This played out with Kody worrying about the cost of the wedding after Tony shared his plans of such a large affair. But things aren’t always what they look like on a reality TV show.

Then lo and behold, the curtains open to the Tony Padron we see today. Through his actions we learned something new. Mykelti’s husband is a highly successful chess player and one terrific family man who adores Mykelti and their children.

Introduction Scenes Caused a Buzz

Tony’s less-than-stellar introduction to Sister Wives certainly caused a buzz. But Mykelti marrying a chess wiz and all-around nice guy would not have gathered the drama that Tony’s wedding planning did. So, like a lot of other stuff seen on this show, fans believe he was introduced this way to spark the viewer’s interest, which it did.

Jump to Sister Wives today, and Tony has finally emerged as a likeable guy. Sure, he seems to lack that filter that stops him from blurting out what he is thinking before weighing the consequences first.

Christine described her son-in-law this way during one of the recent seasons. Talking about a lack of a filter, Kody Brown tends to have the same missing filter as well. So the family is likely used to this.

Sister Wives: Few Rocks Left Unturned

Today, many fans believe Tony brings out the best in Mykelti, and she does the same for him. Fans see them focus on being great parents. And from all their posts, it seems that they spend a lot of time with their kids.

They have a huge social media following, with fans flocking to hear what this couple has to say about the Brown family.

And as the video above suggests, Mykelti and Tony are not shy when it comes to sharing tidbits about Kody and the Brown family’s polygamous lifestyle of yesteryear. They leave very few rocks unturned when it comes to Kody.

This makes their posts very much sought after by the Sister Wives fans today. But no matter what topic these two share with their fans, there’s no doubt about it, they are living a life very much the opposite of Mykelti’s childhood.

Head back to Soap Dirt for the latest buzz on Sister Wives.

Federal investigators are putting up a $25,000 reward for information that eventually leads to the arrest of a Texas man who’s an alleged member of “Greggy’s Cult,” an online child exploitation enterprise that used social media and gaming platforms to exploit kids between 2019 and 2021.

Austin Jan Sy Yatco is wanted for conspiracy to produce, receive, and distribute child pornography, according to the FBI.

Federal investigators have alleged members of the “Greggy’s Cult” group, like Yatco, convinced minors they met online into filming themselves in a sexual manner, and later shared the material with the entire network.

“Greggy’s Cult” had existed long before a similar extremist online group known as “764,” the FBI noted.

764 is an infamous online sextortion network of pedophiles known for engaging in the coordinated grooming and coercive exploitation of vulnerable children, according to the FBI.

Related: Feds Arrest 2 Men Connected to Violent Extremist 764 Sextortion Ring

Federal authorities last week arrested two young men they claim have ties to an infamous online sextortion network of pedophiles that engages in the coordinated grooming and coercive exploitation of vulnerable children. The Department of Justice identified the men as Matthew Edward Pysher and Bryant Najera Gonzalez. Both men were arrested in Los Angeles, though […]

Advertisement

“These networks are known to target vulnerable children globally, often extorting them into self-harm, animal cruelty, and in some instances, suicide attempts,” reads an FBI statement.

A federal arrest warrant has been active for Yatco, 26, since January 23, officials said.

Yatco, according to the FBI, has longstanding ties to the Plano, Texas, area, and lived there for a time before fleeing the United States. He also has ties in the Philippines, where authorities suspect he’s currently hiding out.

“The FBI continues to prioritize the investigation of predators that threaten the safety of our children,” said R. Joseph Rothrock, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Dallas Field Office. “We are committed to apprehending Austin Yatco, bringing justice to his victims, and preventing future abuse.”

While the investigation is being led by the FBI’s Dallas Field Office, Yatco will be prosecuted in a federal court in Brooklyn, New York.

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

Advertisement

Related: Woman Arrested on Child Trafficking, Sexual Assault Charges at Nightclub

A woman in Texas has been arrested on child trafficking and sexual assault charges, and she was taken into custody after police tracked down her location at a nightclub through her social media posts. Officers with the Laredo Police Department arrested Elvira Yakelin Martinez on March 22 at the nightclub after authorities received information about […]

The FBI has asked that anyone who may have information about Yatco’s whereabouts contact the Dallas Field Office at (972) 559-5000 or call 1-800-CALL-FBI. Tips may also be submitted online at tips.fbi.gov or at any U.S. Embassy or Consulate. All tips can remain anonymous.

Parents, teachers, and guardians interested in learning more about protecting children from exploitation can find useful tools and information at Know2Protect.

If you know of a young person who is being exploited or are the victim of a crime, you are urged to report it to your local FBI field office by calling 1-800-CALL-FBI. Tips can also be left at tips.fbi.gov.

