A message making rounds online has fans and critics going back and forth, and Chris Brown is right at the center of it. Ahead of his highly anticipated tour alongside Usher, the singer decided to address the chatter in a way that has the internet talking. While excitement for the shows continues to build, so does the conversation around who’s planning to pull up—and who isn’t.

RELATED: Whew! Chris Brown Slams Content Creator Over Disses About His Music & Past As Woman Linked To Viral Compliment Speaks Out

Taking to Instagram Stories, Chris Brown didn’t hold back, calling out critics who’ve been vocal about people attending the tour. He pointed out that folks have the choice to come or stay home, adding that fans of him and Usher are still expected to pack out venues just like before. He also took aim at what he described as “rage bait” pages and “fake woke” commentary, saying he finds it amusing that people are being criticized for simply wanting to enjoy themselves. In true Chris Brown fashion, he ended his message with a bold statement, saying he can’t wait to prove doubters wrong once the tour kicks off.

“The funniest and the weirdest sh*it ever to me is the fact that [people] have the option to come to my tour and the option not to. I know everyone who is a fan of me and USHER will definitely be in the building and it will be PACKED just like last year. But I’m scrolling through insta and tik tok and I come across rage bait pages and or these fake woke stand up for nothing pages bashing people for wanted to come have a good time. The dudes hating, I can understand that thinking we gone steal ya girl and sh*t. BUT THE KARENS, and the self hating h*es be making me LAUGH. I CANT WAIT TO RUB THIS SH*T IN YALL FACE,” the singer wrote.

Comments Go Off Over Breezy’s Message

Fans and critics ran straight to The Shade Room’s Instagram comment section and tore it up over Chris Brown’s message. Some said they’ve been pulling up to Breezy shows for years and don’t plan to stop. While others felt he should stop addressing the noise altogether. And of course, a few switched the convo real quick, saying forget the drama—let’s talk about those ticket prices.

One Instagram user @buffiebabyy commented “He prove them wrong everytime too 😂”

This Instagram user @bac_lik_i_neva_left added, “What about the prices Chris? Let’s address those 😩”

And, Instagram user @kweenmocha joked, “Chris said ‘how you hatin from outside the club?’“

Meanwhile, Instagram user @espesiallyk wrote, “Ion know but Chris has WAAAY TOO MUCH TALENT AND MONEY to even give AF“

Then Instagram user @brandii_amor said, “😂😂😂 this is Christopher speaking NOT CHRIS“

Lastly, Instagram user @amarya_amy claimed, “No wonder I love Beyoncé! She don’t address sh*t“

Chris Brown Keeps The Same Energy

You already know Chris Brown does not play when folks start speaking on his name—and he proved it again real quick. What started as him dropping a lil’ compliment under a woman’s post turned into a full comment-section showdown after a creator accused him of “thirsting” and brought up his past. Breezy wasted no time clapping back, hopping in the comments with jokes and straight-up jabs, even roasting the creator’s appearance and posting a wild reference pic to match. The creator fired back with his own claims, but Chris kept the same energy, laughing it off while throwing a few more words in the mix—because one thing about it, he’s never letting disrespect slide quietly.

RELATED: Fans Are Ready For Chris Brown & Usher To “Take Their Money” After Announcing Joint R&B Tour (REACTIONS)

The Old Guard is a superhero story meets covert ops and military, but without any capes or costumes. The superpowered beings at the heart of the film are a mysterious group of immortal beings, led by Andromache or “Andy” (Charlize Theron), who have secretly protected humanity for millennia. As they struggle to maintain their anonymity, they must also contend with the emergence of a new immortal, Nile (KiKi Layne). Together, the team faces both modern threats and age-old enemies in their quest to preserve secrecy about their identities and ensure security for the future.

Directed by Gina Prince-Bythewood, who previously created much quieter movies like The Secret Life of Bees and Beyond the Lights, The Old Guard has an emotional depth that you might not expect from a superhero action film. The themes of sacrifice and guilt are grounded by Theron’s stellar performance, as well as those of Matthias Schoenaerts, Marwan Kenzari, Luca Marinelli and Chiwetel Ejiofor. With its blend of thought-provoking elements and adrenaline-pumping action, The Old Guard offers a refreshing take on the genre, providing both entertainment and substance for viewers. A sequel is now streaming, so now is the perfect time to watch the original.