By Chris Snellgrove
| Published 53 seconds ago

Star Trek is a long-running franchise filled with tropes, some of them more annoying than others. For many fans, the dumbest trope that keeps popping up is when there’s only one ship that can save Earth from one catastrophe or another. It always begs the question: why isn’t the seat of the United Federation of Planets better protected? It certainly feels like such an important planet would have its own fleet for protection rather than relying on a long-range vessel like the Enterprise to warp in and save the day.

However, it seems that Star Trek’s scariest episode might have secretly answered fans’ oldest complaint about the franchise. Over on Reddit, user u/Wallname_Liability presented a compelling theory: that in the Star Trek: The Next Generation two-parter “The Best of Both Worlds,” the collection of Starfleet vessels lost fighting the Borg at Wolf 359 was the home fleet. This theory would help explain that Earth was typically better-defended than we might imagine and why there were fewer ships to protect the planet in later movies and shows.

My Borg Friend’s Back (And There’s Gonna Be Trouble)

In Star Trek: The Next Generation, most of the adventures take place in deep space because the intrepid crew has an ongoing mission to explore strange new worlds, seek out new life and new civilizations, and (come on, you know you’re already saying it out loud) boldly go where no one has gone before. But in “The Best of Both Worlds,” a Borg Cube starts heading directly for Earth. The Enterprise crew tries to develop a weapon that can defeat this implacable foe, one who seems nearly unstoppable after they assimilate Captain Picard. Meanwhile, a fleet of Starfleet ships assembles at Wolf 359 for one last stand against the Borg.

Unfortunately, that entire fleet is wiped out. The Borg makes it to Earth, but the Enterprise manages to stop these bionic baddies after rescuing Captain Picard. Data exploits Picard’s connection to the Collective and puts the cube to “sleep,” and it explodes soon after that. Picard and his crew get a mostly happy ending, but the same can’t be said for the crew of the ships that fought at Wolf 359. All vessels were lost, and only a handful of people survived, including Benjamin Sisko and Liam Shaw. 

Resistance Was Futile

According to this Redditor’s theory, the fleet that assembled at Wolf 359 was the home fleet assigned to (among other things) protect Earth. Some of the ships were likely already at Earth (possibly undergoing repairs or retrofits), and others might have been located near some of humanity’s older colonies. But everyone would have had to have been close enough to Earth to quickly warp to Wolf 359, a real star system that is only eight light-years from humanity’s home planet.

Why is the idea that this was the home fleet so important? In various Star Trek episodes and films, there has often only been one ship (usually the Enterprise) close enough to save Earth. In Star Trek: Generations, for example, the Enterprise-B is on a shakedown cruise, but it’s the only ship close enough to save the El-Aurian refugees from the threat of the Nexus. In Star Trek: The Motion Picture, only the Enterprise can intercept V’ger. In Nemesis, the Enterprise is the only Starfleet ship capable of preventing Shinzon from killing everyone on Earth, and so on.

The Best Of Trope Worlds

This trope can get frustrating when you start comparing Starfleet to, say, the United States Navy. How insane would it be if the whole country had to keep relying on a single ship to save us from major existential threats? Star Trek asks us to repeatedly believe that there’s only one ship within spitting distance of the entire solar system that can take care of the crisis du jour. It’s completely unbelievable, but this Wolf 359 home fleet theory helps make these frustrating moments make more sense. 

It’s entirely possible that, in the time of Star Trek: The Original Series and its spinoff movies, there wasn’t a home fleet. Starfleet was a lot smaller back then. Remember, the original Enterprise was one of only 12 Constitution-class vessels. However, both The Motion Picture and The Voyage Home had Earth being attacked by seemingly unstoppable alien forces. In each case, the only man who could stop things was James T. Kirk, but Starfleet must have known he wouldn’t be around forever. Therefore, sometime before The Next Generation premiered, they developed a home fleet that could protect the Earth from overpowered alien attackers.

The Worst Massacre In Starfleet History

Or so they thought. The Borg wiped the floor with the fleet at Wolf 359, which helps to explain why the admiralty needed to assemble an ersatz fleet in First Contact. They were still rebuilding from earlier losses, and most spare vessels were probably being ordered to areas of interest as the Dominion War loomed near. Speaking of which, that war is the most likely reason that the Enterprise was the only ship that could help in Nemesis. The movie took place four years after the Dominion War ended, and once more, Starfleet would have needed time to fully rebuild its fleet.

Obviously, these are only theories, but they are compelling ones. It makes sense that Starfleet would have learned its lessons from V’ger and the Alien Probe and developed a home fleet, only for it to be destroyed by the Borg at Wolf 359. Afterward, the next big Borg attack and the Dominion War destroyed many vessels, all while requiring the existing fleet to stretch that much thinner. Fortunately, Earth was in good hands. No matter how bad the war with the Dominion got, Captain Sisko and Admiral Ross ensured that there was always a fleet or two close enough to protect paradise, even from those pesky Breen.