The Old Guard is streaming on Netflix.

Whew, Roommates! Social media has been flooded with questions after Joseline Hernandez called Zeus CEO Lemuel Plummer out in an emotional post. Joseline shared a series of lengthy message on social media, claiming Lemuel allegedly tried to harm her and sabotage her new streaming network, ‘Why Are You Here TV.’ Amid the allegations, Lemuel jumped online and seemingly denied the claims and set the record straight.

RELATED: Congrats! Scotty & Zeus CEO Lemuel Plummer Announce The Arrival Of Their Baby Girl (PHOTOS)

Joseline Calls Out Lemuel Plummer In Emotional Post

Joseline Hernandez raised eyebrows after put Lemuel Plummer on blast in a series of now-deleted messages. In the caption of her post, she asked fans for prayers and claimed Lemuel allegedly tried to put her and her unborn child in danger. From there, she accused him of cutting off her payments before she launched her own streaming app.

“AND I WANTED MORE FOR MY LIFE THAN JUST WHAT I HAD ITS ILLEGAL AND ITS JUST PLAIN EVIL. TELLING MY HUSBAND YOU WONT FUND OUR BUSINESS IS ILLEGAL. TELLING US TO TAKE OUR CONTENT DOWN IS ILLEGAL. WHILE IM PREGNANT IT IS EVIL.”

On top of that, Joseline also shared a photo of herself seemingly lying in a hospital bed on her Instagram Story. The photo doesn’t show her face, but it looks like her feet are visible as she appears to rest in the room. She claimed the stress dealing with Lemuel caused her to end up in the hospital. Swipe below to see the photo.

Lemuel Speaks Out & Addresses Joseline’s Payment Claims

Lemuel didn’t stay quiet — he jumped on his Instagram Story and shared messages of his own, seemingly clearing things up. He said Joseline’s outburst allegedly stems from “a breach of agreement” that they’ve tried to handle respectfully and privately. In a post, he told Joseline that “bullying and manipulation won’t work.” Additionally, he addressed her claims about not getting paid. He said she has received well beyond standard fees, plus extra support, opportunities, and residual payments. He also shut down any claims that he tried to harm her.

“I’ve never attempt to harm anyone, especially Joseline, who could probably beat me up anyway… and I’ve treated her and her her husband with respect.” 

Social Media Weighs In After Lemuel & Joseline Trade Words

Folks onlne wasted no time sharing their thoughts on Joseline and Lemuel’s exchange in The Shade Room’s comment section. Some people believe Lemuel, while others stood ten toes behind Joseline. Meanwhile, others stayed fire on following the terms in a contract. Peep some of the reactions below.

Instagram user @xiomaradagod wrote, “I love when he claps back , I miss when ppl were actually smart enough to use big words.” 

instagram user @melanin_dop3 wrote, “Sorry Joseline ion belive you 🥴🥴” 

While Instagram user @danibelllax wrote, “idk i feel like she’s being dramatic.” 

Then Instagram user @sha.kira.___ wrote, “Joseline who could😌 probably beat me up is HILARIOUSSSSSSS 🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂” 

Another Instagram user @smokyb0y wrote, “Surviving Zeus will be the biggest documentary of all time. It’s too much 😂😂😂” 

Instagram user @therealnayblanco wrote, “I believe Lemmy 🤷🏽‍♀️” 

While another Instagram user @yxng__d wrote, “WE BELIEVE YOU JOSELINE!!! This is her first time ever speaking out about this man, while Natalie and other casts members have been creating this narrative about lemmy!! Everybody can’t just be lying now 🤨” 

Then another Instagram user @freelifemike3 wrote, “He treating her how she treat the girls on her show, sounds fair to me. Don’t think you bigger than the program.” 

Finally, Instagram user @shaydaplugg wrote, “A contract is contract. Now she’s trying to pull a Pooh shiesty move 😂😂😂” 

RELATED: Baby On The Way! Joseline Hernandez Shares Exclusive Details About Pregnancy With Balistic Beats (PHOTOS) 

There is a new biopic out called Michael, and not too surprisingly, it is about Michael Jackson. The focus is more on his early years and rise to fame, starting in the 1960s and ending near the end of the 1980s, with the release of Bad and its subsequent tour. It was in production for a while, and had reshoots in 2025, which fueled speculation that it might be the first part of a duology. It would make some sense, given this film covers about two decades, and then ends about two decades before Jackson’s untimely death in 2009.

At best, it’s kind of just another music biopic, hitting all the predictable beats you’d expect and not really doing much beyond telling a story most fans (and maybe even a fair few casual listeners) will already know. At worst, it’s kind of more frustrating than something like Bohemian Rhapsody, which already felt too safe and sanitized in 2018, which was almost a decade ago now. Music biopics need to be a little more exciting, and so too do biopics in general, really. In the interest of highlighting some other not very good ones, these biographical movies are pretty lackluster, and are arguably worse than (the, again, not very good) Michael.

8

‘Wyatt Earp’ (1994)

Image via Warner Bros.

Wyatt Earp is most interesting for not being Tombstone, and for coming out only one year after that far superior film about the titular figure, Doc Holliday, and the gunfight at the O.K. Corral. Since Wyatt Earp is a good deal longer (and you really feel the length), it technically covers a little more than Tombstone, so it’s not like they feel like the same movie, just of different quality, but the approach taken overall for Tombstone was also flat-out better.

For present purposes, Wyatt Earp feels more like a biographical film, and it’s a bloated and poorly paced one, so that’s why it’s here. The hope, in all likelihood, was that it would be a Dances with Wolves-level hit, since that was another epic-length Western starring Kevin Costner from the 1990s, but Wyatt Earp also falls short of that one by a good deal. Watching it, you’re left with a feeling of regret about not picking either Tombstone or Dances with Wolves to watch instead.

7

‘Judy’ (2019)

Image via 20th Century Fox

Taking a similar approach to Michael as far as titles go, Judy (2019) is all about Judy Garland, who’s best known for her roles in various iconic movie musicals. However, Judy takes place near the end of Garland’s rather tragic life, showcasing her attempts to stage a comeback during what ended up being the final year of her life: 1969, exactly 30 years on from her most famous film, The Wizard of Oz.

It’s got that Wyatt Earp problem of making you wish you were watching something better instead, like The Wizard of Oz or another actual Judy Garland movie. The film kind of came and went, though Renée Zellweger was praised for her performance as Garland… for some reason? She goes very broad, and it almost feels a bit like a Saturday Night Live caricature has stumbled its way into a deathly serious and plodding drama. The film might’ve meant well, but it’s overdone on an acting front and then undercooked on all the other fronts, leaving Judy thoroughly unsatisfying and frustratingly dull in just about every way.

6

‘Mommie Dearest’ (1981)

Image via Paramount Pictures

With Mommie Dearest, it is a worse film about a famous actress than Judy, but it’s also the kind of bad that makes it more engaging – at least in bursts – than the drab and overall more tedious aforementioned film about Judy Garland. The central figure in Mommie Dearest is Joan Crawford, though things are seen from the perspective of Crawford’s adopted daughter, Christine, who wrote the memoir upon which Mommie Dearest was based.

The film is a feature-length excuse to let Faye Dunaway chew a lot of scenery, and she herself is a pretty forceful and sometimes hammy actress who is playing the also bold, uncompromising, and sometimes hammy Joan Crawford. It’s either great casting, or a total nightmare of too muchness, or maybe somewhere in between, as in the kind of thing you can flip back and forth between admiring, finding hilarious, and being bored by. It’s a dark film thematically, but the execution is very camp in a way where it’s hard to tell how much – or if any – of the comedy was supposed to be intentional.