By TeeJay Small
| Published 2 seconds ago

Paramount Pictures dropped an announcement trailer for their upcoming film, Focker In-Law, last week, and it immediately caught my attention. As you can probably tell from the title alone, the film is the fourth installment in the Meet The Parents film series, which originally kicked off in 2000. While I loved the original film and enjoyed parts of the 2004 sequel, I can’t help but feel frustrated that we’re getting the exact same movie for the fourth time. From the trailer, it looks like Focker In-Law promises to add some comedic beats from Ariana Grande, but little else.

A Strong Start And Slow Decline

In case you’re not hip to the franchise, the original Meet the Parents tells a very straightforward comedic story of an obnoxious, anxious man named Gaylord Focker (Ben Stiller), as he encounters his girlfriend’s family for the very first time. Focker wants to take this opportunity to get the family’s blessing to propose, but he’s mired by a series of misunderstandings and social faux pas at every turn. To make matters worse, Focker must contend with his girlfriend’s domineering ex-CIA father, Jack (Robert De Niro).

The second film, Meet The Fockers, introduces some fresh talent, flips the script on Jack a little bit by taking him out of his comfort zone, and ratchets up the tension as the happy couple navigate their upcoming wedding and a premarital pregnancy. It’s sort of unnecessary, but it’s a harmless way to squeeze more laughs out of a pretty simple premise. Then, in 2010, we got Little Fockers, which produced absolutely no memorable moments whatsoever. Seriously, Ben Stiller even took to X this week to say “I stand by the first two” installments in the franchise, ignoring the third film entirely.

The Same Old Jokes For A New Generation

Now, it looks like we’re due for the same material a fourth time with Focker In-Law. Greg Focker is still an awkward, bumbling mess, while the aging Jack flexes his people skills and dunks on his son-in-law for having a stupid last name. Meanwhile, a new generation of Focker men have emerged, with Greg’s son Henry (Skyler Gisondo) planning to propose to his girlfriend, Olivia Jones (Ariana Grande). From the trailer, it looks like Grande plays an FBI hostage negotiator, who wishes to pry Focker Jr. away from his emotionally topsy-turvy family in favor of a life of relative normalcy.

Will I watch this movie as soon as it comes out? Almost certainly. But will I have any memory of seeing it within hours of leaving the theater? I’ve got my doubts. The truth is, Focker In-Law could have been an opportunity to completely reshape the characters in fun and exciting ways. We could have had Greg really come into his own with age, assuming a more confident and bullish attitude. We could have even seen him and Jack get on the same page for once, and work together to test Ariana Grande’s worthiness to enter the coveted “circle of trust.”

Instead, it seems like we’re due for another 90 minutes of Robert De Niro rolling his eyes at Ben Stiller, and conflicts driven by characters who refuse to sit down and explain themselves in plain English. The trailer reveals that even minor side characters from the other film are returning to do their same schtick. I’m not mad about Focker In-Law basically recycling the Meet The Parents script for the fourth time, but I am a bit disappointed, since I know for a fact that Stiller, De Niro, and the others are capable of putting out something much stronger.

In fairness, this is all a reaction to a single trailer. There’s an extremely minute chance that Focker In-Law subverts all my expectations, and delivers a new comedy classic that can hold its own. There’s a similarly likely chance that the earth is obliterated by a meteor before the film hits theaters, but I won’t be holding my breath either way. If this film is what Ben Stiller needs to finance a third season of Severance, then I’m content to buy 50 tickets and give Focker In-Law the best damn opening weekend I can.

The Pitt has never exactly been a show that lets its characters breathe easy, but Dr. Robby’s Season 2 ending still hit especially hard. After everything he’d been carrying, the image of him holding Baby Jane Doe felt like the kind of moment designed to send fans spiraling into theory mode. Maybe this was a turning point. Maybe he was finally choosing life over burnout. Maybe, in the wildest version of that idea, he was somehow about to become her foster parent. As it turns out, that last part is very much not happening.

Speaking to TVLine, creator R. Scott Gemmill shut down the Baby Jane Doe adoption theory pretty quickly. Asked if there was any world where Robby (Noah Wyle) is fostering the baby in Season 3, Gemmill said, “No. We joked about it — cutting to him on his motorcycle with the baby in a Baby Bjorn — but no. Whether we follow up with Baby Jane Doe remains to be seen, but he’s got his hands full with his spirit quest.”

He also confirmed that Robby does go through with that trip, adding, “No, he ends up going. In those final moments with the baby, Robby finally puts her down and decides to go. Part of it is, he feels he has to go now because he’s talked about it for so long. One of the things we play in Season 3 is that he comes back, but he doesn’t come back to the hospital right away.”

What Can We Expect From ‘The Pitt’ Season 3?