5

‘The Iron Lady’ (2011)

Image via TWC

Advertisement

The Iron Lady is one of three movies that contain an Oscar-winning Meryl Streep performance, and it’s easily the worst of them. Streep is better in both Kramer vs. Kramer and Sophie’s Choice, and those are overall much stronger films, too. Admittedly, they’re not super comparable, beyond all the movies in this trio being “dramas,” since The Iron Lady was the only one of the three that required Streep to play a real-life figure: Margaret Thatcher, a divisive U.K. Prime Minister who held that position from 1979 until 1990.

She was to the U.K. what Ronald Reagan was to the U.S., and both leaders had vocal supporters and detractors. The Iron Lady is not terrible because of who Thatcher was or wasn’t, but because it is so very bland, clunky, tedious, and borderline useless. It offers little to no interesting insight into Thatcher or the period during which she led the U.K., and not even Streep really makes an impression. Actually, she does an impression. That’s all it is. She is impersonating Margaret Thatcher. It’s not an interesting performance, and it’s not a good performance. She is great in most movies she’s ever starred in, but not this one. It’s a joke of a film, and not even a funny joke at that.

4

‘Back to Black’ (2024)

Image via Focus Features

Advertisement

This is starting to feel like piling up on biopics about women, but the top 3 in this ranking are back to focusing on men, so along with Wyatt Earp, that’s four about men. And, nice and equally, four about women. More men, actually, since none of the words above have been particularly nice about Michael. It’s good to be all about equality, even when being negative about boring biopics.

Which is lots of preamble before begrudgingly getting to Back to Black, which is a film that has so little worth commenting on beyond the very obvious things that are wrong with it. It doesn’t do Amy Winehouse or her legacy justice, it fades into the background in terms of being boringly biopic-ey, and it exists in the shadow of Amy (2015), which is one of the best, heaviest, and most thought-provoking music documentaries of all time. Just watch that instead, or listen to Winehouse’s actual music. Or both. They’re both much better options than slogging through Back to Black.

3

‘The 15:17 to Paris’ (2018)

Image via Warner Bros. Pictures

Advertisement

Not everyone loved American Sniper, which is easily the most popular of Clint Eastwood’s directorial efforts of the past decade and a half, biopic-related or otherwise, but it looks like Lawrence of Arabia compared to The 15:17 to Paris. This one is about three real-life American men who thwarted a terrorist attack in 2015, and it also stars those three real-life figures, playing themselves.

Criticizing this movie is not intended to take away from their actual heroics, and yes, acting ability does not matter as much as what they were able to do in the moment. But the choice to have these non-actors play themselves backfired, as if you’re judging their acting, it’s not good, to say the least. They stand out alongside various professional actors who appear in supporting roles, and even more distractingly, some of these actors are best known for their comedic performances (like Judy Greer, Jenna Fischer, and Tony Hale). All that, plus a dud screenplay, adds up, and ensures The 15:17 to Paris is a pretty awful film, all things considered (unfortunately).

2

‘Stardust’ (2020)

David Bowie is a monumental enough figure that even just picking out one of his many eras to depict and explore in a film would be a mammoth task. Stardust focuses on his attempts to tour the U.S. right before he adopted his Ziggy Stardust persona, which is a pivotal and likely difficult era to capture even if you’ve got the rights to Bowie’s music and approval from his estate… which Stardust did not have.

So, if anyone ever wants to make a proper Bowie biopic one day, no one is going to be offended about you overshadowing Stardust. But it’s also probably futile to try, especially if you want to capture more than one era of Bowie (and there are so many different eras and personas, not to mention styles of music covered across a decades-spanning career). Stardust was just never really going to work, and it’s weird enough effort was put into it that it technically stands as a finished/released film.

1

‘Gotti’ (2018)

Image via Paamount Pictures

A movie has to be pretty bad to give Battlefield Earth a run for its money as the worst thing John Travolta has ever starred in, but Gotti is pretty darn bad. Battlefield Earth is probably more of an ambitious disaster, which makes it a bit more enjoyable, though Gotti is also clunky enough to be fairly entertaining at times, with Travolta bluntly stumbling his way through a very strange performance as notorious gangster John Gotti.

It’s not a constant source of unintentional comedy, yet there’s enough here to laugh at if, for whatever reason, you’re burned out on genuinely great gangster movies and want to watch some tasty trash. It’s up there (or down there?) as one of the worst crime movies in recent memory, and since it’s about a real-life criminal, it also stands as an all-time bad biopic, too.

Advertisement

Gotti

Advertisement

Release Date

June 14, 2018

Runtime

110 Minutes

Advertisement

Writers

Leo Rossi

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Netflix has an unusually heavy lineup of horror movies slated for April 2026, even if they may seem a little out of season.

Thankfully, there is some much-needed variety among the films despite their shared genre and near-simultaneous launch on Netflix.

To narrow things down, the Watch With Us team has selected three new Netflix movies to watch in April 2026, as ranked by IMDb.

Our selections include an original story, a legacy sequel and a follow-up to an acclaimed sci-fi/horror flick.

Related: New on Netflix in April 2026 — The Full List of Movies and TV Shows

Netflix just announced it’s increasing subscription prices for the second time in under two years, but the streamer has the content library and future slate to justify that move. Don’t believe me? Well, just check out what Netflix has scheduled to release in April 2026. Watch With Us has compiled the full list of all […]

3. ‘Him’ (2025)

IMDb rank: 5.0

How far would you be willing to go to be one of the greatest football players of all time? The horror flick Him puts that question to Cameron Cade (Tyriq Withers), an athlete who grew up idolizing Isaiah White (Marlon Wayans), the acclaimed quarterback of the San Antonio Saviors. Cameron has followed in his hero’s footsteps and become a college player who stands on the cusp of greatness.

When Cameron’s career is threatened by a head injury before he’s even taken the field, the Saviors and Isaiah offer him a chance to join the franchise and succeed his hero. What Cameron doesn’t realize is that accepting this contract will have a higher cost than he ever dreamed of. The Saviors and Isaiah have been hiding some big secrets for decades, and the price for their success is coming due. If Cameron wants to be a part of that tradition, he may have to turn his back on everything he’s ever believed in.

Him is now streaming on Netflix.

2. ‘Scream’ (2022)

IMDb rank: 6.3

You can tell that Scream was made before Jenna Ortega became a breakout star because her character, Tara Carpenter, barely gets any scenes outside of the extended prologue. But the attempt on Tara’s life is enough to draw her estranged half-sister, Sam Carpenter (Melissa Barrera), back to Woodsboro. The reason Sam ran away from her life is that she’s discovered her disturbing link to the original Ghostface murders three decades earlier, and someone is starting a new round of murders.

Advertisement

Related: Every ‘Scream’ Movie, Ranked

As inevitable as death and taxes is another Scream movie installment — but we’re not complaining. This weekend, Scream 7 graces theaters everywhere, and with it comes the exciting return of one of Scream‘s original actors, Neve Campbell, who returns to the franchise after skipping Scream VI. We couldn’t be more excited to herald the next chapter […]

It doesn’t take long for Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell), Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox) and Dewey Riley (David Arquette) to be drawn into the hunt for the new Ghostface killer. But they’re not just the hunters, they’re the prey. There’s nothing that the new killer would love more than to slaughter the original Woodsboro survivors, as well as the new generation of teens who find themselves on Ghostface’s kill list.

Scream is streaming on Netflix.

1. ‘A Quiet Place Part II’ (2021)

IMDb rank: 7.2

Thank You!

You have successfully subscribed.

Advertisement

John Krasinski only briefly returns as Lee Abbott in A Quiet Place Part II, but he does helm the sequel to his wildly popular sci-fi/horror flick. In the wake of Lee’s death, it falls to his wife, Evelyn Abbott (Emily Blunt), to find a safe haven for herself and her children, Regan (Millicent Simmonds) and Marcus (Noah Jupe). That’s very difficult in a world where even the slightest sound can attract the attention of the vicious alien invaders who murdered Lee.