Gemmill also said Season 3 will center on Robby “definitely putting in the work, doing the work, and trying to heal — and needing the work that he hasn’t put in himself.” That all points to a pretty different start for Robby next season than fans may have expected. Gemmill confirmed The Pitt will make a four-month jump and begin in November, which gives the series a colder setting and a little more breathing room without leaping too far ahead. He told TVLine:

“We’re only going to do a four-month jump. We’ll start in November. That serves a lot of purposes for us. It gives us some cold-weather scenarios, but also allows us to keep people a little longer who would normally be moving on, if we want. Sometimes those big jumps aren’t always ideal. There’s a lot of information you have to catch up on, so this way it’s less of a dump.”

The Pitt streams on HBO Max.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Release Date

January 9, 2025

Network

Max

Advertisement

Showrunner

R. Scott Gemmill

Advertisement

Directors

Amanda Marsalis

Writers

Advertisement

Joe Sachs, Cynthia Adarkwa

Advertisement

• 

  Noah Wyle

  Dr. Michael ‘Robby’ Robinavitch

  Advertisement
• 

  Tracy Ifeachor

  Dr. Heather Collins

  Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Days of Our Lives 2-week spoilers for April 20 – May 1, 2026 stun as Kristen DiMera (Stacy Haiduk) is getting violent and Jeremy Horton (Michael Roark) being totally smitten.

Days of our Lives Spoilers Monday, April 20th: Theo Leaves His Journal Behind

On Monday, April 20th, we’ve got Theo Carver (Cameron Johnson) journaling at the pub and then Gabi Hernandez (Cherie Jimenez) shows up and joins him. So, Theo is being really open with her. They’re having a nice conversation and after he and Gabi talk for a while, Theo takes off, but he accidentally leaves his journal behind. Gabi notices it under the menu, but Theo’s already gone. Gabi turns it around and sees that Theo was writing about his feelings about her.

Plus, Cat Greene (AnnaLynne McCord) talks with Rafe about the DiMera honeypot and EJ DiMera‘s (Dan Feuerriegel) sick scheme. Chad DiMera‘s return as Connor Floyd debuts in the recast role could throw Cat’s honeypot plan off. Stephanie Johnson (Abigail Klein) turns to Jeremy for comfort again.

And we have Stephanie walking out on Alex Kiriakis (Robert Scott Wilson) for a second time and again leaning on Jeremy. The baby stuff with Trey and the talk about kids and Chad, I think it was just too much for Stephanie and Alex both. Plus, Chanel Dupree DiMera (Raven Bowens) and Lani are excited to see each other. And this, of course, is right as the breast lump crisis is emerging. So, Chanel and Lani spend time catching up.

DOOL Spoilers Tuesday, April 21st: New Chad Debuts

Tuesday, April 21st, we’ve got Cat shocked to see new Chad in Salem with new Thomas and the same Charlotte. Connor Floyd and Alexander Boyd make their debuts as Chad and Thomas DiMera officially on Tuesday, but we may get a glimpse of them on Monday. Autumn Gendron resumes the role of Chad’s daughter. She hasn’t changed.

Gabi and Philip Kiriakis (John-Paul Lavoisier) enjoy some romance, but is Theo going to be on Gabi’s mind after she read his journal? Of course, she loves Philip, but Gabi’s dirty corporate secret could break them the moment it comes out.

Also, EJ kicks Gwen Rizczech (Emily O’Brien) out of the DiMera mansion with her divorce from Dimitri Von Leuschner (Peter Porte). She’s not a DiMera, and EJ’s had it with her sexing Xander Cook Kiriakis (Paul Telfer) all over his house. EJ tossing Gwen out may frustrate Xander, though, because he was spying while over there fooling around with Gwen. Meanwhile, Leo Stark (Greg Rikkart) is drunk on wine and stalking Javi’s new boyfriend online.

Days Spoilers: Leo Grills Gwen

Also, Leo chats up his ex bestie, Gwen. Leo’s trying to dig out info about EJ now that Gwen is annoyed because EJ booted her from the mansion. Leo starts prodding in, you know, poking around saying that Gwen lived under the same roof as EJ. You know, she was around the science lab. Leo wants to know what Gwen knows.

But is she going to tattle on EJ? That would be crazy if she did. Later, Leo takes Gwen back to his room at the Salem Inn. Theo meanwhile hopes his mom Lexie Carver (Nikki Crawford) finally wakes up and Theo is again sitting vigil at her bedside holding his mom’s hand and kissing it and praying for her to wake up.

Days of our Lives Spoilers Wednesday, April 22nd: Lani Checks in with Kristen

Wednesday, April 22nd, Lani Price (Sal Stowers) checks in with Kristen now that she’s back in Salem to stay. Eli and twins Jules and Carver are also going to be with them, but we don’t have a spoiler on when their air dates will be. Kate Robert’s (Lauren Koslow) tells Roman Brady (Josh Taylor) some more lies. Kate set up Johnny DiMera (Carson Boatman).