Evelyn and her kids soon encounter Emmett (Cillian Murphy), a friend of the family whom they haven’t seen since the invasion began. Emmett may not be the same man he was before, and Evelyn doesn’t have many options left, especially when they discover a colony of survivors led by an unnamed man (Djimon Hounsou).

A Quiet Place Part II is streaming on Netflix.

By Chris Snellgrove and Joshua Tyler | Published 2 seconds ago

Thanks to years of mismanagement by Paramount’s appointed head, Alex Kurtzman, the Star Trek franchise is in a precarious position. Nothing new is in production, and everything currently airing has been canceled.

It’s clear that Trek is going to need another hit show in order to remain relevant. The best idea for this has been around for over three decades: we need a Star Trek series focusing on Captain Kirk’s second five-year mission.

The Missions We Never Saw Between Movies

If you just spit out your tea (Earl Grey, hot), you might be surprised to discover that both the Star Trek Chronology (which came out in 1993) and the Star Trek Encyclopedia (which came out in 1994) both specify that Kirk and crew had a second five-year mission after the events of The Motion Picture. Effectively, there was a time jump between The Motion Picture and The Wrath of Khan, and the unhappy Admiral Kirk we see in that second film is one who has finally given up gallivanting around the galaxy.

With a new Star Trek series set in this time period, we could finally explore exactly what happened between The Motion Picture and Wrath of Khan.

Solving The Casting Problem

At first glance, you might think that the biggest hurdle to creating such a Star Trek series would be recasting iconic characters once played by Hollywood heavyweights like William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy. However, Strange New Worlds has already given us younger versions of main Original Series characters like Kirk, Spock, Uhura, and Scotty as well as supporting characters like Chapel and M’Benga. If these actors could reprise their roles in a future Star Trek series, it would require relatively little effort to cast new actors for the remaining TOS characters, such as McCoy, Sulu, and Chekov. 

The problem with that plan, of course, is that all of these Star Trek: Strange New Worlds actors were cast because they were young enough to pull off pre-Original Series versions of these famous characters. However, that’s the beauty of this plan: SNW hasn’t even aired its fourth season yet. By the time this show’s fifth and final season airs and Paramount completes preproduction on a totally new Star Trek series, all of these actors will be old enough (more or less) to play the part of post-Motion Picture characters.

If you still think these Strange New Worlds actors would be too young for this role, it may be worth considering that William Shatner and his original crew were arguably too old for the parts they were playing. You see, The Original Series’ final season was set in 2269, and The Motion Picture was set sometime in the 2270s. Despite the full decade between the end of the show and the first film, TMP was supposed to take place relatively soon after TOS.

Therefore, the actors in this proposed Star Trek series only have to look as old as the TOS crew looked in, say, 1972. That year, William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy were 41 years old. Meanwhile, current Kirk actor Paul Wesley is 43 now, and current Spock actor Ethan Peck is 39. Throw in the fact that they each look younger than they are, and these two actors would look perfect for a new Star Trek series that takes place after The Motion Picture.

A Better Way To Bring In New Fans

Aside from easy casting, such a series would be beneficial because it would, like Star Trek (2009) film, bring in new fans to the franchise. With respect to other shows, this franchise will always be associated with Kirk, Spock, and the classic Enterprise crew. A series focusing on their previously unknown adventures would likely bring in many more fans than some other concept

With my proposed new Star Trek series, Paramount could attract new fans while giving old ones something we’ve wanted to see for years: an onscreen version of the franchise’s “lost years” that better contextualizes where our characters are (physically and emotionally) in The Wrath of Khan.

Solving The Alex Kurtzman Problem

Given that Paramount has been busily scrapping everything related to the Star Trek: Strange New Worlds universe, it’s doubtful they will take our suggestion for a new series very seriously. However, this doesn’t have to be a spinoff of the existing universe. The look and style of this new show could be totally different. Hopefully, it would also involve a different creative team, one that’s not under the direction of franchise villain Alex Kurtzman.

This idea can work without the Kurtzman regime. Jettison Alex Kurtzman and everyone working with him. Bring in a totally new group (we suggest one headed up by Terry Matalas) and simply bring back those existing actors to play these new versions of the characters.