She humiliated Bonnie Kiriakis (Judi Evans) at the book launch. She embarrassed Julie Williams (Susan Seaforth) as well, so Kate should be worried. Roman is going to be livid once Kate’s lies are exposed. Marlena Evans (Diedre Hall) asked Xander some hard questions, and I wonder if he’s going to confess he saw Sarah Horton (Linsey Godfrey) and Brady Black (Eric Martsolf) are closer. Marlena may point out Xander’s hypocrisy since he’s been sleeping with Gwen for a while.

Sophia Choi (Rachel Boyd) and Tate Black (Leo Howard) argue. She’s still aggravated at Tate because he’s still with Holly Jonas (Ashley Puzemis) and Tate still wants Sophia in prison for drugging him and Holly. Johnny DiMera (Carson Boatman) takes action about Chanel’s health. I wonder if Johnny’s going to press Chanel to get an appointment or maybe Johnny just goes around Chanel and calls Sarah Horton (Linsey Godfrey) and tells her about the breast lump and has her schedule a mammogram because she orders an ASAP radiology test.

Thursday, April 23rd: May Sweeps Kicks Off On DOOL

Then on Thursday, April 23rd, May sweeps kicks off. We’ve got new Chad questioning Gwen and it may be about her living at the mansion and being around EJ a lot. Chad is not exactly a big fan of Gwen’s.

Julie and Jeremy talk and I wonder if he’ll tell Julie that Stephanie keeps turning to him. Julie may warn Jeremy not to get that attached to a married woman. You know, don’t make anything of this. Michael Roark’s last air date on Days of our Lives is April 29th.

Leo invites Javi Hernandez (Al Calderone) out to do something with him. I can’t imagine that he’ll say yes to anything like a date with Leo since Javi’s got a new guy. I’m kind of expecting a polite refusal. Stephanie gets a firearm lesson from her dad, Steve.

I’m a little worried Stephanie may shoot somebody by accident, even with Steve’s lesson. Hopefully Stephanie doesn’t put a bullet in Alex. Meanwhile, EJ is totally blindsided. This could be about his dad Stefano’s will or something to do with Chad.

Friday, April 24th: Joy Wesley Returns to Days

Friday, April 24th, Sarah tears into Xander. He may be prodding her about getting closer to Brady. Might be about dodgy dealings at Titan if Maggie Horton (Suzanne Rogers) vented to Sarah about him and Kate doing dubious deeds. Alex and Stephanie start to smooth some of the issues over in their relationship.

But then she leaves to run an errand, and Alex answers a knock at the door thinking Stephanie left her keys. But it’s not his wife. It’s Joy Wesley (AlexAnn Hopkins), his baby mama. And of course, he has no idea about the infant that she should have that should be a couple of months old by now.

Brady is angry, but probably not totally surprised to hear the awful accusations that Kristen slung at his stepmom, Marlena. So, Doc may try to calm Brady down, but he may see that he needs to find a permanent solution to the Kristen problem, maybe just getting her out of all their lives.

And speaking of her, EJ is angry to get a slap in the face from his psycho sister Kristen. And unhinged sociopath Sophia gets a kill order. Kristen calls Sophia and orders her to take the shot. No emotion, no mess. Presumably, this is about killing Johnny.

Week of April 27th-May 1st: First Full Week of May Sweeps on Days of our Lives Spoilers

The week of April 27th through May 1st is the first full week of May sweeps. And of course, Joy Wesley’s back and we should get a glimpse of her baby pretty soon. I wonder if she named the kid Alex Jr. or if it was a girl, maybe Alexandria. That would be kind of interesting.

Stefano DiMera (Joseph Mascolo) will reading is going to have surprises in store for EJ, for Kristen, Chad, Johnny, possibly Theo, and others. Interested to see if Tony DiMera (Thaao Penghlis) and Anna DiMera (Leann Hunley) make it home for it.

Lexie is due to wake up. Long overdue, honestly. And since this is the first full week of sweeps, it’s the perfect time with Theo giving up his job and basically sitting vigil at her bedside. EJ’s gotten everything that he wanted with this Lexie thing.

Now, I don’t think that he’s running some kind of con on Theo. Like seriously, you know, EJ loves Lexie. Doesn’t love Kristen, but he does love Lexie. And I do think he is making a good faith effort to wake her up and give her and Theo time together, the life together they were cheated out of.

Days Spoilers: Cat & Chad Still Doomed

Cat’s still hot for Chad, but unless Thomas changes his tune, Chad still can’t date Cat. Plus, Leo and Gwen may be roommates. We’ll find out if Dimitri leaves Salem quietly or lurks to make more trouble. And until Gwen gets her divorce settlement, she may be broke and really need a place to live. And Michael Roark exits Salem as Jeremy Horton in this week. So, his plan was to head back to New York to see his dad, Mike. We’ll see if that comes to fruition.