Matalas already pulled this off, by the way, with Star Trek: Picard season 3. The first two seasons of Picard were run by someone else and bear no resemblance at all to Picard season 3. Matalas took over in the third season, jettisoned everything the previous Picard team had done, and effectively created a brand new show while keeping a few key cast members.

That third season of Picard, despite featuring Star Trek: The Next Generation cast members, was heavily influenced by the look of Star Trek during this lost era. It’s why the season’s Neo Constitution-class ship looks so much like the Enterprise refit from The Motion Picture.

That’s what Star Trek needs. The entire franchise needs to be given the Picard season 3 treatment, and whether it’s Terry Matalas or someone else in charge, Star Trek’s lost years may be the best way to save it.

By Jonathan Klotz
| Updated 5 seconds ago

The most successful fantasy films of all time, The Lord of the Rings trilogy and Harry Potter, have reigned at the top of the mountain for decades, yet the genre has experienced a resurgence in recent years thanks to the rise of podcasts. Actual play podcasts featuring players going through a tabletop RPG have become one of the hottest genres of the new medium, and the best of them, including Critical Role, Dimension 20, and Not Another D&D Podcast, were based on Dungeons and Dragons Fifth Edition.

You’d think that 2023’s Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves, the best fantasy movie of the last decade, would have become a hit, but instead it disappointed at the box office (ironically, thanks to the franchise owner, Wizards of the Coast, horrible timing). Now it’s finally developing a following. 

A Tabletop Adventure On The Big Screen

Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves picks up after the adventuring party of Edvin the Bard (Chris Pine), Holga the Barbarian (Michelle Rodriguez), Simon the Sorcerer (Justice Smith), Doric the Druid (Sophia Lillis), and Forge the Thief (Hugh Grant) were betrayed by the obviously evil wizard Sofina (Daisy Head). Out for revenge, Evin and Holga get the band back together, go into an actual dungeon complete with a dragon, and pull off a fantastical heist. 

The film has everything fans of the game have wanted to see on the big screen for decades, including an aarakocra and a cameo appearance by the characters from the 80s Dungeons & Dragons Saturday morning cartoon. Actual spells from the tabletop game are used, and real mechanics were played out.

All of this helped make the rollicking adventure feel like someone’s homebrew campaign brought to life. Even for those who don’t play the tabletop game, the comedy beats all and makes it a fun fantasy adventure. 

Why Dungeons & Dragons Failed To Find A Big Theater Audience

Mere weeks before Honor Among Thieves was released, Wizards of the Coast, the company that owns Dungeons and Dragons, did something so heinous it caused a boycott by fans. For more than 20 years, the game had operated under the Open Gaming License (OGL).

That OGL let independent writers and small companies create adventures, rulebooks, podcasts, and entire businesses built around D&D without fear of being shut down. And Wizards of the Coast decided to end it all.

A leaked draft of a new license Wizards of the Coast was planning appeared online. The Open Game License was being changed so that Wizards would get a 25 percent cut of everything fans earn when a creator makes more than $750,000 from monetizing the game. Worse still, the new terms would ban all online tabletop simulators and allow Wizards of the Coast to claim sole ownership of anything created by fans.

This leak of the company’s plans sparked a firestorm in the Dungeons & Dragons community. Core fans revolted en masse. An organic, fan-driven boycott of the company and everything it was involved with began. That boycott included the movie, meaning the group of people Hollywood expected as the film’s core supporters were not only avoiding it, but actively campaigning to keep it from being seen. It worked.

The film received a favorable response from those who saw it, with a 91 percent “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes from over 300 reviews by critics and a matching 92 percent from over 2,000 reviews by the public. Yet Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves underperformed, barely squeaking by with $200 million worldwide. That failure is undeniable, but it’s not the fault of the movie. Honor Among Thieves was destroyed by the greed of the company that owns its IP.

The backlash became so intense that Wizards eventually reversed course and released key D&D rules under a Creative Commons license, making them far harder to control in the future. But that change was too late to save Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves.

Standing On Its Own

Removed from the drama of early 2023, Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves can now stand on its own merit. Thanks to streaming, audiences are watching and enjoying the movie.

Unfortunately, the movie’s weak performance destroyed the hope of a sequel. However, if Honor Among Thieves continues to gain a much-deserved cult following, there’s always a chance that the writer/director duo of Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley (who also worked with Pine on Horrible Bosses 2) will get another chance to bring the game to life.

Whether Honor Among Thieves gets the sequel it deserves or not, thanks to streaming, fans can enjoy the funniest fantasy movie since Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and newcomers can get a taste of what it’s like to play the most popular tabletop role-playing game in the world.

A former Girlicious member is speaking out and taking a hard look back at the early 2000s pop scene. Natalie Mejia, who rose to fame on “Pussycat Dolls Present: Girlicious,” is now calling out what she describes as a “hypersexualized” culture that pushed young female artists to prioritize image over comfort.

Looking back on her time in the group, formed by Robin Antin, Mejia admitted she felt pressure to conform to the industry’s expectations at the height of her career.

“I was chasing the success, and it meant so much to me to finally get into the position of having this big label and this management and these people behind you and I think for me, I was like, ‘Oh I guess this is what it takes,’” she told The Daily Mail.

At the time, Girlicious followed in the footsteps of the The Pussycat Dolls, embracing bold, revealing looks that mirrored the era’s emphasis on sex appeal.

Mejia Says Motherhood And Changing Times Shifted Her View On ‘Hypersexualized’ Era

Now 37 and a mother, Mejia says both personal growth and societal changes have reshaped how she views that chapter of her life. “I think the times have changed so much as well,” she said. “We’re kind of looking at different things about like Me Too and just the young adolescent girl being so hypersexualized, it’s important that everybody’s comfortability level is respected.”

She continued, “I think it’s making space for an elegance or an image that you can still be sexy and beautiful and lovely but not have to be completely vulnerable in your bare skimpies if you don’t want to.”

Natalie Mejia Opens Up About Finding Balance Between Faith And Hollywood Beauty Standards

While the entertainment industry still places heavy emphasis on appearance, Mejia says she’s worked to find a middle ground that aligns with her values. “The music industry and entertainment industry has so much demands with the beauty industry, right?” she told the outlet. “So it’s like, you know, how risque are you willing to go, or what’s your sex appeal?”

“And that’s kind of an important part of Hollywood culture and things like that,” she added. “So I’ve definitely had to find a balance of elegance and things that represent my faith in a way that feels true to myself, but still feeling confident in myself with the beauty standards and things like that.”

Mejia Says Reality Show ‘Villain’ Edit Didn’t Reflect Her True Experience

Formed by Robin Antin, Girlicious featured Natalie Mejia alongside Nichole Cordova, Tiffanie Anderson, and Chrystina Sayers. The group released their self-titled debut album in 2008 after being assembled through the reality competition “Pussycat Dolls Present: Girlicious,” but ultimately disbanded just a few years later.

Despite the group’s short run, Mejia says her experience on the show, and how she was portrayed, has stuck with her. “I actually was very surprised that I was kind of categorized as the villain because in my experience, I was, I feel like the crybaby,” she told The Daily Mail. “I was always crying every minute, and it didn’t really portray that like on the interview, it was very selective as to which parts they moved forward with, and there was a lot of sound bites, so some things I was saying but not in that moment.”

“And so it just kind of fit perfectly into a scene that maybe wasn’t actually like the how it transpired, but I had to brave that as the villain, because it was like a love-hate thing, like either you loved me or you hated me on the show,” she continued. “And I think that I was very outspoken, and sometimes it had some backlash, but overall, I felt like I was very vulnerable and I was very a teenage girl in the moment in a competition reality show.”

Natalie Mejia Embraces New Chapter With Faith-Focused Music After Girlicious

Girlicious may have been short-lived, but Mejia has since entered a new chapter. Now a mother, she recently released a new album, “Holy Exodus,” reflecting the Christian faith she’s embraced in recent years, marking a clear shift from the image-driven pop persona that once defined her early career.