Fans of “Euphoria” are calling for the cancellation of the show over the introduction of more provocative scenes.

The backlash is largely focused on Sydney Sweeney’s character, Cassie Howard, who in the new season takes on the lifestyle of an OnlyFans creator. Creator Sam Levinson has yet to address the criticism directly, but has previously defended his work, saying we live in a “sexualized world.”

Sydney Sweeney herself has also not responded, though she has previously shown that she has no issue playing the role.

Sydney Sweeney Appeared In More Provocative Scenes For Season 3

After waiting four years for the third season of “Euphoria,” fans of the show have expressed dissatisfaction with how creator Sam Levinson chose to portray Sydney Sweeney’s character,  Cassie Howard.

Some critics have accused the show of leaning into “disturbing” and “misogynistic” storylines, in relation to how Sweeney’s character is featured in even more provocative scenes than in previous seasons.

In one scene, the actress is dressed as an adult baby with her legs spread upwards in a seductive manner, while another shows her styled as a dog on a leash, wearing only lingerie to cover her body.

She is also featured in other revealing scenarios, including one where ice cream drips down her chest and another where she is wrapped in a soaking wet, see-through American flag.

In yet another scene, she is shown wearing only a nude thong for what appears to be a baseball-themed shoot.

See some of the scenes here.

Sydney Sweeney Was Criticized For Acting The Provocative Scenes

Beyond the criticism of Levinson writing such scenes into the script, most fans struggled to understand why Sweeney agreed to perform them despite their highly provocative nature.

A user asked, “How is Sydney even agreeing to do this season of Euphoria?” while another said, “Why would Sydney agree to doing allat… weird.”

One netizen, who, like many others, described the scenes as a “humiliation ritual,” also claimed they could no longer bear seeing Sweeney in such situations.

“Please god i cant keep seeing Cassie degrade herself in the most embarrassing ways imaginable,” the individual noted.

One other person called for the outright cancellation of the show, while questioning the essence of the new storyline.

Syndey Sweeney Was Excited About Her Character On The Show’s Third Season

On her part, Sweeney appeared to have no issues acting out the scenes, as she gushed about her character during the premiere of season three.

“I mean, Cassie’s a crazy character,” the actress told Entertainment Tonight at the time. “She will do anything and at all costs to be famous this season, and she makes a lot of very wild and interesting choices.”

She has also previously talked about her raunchy scenes, noting that she doesn’t have a problem playing such roles, while calling out a “stigma” against actresses who appear nude on screen.

The New Season Has Suffered Poor Reviews From Critics

Amid the backlash from fans, “Euphoria” season three has also been poorly received by movie critics.

The New York Post described the storyline as “lazy writing,” adding that it “sacrifices depth for absurdity.”

“For Zendaya, Elordi and Sweeney, ‘Euphoria’ launched them into stardom, and now it brought them back for material that doesn’t meet their talents,” read the outlet’s review.

Ben Travers of IndieWire described the show’s plot as “maddeningly inert” compared to previous seasons.

He added, “Most characters aren’t changing, nor are their motivations to change clear to them or novel to us. The result is a start to the supposedly final season that grows old instead of up, while evoking a once-unthinkable question: How could ‘Euphoria’ become boring?”

Meanwhile, season three of “Euphoria” is currently the lowest-rated season of the series on Rotten Tomatoes, sitting at 40%, which is approximately half the rating of seasons one and two.

‘Euphoria’ Creator Previously Defended The Explicit Nature Of His Work

Levinson has not directly responded to the criticism targeting his show, but he likely has no plans to change his style, given the defense of his work at the 2023 Cannes Film Festival.

At the time, he shared that his work reflects the reality of young teenagers today, particularly how they are often interested in exploring their sexuality through exposure to pornographic material.

“We live in a very sexualized world,” he said at the festival. “The influence of pornography is really strong in terms of the psyche of young people.”

For now, only two of the season’s eight episodes have been released, with the next expected to debut on April 26, followed by weekly releases until the finale.

By Jennifer Asencio
| Published 17 seconds ago

As more material based in the world in which The Lord of the Rings takes place gets made, more entertainment pundits and fans are referring to Middle-earth and everything in it as a “franchise.” This is a travesty of entertainment that was even decried by Christopher Tolkien, son of the story’s creator, JRR. Middle-earth has been the inspiration for almost all modern fantasy, most notably the tabletop role-playing game Dungeons & Dragons, but calling The Lord of the Rings and its associated worldbuilding a franchise is a cynical attempt to pardon weak and uncreative attempts to add to it by modern filmmakers.

Tolkien’s son famously did not enjoy the original Peter Jackson trilogy’s telling of the quest to destroy the One Ring. In a 2012 interview with the French newspaper Le Monde, Christopher decried the films for a variety of reasons, including the commercialization of The Lord of the Rings for pop culture, which he felt betrayed the essence of his father’s work. “The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, have overwhelmed me.”

How The Hobbit Stretched Tolkien

The younger Tolkien said this just in time for the release of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, the first of the Lord of the Rings films to contain source material Tolkien didn’t write. Young Tolkien’s statements were about the original trilogy, which he felt overshadowed the books and thus subsumed them as the authoritative version of the story, but The Hobbit trilogy only made that worse. It expanded a single book into three movies that were as long as their predecessors, each covering one book apiece.

To stretch the single book The Hobbit into a trilogy, writers like Phillipa Boyens added plots that JRR Tolkien never intended. This included the infamous love triangle between Legolas, Kili, and Tauriel, the latter played by Evangeline Lilly, who only joined the cast on the condition she would not be inserted into a gratuitous love triangle. That she finished filming the trilogy despite this blatant betrayal is either a remarkable sign of Lilly’s patience or of the power of her movie contract.

Rings Of Power Took A Bad Idea And Ran With It

Rings of Power took the technique of adding extraneous and original characters and subplots into the established lore and ran with it faster than Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli ran to Rohan. The most blatant of these new additions is the constant attempts to give Galadriel a love interest despite lore linking her to Celeborn in a marriage lasting thousands of years and no established history of her being with anyone else. They even matched her in the second season of the show with a character who turned out to be Sauron.

Many of the new characters are also gratuitous, including an Orc protagonist, despite canon that is clear that Orcs are corrupted former elves (this is an oversimplified explanation about which Tolkien wrote entire books). Races that don’t have the variety of humans are given that variety anyway, especially if the character it is given to is in a position to lead or be a hero. These characters wouldn’t be an issue except that they were not the world Tolkien wrote; they are imposed upon Tolkien’s world by the lack of respect for his source material.

Tolkien Under Fire From Activists

Tolkien’s source material has been attacked by commentators before, including the 50^th anniversary edition of the game Dungeons & Dragons. In that book, the publishers at Wizards of the Coast denounced the creators of the game for misogyny, racism, and themes of colonialism and slavery.

Lord of the Rings had so much inspiration on Dungeons & Dragons that the game had to replace hobbits with Halflings to avoid a lawsuit for copyright infringement (and even then, the names of the different Halfling races are very similar to those of The Shire). This close adherence by D&D to Tolkien’s vision opened the author and his works to the same accusations, especially since the minions of Sauron include men who seem to be based on North African and Indian soldiers.

The Importance Of Skin Color In Middle-earth

These accusations are therefore “answered” by subverting all the racial elements of the show, both those that are real-world and those that are fantasy. Protagonist Orcs are not something Tolkien would have designed, especially in a prequel to the main series that takes place so long before it, when Orcs were new.

All Elves were fair, because those who were “dark” never saw the Light of the Two Trees of Valinor; this is in Tolkien’s Middle-earth history, The Silmarillion. With the wide variety of human skin tone variants present among Men, Dwarves, and Harfoots (the predecessors to hobbits), inserting real-world identity politics on the Orcs and Elves is more of a rebellion against Tolkien and his perceived transgressions than it is “inclusive.”

Upcoming Middle-earth Transgressions

Two new Lord of the Rings projects are expected in the next year or two: The Hunt for Gollum and Shadows of the Past. The Hunt for Gollum is about the period between The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring, as Aragorn tracks the doomed hobbit-creature in the search for the One Ring before anyone knows Bilbo has it. The problem with this script, directed by original Gollum actor Andy Serkis, is that Philippa Boyens and her co-writers are essentially making it up. This particular period in Middle-earth’s history isn’t detailed in any of the books; it’s only alluded to through secondhand information from Gandalf when he visits The Shire for the One Ring.

Shadows of the Past, written by Boyens, Stephen Colbert, and his son, Peter McKee, at least relies on source material to tell its story. There were a few chapters of The Fellowship of the Ring that were left out of the movie, particularly the adventures in the Barrow Downs and the party’s encounter with Bugs Bunny cartoon Tom Bombadil. However, unable to resist adding yet more of their own garnishes to Tolkien’s work, the trio have reportedly framed this story around Sam’s daughter, well after the trilogy takes place, who will be solving a mystery from the past.

How Calling Lord Of The Rings A Franchise Allows Hollywood To Ruin It

Calling Lord of the Rings a franchise is the backhanded technique that these writers think allows them to alter and add to Tolkien’s work. If a collection of stories is a franchise, it gives other creators permission to have their say about it, especially in film.

Most people haven’t read much more than The Hobbit or the trilogy, if they even got through all of that. The Silmarillion is a famously tough read, and Tolkien’s many other histories of his fantasy world are more like notes than prose. So most people wouldn’t recognize that these works have been altered, since, as Christopher observed, most people take the films as the definitive canon. In this way, The Lord of the Rings has been appropriated from its creator.

The fact is, until Peter Jackson got hold of it, The Lord of the Rings was the sole work of Tolkien. To write it, he leaned on his research of Icelandic sagas and Anglo-Saxon poetry, like Beowulf and Arthurian legend.

Tolkien wrote his novels and his histories of Middle-earth in the style of these sagas, complete with their triumphs, tragedies, wars, and romances. Tolkien modernized the concept of the saga, but he did so without turning the storytelling style into a franchise by creating his own original work.

Hollywood Is Rationalizing Theft

Those insisting that Lord of the Rings is a franchise are thus rationalizing the theft of Tolkien’s world from its author. The worst part is that this theft isn’t because of anything the author did wrong except not be a writer in the 2020s.

The changes that Boyens and her compatriots have made to the series are all there to apply presentism to the saga by adapting the content to their own tastes rather than presenting Tolkien’s work as it stands. There are too many themes of the series they deem “offensive” for them to present the source material accurately, so what we have gotten since the original, Oscar-winning trilogy are several Tolkien fanfictions with Mary Sue self-insertions.

Controlling Lord Of The Rings Corrupts Everyone Who Uses It

Control of the Lord of the Rings saga is just like the One Ring, and as happens to everyone who touches the One Ring (except maybe Sam Gamgee), it has corrupted those in power with their own egos. They think they can do better than Tolkien, but they can’t, so they pardon this with the cynical label of “franchise.”

The slop eaters let them get away with it because slop eaters will eat anything the producers tell them to, even when it attacks and subverts a thoroughly established canon. It’s up to the rest of us to remind Hollywood that Middle-earth is not a franchise, lest it continue to grow into the commercial nightmare JRR’s son feared.

By Jonathan Klotz
| Published 7 seconds ago

Streaming has turned countless theatrical bombs into hits. Morbius and Madame Web had value as movies that were ”so bad they’re good,” but it’s likely even Angelina Jolie forgot she starred in Life or Something Like It. The 2002 romantic comedy drama was hated by critics, ignored by audiences, and managed to lose millions of dollars in theaters on its way to being forgotten, yet when it started streaming, it suddenly topped viewing charts on platforms like Netflix. 

Angelina Jolie Will Die In Seven Days

You’d be forgiven for thinking that Angelina Jolie made Life or Something Like It before she brought Lara Croft to the big screen in Tomb Raider, but the rom-com came in between the original and Cradle of Life, and only three years before Mr. and Mrs. Smith cemented her status as a major action star. The low-key rom-com has Jolie starring as Lanie Kerrigan, a local Seattle reporter filled with the type of ennui and emptiness about her life that marked so many early-2000s films, when she’s told by a street prophet (Tony Shalhoub) she’ll die in seven days.

The prophet is shown to be eerily correct throughout the film, predicting an earthquake at exactly 9:06 AM in San Francisco, and that an “Angel will fall from the sky,” which turns out to be a member of the Anaheim (now LA) Angels. The prediction is enough to get Lanie to try to turn her life around.

Though her hot baseball-playing boyfriend Cal (Angel’s Christian Kane) is useless, Pete (Edward Burns), the cameraman, is right there to share his philosophy of living each day to the fullest. Lanie finds herself falling in love with Pete’s weirdo charm and zest for life while pursuing her dream of becoming a national-level news anchor harder than ever. That’s the entire plot, and while Angelina Jolie tries to make Life or Something Like It into a hit through sheer willpower, the film, like Lanie, was doomed before opening day. 

The Worst Combination Since Pineapple And Pizza: Expensive And Boring

If you decide to watch the movie on streaming, keep in mind that this film had a budget of $40 million, and that was before the inescapable marketing campaign. With inflation, that would be close to $70 million today.

While Angelina Jolie was expensive to get for the film, Life or Something Like It cost $20 million more than the gorgeous Nosferatu remake and $30 million beyond Den of Thieves 2: Pantera, a film that managed to turn a profit, beloved by fans and critics, and was enough to secure a third film. There was no way Jolie’s film was going to turn a profit, even though it did beat The Ring and the “seven days until you die” plot to the punch by a few months. 

Angelina Jolie may be an A-list star with a string of blockbusters to her name, but like any performer, she has an equal number of flops in her filmography, and Life or Something Like It may be the most forgettable. That’s not to say the film is bad; Jolie does her absolute best to elevate it, but it’s completely forgettable, and today it would be a six-episode series on a streaming service. It’s a testament to her star power that has yet to dwindle after over 30 years in the spotlight that dropping one of her worst films on a streamer would turn it into a smash hit.

Life or Something Like It is currently streaming on Amazon Prime Video.